Interview: Newsome, “Gettysburg’s Southern Front”

I met Hampton Newsome a few weeks ago during a symposium at the Carnegie Public Library and Music Hall in Carnegie, PA, where he was presenting on the topic of his book Gettysburg’s Southern Front: Opportunity and Failure at Richmond. He was good enough to answer some questions about himself and his book.

—————

BR: Can you tell us a little bit about yourself and your writing?

HN: First off, thanks so much for reaching out about my book – I really appreciate it. As for me, I’ve been researching and writing about the Civil War for about twenty years. In that time, while focusing on subjects that haven’t received a lot of attention, I’ve completed a few book length narratives and one co-edited volume. These titles include: Civil War Talks: Further Reminiscences of George S. Bernard and His Fellow Veterans – edited by Hampton Newsome, John Horn, and John Selby (Univ. of Virginia Press, 2012); Richmond Must Fall: The Richmond-Petersburg Campaign, October 1864 (Kent State Univ. Press, 2013); The Fight for the Old North State: The Civil War in North Carolina, January-May 1864 (Univ. Press of Kansas, 2019); and Gettysburg’s Southern Front: Opportunity and Failure at Richmond (Univ. Press of Kansas, 2022).

BR: What got you interested history in general, and the Civil War in particular? Who/what were your early influences?

HN: My interest in the Civil War has pretty much been a lifelong affliction. It probably began with the subscription to Civil War Times Illustrated I received from my parents when I was a kid. And, like so many dealing with the same condition, I owned (and still own) a well-worn copy of Bruce Catton’s American Heritage Picture History of The Civil War with its detailed and endlessly-fascinating David Greenspan maps.

For a long time, my Civil War-related activities simply involved reading whatever books I could get my hands on. However, about two decades ago, I decided to give a shot at writing an article about the Battle of Burgess Mill, which occurred in October of 1864 during the Petersburg Campaign. After a lot of research and writing, the project mushroomed into a full-blown book, which was later published as Richmond Must Fall.

As for influences, I’ve always admired the books of Gordon Rhea, John Hennessey, Elizabeth Varon, and David Blight – among others. By combining deep research with clear writing, these historians have produced engaging narratives about important campaigns, notable events, and complicated personalities.

BR: Why the Union actions around Richmond during Lee’s foray into Pennsylvania in the summer of 1863, in particular?

HN: I guess I was drawn into this latest project by the fact that, during the Gettysburg Campaign, a force of 20,000 U.S. troops threatened Richmond as part of a multi-faceted effort to damage Robert E. Lee’s chances in Pennsylvania – and very few people seem to know much about it. After doing some digging, I was convinced the operation would make for an engaging story. Indeed, it was quite satisfying to research and write about such an understudied set of events. After turning over a lot of rocks, I found more material than I could possibly fit into a standard monograph. The advance on Richmond involved an array of fascinating characters, multi-angled decisions, and intriguing events. For me, it represents one of the more interesting “what-ifs” of the war.

BR: Can you briefly describe the actions covered in the book?

HN: This book describes the attempt by Major General John Dix to threaten Richmond and its communications during the Gettysburg Campaign. The brainchild of Henry Halleck, the operation reflected one of several little-noticed Federal attempts to damage Confederate supply lines in the east as Lee marched north into Pennsylvania. Dix’s campaign at Richmond, launched from a temporary supply base on the Pamunkey River just outside of the city, involved a cavalry raid against the rail bridges over the South Anna River, an infantry advance toward Confederate defenses on the Chickahominy, and a large expedition against the railroad bridges north of the city. The book also delves into diplomatic efforts by Confederate officials in Richmond at the time, namely, the unsuccessful mission by Vice President Alexander Stephens to seek negotiations with the Lincoln administration, most likely with the aim of ending the war.

BR: What did you find most surprising in your research? Did anything diverge from any preconceived notions you had?

HN: I think the most surprising thing is the fact that this operation is virtually unknown to so many people, even those with a deep interest in the Civil War. For good reason, authors have flyspecked the Gettysburg Campaign for years producing hundreds of books on this famous campaign alone. Yet, this particular aspect of the Gettysburg story – Dix’s advance on Richmond – has received little attention beyond a few journal articles.

I was also surprised at the information I stumbled on about the participation of Black Virginians in Dix’s campaign. This wasn’t a topic of focus when I began my research but as I gathered sources and read about the military operations outside Richmond, I was struck at how enslaved people stepped forward seemingly at every turn to aid U.S. commanders in the field. Black individuals throughout the region routinely identified Confederate troop locations and provided details about local roads and key geographic features. Further, in the thousands, they joined the U.S. columns in the countryside east of Richmond throughout the operation seeking to gain their own freedom. Of course, this was not an unusual occurrence during the war and has been chronicled in many other campaigns. However, it was notable to me how clear and consistent that participation was as revealed in contemporary accounts.

BR: Can you describe how long it took to write the book and what the general steps were in the process?

HN: I usually spend about four or five years on a book. This one began around 2018. I gathered research for a year or two, spent some time producing a draft, did some follow-up research, and then a lot of rewriting. This project was particularly compelling because nearly everything covered in it had received limited attention in the secondary literature. So, even those relevant portions of the Official Records (the O.R.) – that well-worn primary source for nearly all similar projects – came across as new and fresh to me and pointed to many other research opportunities.

BR: Can you describe your research and writing process? What online and brick and mortar sources did you rely on most?

HN: With regard to research, I try to use everything I can find. The Official Records, memoirs, regimentals, and campaign studies written by the participants usually form the building blocks of my projects. In addition, I use whatever material I can find at research repositories. Every project involves trips to the National Archives and Library of Congress. But I also try to find relevant material in collections from various research institutions – going in person whenever I can and leaning on archivists and local researchers when I can’t. In addition to the usual sources, I’ve found a gold mine of material through period newspapers, many of which have only become widely available to researchers in a searchable form over the last decade or so. While the frontpage news articles can be marginally useful, the soldiers’ letters appearing in the back pages provide a compelling array of eyewitness accounts and descriptions about troop movements and engagements unavailable elsewhere.

As for writing, let’s just say my first drafts aren’t pretty. When I finally begin writing, I try to get things down as quickly as possible to avoid leaving anything of substance out. Then, I go back and edit the work – rewriting over and over (and over) again while trying my best to repress any emotional attachment I may have with the text. After putting the manuscript aside and conducting more, targeted research, I pick it up again and do more revisions, and then do more of the same.

BR: How has the book been received so far?

HN: I’ve been happy with the response. For certain, many readers understandably prefer to stay on the beaten path. However, the positive reviews, awards, and feedback for Gettysburg’s Southern Front suggests there is an appetite out there for something beyond the well-known, well-covered events. Also, I’d be remiss not to thank the staff at University Press of Kansas. They are amazing to work with and have produced, at least in my view, a great looking book.

BR: What’s next for you?

HN: I’m working on a study of the Appomattox Campaign. While there are several excellent books on various aspects of this final struggle between Grant and Lee, I don’t think there are nearly enough. With this new project, I hope to cover the military issues involved in the campaign from April 3 to April 9 – the movements and battles – with a focus on U.S. command decisions along with a variety of additional angles. So far, I am enjoying it. We will see how it goes!