2 comments about Jubal: The Life and Times of General Jubal A. Early, Csa, Defender of the Lost Cause.

1. This book doesn't really seem to deal with Early the general as much as it does Early the leader of the Lee cult after the war. Skip ahead to the last few chapters.



2. For those well familiar with the Civil war, this is a great biography of Early in that it concentrates on Early the person and the General while assuming that you have the basic facts down on the Civil War. The author does not spend too much time on minute detail on troop movements that has been covered many times before but provides in-depth insight to "Old Jube" and his actions. A tough and controversial fighter, until reading this book I didn't know that the former Commonwealth Attorney and life long bachelor from Franklin County sired four children refusing to marry his companion because she was beneath his station. Great historical highlights such as Early's controversial role on Lee's left at Gettysburg, his great assignment defending Fredericksburg against great odds while Lee takes the rest of the army to Chancellorsville, his zealous and dictatorial grip on the Lost cause syndrome, and his public branding of the ill equipped Longstreet (not a lawyer and politically naive) as the cause of Lee's defeat at Gettysburg. Wonderful that it highlights the second battle of Fredericksburg and how the Federals found out the heights were lightly defended. In addition, the author makes an excellent case that when defending the valley after Jackson, Early did as well as Jackson until Grant sent Sheridan and a 40,000 man army to defeat him. The author notes that aside from poor use of his calvary and his negative tongue-lashing, Lee's "bad, old man" was a tough fighter and a major player in the Army of Northern Virginia.

5 comments about Into the Rising Sun: In Their Own Words, World War II's Pacific Veterans Reveal the Heart of Combat.

1. I read this book after "Beyond Valor" by the same author and I wasn't disappointed. "Into the Rising Sun" is a collection of first hand accounts of the brave men who fought in the Pacific. The author sets up the accounts with some background material to make more sense to it all. After re-living some of these battle through this book, I started to understand what a living Hell these guys lived through. The intensity of the Japanese soldier was astonishing.

   This book has special meaning to me since my father was a Marine fighting the Japanese in the Pacific. He was at Guadalcanal and Okinawa .I now know what a hero he was!




2. This review is of the Audio CD version of this excellent book. Jeff Riggenbach did a fantastic job reading this text. He managed to give proper emphasis without drowning the material.

   Many soldiers are reluctant to talk of their wartime experiences for fear of seeming boastful. O'Donnell got these veterans to open up and tell their stories. They did so that the fallen heroes would get proper credit, not to tell of their own exploits in a grand fashion. Many of the other reviewers have told of the specific episodes relayed in the book, but what struck me was the depth of feeling that these men had many decades after the fact. One soldier tells of looking up the family of a fallen buddy after the war. It was as if he felt driven to tell them of their son's valor and his worth to his fellow soldiers. Another tells of a friend he saw die in combat after having met his wife and been their with him during the arrival of their child. It was a common theme that these men had these experiences with them every day, if only just beneath the surface. I highly recommend it to those who would like to grasp the depth of the sacrifice these individuals made on our behalf.




3. Well, if other reviews don't say it already, this book was one of the more brutally honest books written about war against Japan. Its honest because its brutally politically incorrect. The American soldiers who relates their stories, tell not only of the horrors that the Japanese troops committed but additional horrors of what they did to the Japanese troops. This was no-hold bar combat, where there were no "good guys" or "bad guys" per say. The stories related in this book was all about killing, surviving and living on. In doing so, anything goes and there were no rules. It may be that many general readers may be kind of shock to read so honest account. Some of them may not like the read how the Americans in these pages acted with certain amount of brutality that almost mirror their enemies. But then, what is war after all, right?



4. A fairly interesting book. O'Donnell lists the campaigns of the elite troops of this theater of command, details the plan of battle, and then gives the oral histories of those who served in those campaigns. Most of the veterans are at the end of their lives, so these oral histories present a heartfelt tribute to the difficulties these soldiers endured during combat. What surprised me most was how these soldiers/veterans got choked up recounting the battles they went through, and the friends they lost. Freedom isn't cheap, and these soldiers are living proof of how America was affected by the battle.
   This is a good read. Oral histories are good at describing the personal experiences of soldiers, but they don't put perspective on the actual battle campaigns. If one wants to know more about the War in the Pacific, one needs to read a general history, before reading this book.



5. This is the second of Patrick O'Donnell's books. O'Donnell is a gifted oral historian who's been collecting the recollections of men who were soldiers and served in the Second World War, partially through a website he set up some years ago, and partially through other sources. This compilation shows off O'Donnnell's strengths, and weaknesses (such as they are) and is a good example of his work.
   
   O'Donnell, for whatever reason, is very attached to "elite" infantry units. In his book on the European Theater, this included paratroopers, rangers, and the members of the 1st Special Service Force. In the current book, which covers the Pacific Theater, the distinction between "elite" forces and the regular ones is somewhat more blurry: Army Rangers, paratroopers, and members of Merril's Marauders are the participants from the army, but the author chose to distinguish the Marine Raider and Parachute units from other Marine outfits. This is a weakness as all of these forces were disbanded in 1943-4, and so the book would be rather truncated as far as the Marine Corps went for the last 18 months or so of the war. This (of course) is unacceptable, so the author merely follows former members of these specialized units who were absorbed into other, regular Marine regiments.
   
   The result is that some battles are covered in considerable detail here, while others (notably Saipan and Peleliu) are ignored because the Marines who participated in these campaigns weren't "elite." This includes members of the 1st Marine Division, who were arguably the most experienced in terms of combat against Japanese soldiers. So what's here is rather skewed and somewhat disjointed, but if you accept that, then the material that's here is worthwhile.
   
   I enjoyed this book, within its limitations, and I would recommend it and the others in O'Donnell's series, provided you accept what they are.

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 Giap: The Victor in Vietnam.

1. MacDonald, a Britisher, had easier access to the Vietnamese than an American or French writer would, as the Vietnamese judged he would be less biased in his approach. Their faith was rewarded; in a book which draws much on personal interviews with Vo Nguyen Giap and other veterans of the Vietnamese war, MacDonald has given us a clear, balanced, interesting portrait of one of the major military figures of the 20th Century.

   In a career spanning three decades, having only the resources of a small third-world country (though with powerful international friends), Vo Nguyen Giap managed to bring the armies of two major Western powers to their knees. MacDonald tells us the military and some of the political story of this remarkable leader.

   What is missing is the personal side. Except for a little information surrounding his first wife's death and his second marriage, the book is silent on Giap's private life. It would be fascinating to know more of this man as a person, but apparently Giap was unwilling to discuss personal matters with MacDonald. Perhaps this is just Vietnamese reticence, but there is no real insight into the man himself.

   The political Giap is only a little more fully drawn. The blank spots here are a function of Vietnamese and Communist ways of thinking. Giap was a member of a collective leadership which took the collective part very seriously; no policy or initiative is attributed to an individual, only to the complete Politburo. A few hints of personal positions, a vague suggestion of a possible difference of opinion, and the screen of the collective solid front descends again.

   Though primarily a biography of Giap, the book is also a history of the series of armed struggles in Indochina beginning in the late 1930s. The Japanese invasion, the French war (which MacDonald calls the Indochina war), and finally the war with the U. S. are all described tersely but clearly. It is refreshing and revealing to read an account which is designed neither to justify nor excoriate the U. S., but instead is a sober report on the facts.

   Especially as the U. S. and Vietnam approach normal relations and as U. S. investment and interest in Vietnam increase, this is a useful and valuable book.




2. A detailed, balanced and often fascinating account of the life of one of the twentieth century's most successful and lesser known military commanders. It is written by a British Brigadier (that's a one-star general in the US).

   What makes this work different is that it doesn't pull punches in terms of 'political correctness'. It might therefore upset the odd Frenchman, the occasional American (or even some Japanese readers). Those that might have pre-conceived or ill-informed notions as to the role of their respective nations in the various wars in Vietnam during Giap's years as a commander.

   It should be required reading at Army Staff Colleges, such as Leavenworth (if it isn't already) and France's Ecole Militaire at St.Cyr, where it probably is not, although it seems that there is a french translation.

   In all, a thought provoking title, and well worth a read by those interested in the subject from whatever angle.




3. It should be required reading for politicians and military leaders but especially politicians who get all our kids in harms way. Great book on the life of a great General regardless of which side you're on. It isnt politically correct but it does take you inside the mind of the guy behind the victory in Vietnam. As a vet of two tours in Nam with the Marines I found it fascinating to peer inside the strategy and the man. Great read.

5 comments about Custer Victorious: The Civil War Battles of General George Armstrong Custer.

1. Being from Michigan, I knew George Custer was a Civil War hero. After reading this book I realized just how important that man was to the Union cause. Although young, Custer was mature beyond his years, his prowess as a calvaryman is second to none. He was loved by his troops and respected by his enemies, some who he bested many times during the Civil War. He was a true leader in every sense of the word. Fearless and steady, always leading his troops into a charge. Ever concerned for the well being of his men. This book is a wonderful piece on a great man who was lost in history by speculation and heresay. Had he his Michigan Calvary Brigade, his beloved "Wolverines" or men like them at Little Big Horn and not 17 and 18 yr old troops as recently discovered, even though being outgunned I am sure there would have been different results for historians to ponder. Rest in Peace Major General Custer, your name is forever cleared.



2. This book tells the fascinating story of George Armstrong Custer's Civil War career. The self-confidence of this man, followed by his real accomplishment, is amazing. Prior to reading this book, I was aware of only Custer's battle with Jeb Stuart at Gettysburg. Now I find that Custer met Stuart on numerous occasions and, in fact, it was his brigade that was responsible for Stuart's death at Yellow Tavern. For the life of me, I can't figure out why this epic rivalry between these two great cavalry leaders is not better known.
   
   The bad news is that the writing is merely adequate. The prose is a tad purple and the last chapter, in which the author summarizes his theory that Custer was truly a great military leader, is superfluous in that the author has done a much more convincing job in merely telling the tale. Finally, I might quibble about the title. I almost didn't buy this book because I thought it was an alternative history of Little Big Horn.
   
   We live in an age with a scarcity of heroes. This book presents us a hero in the classic mold. We could do worse than to emulate this man. It is perhaps telling of our times, however, that rather than to acknowledge Custer's heroism, we defame his memory.



3. This is a good read and will open up a new opinion of Custer for most people. It was only in the 20th century that the name of George Armstrong Custer became associated with the ultimate bad decision and failure. In the last half of the 19th century, he was still remembered for his daring and SUCCESSFUL civil war exploits. It is nice to see his Civil War record documented in one spot so that future generations can see that there was more to this warrior than the Battle of the Little Big Horn. He employed the same tactics but with much more confidence and obviously greater success.



4. George Armstrong Custer is known to most people today as the general who led his soldiers to slaughter at the hands of the Indians at the Little Bighorn in Montana. But it was the glory and fame earned as a dashing and courageous Civil War cavalry officer that made that defeat so shocking and controversial. Gregory J.W. Urwin focuses on those Civil War years in this study.
   
   Custer graduated last in his class from West Point in 1861 (he may have been expelled if the army wasn't in desperate need of officers at the time). Assigned to a cavalry regiment, he first saw action at First Bull Run. There and later with McClellan on the Peninsular and then with General Alfred Pleasanton, Custer gained a reputation for bravery and bravado. He especially distinguished himself at Gettysburg and in the Shenandoah Valley with Sheridan in 1864. But perhaps his greatest achievement was the constant pressure he and his troops put on Lee as he retreated toward Appomattox Court House; Lee said it was a major factor in his decision to surrender.
   
   Custer was dashing and fearless in battle - and was not shy about having the spotlight on him. This, of course, breeds jealous enemies as well as cheering supporters (and is one reason why the Little Bighorn debacle was, and remains, so controversial). Urwin goes out of his way to make sure his book has no odor of the academic about it (despite the numerous footnotes and extensive bibliography): he writes in a familiar and totally informal style and describes much of the action in a novelistic way. This makes much of the book a page-turner - a fresh thing for historical writing. A most enjoyable read, and probably the definitive account of Custer in the Civil War - before his experiences on the Plains changed him and ultimately led to his downfall.



5. this book is valuable as a reference to Custer's Civil War service. At least you will learn in which battles he participated. Whether or not he was the brave hero portrayed is questionable simply because this author is so in love with Custer that everything else is disregarded.
   
   Urwin was only 24 years old when he wrote this book, and it shows. It's almost adolescent in its praise of Custer. He denigrates everyone who criticized Custer during his 7th Cav days. The enlisted men were "trash", the officers "petty and jealous". This is a book written by a young man with a lot to learn.

No comments about The War the Infantry Knew 1914-1919.

2 comments about Bad Hand.

1. I thoroughly enjoyed this book. Coverage of Ranald Mackenzie is rather sparse and this book does a great job of detailing the man's entire life. Mackenzie was one of the many frontier heros who did not gain the notariety of other Indian fighters, but he was one of the most successful. Mackenzie showed the ability to learn from his mistakes and adapt tactics as necessary. He also served in all the theaters of Indian warfare (Northern Plains, Southern Plains, US/Mexico Border, and Arizona). This book is easy and entertaining to read and will hopefully help us remember an Indian fighter that history has tried to forget.



2. This was a good book. General MacKenzie WAS the great American Indian/bandit fighter which spawned the myth(?) of the American West in the next century (John Wayne played MacKenzie's role in "Rio Grande"). As for his place in history, he was not shot down in his prime the way the inept Custer was, and as a result, he has all but been forgotten in Western lore (his going mentally insane didn't help matters either).

   The book reads easily, flows well and the author doesn't bog you down with unimportant details. I recommend this book to anyone with a mild-to-high curiosity about the Indian Wars and the history of the American Southwest in the late 1800s.

5 comments about An Accidental Soldier: Memoirs of a Mestizo in Vietnam.

1. I can honestly say that I rarely read any books. Being made aware of it through my 2nd Platoon Buddies from "B" Co. 2/502 Inf, 101st ABN. Div., it immediately got my undivided attention , because it was listed as "non-fiction". -- THAT WAS LIE #1. This book is just packed with 1/2 truths, innuendos, lies, & egotistical exaggerations, that IT COULD ONLY HAVE BEEN WRITTEN BY A person we would always refer to as a "R.E.M.F."
   These characters usually secured a job in the rear area, listening to(& collecting) stories from THE REAL GRUNTS IN THE BOONIES, inserting themselves into stories years later, as if no one would ever be living to notice the LIES.
   Well, mr."Rambo wanabe" manny garcia, MANY OF US ARE STILL ALIVE & here to tell those who read your phony stories, in a book they THOUGHT was "NON-FICTION" , "THEY WERE DUPED" !
   One TRUTH , in your book, however, did point out that MANY , MANY, times we were far from up to full manpower strength. We DID HAVE TO combine platoons to get (close to) full manpower. In fact, on one occassion, one trooper you refer to as "Jay" Wunder( real name, Ray Wunder),from the 3rd Plt. was with our 2nd Platoon, when "The gooks in the wells" incident occured & Jimmy D. Hale (2nd Plt.) & 3rd Plt. Ray Wunder's name & the story was documented in our own "Screaming Eagle" Magazine. Many of us have this copy, & believe it or not mr. garcia, I have almost every ORIGINAL copy of every (S.E. Mag.)issue for the entire time The 101st ABN.Div. was in V.N.--- Thanks to a considerate, "REAL" 101st WW II HERO , Fred Patheiger, (now dec'd.). Well, isn't it amazing, with all of your "single-handed" attacks & heroic actions, -- I couldn't find your name written about -- EVEN ONCE!!
   I only wish there were some legal action we ( REAL "B" Co. 2/502 V.N.Vets from 67'-68') could take against you calling this book "non-fiction",but you, "stating that" you are a lawyer, I'm sure you've done some of your "SLEAZY LAWYER CHECKING"& have that "covered".
   We, from the 2nd Platoon, will be passing your book of trash, to each other, so don't expect very much $$$ from us !
   Hoping to meet you someday, mr. garcia,
   ( ALONG WITH THOSE REAL HROES FROM "YOUR" 3rd Plt.)
   
   Paul "JOE" Penkala
   [...]



2. As the 1st Lieutenant who led Mr. Garcia's supposed platoon, 1967-68, I would like to point out that none of the incidents he describes, coincide with the experience of any other members of the platoon, or after-action reports of operations. In fact, no one, including myself, can remember having served on the line with him, and we were a close-knit group. It is a work of fiction, not the facts, and should be seen as such. For those unsung heroes of the 3rd platoon of B company, who really did bear the burden of some of the bloodiest battles of that war, it is shameful that this man is attempting to profit from his fictitous heroism. As has been documented in Stolen Valor, all men who served, wished to be seen as heroic and brave, and many who were not, later, falsely claimed to have to have been Audie Murphy. I think this phoney hero owes the "real" members of the 3rd platoon, an apology and should pull his book from the shelves. Hopefully Amazon will do it for him for perpetuating his false "non-fiction" DAVID BELDING, CAPTAIN,US ARMY RETIRED



3. Regardless of it's literature categorization, this is a heartfelt, wonderfully written book, and it does it's purpose: it makes the reader consider war from all perspectives, and has you question the bases of ethnic conflict. Job well done.
   Shut the hell up; we can honor the army and simultaneously criticize the institution of war. I feel like we should write a book review NOT ONLY about the author's integrity, but about the craftmanship behind the writing.
   And again, job well done, Manny Garcia.



4. I use this book in a university-level class and have Manny visit the class where the students have the opportunity to cross-examine him on the book and race relations in general. The students generally find the book useful, some saying it is the best book they have read. It is a hard read. Is it truthful? What actually did happen in Viet Nam during those absolutely horrible and useless times with so many lives on all sides thrown away? The Swift Boat fraggers made it clear that any criticism of the US forces in Viet Nam was unacceptable and as with many conservatives, any lie will suffice to stifle criticims of the military and their overbloated worship, What DID happen in Viet Nam? Memories are funny things. Many veterans have nightmares of their experiences in Viet Nam. Are these real memories? Maybe so and maybe not. Did they happen? Did they happen to Manny? I think they did happen and probably to Manny, or near him and they live in his memory like monsters. War is a terrible waste, but so many love it, so many worship it. So many equate military duty with patriotism. Any country that equates military service with patriotism is a danger to the whole world. Our arrogance keeps costing us our money, our lives, our reputation. If there is no other message in Manny's book, that is it. The US has taught the world so many lessons and has forgotten them all.



5. I was in 3rd Plt 2/502 101st Abn from Nov. 1967 until April 1968 and was wounded along with Danial Boaz, Mike Hibner and others at Bastogne as stated in this book. The details however are not accurate. Boaz did not leave in a body bag, he was medivaced to a hospital ship and died a few days later. I did have a sucking chest wound but I never even knew it until I was in the APC and the wounded medic told me, I never knew manny garcia and he never bandaged my wound. I did know, and proudly served with others mentioned in this book. Guys like Boaz, Wunder, Irwin, Moody, Hall, Davis, Sgt Barnhill, and SFC Wilson he called him williams. He left out others like Hibner, Jackson, Davis, Hall, Sealey and MILTON LEE our Medal of Honor awardee. How could Milton Lee not be in any book about our Company or Platoon? He was killed in Ashaw valley in May of 68 singlehandedly taking out several machinegun nest saving what was left of our pinned down company. Surprised manny garcia didn't take credit for that too. There were many others I proudly seved with whose names escape me but manny garcia was NOT one of them. My guess is this guy was a REMP in our unit because he knew enough partial details to be getting info from someone who was actually there or he read some fairly detailed reports. The book is basically total crap and absolutly fiction. His book insults the men and memories of all who served. SHAME on you garcia and shame on the publisher who printed this FICTION!!

No comments about The Forbidden Zone: A Nurse's Impressions of the First World War (Hesperus Modern Voices).

5 comments about Sherman: A Soldier's Passion for Order.

1. Sherman made war on women and children. He had his troops burned houses to the ground, turned a blind eye to the looting his men did, burned crops to the ground, destroyed any livestock he couldn't use and left the civilian population to starve to death everywhere he went in the South.
   Sherman had town halls burned so there were no accruate records as to how large the population of the town he burned was. Sherman also removed large numbers of civilians (women and children)who worked at the New Manchester and Roswell, Georgia Mills, North; where many of them died of exposure or starvation. On the trip North many of these New Manchester, Roswell, Georgia Mill women workers were raped.
   I am not a sympathizer for the Southern Cause during the American Civil War. However, I do believe that Sherman is a war criminal and shouldn't be idolized which this book does.



2. In this book, the author takes us on an in-depth tour of the life and times of William Tecumseh Sherman. In doing so, he lets us see Sherman as a boy living in poverty; as a nine-year-old foster child; and as a student, young soldier, husband, father, failed businessman, Civil War General, and aging military hero. In the end, we find that Sherman was very much like the rest of us: a man with hopes, dreams and fears of his own, and certainly not the crazed and often despised General who, according to legend, burned Atlanta to the ground and wantonly ravaged, pillaged, and plundered the South.
   
   True, Sherman did order that all inhabitants of Atlanta be evacuated [705 adults (few men), 860 children, and 79 slaves], but that was to prevent snipers from killing his soldiers. And he did order that all facilities which could be used to support the war effort be destroyed (e.g., the railroad station; factories producing uniforms, munitions, railroad tracks; etc.). But that only amounted to about one third of the structures in Atlanta. And he did march the bulk of his 60,000 man army to Savannah living off the land. But he did so to help bring the Civil War to a speedy conclusion with minimum loss of life by severing the logistic supply lines across the South. And his orders were not to burn or destroy any private property, no matter what the inhabitants "said", as long as they were not fired upon.
   
   And finally, and most revealing: When Confederate General Joseph E. Johnston was given the authority to surrender all remaining Confederate armies to General Sherman, Sherman met with him and developed what he thought were acceptable surrender terms. He forwarded them to Washington to obtain the necessary authorization only to find that his terms were considered much too soft on the South by then Secretary of War Edwin Stanton. Stanton went so far as to send a letter to the New York Times accusing Sherman of TREASON and then attempted to have General Grant relieve him of his command. Grant met with Sherman but avoided doing so.
   
   According to the evidence, then, William Tecumseh Sherman wasn't the crazed villain many in the South consider him to be. And maybe, just maybe, he was the best friend the South ever had, or at least he tried to be. In any event, after reading this biography, one can only wonder how many people now living in the South, who vilify Sherman's memory, owe their very existence to the fact that he decided to make war on property rather than on their forefathers.



3. The difficulty for those of us interested in studying the American Civil War is that the available bibliography is overwhelmingly large. One could begin reading as a child and reach adulthood and continue reading until death or senility interrupted the exercise without completing all of the published titles! Life is too short to read poorly written books!
   
   With that observation in mind, it is a welcome experience to occasionally come across a worthwhile one volume biography of a major historical figure and "Sherman: A Soldier's Passion for Order" fills the bill perfectly. The author, John F. Marszalek, is a history professor at Mississippi State University.
   
   While it may strike some as odd that a historian employed on a campus located in the Deep South chose to write about General William T. Sherman, it is worth remembering that "Uncle Billy," himself, was a man of contradictions. Sherman tried and failed at many occupations during the antebellum period. One of the few successful and easily the most satisfying positions that he held was as the superintendent of a military academy located in Louisiana. But for the crisis of secession and war, Sherman would have been pleased to remain at the academy as a Southern gentleman and an accepted member of local society. The war came, however, and Sherman resigned his position and donned the blue Federal uniform. As a Union general, Sherman became the scrouge of the same South that he had so admired and enjoyed.
   
   Sherman was adopted into the family of a prominent Ohio politician following the death of his father. This was the first of many disruptions in his life. His adoptive parents compelled him to change his actual first name from "Tecumseh" (after the celebrated Indian leader and warrior) to William. Marszalek sees many of Sherman's subsequent choices and decisions as part of a determined effort to create and maintain continuity, stability and order. As much as he loved the South, Sherman viewed secession and disunity as a form of anarchy that needed to be crushed. Similarly, the Indian tribes threatening the settlement of the frontier needed to be suppressed. Late in his life, Sherman resisted his wife's repeated entreaties to have him convert to Catholicism.
   
   Marszalek also treats Sherman's friendship and eventual estrangement from Ulysses S. Grant. Sherman was devoted to the military and grew disillusioned when Grant chose to pursue a political career during the Reconstruction Era. Although both Grant and Sherman lived long enough to write memoirs, Grant's memoirs are better known on account of his superb ability as a writer. Unlike Grant, Sherman's own book generated more controversy than praise upon its publication (Grant defended Sherman's book, however, as providing accurate accounts and descriptions of events) and is not read as often today.
   
   I have had the good fortune to have visited Grant's residence in Galena, Illinois and the former Galt House (the hotel still exists, but it has relocated to a much larger building several blocks away) in Louisville, Kentucky, where Grant and Sherman studied their maps and plotted the strategy that resulted in the eventual Union victory. Marszalek's book helped bring some of these same details to life for me as a reader. Recommended.



4. 
   "Wars are not all evil; they are part of the grand machinery by which this world is governed; thunderstorms which purify the political atmosphere, test the manhood of a people, and prove whether they are worthy to take rank with others engaged in the same task by different methods." - Gen. William T. Sherman
   
   As a casual student of Civil War history, i.e. returning to it periodically after bouts with trashier fare, I've heretofore lost sight of General Sherman in General Grant's shadow at Shiloh, Vicksburg and Chattanooga. Even the commendable Nothing but Victory: The Army of the Tennessee, 1861-1865 failed to correct this failing. SHERMAN finally forced the man into my awareness.
   
   This book by John Marszalek is an extensively researched, comprehensive, and solid summary of the General's life from boyhood to death. I would love to have seen what the late, great Shelby Foote could've done with the material, but that's neither here nor there.
   
   SHERMAN includes all of the elements of the man's private and public life that you'd expect in a biography. What stood out for me were the elements that I never suspected: his sojourn in California from 1848 to 1857 both as a military officer and a private banker, his position as the first superintendent of the military academy that would later evolve into Louisiana State University, his eventual post-war falling-out with Grant, and his controversial views on race. Indeed, Sherman's personal view of slavery was akin to that of a Southern slave owner; he thought it consistent with the natural order of things. Furthermore, he opposed the abolitionists of the pre-war period believing their efforts conducive to the growing national disorder that eventually resulted in the Civil War. Sherman once said:
   
   "The negro should be a free man, but not put on any equality with the Whites ... the effect of equality is illustrated in the character of the mixed race in Mexico and South America. Indeed it appears to me that the right of suffrage in our Country should be rather abridged than enlarged."
   
   The chapters on Sherman's Civil War career make clear that he was significantly more successful as a war strategist than as a battlefield tactician as evidenced by his failures as a corps commander at Chickasaw Bayou (1862), as army commander when his Army of the Tennessee was repulsed at the north end of Missionary Ridge at the Battle of Chattanooga (1863), and as an army group commander at the Battle of Kennesaw Mountain (1864). His claim to fame is, of course, his brilliant march through Georgia and the Carolinas during which his forces occupied Atlanta and Savannah, GA, and Columbia, SC, unopposed after skillfully maneuvering enemy forces out of all three cities beforehand.
   
   SHERMAN includes three photo sections, but no battlefield maps which otherwise might have been usefully illuminating.
   
   What drove Sherman was his deep antipathy for disorder, whether it be military, social, familial, or political. He would've made the consummate military dictator if given the opportunity. He was a great commander and man for his time and place. In today's politically correct and "enlightened" times, he would be shunned.
   
   "I look upon war with horror, but if it has to come I am here." - Gen. William T. Sherman



5. This is a good book about Sherman and the civil war. If you like Sherman is book is for you. Worth your money.