Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #257768 in Books
• Published on: 1992-12-01
• Released on: 1992-12-01
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Mass Market Paperback
• 368 pages

Customer Reviews

A Classic
Very few books have been written to which the term "classic" has been almost immediately applied. The Passing of the Armies by Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain is one of those books. Chamberlain enlisted in the Union Army in 1862 and was immediately commissioned Lieutenant Colonel of the 20th Maine Infantry. In May 1863 he was commissioned Colonel of the regiment and it was this position that he held when the 20th Maine gained renown for its defense of Little Round Top at the Battle of Gettysburg on July 2, 1863. By the end of the Civil War he had risen to the rank of Major General and he carried shrapnel in his body for the rest of his life as a result of wounds received during the conflict.

Prior to enlisting Chamberlain was a college professor, having graduated from Bowdoin College in 1852. In 1856 he was teaching classes in natural and revealed religion at Bowdoin. By 1861 he added Professor of Modern Languages and in 1862 he had been granted a two year sabbatical to study in Europe when he decided to fight for the Union. After the war he was twice elected Governor of Maine; he became President of Bowdoin in 1876 and in later life he served as a government surveyor during the McKinley Administration.

Chamberlain begins his narrative with the beginning of the final campaign of the Army of the Potomac against Confederate General Robert E. Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia. It was the spring of 1864 and Union General Ulysses S. Grant had Lee and his army backing up toward what finally became the siege of Petersburg, Virginia. The final campaign began on March 30, 1864 when the two armies clashed along the White Oak Road just southwest of Petersburg. Grant and Lee hurled their troops at each other's line in such a tenacious manner that Chamberlain was surprised when, at the end of the battle, Grant ordered a maneuver around Lee's flank instead of falling back to regroup, as had been the custom of the Union Army after sharp engagements during the preceding years of conflict. The author then goes on to discuss every major action of the campaign through the surrender of Lee at Appomattox Court House, Virginia and the final Grand Review of the Union Army in Washington, D.C.

Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain was not a historian. He wrote in the introduction to the book: "History is written for the most part from the outside. Truth often suffers distortion by reason of the point of view of the narrator, some preoccupation of his judgment or fancy not only as to relative merits but even as to facts in their real relations." In this same paragraph he writes that he will simply tell of things as he saw them.

What Chamberlain did was to write a book that transcended the entire war. He was able to see the participants for what they were; men doing a job as best as they could, given the horrific circumstances. At Appomattox he and his regiment had been assigned to oversee the final act of the surrender, the stacking of arms and the furling of the colors of the Army of Northern Virginia. He ordered his men to snap their muskets to "carry arms," a customary salute, as the Confederate column approached. Confederate General John B. Gordon, at the head of his column, draws his saber, spurs his horse so that he rears a bit, and brings the tip of the blade to the toe of his boot as a return salute. It was a soldier's salute, one that could only come out of the bonds of shared experience.

Chamberlain's narrative at times seems melodramatic, as when he describes a girl dressed in white placing a wreath around his neck during the Grand Review, or when he describes receiving the order that disbanded the army on July 1, 1865: "Ceases to exist? Are you sure of that?" He also uses the text to make a political statement. Chamberlain completed the book shortly before his death in 1915. It was written during a time when the awarding of the Congressional Medal of Honor during the Civil War was, in some instances, being questioned. Entire regiments had been awarded the medal simply for re-enlisting and some soldiers were still attempting to obtain the medal, often under dubious circumstances. Chamberlain wished to see those who had actually earned the medal keep it, "but let us not behold the sublime spectacle of vicarious suffering travestied by the imposition of vicarious honors."

The Passing of the Armies is part of the pantheon of Civil War literature. It is simply the work of one soldier trying to make some sense out of all he has seen. It is not a self-serving volume, as many books are that are written by high ranking officers. The scholar that wants to experience the conflict without the hatred should read this book.

Details, details, endless details........
For very dedicated civil war buffs only.

Very detailed and drawn-out account of the battles near Appomattox at the of the war. Chamberlain wasn't a Professor of Rhetoric for nothing, and he lives up to the title in this book. I slugged my way through half of the book before giving up. Page after page of flowery decriptions of the heroism and high religious morals, etc., etc. of the fighting men, minute by minute accounts of charges and retreats, which general/commander gave this order, which brigade went this way and that, accounts of who lost their sword and what happenned to the guy's hat, the after-war history of the replacement sword.......it just goes on and on endlessly. It's all so confusing, and there are no good maps included to illustrate the movements of the troops.

Chamberlain was a genuine civil war hero, so we have to forgive him, but he could have used a good editor. If it were pared down to maybe half the length, it would make for an interesting and exciting read. As it is, it's a good cure for insomnia.

A Tough Read...
There is something inherently compelling about Chamberlain's account of the last couple of weeks of combat between the ANV and Grant's army group. The guy was there, in the middle of the worst fighting, and was probably THE most effective Union field general. He was obviously tough, intelligent, resourceful, clear-headed, and his reputation as a combat leader helped him get the most out of his officers and men. It was probably no accident that he was chosen to receive the formal ANV surrender. Grant knew Chamberlain was reliable and would do the right thing without being told. That he could remember this amount of detail so many decades later is another example of his powerful intellect. He apparently had at least one failing. He did not know how to write a clear narrative. I realize that people of that era wrote in more flowery prose than we are used to, but his style really gets in the way of the story he was trying to convey. If you are into history, this is worth adding to your library, just be prepared for a tough read.