"Gettysburg: The Last Invasion"

I don't understand the title of that book. I grew up down the street from the site of Fort Stevens, in Washington, DC. The battle took place July 11-12, 1864, a couple of days after the battle of Monocacy, in Frederick County, Maryland. As many as 15,000 Confederate soldiers under General Jubal Early were inside the District of Columbia and were about five miles from the White House.

Simultaneously with this action was the Johnson-Gilmor raid, where Confederate cavalry went on a series of raids around Baltimore. General Bradley T. Johnson had intended to raid on the Rebel POW camp at Point Lookout, Maryland but this portion of the mission was not fulfilled.

Up the street from Fort Stevens, I grew up seeing the small national Cemetery of the graves of the men who were killed in the battle of Fort Stevens. A picture of that site in August 1865, the oldest known photograph of the place, is attached below. If these actions in July 1864 don't constitute an invasion of the North, I don't know what does.

Nationalbattlegroundcemetery-circa August 1865.jpg
 
As you well know, the Mason-Dixon line is the geographical/cultural boundary between the northern and southern states.

Therefore, the title of the book is correct,


Dave
 
As you well know, the Mason-Dixon line is the geographical/cultural boundary between the northern and southern states.

Therefore, the title of the book is correct,


Dave

Thanks for your reply, Dave; but I still disagree.

First of all, the title is simply, Gettysburg: the Last Invasion. But that begs the question, the last invasion of what? If the north is defined by the the Mason-Dixon Line, then does that mean border states like Maryland were a no-man's land that raised a flag to pledge allegiance to neither side? And if the M-D Line is the determinant, then the title should be Gettysburg: the First and Last Invasion because you couldn't count Antietam any more than you could count Monocacy and Fort Stevens. And by the way, I forgot to say anything in my previous post about Early's army torching Chambersburg, Pennsylvania on July 30, 1864... definitely an invasion by your standards.

I wish Mr. Guelzo and his book all the success in the world. But I still don't get the choice of title.
 
Yeah, the title might not be the best--provocative more than precise--but I'm guessing the book is a good one. Guelzo tells a great story, and as a Civil War professor at Gettysburg College, he knows a LOT about the topic. I have listened to many of his lectures on CD during my daily commute--over 50 hours on American history, Lincoln, etc--and find him engaging and though-provoking. I also read his 2012 book, Fateful Lightning: A New History of the Civil War and Reconstruction, and found it a very well structured and intelligent synthesis of the political, social, and military factors in the war and what followed. I'm not sure that book surpasses McPherson's Battle Cry of Freedom or Foner's Reconstruction: America's Unfinished Revolution but I thnk it rivals them. I expect Gettysburg: The Last Invasion won't necessarily add new facts or issues but will make the reader see them in a new and more meaningful light. Despite the semi-lame title, I'm going to get this book and will try to remember to report back with my impressions.
 
Just to be a contrarian, I would say the last invasion was Appomattox Courthouse, but I guess you could go further and say the Battle of Palmito Ranch in Texas in May might have been the last invasion.
 
It' s difficult saying one is the last of the last, since there are some who don't accept that there was a last invasion, 150 years later.
Early's move to Washington, D.C. was ingenious. It was a waste of effort, as the Confederacy was unable to capture Washington, capture the nearby White House, lay a siege and had to leave the vicinity, about as fast as they came.
The Confederacy should be famous, though they are not, for raids in Missouri, Kentucky, West Virginia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania, where they raided but lacked the staying power.
 
Has anyone on the forum read this book yet? Was looking at some reviews on Amazon, someone saying he seems to be more on the Sickles side of things and pretty heavily against Meade. Thought about getting it but wanted to wait to see what some of you thought. Especially since the kindle book is $17.99! Quite a bit for a kindle book.
 
Has anyone on the forum read this book yet? Was looking at some reviews on Amazon, someone saying he seems to be more on the Sickles side of things and pretty heavily against Meade. Thought about getting it but wanted to wait to see what some of you thought. Especially since the kindle book is $17.99! Quite a bit for a kindle book.

I did download the sample and am reading it now. No opinion yet.
 
The scuttlebutt around Gettysburg is that there is nothing new in the book.
After reading the sample, I would have to agree. But after 150 years with this battle in particular having been analyzed under the microscope of history, finding something new may not be possible. He does mention Eric Wittenberg who post comments on this site. I still plan to read it to see the thoughts and opinions of the author.
 
Back
Top