What do you think?
Rate this book
The Cannons Roar: Fort Sumter and the Start of the Civil War―An Oral History
The first-ever oral history of the attack that started the Civil War that combines illuminating historical narrative with intense first-hand accounts.
On April 12, 1861, Confederate troops began firing on Fort Sumter, beginning the bloodiest conflict in American history. Since that time numerous historians have described the attack in many well-regarded books, yet the event still remains overlooked at times in the minds of the public.
The Cannons Roar seeks to remedy that. Rather than providing a third-person, after-the-fact description, acclaimed author Bruce Chadwick will tell the story of the attack from the people who were in the thick of it. In so doing, readers can hear from people themselves, telling a compelling story in a new way that both draws readers in and lets them walk away with a better understanding and appreciation of one of the most dramatic and important events in our nation’s history. The Cannons Roar will not only provide portraits of the major players that are more descriptive than those offered by historians over the years, it will give voice to dozens of regular people from across the country and socioeconomic spectrum, to provide readers with a true and complete understanding of the mood of the country and in Charleston.
Using letters, newspaper articles, diaries, journals, and other written sources, Chadwick describes in vivid detail the events preceding the attack, the attack itself, and its aftermath. While we hear from historic pillars like Abraham Lincoln to PGT Beauregard to Jefferson Davis, Chadwick also features Charleston merchants and Northern farmers, high society doyennes and “the dregs,” South Carolina’s new governor Francis Pickens, who was the blustery former Minister to Russia. Collectively, readers will obtain a fuller understanding of the politics and thinking of political and military leaders that influenced their decisions or lack thereof. The book will also capture both the South and North’s expectations regarding England entering the war (as well as letters from England’s leaders showing their reluctance to do so), as well as an expectation on both sides of a quick resolution.
Skillfully combining traditional history with the in-the-moment ethos of an oral history, The Cannons Roar to bring this historic moment in American history to new and vivid life.
On April 12, 1861, Confederate troops began firing on Fort Sumter, beginning the bloodiest conflict in American history. Since that time numerous historians have described the attack in many well-regarded books, yet the event still remains overlooked at times in the minds of the public.
The Cannons Roar seeks to remedy that. Rather than providing a third-person, after-the-fact description, acclaimed author Bruce Chadwick will tell the story of the attack from the people who were in the thick of it. In so doing, readers can hear from people themselves, telling a compelling story in a new way that both draws readers in and lets them walk away with a better understanding and appreciation of one of the most dramatic and important events in our nation’s history. The Cannons Roar will not only provide portraits of the major players that are more descriptive than those offered by historians over the years, it will give voice to dozens of regular people from across the country and socioeconomic spectrum, to provide readers with a true and complete understanding of the mood of the country and in Charleston.
Using letters, newspaper articles, diaries, journals, and other written sources, Chadwick describes in vivid detail the events preceding the attack, the attack itself, and its aftermath. While we hear from historic pillars like Abraham Lincoln to PGT Beauregard to Jefferson Davis, Chadwick also features Charleston merchants and Northern farmers, high society doyennes and “the dregs,” South Carolina’s new governor Francis Pickens, who was the blustery former Minister to Russia. Collectively, readers will obtain a fuller understanding of the politics and thinking of political and military leaders that influenced their decisions or lack thereof. The book will also capture both the South and North’s expectations regarding England entering the war (as well as letters from England’s leaders showing their reluctance to do so), as well as an expectation on both sides of a quick resolution.
Skillfully combining traditional history with the in-the-moment ethos of an oral history, The Cannons Roar to bring this historic moment in American history to new and vivid life.
416 pages, Hardcover
Published April 4, 2023
22 people are currently reading
95 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 - 7 of 7 reviews
May 11, 2023
Chadwick at least gets points for creativity and originality, in putting together a narrative oral history as told by people who are long since dead and didn’t know they were participating in a narrative oral history. It’s an intriguing idea, but one that only sort of pays off.
The book aims to tell the story of the attack on Fort Sumter that started the Civil War, via “intense first-hand accounts” rather than through “a third-person, after-the-fact description.” So the narrative is at its best when recounting the memories of those who reflected in detail on events after the fact or recorded their thoughts in the moment, like Union Major Robert Anderson, Captain Abner Doubleday and famed diarist and Charleston resident Mary Chesnut.
Other key players like Abraham Lincoln didn’t commit many of his thoughts and deliberations about the Sumter standoff to paper, during or after the fact, so Chadwick is forced to pull Lincoln quotes from wherever he can, in order to inject Lincoln into the story.
The result of all of this is an uneven mix of “intense first-hand accounts” that are tied together with the very “third-person, after-the-fact description(s)” that Chadwick sought to avoid, but is forced to provide in voice-of-God passages that serve to set up, explain and connect the book’s first-hand passages.
The book does well in portraying the public mood as South Carolina seceded and the standoff over Sumter intensified, with the loquacious and keenly observant Mary Chesnut serving as a gift to this “oral history” format. Anderson comes across as the hero of the story, as he shows restraint and good judgment while getting little support or communication from Washington as events unfold. And South Carolina governor Francis Pickens is rightly given a good thorough portrayal as a key player in the drama, as for many months before the situation became a standoff between North and South, between Lincoln and Davis, Anderson and Pickens were essentially the leaders-by-proxy of the opposing sides.
But overall, the format lends itself to a somewhat simplistic story that’s lacking in context and complexity. The quotes that are used to tell the story - and the text connecting those quotes - are not thorough enough for readers to make up their own minds about who and what was right and wrong. If you’re familiar with the Sumter standoff, there’s not much new here - if you’re not familiar with the details and the nuances of the standoff, you won’t get them here.
The narrative elides details like Secretary of State William Seward's alleged meddling in the Sumter relief operation, simplifying the failure to send the USS Powhatan to Sumter as a mere "mix-up." And about all that's said of James Buchanan, in his own words, is that he opposed secession (without noting that he weakly believed he was powerless to stop it), and at least he tried to reinforce Sumter (in what was actually a ham-handed effort that arguably just made tensions worse).
The timeline of the narrative is also difficult to follow if you're not familiar with events, and can be challenging even if you are. Flashbacks and flash-forwards can muddle the chain of events - a third of the way into the book, for example, we're well into the Sumter standoff when Anderson's bold move to occupy the fort is described - and not as a flashback, but just as part of the unfolding narrative. How could the standoff already be underway if Anderson wasn’t even in Sumter yet? There are also frequent diversions and thematic chapters that depart from the main storyline, on topics such as Lincoln's appearance, which are a mere stringing together of quotes and observations that don’t serve to advance the narrative.
The quotes that are used lack dates, citations and context. The book has no end notes, and lists in its bibliography just a few primary sources and a few dozen secondary works from which the quotes were apparently sourced.
Overall, the attempt to construct this story as an oral history long after the fact was a unique idea, but there’s not much here for anyone already familiar with the story, and there’s too much missing for the new reader who’s otherwise unfamiliar with the full story’s twists and turns and details and complexity. It’s a noble attempt to tell the story in a new way that, for me, just didn’t quite work.
The book aims to tell the story of the attack on Fort Sumter that started the Civil War, via “intense first-hand accounts” rather than through “a third-person, after-the-fact description.” So the narrative is at its best when recounting the memories of those who reflected in detail on events after the fact or recorded their thoughts in the moment, like Union Major Robert Anderson, Captain Abner Doubleday and famed diarist and Charleston resident Mary Chesnut.
Other key players like Abraham Lincoln didn’t commit many of his thoughts and deliberations about the Sumter standoff to paper, during or after the fact, so Chadwick is forced to pull Lincoln quotes from wherever he can, in order to inject Lincoln into the story.
The result of all of this is an uneven mix of “intense first-hand accounts” that are tied together with the very “third-person, after-the-fact description(s)” that Chadwick sought to avoid, but is forced to provide in voice-of-God passages that serve to set up, explain and connect the book’s first-hand passages.
The book does well in portraying the public mood as South Carolina seceded and the standoff over Sumter intensified, with the loquacious and keenly observant Mary Chesnut serving as a gift to this “oral history” format. Anderson comes across as the hero of the story, as he shows restraint and good judgment while getting little support or communication from Washington as events unfold. And South Carolina governor Francis Pickens is rightly given a good thorough portrayal as a key player in the drama, as for many months before the situation became a standoff between North and South, between Lincoln and Davis, Anderson and Pickens were essentially the leaders-by-proxy of the opposing sides.
But overall, the format lends itself to a somewhat simplistic story that’s lacking in context and complexity. The quotes that are used to tell the story - and the text connecting those quotes - are not thorough enough for readers to make up their own minds about who and what was right and wrong. If you’re familiar with the Sumter standoff, there’s not much new here - if you’re not familiar with the details and the nuances of the standoff, you won’t get them here.
The narrative elides details like Secretary of State William Seward's alleged meddling in the Sumter relief operation, simplifying the failure to send the USS Powhatan to Sumter as a mere "mix-up." And about all that's said of James Buchanan, in his own words, is that he opposed secession (without noting that he weakly believed he was powerless to stop it), and at least he tried to reinforce Sumter (in what was actually a ham-handed effort that arguably just made tensions worse).
The timeline of the narrative is also difficult to follow if you're not familiar with events, and can be challenging even if you are. Flashbacks and flash-forwards can muddle the chain of events - a third of the way into the book, for example, we're well into the Sumter standoff when Anderson's bold move to occupy the fort is described - and not as a flashback, but just as part of the unfolding narrative. How could the standoff already be underway if Anderson wasn’t even in Sumter yet? There are also frequent diversions and thematic chapters that depart from the main storyline, on topics such as Lincoln's appearance, which are a mere stringing together of quotes and observations that don’t serve to advance the narrative.
The quotes that are used lack dates, citations and context. The book has no end notes, and lists in its bibliography just a few primary sources and a few dozen secondary works from which the quotes were apparently sourced.
Overall, the attempt to construct this story as an oral history long after the fact was a unique idea, but there’s not much here for anyone already familiar with the story, and there’s too much missing for the new reader who’s otherwise unfamiliar with the full story’s twists and turns and details and complexity. It’s a noble attempt to tell the story in a new way that, for me, just didn’t quite work.
August 24, 2023
Fort Sumter - everyone knows this as the beginning of the American Civil War. But there was more than just the Confederate government deciding to fire on the fort. There were months negotiations, and a lot of different opinions on the matter.
Bruce Chadwick walks through what led up to the firing on Fort Sumter, and the beginning shots of the war. This was well done and easily laid out, with plenty of quotes and documented items throughout the book.
Highly enjoyable read!
Bruce Chadwick walks through what led up to the firing on Fort Sumter, and the beginning shots of the war. This was well done and easily laid out, with plenty of quotes and documented items throughout the book.
Highly enjoyable read!
May 11, 2023
In a word--disappointing. Aside from the pretentious subtitle "An Oral History", the book suffers from a couple of fatal flaws--namely the lack of a notes section and missing a timeline of the run-up to the bombardment of Fort Sumter. There is no acknowledgements section, no bookend postlude and/or epilogue section, and the listing of Sources is incomplete. There is overall lack of narrative flow and limited attachment to specific days; resulting in a confusion of dates (if listed) with actions, settings, and protagonists. If interested in the run-up to the Civil War and Fort Sumter, there are more worthy volumes; and if "oral history" go to Mary Chestnut's diary.
April 3, 2024
Rather boring. I found my thoughts constantly wandering. Meandering and directionless. Inadequate contextualization. Some points for a few original quotes but impossible to determine how well researched it was. Also the oral history idea is unique but badly executed. I’m always skeptical of a historian who adds facts without citation such as a person’s emotions or thoughts.
September 30, 2025
A very complete story of the beginning of the civil war--through the account of the issue around Fort Sumter. Chadwick finds contemporary documents and statements that very well explain the feelings of the people of that time.
September 4, 2023
Interesting reads sometimes tedious but good researched account of civil war start in Charleston harbor
October 18, 2023
An interesting look at the road up to the start of the Civil War at Fort Sumter. Worth the read.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews