Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain [1]
The Civil War was unquestionably a seminal event in American history. No war before or since has pitted American against American, brother versus brother. Unfortunately, too often history becomes a study of events on a timeline with little attention paid to the people that lived through those events. If we do pause to reflect on an individual it is because of some spectacular accomplishment that earned them a place on currency or monument in the nation’s capital. However important these heroes may have been in their moment in history, there are many more that were key to events unfolding as they did. Men like Robert E. Lee or Ulysses S. Grant are famous for not only being great leaders, but also as men of deep convictions, each believing their cause was just. Other men made impacts to the war in different ways, and Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain is one of those men. Chamberlain is most famous for his battle tactics at Little Round Top during the Battle of Gettysburg, but his influence had a much greater impact beyond that one battle.
Chamberlain was literally a “horse-shoe nail” for the Union. This is in reference to the anonymous proverb, “For want of a nail a shoe was lost; for want of a shoe a horse was lost; for want of a horse a rider was lost; for want of a rider a battle was lost; for want of a battle a kingdom was lost - and all for want of a horse-shoe nail.”[2] Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain was an indispensable “horse-shoe nail” for the Union cause during the Civil War. His presence, and in some instances, his absence, at critical battles in the war made the difference between the Union winning or losing.
To prove this assertion, it will be necessary to fill in the gaps in scholarship, not through a biographical study of Chamberlain, but instead, through an examination of the entire Civil War using a military lens while focusing on the impacts of his actions or inactions. His role as a “horse-shoe nail” will be evaluated by analysis of how Chamberlain perceived himself, as well as the perceptions of the men that served under him, the officers that he served, his peers, his allies, his family, and even his adversaries. Only in this way can the extent of his influence on the outcome of the Civil War be thoroughly evaluated.
One methodology that will be utilized will be through a qualitative exploratory analysis of historian’s historiographical interpretations of Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain’s actions during the war. This will help to show that his presence had an undeniable impact on the ultimate outcome of the war. Additionally, a qualitative exploratory analysis of primary and secondary sources pertaining to the events in which Chamberlain had an impact will also be conducted. The overarching question that will be addresses is: Was Chamberlain’s presence in the Civil War crucial to the Union’s victory?
To investigate the veracity of the contention that Chamberlain was a “horse-shoe nail” for the Union cause, research questions will be posed and will be investigated individually and in concert. The leadership acumen Chamberlain demonstrated during the Civil War was not formed in the crucible of combat. The foundation of his character was constructed during his upbringing in Maine. Several of the research questions will examine these formative years to initially lay a foundation from which Chamberlain’s military career can be scrutinized.
The heroic actions of Chamberlain’s men at Little Round Top may be what gained him notoriety, but that was not the first or the last engagement of Chamberlain and the men under his command. Although there were many clashes during the Civil War that involved tens of thousands of troops, it was often the actions of a few soldiers under the command of an exceptionally capable leader that turned the tide for one side or the other. To answer the question as to where Chamberlain had this kind of influence, questions will be explored that look at his impact on the outcome of the engagements he was involved in as well as the impact the engagements he was involved in had on the outcome of the extended campaign, and finally, what the impact of these campaigns had on the overall course of the war.
The Civil War was fought using Napoleonic tactics. Massed troops were hurled together through hail of lead and cannon balls. For these men to keep moving forward under these hellish conditions, they needed to draw on the courage of their leaders, which meant their leaders shared their peril. Chamberlain led his troops from the front, urging them onward with his words and the example of his courage. This built an exceptionally strong bond between the Chamberlain and his men. Chamberlain’s effectiveness on the battlefield was closely tied to the faith the men below and above him had in his abilities. To answer the question of the type of leader Chamberlain was, it will be imperative to examine how his leadership ability and conduct in battle was perceived by his men, his superiors, and especially his adversaries.
The premise that Joshua L. Chamberlain was a “horse-shoe nail” for the Union is a unique assumption that does not appear to be thoroughly analyzed in any academic scholarship. Although Chamberlain is a well-known commander in the Civil War, the actual extent of his influence through his actions during the war has yet to be examined as it related to the outcome of the war and the ultimate victory for the Union. There is a significant gap in the historiography between the analysis of Chamberlain’s effectiveness during particular engagements and the sustained effect he had throughout the war. Chamberlain’s impact on the Union’s rising success as the war progressed was a result of his growing experience as a military leader and the recognition of his abilities by his men and his superiors. It is the cumulative effect of Chamberlain’s steadfast dedication to his men and the Union cause throughout the Civil War that made him an indispensable “horse-shoe nail."
_____________________________________
Comments