Divide Waters: The Naval History of the Civil War
Historical accounts often define important milestones for the human society. It is a creed that Ivan Musicant’s book Divided Waters: The Naval History of the Civil War lives up to as it defines a watershed moment not only in the history of America’s naval operations but also in all other aspects of its human development. The book gives a detailed overview of America’s naval operations during the period of the civil war. Ivan Musicant’s ability to paint such a vivid picture of the events at the time is aided by the use of both primary and secondary sources (official records from both sides of the war). It therefore gives the accounts contained in the book a mastery and superiority among its contemporaries since a majority of them are written from a purely entertainment point of view rather than being based on a factual approach.
Contrary to many of its contemporaries, the book offers a narration of the naval accounts of the civil war rather than making an attempt to analyze the events. It therefore primarily focuses on the physical and mechanical aspects of the ships being used by the servicemen from both sides of the war front. The physical and mechanical aspects included the materials used in the manufacturing of the ships such as iron, the propensity of the ships to sink and their ability and/or inability to attack or evade attacks from other ships through maneuver tactics (Musicant, 2000). Through the use of primary sources, Musicant was able to bring out the finer details of the war such as the superiority contest of the Alabama and Kearsage rival ships (Musicant, 2000).
A narration of the physical and mechanical aspects helped to personalize the encounters.
This is because it brought about a new perspective to the understanding of the war; that is, the challenges that servicemen from both sides of the war faced. It moves away from the often romanticized view of the war which is often biased. It therefore allows readers to imaginatively undergo and appreciate the struggles and experiences of the individual servicemen during the war regardless of sides (union or confederate). Such a perspective is important as it allows the reader to move beyond the strict ideologies that led to the emergence of the war to the very essence of the war; the men that sacrificed themselves often paying the ultimate price for a course that would ultimately shape the course and history of a country.
In most of the narrations and analyses of the Civil War, the Union is often given all the credit with little regard to the efforts made by the Confederacy. However, Musicant’s accounts give a different and more realistic picture of the war. He highlights the numerous innovations that the Confederacy’s navy made, which defined the history of naval operations for periods to come. The story of the Confederacy’s navy is even more remarkable given the meager resources that were available to them as compared to the Union Navy (Musicant, 2000). The book also highlights failures of the Union Navy, which are seldom addressed in other historical works such as the failed attempt to take over Fort Sumter through an amphibious sea entry following a blocked by the Confederacy’s navy.
Yet, Musicant at the same time gives credit where it is due to the Union Navy. He gives a detailed overview of the prowess of the Union’s navy in riverine operations especially in the beleaguered siege against the Confederate navy in Vicksburg (Musicant, 2000). He also acknowledges that the blockade put in place by the Union Navy in the latter stages of the war especially in the riverrines where the Union had the upper advantage ultimately resulted in the defeat of the Confederacy. The ability to focus attention on both sides of the war inclines the reader to have an abstract understanding of the war away from the often bias accounts (especially in favor of the Union’s navy) that have been perpetuated since the war.
The book is also quite involving which makes it easy to understand the historical concepts that Musicant aimed to put across. This is especially because of the graphic nature in which he narrates some of the accounts such as the Battle of Mobile Bay (Musicant, 2000). His narration of the story is further spiced up by the use of firsthand accounts through diaries which enables a reader to understand and appreciate the tensions and emotions that navy officers from both sides of the encounter faced.
Thus far, from a historical point of view, the book is remarkable. However, he appears to have over relied on firsthand accounts too much to the extent that the book appears to be a mere collection of primary sources rather than a well-orchestrated and synchronized use of both primary and secondary sources. Secondly, despite the concise attempts by Musicant to offer a fair representation of both sides of the war, he falls into the usual fallacy of being in favor of the Union whether wittingly or not. While he acknowledges the vast number of ships that the Confederate navy had at one point, he fails to recognize them for the superior quality that they had. Of the expansive Confederate fleet, about twenty-five of them were ironclads, yet he fails to recognize them as such and instead he refers to them as floating batteries which are less superior.
Overall, from a historical perspective, the book makes an attempt to give an impassioned overview of the naval operations of both sides during the civil war. Musicant achieves this by evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of both the Union and Confederate navies. It is a departure from similar works of history that only offer evidence either primary or secondary from a single perspective. However, Musicant still falls for the usual mistake made by a majority of the war’s historical accounts of undermining the Confederate Navy whether design or default.
Reference
Musicant, I. (2000). Divided Waters: The naval history of the civil war (reprint edition).
Minneapolis, MN, Book Sales Publishers
