Book Review: Allegiance: Fort Sumpter, Charleston, and the beginning of the Civil War, by David Detzer

This is a good book. I started it wondering whether or not a 320 page book about one tiny battle would be able to hold my attention. It did. Detzer's writing is excellent, highly readable, and free from academic jargon. His research on the topic is exhaustive: he knows what he is talking about.

Detzer provides a fine snapshot of antebellum Charleston, its commerce and society, its colorful characters and politicians, and its slaves. He does a good job of pointing out the sad ironies of slavery amidst a free people: he's not preachy but at times very cutting.

Detzer sugar-coats no one, although he comes close in his portrayal of Major Robert Anderson, who is presented as a man of high character and leadership skills, who is blessed with equal but contradictory doses of pacifism and duty to country.

The final chapter was outstanding, and presented a very sensitive and appropriate retrospective on the later lives of some of the major characters as well as Charleston and Fort Sumpter.

It's an excellent book. There are a few weaknesses, all relatively minor. Dezter is a professional historian, but he gets pretty snarky in places. I'm still trying to decide whether it's endearing or irritating. He does a good bit of editorializing, as well. Usually in just a sentence, never more than a paragraph or two at a time, but liberally sprinkled through the book.

One example is his almost-gratuitous passage on the meaning of the flag, on pages 127-128, claiming that there is no true meaning of a flag. In fine postmodern fashion, Detzer intimates that the flag means whatever its wielder wishes it to mean. He then goes on to complete the book demonstrating (unconsciously, perhaps?) that it stands for the sovereignty of the nation whose emblem it bears. There seems to be no confusion about the meaning of the flag for either the soldiers in Sumpter or the civilians in Charleston--and they both seem to ascribe to it the same significance.

Another weakness in his writing is his tendency to skip around in chronology from one paragraph to the next without giving the reader due warning. I found on repeated occasions, well into the paragraph, that the matter being expounded happened before the matter in previous paragraph. I'm no fan of slavish chronology, but I would appreciate a warning when the time of the scene shifts backwards, otherwise it can be (and was) a little confusing.

All these petty gripes are minor in view of the excellence of the account Detzer has created. I recommend the book to anyone who has an interest in Civil War era history.