What do you think?
Rate this book
Clashes of Cavalry: The Civil War Careers of George Armstrong Custer and Jeb Stuart
Clashes of Cavalry [Jul 01, 2001] Hatch, Thom … 0811703568
304 pages, Hardcover
First published July 1, 2001
1 person is currently reading
15 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
February 9, 2008
Been awhile since I read a Civil War book, I grabbed this one on a lark. It's a comparison of the Civil War lives of Custer and JEB Stewart, two of the most notable cavalry officers of the Civil War. Two men who could not be more different, Custer and Stewart rose to prominence in a war that either made men--or killed them.
Stewart's career was the more promising of the two, taking advantage of the Virginia preference and a strong showing at Bull Run to take charge of the Army of Northern Virginia's cavalry. He leads his troops on grand reviews and great raids, looking ever more unstoppable. But by 1863, he is poised for a fall, and Custer is the man to give it to him.
Custer, barely out of West Point, had to scrap and struggle for his positions. An aide, he wanted battle.
And battle he would get--both personally as he wooed his future wife and tried hard to get into a position of command. Eventually, he got that which he sought, and Custer's glory grew--at the expense of Stewart.
Crossing swords at just the moment where the armies were crossing their roles (Gettysburg), Stewart's power in the South takes a marked decline just as Custer's shoots up like a meteor. Using a combination of courage, brains, and supportive superiors, Custer, if the text is to be believed (more on that in a moment), moves to the fore as a capable, active commander who leads his troops to victory, often in the face of defeat. Stewart, with the South struggling and his ability to freelance failing, has his moments but never captures the glory of his former times. In the end, he gets his wish--to die before the South really suffers.
While Custer will die in battle, too, his Civil War time is an arguably unparalleled success--from a man almost booted out via Court Martial to Major General. He gets all that he wanted--even the girl, as the North marches on victorious.
This book is a very uncritical look at both men, which bothers me in a modern biography. While there are hints here and there--Stewart comes off a bit as a braggart who might not have been as good as his reputation and Custer is clearly seeking fame and fortune, possibly even at the expense of prior allies such as McClellan--the book actively works to diffuse any possible negatives of both men. This is a shame because the comparison is fascinating and in hands more unbiased than Hatch, this could have been a fascinating look at two figures who were both brilliant men and absolutely hams in their own way.
This is why I said, "if the text is to be beleived"--because it is so uncritical, even of figures not featured in the book (Meade's over cautiousness after Gettysburg is praised, Burnside and Hooker's ineptitude as generals isn't even mentioned, Pickett's Charge is left alone as a strategical idea, etc.), that I am cautious myself about feeling that the text's portrayal of Custer as a leader is accurate. This is the first time I've read of Custer being this good as a leader, and I definitely want another source before I consider it gospel.
The Stewart seen in this book is fairly typical to the one I've read of before, though Hatch seems unable to decide if he wants to make JEB a hero or a villain as a leader. He seems to show Stewart as lacking in tactical ability at times but then will cross himself and show how good Stewart was at exposing the enemy. Perhaps that's the nature of Stewart, but as a writer of a biography, I think you need to take a side more definitively.
There was also one other problem with this book that drove me crazy--Hatch (or his editor) did not take the time to always keep the units straight. At times, people are commanding regiments, brigades, and divisions interchangeably. When describing a battle, it's essential that you keep those terms separate and in a few places Hatch definitely does not do that. A few charts of command would also have been helpful, particularly for the 1864 battles. Had I not had a good working knowledge of both armies before reading this book, I would have been lost.
All in all this was a good read, but I think there's a lot of ground to be mined here that Hatch left unearthed. I look forward to reading more on the subject soon. (Library 02/2008)
Trebby's Take: A good read for a Civil War buff, but not for the casual reader.
Stewart's career was the more promising of the two, taking advantage of the Virginia preference and a strong showing at Bull Run to take charge of the Army of Northern Virginia's cavalry. He leads his troops on grand reviews and great raids, looking ever more unstoppable. But by 1863, he is poised for a fall, and Custer is the man to give it to him.
Custer, barely out of West Point, had to scrap and struggle for his positions. An aide, he wanted battle.
And battle he would get--both personally as he wooed his future wife and tried hard to get into a position of command. Eventually, he got that which he sought, and Custer's glory grew--at the expense of Stewart.
Crossing swords at just the moment where the armies were crossing their roles (Gettysburg), Stewart's power in the South takes a marked decline just as Custer's shoots up like a meteor. Using a combination of courage, brains, and supportive superiors, Custer, if the text is to be believed (more on that in a moment), moves to the fore as a capable, active commander who leads his troops to victory, often in the face of defeat. Stewart, with the South struggling and his ability to freelance failing, has his moments but never captures the glory of his former times. In the end, he gets his wish--to die before the South really suffers.
While Custer will die in battle, too, his Civil War time is an arguably unparalleled success--from a man almost booted out via Court Martial to Major General. He gets all that he wanted--even the girl, as the North marches on victorious.
This book is a very uncritical look at both men, which bothers me in a modern biography. While there are hints here and there--Stewart comes off a bit as a braggart who might not have been as good as his reputation and Custer is clearly seeking fame and fortune, possibly even at the expense of prior allies such as McClellan--the book actively works to diffuse any possible negatives of both men. This is a shame because the comparison is fascinating and in hands more unbiased than Hatch, this could have been a fascinating look at two figures who were both brilliant men and absolutely hams in their own way.
This is why I said, "if the text is to be beleived"--because it is so uncritical, even of figures not featured in the book (Meade's over cautiousness after Gettysburg is praised, Burnside and Hooker's ineptitude as generals isn't even mentioned, Pickett's Charge is left alone as a strategical idea, etc.), that I am cautious myself about feeling that the text's portrayal of Custer as a leader is accurate. This is the first time I've read of Custer being this good as a leader, and I definitely want another source before I consider it gospel.
The Stewart seen in this book is fairly typical to the one I've read of before, though Hatch seems unable to decide if he wants to make JEB a hero or a villain as a leader. He seems to show Stewart as lacking in tactical ability at times but then will cross himself and show how good Stewart was at exposing the enemy. Perhaps that's the nature of Stewart, but as a writer of a biography, I think you need to take a side more definitively.
There was also one other problem with this book that drove me crazy--Hatch (or his editor) did not take the time to always keep the units straight. At times, people are commanding regiments, brigades, and divisions interchangeably. When describing a battle, it's essential that you keep those terms separate and in a few places Hatch definitely does not do that. A few charts of command would also have been helpful, particularly for the 1864 battles. Had I not had a good working knowledge of both armies before reading this book, I would have been lost.
All in all this was a good read, but I think there's a lot of ground to be mined here that Hatch left unearthed. I look forward to reading more on the subject soon. (Library 02/2008)
Trebby's Take: A good read for a Civil War buff, but not for the casual reader.
December 19, 2020
This book has 295 pages, not 2.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews