Books in Campaigns and Commanders Series series

“Truscott was one of the really tough generals,” soldier-cartoonist Bill Mauldin of the 45th Infantry Division once wrote. “He could have eaten a ham like Patton for breakfast any morning and picked his teeth with the man’s pearl-handled pistols.” Not one merely to act the part of commander, Mauldin remembered, “Truscott spent half his time at the front—the real front—with nobody in attendance but a nervous Jeep driver and a worried aide.” In this biography of Lucian K. Truscott, Jr., author Harvey Ferguson tells the story of how Truscott—despite his hardscrabble beginnings, patchy education, and questionable luck—not only made the rank of army lieutenant general, earning a reputation as one of World War II’s most effective officers along the way, but was also given an honorary promotion to four-star general seven years after his retirement. For all his accomplishments and celebrated heroic action, Truscott was not one for self-aggrandizement, which may explain in part why historians have neglected him until now. The Last Cavalryman, drawing on personal papers only recently made available, gives the first full picture of this singular man’s extraordinary life and career. Ferguson describes Truscott’s near-accidental entry into the U.S. Cavalry (propelled by Pancho Villa’s 1916 raids) and his somewhat halting rise through the ranks—aided by fellow cavalryman George S. Patton, Jr., who steered him into the nascent armored force at the right time. The author takes us through Truscott’s service in the Second World War, from creating the U.S. Army Rangers to engineering the breakout from Anzio and leading the “masterpiece” invasion of southern France. Ferguson finishes his narrative by detailing the general’s postwar work with the CIA, where he acted as President Dwight Eisenhower’s eyes and ears within the agency. A compelling story in itself, this biography of Lucian K. Truscott, Jr.—a cavalryman to the last—fills out an important chapter in American military history.

When the Revolutionary War began, Congress established a national army and appointed George Washington its commander in chief. Congress then took it upon itself to choose numerous subordinate generals to lead the army’s various departments, divisions, and brigades. How this worked out in the end is well known. Less familiar, however, is how well Congress’s choices worked out along the way. Although historians have examined many of Washington’s subordinates, Washington’s Revolutionary War Generals is the first book to look at these men in a collective, integrated manner. A thoroughgoing study of the Revolutionary War careers of the Continental Army’s generals—their experience, performance, and relationships with Washington and the Continental Congress—this book provides an overview of the politics of command, both within and outside the army, and a unique perspective on how it affected Washington’s prosecution of the war. It is impossible to understand the outcome of the War for Independence without first examining America’s military leadership, author Stephen R. Taaffe contends. His description of Washington’s generals—who they were, how they received their commissions, and how they performed—goes a long way toward explaining how these American officers, who were short on experience and military genius, prevailed over their professional British counterparts. Following these men through the war’s most important battles and campaigns as well as its biggest controversies, such as the Conway Cabal and the Newburgh Conspiracy, Taaffe weaves a narrative in the grand tradition of military history. Against this backdrop, his depiction of the complexities and particulars of character and politics of military command provides a new understanding of George Washington, the War for Independence, and the U.S. military’s earliest beginnings. A unique combination of biography and institutional history shot through with political analysis, this book is a thoughtful, deeply researched, and an eminently readable contribution to the literature of the Revolution.

In a world rife with conflict and tension, how does a great power prosecute an irregular war at a great distance within the context of a regional struggle, all within a global competitive environment? The question, so pertinent today, was confronted by the British nearly 250 years ago during the American War for Independence. And the answer, as this book makes plain, is: not the way the British, under Lieutenant General Charles, Earl Cornwallis, went about it in the American South in the years 1778–81. Southern Gambit presents a closely observed, comprehensive account of this failed strategy. Approaching the campaign from the British perspective, this book restores a critical but little-studied chapter to the narrative of the Revolutionary War—and in doing so, it adds detail and depth to our picture of Cornwallis, an outsize figure in the history of the British Empire. Distinguished scholar of military strategy Stanley D. M. Carpenter outlines the British strategic and operational objectives, devoting particular attention to the strategy of employing Southern Loyalists to help defeat Patriot forces, reestablish royal authority, and tamp down resurgent Patriot activity. Focusing on Cornwallis’s operations in the Carolinas and Virginia leading to the surrender at Yorktown in October 1781, Carpenter reveals the flaws in this approach, most notably a fatal misunderstanding of the nature of the war in the South and of the Loyalists’ support. Compounding this was the strategic incoherence of seeking a conventional war against a brilliant, unconventional opponent, and doing so amidst a breakdown in the unity of command. Ultimately, strategic incoherence, ineffective command and control, and a misreading of the situation contributed to the series of cascading failures of the British effort. Carpenter’s analysis of how and why this happened expands our understanding of British decision-making and operations in the Southern Campaign and their fateful consequences in the War for Independence.

In July 1918, sensing that the German Army had lost crucial momentum, Supreme Allied Commander Ferdinand Foch saw an opportunity to end the First World War. In drafting his plans for a final grand offensive, he assigned the most difficult sector―the dense Argonne forest and the vast Meuse River valley―to the American Expeditionary Forces under General John J. Pershing. There, the Doughboys faced thickly defended German lines with terrain deemed impossible to fight through. From September 26 through the November 11 armistice, US forces suffered more than 20,000 casualties a week, but the Allies ultimately prevailed in a decisive victory that helped to end the Great War. In Thunder in the Argonne, Douglas V. Mastriano offers the most comprehensive account of this legendary campaign to date. Not only does he provide American, French, and British perspectives on the offensive, but he also offers―for the first time in English―the German view. Mastriano presents a balanced analysis of successes and failures at all levels of command, examining the leadership of the principals while also illuminating acts of heroism by individual soldiers. The Meuse-Argonne Offensive is widely regarded as one of America's finest hours, and the amazing feats of Sergeant Alvin York, Major Charles Whittlesey of the Lost Battalion, and Lieutenant Sam Woodfill―all accomplished in the midst of this maelstrom―echo across the ages. Published to coincide with the centennial of the campaign, this engaging book offers a fresh look at the battle that forged the modern US Army

March 1862. The Union ironclad warship, Monitor, with its two eleven-inch Dahlgren smoothbores in a unique revolving turret assembly, leaves New York City under tow to serve blockade duty off the coast of North Carolina. Meanwhile, the Confederate ironclad Virginia (formerly the wooden frigate Merrimac) is raising havoc with Union blockaders in Hampton Roads. The inevitable showdown takes place on March 9. For more than four hours the two ironclads battle furiously at close range. The Merrimac finally withdraws and returns to Norfolk to protect the river approaches to Richmond, leaving the Monitor in control of the Roads and in position to protect the Union blockaders. In May, the Merrimac is destroyed by its own crew to prevent capture; in December, the Monitor sinks in a storm off Cape Hatteras while under tow from Hampton Roads to North Carolina waters. An exciting account of two ships that would change naval warfare forever.

Civil War scholars and buffs alike have long differed on the turning point of the war. Gettysburg, Vicksburg, and Chattanooga, to name but a few, have garnered attention as turning points. Seldom do the names of Forts Henry and Donelson enter the argument. But as prolific military historian Spencer C. Tucker points out, the capture of these river bastions in Tennessee became the first important Federal victories of a war still in its infancy.<br>From the beginning Union leaders devised a plan to capitalize on their command of America's waterways as a means of dividing and conquering the Confederacy. Large, navigable rivers such as the Mississippi, the Tennessee, and the Cumberland formed gateways to the Southern heartland.<br>In February 1862 a combined effort by the land forces of unheralded Federal General Ulysses S. Grant and a flotilla of gunboats commanded by veteran Flag Officer Andrew Foote moved on the inadequate Confederate defenses of northwestern Tennessee in a attempt to open the South to deeper penetration.<br>Ill-prepared Fort Henry on the Tennessee fell on February 6; ten days later Grant offered the hapless commander of Fort Donelson on the Cumberland the terms for which he would become famous - Unconditional Surrender.<br>The loss of these two important forts opened Tennessee to Union invasion. Within weeks Nashville fell, and soon the state and most of its resources were in Union hands. Grant became an instant hero in the North, while in the South the Confederacy scrambled to recover. It never would.<br>Tucker, an authority on naval warfare, deftly blends the elements of naval innovation, combined operations, and political considerations into a compelling story about the beginning of the end for the Southern Confederacy.