No comments about The Officers of the CSS Shenandoah (New Perspectives on the History of the South).

1 comments about Joe Brown's Pets: The Georgia Militia, 1862-1865.

1. My ancestor was in the Georgia Militia and the State Guard.For six years, I had been struggling to learn abut his service in the Civil War. This book has more information about the Georgia Militia than every other resource combined. I would highly recommend it.

1 comments about Personal Memoirs of John H. Brinton: Civil War Surgeon, 1861-1865 (Shawnee Classics (Reprinted)).

1. I think this book is a must read for all Civil War enthusiasts. This book is very descriptive and worth the money and time of getting it. I think that all persons that are literare should read this book.

No comments about There He Stands: The Story Of Stonewall Jackson (Civil War Generals).

2 comments about Judah P. Benjamin: Confederate Statesman.

1. Excellent perspective of history without the northern or PC agenda.



2. Judah Benjamin's story has fascinated me since I was a child. Here was a man who lived by a masterful combination of brains and charm, who overcame great adversity, and, when The Cause was lost, picked himself up and moved on. Benjamin was a biographer's nightmare...he never kept correspondence, burned all his papers before evacuating Richmond [and did the same shortly before he died], and never wrote, or spoke, of the Civil War once it was over. He became the richest lawyer in Louisiana at a young age, lost everything in the war, and, starting over in England in his 50's, became the richest lawyyer there. Who was the first Jew in the U.S. Senate? Who was the first Jew nominated to the Supreme Court? Who was the first American Jew to hold a Cabinet position. Who was the first Jew [and man born outside England] to be a Queen's Counsel in England? Benjamin is the answer to ALL those trivia questions. [David Yulee had served in the Senate earlier, but he had long since converted to Presbyterian; Benjamin turned down President Fillmore's nomination because the Court didn't pay enough] Judah Benjamin held three different jobs in President Davis' Cabinet,[despite an earlier near duel with Davis in the Senate] and was, in many ways, Davis' right hand man, accessory brain, and designated "nice guy", soothing the feathers that Davis ruffled. The story of Benjamin's escape to England at the end of the war is, alone, worth the price of the book. Benjamin's marriage gets plenty of space; in many ways, it was the match made in Hell. Natalie was a piece of work, yet the Benjamins were, on some level, quite devoted to each other, and stayed more or less together for over 50 years.
   
   Judah Benjamin is a problem for some Jews, and northern liberals...here was a Jew, educated at Yale, who owned slaves, and was probably the most articulate defender of slavery. Then, he was one of the central figures in the Confederacy for four years. History does not always fit neatly; try making Thomas Jefferson fit anything. The number of Jews in the Confederacy was around 2000 [see Robert Rosen's "The Jewish Confederates"], and, as for slavery, not only did rich Jews own slaves, so did rich Indians, Mexicans, and free Blacks.
   
   Dr. Robert Meade published this great masterpiece in 1943. It is one of the very finest pieces of biography about anybody, anytime. There are three other Benjamin biographies that I know about, and own. Two of them are even worth reading. But, there is no real comparison. This is up there with Dr. Freeman's "R.E. Lee". High praise, I know, and not made lightly. {If you can find Meade's two volume study of Patrick Henry, get it. Good luck} LSU press deserves a big "THANK YOU" for making this great book available.
   
   ADDENDUM: There is now a fifth volume available...the 1933 "Judah P. Benjamin-Statesman of the Lost Cause" by Rollin Osterweis can be had from Amazon. See my review of it; this volume remains definitive.

5 comments about Jefferson Davis: The Man and His Hour.

1. Once more, William C. Davis have provided us Civil War readers with another pure winner. Of all the biographies I have read on Jefferson Davis, this book definitely proves to be the best. It highly readable, interesting as well as entertaining and after you finished with the last page, you actually feel like you know something about Jefferson Davis, his talents which was outweighted by his weaknesses. The biography paint a rather tragic figure of man who was so devoted to his cause but yet, did so much to defeat it. The irony will proves to be unforgettable to anyone who read the book. I would considered this book to be one of these so called "must read" book by anyone who have a slightest interest in the Civil War.



2. WC Davis writes a thorough bio on one of the most unique icons in our history. Jeff Davis is shown from his youth, painful first marriage, through his political and military rise, to the senate and to the Chief Executive position in the Confederacy. WC's bio helps explain why Davis was so unwilling to give up to the point of unrealistic dreams during the final month of the war particularly when Lee's army collapsed. WC notes the sad loss of Jeff Davis' first wife that left him a social cripple for several years to his slow rebirth. His success in the Mexican war seemed to lead him to conclude that he was a superior military man and his role as the Secretary of Defense perhaps encouraged his perspective. More a man of criticism than bright ideas in the senate, he seemed to hold his perception of honor above all else. WC does a great job describing Jeff's relations with his generals particularly Lee who seems to placate Davis' need for detail unlike Johnson and Beauregard. At the end, Jeff Davis seems to hold the Confederacy by himself and his only last political hurrah may have been allowing Alexander Stephens to make his futile effort at peace in March 65. In the end, WC notes that Jeff Davis seems to rebound with the southern public aided by his cruel treatment at Fort Monroe by his captors; however, his two-volume book seems a disaster of disorganization. One has to respect Davis for holding the Confederacy together in spite of his true desire to be a general and particularly because of his ill health and fractured political support. The book answers the question of how Davis could ever imagine that the Confederacy could survive as he was riding with a small protective band through Georgia in his last hours acting more like a fugitive than the President of a country that could still rally.



3. William Davis has written many has written many wonderful books about the Civil War and quite frankly he has come a long way as a writer since he wrote this book. In this book all too often his sentence structure is poor and I had to read some sentences two or three times to see what he meant. There are also a few typos in this edition but that is hardly Davis' fault. On the other hand there is a reference in the book about Bedford Forrest being from Alabama which is hard to explain. Overall though this book is well written and will certainly hold the reader's attention.

   All in all, this is an excellent biography of Jefferson Davis. I would suggest that anyone who reads this book also read William Cooper's biography of Davis because the two authors take different approaches to their subject and together they offer a great insight into the life of President Davis.

   This biography tends to delve more into the personality quirks that made Davis who he was and is sometimes very critical of these quirks. In fact, this book is sometimes much more critical of Davis than is Cooper but on the other hand there is plenty of praise for the subject also. The author tends to focus on Davis as commander in chief and generally on his relationship with his generals, especially Joe Johnston, Beauregard and Bragg. These three relationships Davis argues were devastating to the Confederacy and were examples of Jefferson Davis at his worst. Full credit is given to Davis however for realizing what he had in Robert E. Lee and for doing all he could to support his best general through good times and bad.

   After all is said and done the author reaches what seems like a sound conclusion. Jefferson Davis probably did as well or better than any of the other possible choices the South could have picked as their leader. He made mistakes but it was he who set up the structure that kept the armies in the field for four years. Davis was the one who persuaded Congress to pass the laws that sent the armies men and food, Davis chose Lee for command when "Granny Lee" was not at all popular, and Davis dealt with the obstinate Governors who tried to keep men and arms to themselves when they were desperately needed elsewhere. In short, Davis held the new nation together longer than most any other Southern leader could have.

   Finally, the author deals quite well with the process that brought Davis to near sainthood in the South after the war. It was a process that started with his imprisonment in Fort Monroe and ended with one of the largest funerals in Southern history. Together, Cooper and Davis cover most every aspect of the life of Jefferson Davis and the two books compliment each other quite well. What Davis misses, Cooper takes care of and what Cooper only touches upon, Davis completes. These two books will serve as the most complete biographies of Jefferson Davis for years to come, and they may never be surpassed.




4. Davis presents casual readers and historians with an excellent bio of Davis and his tenure as president of the short-lived Confederate nation. His meticulous research is evident in this interesting account of the man AND his motivations. I had the privilege of hearing Mr. Davis address a Civil War Round Table shortly after the publication of this book. His other works, especially "The Deep Waters of the Proud" are also highly recommended



5. rHE AUTHOR WILLIAM C. DAVIS HAS WRITTEN MANY BOOKS ON THE CIVIL WAR AND THIS PERIOD OF OUR HISTORY. FOR A LONG TIME HE WAS EDITOR OF THE MAGAZINE CIVIL WAR ILLUSTRATED. SOME OF HIS BOOKS BELONG MORE IN THIS MAGAZINE THAN IN BOOK FORM. THISIS ONE OF HIS BEST, COMPARABLE TO HIS FINE WORK ON BRECKENRIDGE AND LIKE THAT EARLIER BOOK THIS OFFERS US A GOOD READ ABOUT THE POLITICS OF THE TIME BOTH NORTH AND SOUTH. IT IS A GOOD READ IN THE SENSE THAT THEE AUTHOR HAS GIVEN A GREAT DEAL OF TIME TO RESEARCH AND THINKING ON HIS SUBJECT. HOWEVER, IT IS NOT AS WELL WRITTEN AS SOME OTHER BIOS OF JEFF DAVIS.
   WM. DAVIS ATTEMPS TO BE FAIR IN HIS ASSESSMENT OF DAVIS, NEITHER PRO NOR CON TO A GREAT EXTENT AND THIS SEEKING FOR FAIRNESS TAKES SOME OF THE EXCITEMENT FROM THE SUBJECT. ON THE WHOLE IT IS A WORTHY BOOK FOR ANY READER--PROFESSIONAL OR BUFF.

4 comments about Reminiscences Of The Civil War.

1. Being a passionate reader of autobiographical accounts of the Civil War, I have to put this book on my top five of all-time favorites. General Gordon writes in a concise, easy-to-read style that demonstrates his intelligence as a leader and character as a great American.



2. This is an excellent book. Gordon may not be as well known as some Confederate Generals, Nevertheless, He was a very good officier and a gentlemen that can discuss the many complex issues with the Battles he was a part of. I strongly suggest that you read this book to learn more about him and his part in the war between the States.



3. John Gordon's book is an important book to read for those trying to gain an understanding of the Civil War and a perspective of a individual that had been involved in multiple engagements. From the start, Gordon writes about raising the Racoon Roughs and their start in Georgia which carries the reader chronologically throughout various battles. His service to the Confederate cause is covered well from his early beginnings to his involvement with General Lee in the surrender at Apomattox. This book is an important tool for understanding the fairness and qualities of Gordon and his sympathies for the people involved in the Civil War be it North or South. His character in speaking about individuals involved is fair and truly demonstrates that he wasn't just another 'racist' that fought for the South which is typical of only today's modern society. It is a must read for those looking to get into the mind of a great Southern leader. I would have rated this book 5 stars if Gordon would have only covered his involvement in the Civil War instead of writing reports on battles he wasn't involved with, though shaped the outcome of the Civil War. It would have better in my opinion if the book didn't get into explaining other battles or problems which Gordon had not took part in since it didn't appear that those other situations affected him.



4. John B. Gordon was Georgia's greatest Confederate Hero.
   After the war, he led the KKK in Georgia and participated in one of the greatest stock market scandals of the Gilded Age.

   He also formed a triumvirate, along with Aleck Stephens and Joe Brown that dominated Georgia politics for more than a quarter century after "redemption." And milked his image as the "plumed knight of Appomattox", who led the last charge of the Army of Northern Virginia.

   John B. Gordon, in short, was a piece of work. (Read C.Vann Woodward's description of him in TOM WATSON AGRARIAN REBEL.)

   Another of Gordon's postbellum achievements was as high priest
   of the cult of the "lost cause." In codifying the "myth," he was second only to Jubal Early. Like Early, he maintained that the war had not been about slavery at all, but states rights. Like Early, he would maintain that the South was not defeated but only overwhelmed but vastly superior numbers of men and material. Unlike Early, he downplayed the struggle between northern industrial capital and southern landed gentry and he gave the myth a conciliatory twist perfectly suited to the capital hungry "new south." For decades he would dazzle memorial day audiences, with a speech arguing that *both* sides of the "war between the states" were right and *both* sides won( the North preserved the union and the South preserved "honor"). (Now *that's* conciliatory!)

   It is this mythmaking, that is in evidence in his wartime memoirs. His overwritten florid prose

   describes each calvary charge in romantic hyperbole with out a hint of gore attached to the proceeding. (It is just this sort of bunk that Sherman had in mind when he told cadets "war is not a gentlemen's game,
   war is hell.")

   As "myth" this book deserves five stars, as "history" two would be being generous--so I've split the difference.

   If one wants a real soldier's story told with out concern for the memories of marble men or a sense of decorum one would be better off with Edward Porter Alexander's FIGHTING FOR THE CONFEDERACY.

   If on the other hand wants to wallow in fantasies of "moonlight and magnolias" then, by all means, knock yourself out!

3 comments about The Generalship Of Ulysses S. Grant (Da Capo Paperback).

1. The paucity of source material utilized by General Fuller is more than offset by the lucidity of his commentary, and his keen insight into the military mind and psyche. Grant, the man, appears to have been a hobby of Fuller's, and while there are better analyses of the details of Grant's campaigns and battles, the reader leaves this book with a sense of knowing and understanding Grant, and believing that Grant's personality was the critical factor in the Union's 1864-1865 Virginia compaigns. The assessment of U.S. Grant is Fuller's personal assessment, nevertheless, when this reader finished the book he hoped Fuller was right. Essential Civil War reading. There's also some interesting commentary on the theory of military strategy and tactics.



2. I find this book to be the best detailed analysis of the generalship of U. S. Grant available. Written by one of the most outstanding military writers in the world, it presents a thought provoking and convincing picture of one of our greatest generals. It pictures General Grant as one of the greatest strategists of all times and gives many convincing arguments to back up the claim.

   The book covers other aspects of his csreer and comments on his capabilities and shortcomings. It is not completely lauditory, as it points out his many failures as a tactician as well as other shotcomings. Substantiation and analysis of his actions make for a very convincing account. It is especially effective when read in conjunction with his memoirs.

   I highly recommend it.




3. An earlier reviewer commented on the paucity of General Fuller's source material. In May of 1929, Fuller wrote this passage (in all the orotund glory of its semi-colons) in his preface: "Here, then, is the gist of this book--to write living history as well as truthful history--a difficult task; for in my opinion all history has been diluted with about seventy-five per cent. of falsehood; and more especially official history, which is normally meticulously accurate in fact and utterly false in spirit.... In order to decipher [Grant's] generalship I have relied on three sources: the official records--the bones of my subject; the personal memoirs and various historical works--the muscles; and my own intuitions and deductions which I may liken to the nerves. This latter source may be very defective; yet I feel not more so than the other two."
   
   This famous book was written by one of the relatively few critics with real (as opposed to armchair) high-level military knowledge and experience. Both were gained, moreover, on battlefields bearing closer resemblance to those of Grant than anything seen since. For what it's worth, General Fuller remains the highest ranking non-participant military man ever to write at length on the American Civil War (which in Fuller's day was still officially and legally designated by Damnyankees, at least, as "The War of the Rebellion." My unreconstructed Confederate ancestors, naturally, had other ideas.)
   
   Fuller's book had a profound effect in Europe. Until its publication, accepted European military opinion held that the U.S. Civil War was no more than a series of military riots conducted by armed mobs. After this book and its analysis of the brilliant campaign that led to the capture of Vicksburg and of the multi-pronged assault that withered and then destroyed the Confederate States of America, the unassuming, unimpressive-looking Grant emerged as one of the great captains of history.
   
   A few--a very few--new details have been unearthed in the seventy-six years since General Fuller handed his manuscript over to his publishers, but no large-scale analysis of Grant as a soldier and commander has surpassed this one.

No comments about Carpetbagger from Vermont: The Autobiography of Marshall Harvey Twitchell (Library of Southern Civilization).

No comments about Band of Brothers: Company C, 9th Tennessee Infantry.