What do you think?
Rate this book
Pemberton: A Biography
It was the sad fate of General John C. Pemberton (1814-1881), a northerner serving in the Confederate army, to die in disgrace and humiliation. Because he surrendered Vicksburg to General Grant, many Confederates considered him a traitor. Because he lost this strategic southern port on the Mississippi, Pemberton was branded as an incompetent.
In this biography, the first to examine Pemberton's life and career in full scope, Michael B. Ballard credits Pemberton for military prowess that previous Civil War scholars have denied him. Here his strength is shown to be in administration, not in the theater of combat. Ballard persuasively argues that if Pemberton's abilities had been properly used, he could have made a positive contribution to the Confederate cause.
Ballard focuses upon Pemberton's theory of command in South Carolina, where his foremost conviction was the preservation of his army. Pressure from both state officials and the Confederate War Department in Richmond, however, dictated that he must hold Charleston at all costs. Submitting to his superiors, Pemberton carried this new philosophy to Mississippi for his next assignment, where his main objective was to defend Vicksburg, a city whose river defenses blocked Union commerce along the Mississippi River. Throughout the winter of 1862-63 Pemberton's forces held off Ulysses S. Grant's army, but in the spring of 1863 Grant's complex diversions confused Pemberton and allowed the Union to gain a beachhead on the east bank of the river and to launch an inland campaign that trapped Confederates in Vicksburg. Remembering the lesson of Charleston, Pemberton tried to save this river city, but he lost both Vicksburg and his men.
Ballard's slant on Pemberton's life, fair and revisionist, must be considered in future assessments, for it details fateful moments in Pemberton's career and offers new insights gained from family papers and manuscripts not previously examined. "I find the author's arguments to be convincing," says Civil War historian Herman Hattaway, "and like him, I am led to a keener appreciation of Pemberton than I ever had before."
In this biography, the first to examine Pemberton's life and career in full scope, Michael B. Ballard credits Pemberton for military prowess that previous Civil War scholars have denied him. Here his strength is shown to be in administration, not in the theater of combat. Ballard persuasively argues that if Pemberton's abilities had been properly used, he could have made a positive contribution to the Confederate cause.
Ballard focuses upon Pemberton's theory of command in South Carolina, where his foremost conviction was the preservation of his army. Pressure from both state officials and the Confederate War Department in Richmond, however, dictated that he must hold Charleston at all costs. Submitting to his superiors, Pemberton carried this new philosophy to Mississippi for his next assignment, where his main objective was to defend Vicksburg, a city whose river defenses blocked Union commerce along the Mississippi River. Throughout the winter of 1862-63 Pemberton's forces held off Ulysses S. Grant's army, but in the spring of 1863 Grant's complex diversions confused Pemberton and allowed the Union to gain a beachhead on the east bank of the river and to launch an inland campaign that trapped Confederates in Vicksburg. Remembering the lesson of Charleston, Pemberton tried to save this river city, but he lost both Vicksburg and his men.
Ballard's slant on Pemberton's life, fair and revisionist, must be considered in future assessments, for it details fateful moments in Pemberton's career and offers new insights gained from family papers and manuscripts not previously examined. "I find the author's arguments to be convincing," says Civil War historian Herman Hattaway, "and like him, I am led to a keener appreciation of Pemberton than I ever had before."
250 pages, Hardcover
First published November 1, 1991
1 person is currently reading
30 people want to read
About the author
Michael B. Ballard
24 booksMichael B. Ballard is university archivist and coordinator of the Congressional and Political Research Center at Mississippi State University.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
November 4, 2021
I mentioned somewhere as I began reading this 1991 biography that Michael Ballard would have to work pretty hard to make me feel sympathy for John Pemberton, the Pennsylvania-native who lost Vicksburg for the Confederacy. Both Northerners and Southerners have disdained Pemberton for close to 160 years now, but it was never a matter of his treason or near-treason that mattered to me. It's always been a question of competence: was Pemberton capable of getting the job done, regardless of the province of his nativity, or the land of rebellious upstarts of his [informal] adoption.
In his Preface Ballard elevates our hopes, revealing his discovery of "a large cache of Pemberton papers in the Historical Society of Pennsylvania" that had not previously been mined by historians. Ballard goes on to argue that these letters and correspondence cast Pemberton in a new light, that we come to understand him as a human rather than merely as a famously defeated Confederate general. So let's cut to the chase. Does Ballard succeed in causing us to revisit and revise our commonly shared negative opinions of Pemberton?
No.
If anything, perusing Pemberton's private correspondence leads us to an understanding that this historical personage is even less a sympathetic character then we might have supposed. John Pemberton was an immature child-man. He was in youth ― and later ― what might be called a party animal, a habitual socializer. Wine, women and song preoccupied all his days. Were he born a few decades later, surely he would have been a natural frat-rat. Even worse, Ballard himself emphasizes time and time again how Pemberton was constitutionally incapable of learning any lessons from the hard experiences that life paraded before him. He never outgrew his callow peevishness. He had no inkling of any need or desirability to perform with political shrewdness in the bright spotlight which zeroed in on his performance. Such new insights I learned from Ballard's book. They help to explain Pemberton's later behavior at Vicksburg ― and let's be honest: that's why we care about Pemberton ― but they do nothing to exonerate him. The opposite in fact is true.
Besides Pemberton, two other important, problematic Confederate characters figure prominently in the Vicksburg story. They are Jefferson Davis and Joseph E Johnston. Now if you're going to slant your book to try to make Pemberton look a little better, then either Davis or Johnston, or both, have to assume the antagonist role. Ballard chooses Johnston for his fall-guy: everything that went wrong was really Johnston's fault, not Pemberton's fault. This mini-review is hardly the place to argue and judge the relative merits and defects of those three Confederate leaders and the roles they played in the saga. Even if Johnston deserves blame, that does nothing to erase Pemberton's personal faults and failings: bottom line, he failed to save Vicksburg, which was the task assigned to him; in fact, his was a splendid failure. Nearly every decision Pemberton made was poor and ineffective, if not disastrous. And then inevitably he blamed others for his failures.
Such a figure makes for a dispiriting biography. But of course you can't blame the biographer for the bad behavior of his subject. Ballard's book strongly suggests there is no untapped trove of information waiting in someone's attic that is ever going to redeem John Pemberton's reputation. I'm not the greatest champion of Joseph E Johnston, but trying to make Johnston the fall guy so Pemberton looks a little better by comparison ignores the cumulative portrait of a shallow party-boy that Ballard assembled from an examination of Pemberton's earlier life. In the end Ballard's conclusions are not justified. Pemberton accomplished his own failures all by himself.
In his Preface Ballard elevates our hopes, revealing his discovery of "a large cache of Pemberton papers in the Historical Society of Pennsylvania" that had not previously been mined by historians. Ballard goes on to argue that these letters and correspondence cast Pemberton in a new light, that we come to understand him as a human rather than merely as a famously defeated Confederate general. So let's cut to the chase. Does Ballard succeed in causing us to revisit and revise our commonly shared negative opinions of Pemberton?
No.
If anything, perusing Pemberton's private correspondence leads us to an understanding that this historical personage is even less a sympathetic character then we might have supposed. John Pemberton was an immature child-man. He was in youth ― and later ― what might be called a party animal, a habitual socializer. Wine, women and song preoccupied all his days. Were he born a few decades later, surely he would have been a natural frat-rat. Even worse, Ballard himself emphasizes time and time again how Pemberton was constitutionally incapable of learning any lessons from the hard experiences that life paraded before him. He never outgrew his callow peevishness. He had no inkling of any need or desirability to perform with political shrewdness in the bright spotlight which zeroed in on his performance. Such new insights I learned from Ballard's book. They help to explain Pemberton's later behavior at Vicksburg ― and let's be honest: that's why we care about Pemberton ― but they do nothing to exonerate him. The opposite in fact is true.
Besides Pemberton, two other important, problematic Confederate characters figure prominently in the Vicksburg story. They are Jefferson Davis and Joseph E Johnston. Now if you're going to slant your book to try to make Pemberton look a little better, then either Davis or Johnston, or both, have to assume the antagonist role. Ballard chooses Johnston for his fall-guy: everything that went wrong was really Johnston's fault, not Pemberton's fault. This mini-review is hardly the place to argue and judge the relative merits and defects of those three Confederate leaders and the roles they played in the saga. Even if Johnston deserves blame, that does nothing to erase Pemberton's personal faults and failings: bottom line, he failed to save Vicksburg, which was the task assigned to him; in fact, his was a splendid failure. Nearly every decision Pemberton made was poor and ineffective, if not disastrous. And then inevitably he blamed others for his failures.
Such a figure makes for a dispiriting biography. But of course you can't blame the biographer for the bad behavior of his subject. Ballard's book strongly suggests there is no untapped trove of information waiting in someone's attic that is ever going to redeem John Pemberton's reputation. I'm not the greatest champion of Joseph E Johnston, but trying to make Johnston the fall guy so Pemberton looks a little better by comparison ignores the cumulative portrait of a shallow party-boy that Ballard assembled from an examination of Pemberton's earlier life. In the end Ballard's conclusions are not justified. Pemberton accomplished his own failures all by himself.
July 31, 2024
A well written biography of perhaps the Civil War's most hated general, distrusted by both sections. all the more fascinating since he joined the Confederacy almost purely for family reasons.
February 12, 2018
Fair account of John C Pemberton
This is a well written book about a controversial man. His love for his wife and dedication to his profession showed us a man a courage and determination. Unfortunately the South never appreciated his skills. Not a fighting general but a great administer.
However I think his record at Vicksburg was not without bias. Given the circumstances he did a great job holding a key position. Johnson and Loring failed him. In the end he preserved his army while trying to save the city.
Good read and well documented.
This is a well written book about a controversial man. His love for his wife and dedication to his profession showed us a man a courage and determination. Unfortunately the South never appreciated his skills. Not a fighting general but a great administer.
However I think his record at Vicksburg was not without bias. Given the circumstances he did a great job holding a key position. Johnson and Loring failed him. In the end he preserved his army while trying to save the city.
Good read and well documented.
October 13, 2013
John C. Pemberton is one of those difficult subjects for biography. He was neither glorious hero, nor vile villain, but led a complicated life and had a complicated legacy. Michael Ballard does well in conveying Pemberton's story, with a nuanced and balanced approach.
The author does well revealing Pemberton's strengths and flaws. The reader is regaled with tales of indolent, sometime wild living in his youth and cadet days at West Point. Pemberton's pride, temper, stubbornness, carousing and restlessness all come through, as we learn about his frustrations in his early army career. Eventually, though, when Pemberton settles down with his wife Pattie, his better qualities start to shine through. We was a loving, dedicated family man, and in the army he was a talented administrator.
While Pemberton was a talented administrator, and on occasion proved he did not lack physical courage, his love of his family (and easier living) lead him to pursue a mostly boring career. This doldrums leaves the narrative a bit boring at times, through no fault of the author. The lack of exciting action continues through Pemberton's quiet, highly questionable rise to command during the Civil War. He seems to have risen due to his wife's political connections, and then almost as much a a convenience to assist in his assignments in South Carolina and Mississippi, as much as on merit.
Pemberton's time in Mississippi, directing the Confederate defense of Vicksburg is of course the most famous chapter of his life. Ballard provides good, fair analysis of Pemberton's performance. Pemberton is praised where appropriate, and others faulted when it's due, but the author does not spare him when it comes to his mistakes and shortcomings.
The book is rounded off with a recounting of Pemberton's later years. Again, the narrative is not terribly exciting, since he mostly stayed out of the lime light. Pemberton was not able to pursue the prominent political career that many of his prominent Confederate colleagues had, for example. This is a pattern that occurs throughout the book. It's well researched and written, but the subject lacks so much of the flashiness or excitement that would make his biography a more entertaining read.
The author does well revealing Pemberton's strengths and flaws. The reader is regaled with tales of indolent, sometime wild living in his youth and cadet days at West Point. Pemberton's pride, temper, stubbornness, carousing and restlessness all come through, as we learn about his frustrations in his early army career. Eventually, though, when Pemberton settles down with his wife Pattie, his better qualities start to shine through. We was a loving, dedicated family man, and in the army he was a talented administrator.
While Pemberton was a talented administrator, and on occasion proved he did not lack physical courage, his love of his family (and easier living) lead him to pursue a mostly boring career. This doldrums leaves the narrative a bit boring at times, through no fault of the author. The lack of exciting action continues through Pemberton's quiet, highly questionable rise to command during the Civil War. He seems to have risen due to his wife's political connections, and then almost as much a a convenience to assist in his assignments in South Carolina and Mississippi, as much as on merit.
Pemberton's time in Mississippi, directing the Confederate defense of Vicksburg is of course the most famous chapter of his life. Ballard provides good, fair analysis of Pemberton's performance. Pemberton is praised where appropriate, and others faulted when it's due, but the author does not spare him when it comes to his mistakes and shortcomings.
The book is rounded off with a recounting of Pemberton's later years. Again, the narrative is not terribly exciting, since he mostly stayed out of the lime light. Pemberton was not able to pursue the prominent political career that many of his prominent Confederate colleagues had, for example. This is a pattern that occurs throughout the book. It's well researched and written, but the subject lacks so much of the flashiness or excitement that would make his biography a more entertaining read.
Read
August 2, 2011Michael Ballard also wrote "Vicksburg The Campaign That Opened The Mississippi". This is the first biography of John Pemberton since a biography written by Pemberton's grandson in 1942. Ballard had access to some of Pemberton's correspondence that wasn't available in the previous biography.
Most historians consider Pemberton to be incompetent, an opinion shared by many Confederates at the time, if they didn't consider him a traitor because of his northern birth. Ballard presents a more balanced picture.
Pemberton wasn't cut out to be a field general. He was better as an administrator. Ballard points out several character flaws in Pemberton that contributed to his problems.
This book is worth reading. I doubt that Pemberton will be the subject of another biography any time soon.
Most historians consider Pemberton to be incompetent, an opinion shared by many Confederates at the time, if they didn't consider him a traitor because of his northern birth. Ballard presents a more balanced picture.
Pemberton wasn't cut out to be a field general. He was better as an administrator. Ballard points out several character flaws in Pemberton that contributed to his problems.
This book is worth reading. I doubt that Pemberton will be the subject of another biography any time soon.
October 2, 2021
Good book; the author argues that Pemberton wasn't simply an utterly incompetent general, but rather a good staff officer/administrator mis-assigned to field command. The book covers Pemberton's career through the end of Vicksburg Campaign very well; however, the part of the book (less than ten pages) about the last twenty months of the war didn't go into a lot of detail. For example, after commanding an artillery battalion near Richmond, the author stated that he was re-assigned "when the center of action in Virginia shifted to Petersburg", which sounds like the transfer happened in June 1864. But the next sentence, describing his new post, says he started his assignment in January 1865. There is no explanation about what happened during these six months.
December 13, 2022
This is a well-written book about the Pemberton mostly concentrating on his important command of Vicksburg.
It if fascinating to read how he was treated by the Confederate hierarchy as a northern-born Confederate General. Despite the fact that he chose to fight with the Confederacy, many still did not trust him.
It if fascinating to read how he was treated by the Confederate hierarchy as a northern-born Confederate General. Despite the fact that he chose to fight with the Confederacy, many still did not trust him.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews