When it comes to the Indian Wars, there are names that are familiar to us, like Apache, Comanche, and Cherokee, as well as battles, like Custer’s Last Stand, Battle of Wounded Knee, and Battle of theLittle Bighorn. Less familiar may be the Miamis, the powerful Ohio tribe, and the Battle of theWabash. In his new book, “Field of Corpses: Arthur St. Clair and the Death of an American Army,” Alan D. Gaff presents, in vivid and graphic detail, the greatest single defeat of U.S. forces by Native Americans in our nation’s history.
In every battle and war, there are underlying reasons for defeat or victory. Gaff’s thorough and exhaustive research demonstrates the many reasons for the devastating defeat of the army. The author takes the reader through the buildup of the Army on the Frontier tasked with moving through the Northwest Territory to fight the Miamis.
Only two years into the nation’s first administration under the new constitution, there may have been many reasons why soldiers were in short supply. Not only were soldiers difficult to come by, but they were difficult to retain. Gaff discusses the constant desertions regardless of where the soldiers were from across the numerous states.
Ripe for Failure
Gaff conducts a long buildup to put into perspective the many problems that faced the Frontier Army and its commanding officer, Gen. St. Clair. Not only was St. Clair aged, but he was unhealthy, suffering significantly from the gout, which often kept him from his troops. The commander and his second-in-command, Gen. Richard Butler, were at odds. Indeed, numerous officers and soldiers were at odds with each other. Gaff utilizes the soldiers’ diaries and letters to demonstrate this problem.Regarding soldiers, the author has done his due diligence in his research, while at the same time doing a service to those who served, died, or survived, by giving voice to many of them. By the end of the book, it is clear that those memorialized from this disaster should be memorialized for the right reasons. Those right reasons are not always complimentary. They are, however, always corrective, like correcting the narratives of who survived and who died (many contemporary reports got those facts egregiously wrong), and who fought well and who didn’t.
Gaff’s chronology of events strongly suggests that this disaster that witnessed the death of hundreds and the destruction of an entire army (those who survived did so by escape) was bound to happen. Unwilling and untrained soldiers, disgruntled officers, poor weaponry, slow and unreliable supply provisions, harsh conditions, and poor planning and execution created a situation ripe for failure. Gaff pointedly noted, “Discipline, morale, and cohesiveness were in short supply in St. Clair’s army, leaving future success in doubt.”
Graphic and Powerful
Pulling from numerous accounts, Gaff provides a visual retelling of what took place on the morning of Nov. 4, 1791. An army of nearly 2,000 was caught unprepared despite the gnawing reality that an attack was imminent. Gaff captures the bravery of the soldiers and officers who were facing very poor odds. He also captures the graphic circumstances of their deaths and, for some, the incredible capacity to survive multiple wounds from gunshots, stabbings, and even scalpings.Though it does take a long while to reach the actual battle scene, all that comes before is necessary. To understand the Battle of the Wabash, the reader must know the context of what led to it. Otherwise, it will seem solely like a well-coordinated Indian attack that caught the Americans unawares. But it is not that simple―military conflicts rarely are.
The book works to clarify the issues leading to that Nov. 4 morning, the three bloody hours of fighting, and what happened after―court-martials and all. The cumulative idea behind Gaff’s work, however, can be found at the beginning and ending of his book.
In his introduction, he writes, “It is also time to refer to the battle by its traditional name―St. Clair’s Defeat.” In the final sentence of the book, he reiterates why that traditional name should be used, stating “Blunders aplenty had been committed at every level, but, while there were many excuses to be made, the ultimate responsibility must rest with the man whose name would be forever linked to the death of his army―Arthur St. Clair.”
Argument can be made and, in a way, Gaff makes this argument, that the expedition should have never taken place. The men weren’t ready and their commanding officer wasn’t in a place to lead; Gaff believes St. Clair should have declined the offer. Gaff’s book is a fascinating read full of intricate details. It may seem harsh to place the death of hundreds and the destruction of an army at one man’s feet, but after reading “Field of Corpses,” it is difficult to see it any other way.
