5 comments about Brutal Virtue: The Myth and Reality of Banastre Tarleton.

1. Essential reading for any serious student of the American Revolution. This book incorporates an enormous amount of research about one of the Revolutions most interesting characters. It is interesting to see Scotti question and refute previous works as well as deconstruct Tarleton's psyche and military actions. Most books on history seem to just hash out the facts but Scotti offers serious analysis and theories on Tarleton and his campaigns. The author, in my opinion, is the slightest bit apologetic to Tarleton, but does a good job refuting bias and errors in previous works. The book is well written in a clear, concise manner, easy for the Revolutionary War novice and serious student alike to understand. I highly recommend this book.



2. Not only a fabulous study on the life and career of the most demonized character in the Revolutionary War, but a fascinating look into the reasons why myths are created, and the perseverance of myth and romanticizing American History, especially Revolutionary War History in the U.S.
   An indispensable, extremely well-written and exhaustively researched book.
   True that there are few, if any, real saints or demons in history, but Mr. Scotti blows away the lingering perception of "devil incarnate" of Ban Tarleton. Highly, highly recommended to anyone interested in this era and Tarleton. Bravo.



3. I've always been fascinated by Banastre Tarleton, the man upon whom "Colonel Tavington" in the movie "The Patriot" was based. This book is a well-written biography.



4. Atrocities were committed by both sides during the revolutionary war. This is not in doubt, and historian's tend to forget the American ones. Tarleton's record HAS been misinterpreted over the centuries, but I felt that the author spent too much time trying to exonerate his idol from obvious charachter flaws. The bottom line is that the British Legion used very harsh tactics during the war and the commander WAS responsible for his men, whether he was there or not. I found myself thinking of the excuses used at Nuremberg in 1945-46. The author did dispell many of the myths but the idol worship needed to be toned down a bit. To this reader another opportunity to put the real Tarleton in perspective was lost.



5. You cannot understand the Revolutionary War without an understanding of the South and to comprehend the South is to know something of Tarlton. This is a well-researched, well-written effort with very detailed footnotes. The author attempts to tread that fine line of admitting Tarlton believed in hard war but somehow asks us to believe i.e. "he was not that bad." He hated the Whig, absorbed the bitterness of northern tories whom he led, and fought without any compassion even in those clear circumstances where it would have been more effective. What I now understand better is how Tarlton's harshness may have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. Morgan's triumph at Cowpens is all the more remarkable.
   Tarlton was a nasty little man who was very lucky he did not fall into patriot hands. I recommend the book. The obvious comparisons to Sherman and Grant are dead on!! The author's bias is too transparent to be much of an encumberance.

5 comments about Hannibal (Wordsworth Military Library).

1. Hannibal by Ernle Bradford is a fine and enjoyable read about the history of the Second Punic War, with a principal focus on Hannibal's invasion of Italy and the subsequent 17 year occupation. It is obvious that the author is an admirer of Hannibal, and a grudging admirer of Rome. In some ways Hannibal is treated as a almost mythic character who not only was a military genius but attempted to fight a noble war. The Romans, on the other hand, are portrayed as devious, untrustworthy with their only saving graces being their perseverance and ability to eventually adapt to the superior abilities of Hannibal.

   The book greatest failures lie in the descriptions of the major battles, especially Cannae. One of the greatest military feats of history is dealt with in a few pages. While Bradford does describe the basics of the battle, he does so in a very perfunctory manner. The same is true for the other major engagements. Further, the almost total lack of maps makes the battles and the troop movements difficult to follow.

   The strength of the book is in the description of how the Romans eventually prevailed and Hannibal's miscalculations of the Roman persistence. After the destruction of up to 70,000 troops at Cannae, and numerous legions prior to the battle, most empires would have crumbled. Rome did not. The reasons for Rome's survival is the best reason to read this book.




2. This biography made me wish to meet the famous Hannibal. The research is well done and now I have a good understanding of the role Hannibal played in this period of history. The only reason I gave this book a 4 is because it was a little on the dry side. That may be due to the reader's voice as I listened to the cassette, or because there just wasn't enough "heart and soul" in the telling of the history. That is, I learned tons about Hannibal's military movements, strategies, battles, etc., but a very minute amount about his character and feelings. This is probably not the author's fault, however, because he refers to the ancient sources as not passing down much about Hannibal's character for us to draw from.

   It wasn't until the last chapter or two that I felt I was starting to get to know Hannibal as a man, with references about his wit, humor, and his sly ability to sneak away unnoticed as he was hounded by the Romans. At the end, we are treated to a few of his quotes which give us a little glimpse into his personality. At that point I began wishing I knew more about him, felt a certain empathy with him, and wondered if by the end of his life, he felt he had thrown it away in a useless cause. The author reflects on this a bit, and concludes that even if Hannibal and Carthage had won this war against the Romans, it really wouldn't have changed history that much, rather it would only have slowed the Romans down for a little while. I agreed with that conclusion, and not only felt sorry for Hannibal, but sorry for the human mind that causes us to slaughter one another for .... what?

   In spite of the occasional dryness of the telling, I was fascinated by the information presented about Hannibal's career and the political and military setting of the nations involved. I appreciate having this knowledge.




3. Nice book. Well written, based on good sources, and about one of the most exciting historical figures of all times. Even long after his death, one cannot underestimate Hannibal. Hannibal should have been one of the characters in the 1988 film "Bill and Teds Excellent Adventures."



4. Informative without being too technical in a military sense. Major battles were covered, but not in minute detail; which I often find boring. Overall strategies are covered without the step by step walkthrough of each battle.
   Not really knowing a lot of specifics about Hannibal, I thought this was a very good book to start off with. I had read Bradford's work on Thermopylae and liked that. Hannibal is similar in style. It is obvious that Bradford admires Hannibal, but he balances that out with an almost equal admiration of the Roman's ability to withstand and ultimately defeat him. I came away a little surprised with a sense that Hannibal had a great sense of humor and that he realized his attempt to break Rome was in vain fairly early in the effort. It is probably that, in the end, which I like about Bradford's style - particularly in this book; I have much more of a sense of who Hannibal was than just reading a history of Hannibal.



5. The best book I've read on the best general ever.
   
   Andy Johnson

5 comments about And One Was a Soldier: The Spiritual Pilgrimage of Robert E. Lee.

1. To try to understand Lee apart from his faith is folly. He embodies all that is noble, beautiful, and worthy of emulation in the best of the Christian tradition. His grace, his poise, his presence are all legendary. His strategic acumen is without peer in all of American history. All are grounded in his simple, profound and unshakeable faith in the wisdom and mercy of God. He has been characterized as enimatic by some historians. I believe he is laid bare in this study. Part history and part meditation no Lee admirer should be without this one.



2. A thought-provoking book about one of the more interesting figures in U.S. history. However one might argue that his support of slavery, the needless misery and suffering caused by his refusal to call for an end to the war after his surrender when he admitted all was lost (basically a matter of protocol, due to loyalty to Jefferson Davis), his refusal to allow prisoner exchanges because of the Union's demand that black soldiers be included ('those species of property' as he put it) tempers the urge to consider him the "embodiment of all that is noble, beautiful, and worthy of emulation in the best of the Christian tradition." One would consider the Christian tradition a bit more enlightened. I also wish the author would have included the words Lee spoke when he shook hands with Ely Parker, one of Grant's aides, after the surrender papers were signed at Appomattox Courthouse: "I am glad to see one real American here." Parker responded, "We are all Americans."



3. The review written in a vain attempt to slash at the character of such a paragon of virtue is ridiculous and only shows the strength of Lee's character and the weakness of any who would care to even attempt such damage to it. Lee freed all his slaves by 1863 only because that was the time period set within his father-in-law's will, he would have preferred to release them earlier since he viewed slavery as a vile and impractical institution although he was not in favor of complete and immediate abolition, preferring gradual abolition for their "education as a race"-- in other words, to fit them with abilities worthy of employment and adequate pay once freed. The comment about protocol was ridiculous and incomprehensible. Lee specificially told his younger officers, who suggested that he lead the army into what would be a devastating round of "bushwhacking"- guerrilla warfare in the countryside, that he would not because the only honorable thing was to surrender to Grant, and thus saved the country from years of devastating warfare. To say that Lee prolonged the war, then, is pointless, for it was he who surrendered when davis, his superior, would have continued to fight. The quote which suggests bigorty and prejudice of Lee shall not even be repeated here due to the fact that it was a misinterpretation of his meaning. Lee, in fact, showed by personal example the best way to unite the country. He attended an Episcopalian church in which the congregation was white, until one day a black man entered the church and proceeded to the rail to take communion. there was a oause in the church, for no man dared sit beside this "colored" man- except Lee, who immediate took his seat beside the man and showed that he was in no way prejudiced.



4. A well-researched book on the religious beliefs of Robert E. Lee. A most instructive study on how these beliefs developed and impacted the man. The book is detailed on just what these beliefs were and how they were at the very core of who Robert E. Lee was.



5. Fantastic! What a great read from a Bishop who can recognize a man of character and faith. Unlike most Episcopal bishops today who chase after the wind, Bishop Brown has written an interesting short tome on the greatest man produced by the 19th Century. Bishop Brown's intertwining of C.S. Lewis, Dorothy Sayers, and T.S. Elliot makes it all the more interesting. This book will bless you during devotional time.

3 comments about Hitler: The Pictorial Documentary of His Life.

1. This book was meant as a supplement to John Toland's biography of Hitler. It contains 465 photographs, 11 of them in full color. It is hard to describe the pictures to you. Some are candid shots and others are exquisitely staged. They pretty much line up in chronological order and they also show the people that were on Hitler's periphery. Photograph 155 is the next day Hindenburg died. Photograph 176 shows Bormann at the wheel with a Frau Hess. Photograph 228 a member of Sir Oswald Mosley's black shirt is with the brown shirts.

   We could go on forever however let me say the photographs cover the time from 1899 through 1944. Many of these pictures are not seen in newsreels.




2. Hitler was a madman. Look at his face in the photographs in this book. Pictures don't lie. How could this madman fool a whole nation? To think how one man could change the world is beyond belief for my generation.



3. John Toland's "Pictorial Documentary" of Adolf Hitler was an attempt to capitalize on the apparently unexpected sucess of his Hitler biography (titled simply, "Adolf Hitler").
   
   The author's pictorial biography recycles portions of the text from his original biography of Hitler and surrounds the text with photos of the topic under discussion (e.g., Hitler's background-childhood). There are over 450 photos altogether and a well-written and informative caption is provided for each one. (A section of color photos is included but they are less than spectacular, being primarily drawings by Hitler, postcards from World War I, and Nazi posters.)
   
   You may thus learn nothing new if you have already read the full-fledged biography. On the other hand, the photos of this man, his era, and his acolytes are interesting in and of themselves, and the pictures are well-chosen and cover every aspect of Hitler's life (from his 1899 birth records to the 1947 burning of a pair of his trousers that survived the July 20, 1944 assassination attempt). (The public burning of Hitler's trousers was personally supervised by no less than Gen. Eisenhower, which goes to show the deepseated fear of Hitler even after he died, but of course the Soviets were still playing hide and seek with Hitler's remains during this time and there were onging rumors, often fueled by the Soviet press, that Hitler was still alive.)
   
   If one does not want to wade through Toland's original two-volume tome on Hitler (now readily available in one handy volume), then this pictorial biography is an adequate basic introduction to Hitler's life, lies, and times.
   
   (I recommend buying the hardback edition. I initially bought the paperback version, but the pages were yellowing and the binding not the best. I then bought a heavily discounted hardbook edition. The pages in the hardback, and thus the reproductions of the photos, are far superior to those in the paperback, and, of course, the binding is better as well.)

2 comments about Troop Leader: A Tank Commander's Story.

1. This book is fascinating. It wasn't quite the book I was expecting it to be, but it was still great. It's the story of a young tank-troop commander in the Second World War and his trails and tribulations. Some of the things he writes are blackly funny - like the time he chewed out a general from driving his car right up to the pit he was hiding in, giving him away to German artillery. Some of the things he writes about, common to most honest war accounts, aren't funny at all.
   
   It is a great book, and hard to describe as anything but an honest war account from a perspective rarely attained. Tank-troop commanders don't generally write books, and this is the finest example I have found of the rare breed that does.
   
   I recommend this book to you.



2. First good down-to-earth book I've found on the everyday life of a tank commander. It usefully filled some gaps in my knowledge and is an easy read. Although, we never do find out what happened to poor Audrey!

5 comments about Citizen Sherman: A Life of William Tecumseh Sherman (Modern War Studies).

1. I usually loathe any historical book which puts its subject on the couch, but this is a notable exception. Fellman infuses this book with his own spin on certain matters, but much of the interpretation is accurate! If you enjoy a "National Enquirer" approach to biography, then this is your bag, though a more intellectual, sobering and accurate analysis of events than a tabloid rag. Fellman delves deeply into Sherman's womanizing and the reasons behind it: Ellen, WTS's wife, was a passionless prig, obsessed with Catholicism and being the type of prim, straightlaced wife that Sherman would ultimately abhor. Can we blame him for repeatedly cheating on Ellen? Of course not.

   Fellman is much weaker on the military end of the biography and his limitations show. There are numerous factual gaffes and the author is on safer ground when restricting himself to purely personal matters. This is hardly the definitive treatment of Sherman, try John Marszalek's biography (available on Amazon) for an exceptional and scholarly approach. But if you want a book focused primarily on the private life of Sherman, this nicely fits the bill




2. Some of the above reviews have merit, Fellman definitely puts Sherman on the couch, and, I also don't usually like this, as it takes some liberties that may not be entirely correct. However, it will take more than one source on Sherman to help the reader draw their own conclusions about the man. This said, I very much enjoyed reading Fellman's analysis. I did find it light militarily, however, I really wasn't looking for that kind of bio on Sherman. A history teacher, this was my first exposure to "Cumpy" the man, as opposed to military commander. I found myself wanting to research him more as a result of reading this book, as I feel it inspired me to learn more about him. There is an implication here that the book did not tell me everything I needed to know, but, as stated above, I found myself not really minding as I enjoyed Fellman's ease with words and the simplicity of the smooth flowing text. Therefore, I didn't critique it so much for being a bit on the lighter side of research work. I found that I would need to consult other sources for more information anyway. Having read Grant's bio and Foote's Civil War trilogy, I found this to be a good introduction to Sherman as an individual, especially after hearing Grant's praise of the man in his own work. I'm interested to read Sherman's own book after reading Citizen Sherman, can compare some of Fellman's analysis with Sherman's own. I very much enjoyed the section on Sherman's women, and the way that the text was oriented less chronologically than in the different departments of Sherman's life.



3. I have read dozens of autobiographical accounts of the Civil War by its leaders, both Northern and Southern. Most of these accounts were, of course, written in the sentimental, shielded, "polite society" style of the post-civil war/turn of the century years. Although these books offer valuable insight into the author's actions and reactions, philosophy, and basic moral structure, they leave the modern reader without a real knowledge who the author was as a person. It is only through a thorough understanding of the subject of a biography/autobiography that the reader can truly appreciate the way in which a subject continues to influence us years after that person made his mark on the world. For example, everyone knows that Sherman was a hard-headed, all-out warrior whose unwavering determination helped the Union win the Civil War. But not everybody knows about the Sherman who, during the war years, was an unhappily married man whose heart died when his favorite son did; a man who, years after the dust and gunsmoke settled, sought to recover dormant emotional feelings by seeking the companionship of women half his age. It does seem that there are a few very minute points in this book that are historical misrepresentations, most likely caused by oversight. But despite its few flaws, it gives a full and complete portrait of Sherman, the human being - someone we must see for all he was in truth, before we can truly understand his impact on American History.



4. Citizen Sherman is not so much an attempt to put Sherman on the couch, so to speak, as a study of his character and personality as evinced through his personal relationships and in his voluminous correspondence. Fellman isn't just making things up or shooting from the hip as some reviewers imply; most of the light shed on Sherman's life and character comes from his own words. You will not find most of this information anywhere else. If you want an analysis of Sherman the Civil War general you won't find it here. But that doesn't mean that an understanding of Sherman the man is not worthwhile. This is a wonderful biography, a beautifully constructed and poignant character study of Sherman the man. If all the Civil War buffs out there don't like its lack of reliable military information, too bad; there are many other places to find that. And since when should an author be hesitant to seek an understanding of an individual's motives, emotions, and psychological processes? This is what the finest biographers do. Fellman does not cross the line by asserting theories that are not backed up by evidence. Indeed, his assertions as to Sherman's feelings and emotions are supported by a great deal of evidence.
   I will acknowledge that Fellman, on occasion, does let his liberal bias show as when he claims Sherman was "an utterly inhumane warrior" and the like. After making a brilliant case for the necessity of Sherman's kind of warfare, and letting Sherman speak for himself as to his motivations, very human motivations we all can relate to, Fellman seems to be one of those authors who feels it is necessary to damn any kind of practice that seems to make liberal minded Americans uncomfortable with humanity or themselves. He, as an author, seems to be one of those people who just couldn't live with himself if he didn't somehow pretend he is beyond that, and we all should be too. Well, sometimes just plain old nasty stuff just has to be done, and when it does need doing, we should be glad we have guys like Billy Sherman around to do it for us. This is more a minor annoyance, however, and does not detract from the power of the character study. All-in-all, this is a book well worth reading. You will surely come away with a much enhanced picture of Sherman the man.



5. Fellman's prose is dynamic and his knowledge of the events of Sherman's life is apparently up to the task, but his psychoanalysis is overblown. Sherman's psychological problems clearly must be discussed and psychohistory is valid within limits, but almost all of Fellman's paragraphs drip with analysis of what Sherman or Ellen was thinking, why they thought or said it, and, worse, what they might have said but didn't. One example: Sherman hated newspapermen, claiming, with a degree of truth, the military is chained to a rock while reporters were vultures that flew freely. Fellman claims, "Sherman fancied himself the modern Prometheus, the vulture-tortured embodiment of truthful duty." The mere presence of a rock and vultures, frequently used analogies, does not by definition constitute a paranoic self-vision. Fellman paints an ugly picture of W. T. Sherman that smacks of late 20th century attitudes. If you consider Fellman's approach to be valid, ask youself why a used hardback version only costs $1.39 while a used hardcover of Isaac Robertson's Stonewall Jackson bio starts at $19.30. I want to read one of his competitors' works.

4 comments about Sixty Days in Combat: An Infantryman's Memoir of World War II in Europe.

1. A must for WWII History buffs, but an easy read for all readers. The author recalls how he wanted, along with many other young U.S high school grads to register for military service in WWII and to "fly". With his easy writing style and incredible drawings, Dean Joy pulls you into his daily disappointments as he realized he would fight as an infantryman. You feel what he did as he writes letters home to his beloved parents. Its as though I actually felt, saw, and heard, what this young man did. The remarkable discription of the different sounds of artillery, the German towns and rivers that the Allies went through, the pride of being in Patton's 3rd Army. Along with the author, I hated the "Krauts" and sorrowed over German civilians losing homes and farms to the ravages of war. I literally "willed" this young man to make it home.



2. Not a bad book at all. Dean Joy joined the war late because of an interesting school deferment. He wanted to fly the famous P-51 Mustang but ended up the71st Infantry Division. The book is very interesting reading about a unit that doesn't get a lot of press because they entered the war so late. The book is an easy read, very well written, and provides a good overview of the end of the war. Of particular interest is his description of four captured P-51 Mustangs that were converted to German use.



3. "Sixty Days In combat" by Dean P. Joy. Subtitled: "An Infantryman's Memoir Of World War II In Europe." Presidio Press book, Random House, 2004.
   Born in Colorado in 1924, Dean P. Joy was almost nineteen when he volunteered for the draft in June 1943. He had just finished his freshman year in engineering at the University of Colorado, and, as with so many young men of the time, he was hoping to become a P51 Mustang pilot in the Army Air Corps. The author's poor eyesight squelched that opportunity. So, fortunately (or unfortunately), the young Dean Joy was told to take the test for the Army Specialized Training Program, ASTP. The author expected to be given military training along with his classes in engineering. In October 1943, he and one other fellow arrived at the University of Idaho, in Moscow, Idaho, for the Army Specialized Training Program. Great casualties in the European Theatre of Operations (ETO) caused the cancellation of the ASTP, and Dean Joy, along with " ...some two hundred thousand young Americans in the ASTP" were off to the "...poor bloody infantry after all". (P. 26).
   
   As luck would have it, Dean Joy is transferred to the 71st Light Infantry Division, given infantry training and training on mortars, shipped across the Atlantic to the ETO (on board the ship, " USS General Tasker Bliss"), arrived in France (which has an "ancient smell"), and then off to front for sixty days of combat, from March 10 to May 8 1945. Based upon his wife's suggestion, Mr. Joy has scattered sketches of " ...selected scenes that stick in my memory, as if my eye had been a camera" . These sketches (they look like pen and ink) liven up the details that his words describe; the sketches make the book easier to read.
   
   In reality, this book is an autobiography of a young man growing up in tough times in a tough arena. Dean P. Joy changes from a youngster, just hitting nineteen, a teetotaler and a kid afraid of girls, to an Army veteran, with the Combat Infantryman's Badge, running a bar in occupied Europe, and married to a displaced person. Perhaps the most poignant line in the book is on page 23, when the young Dean Joy recounts:
   "...innocent fun..." in snowy Idaho , a carefree memory ...
   " of the ASTP ...of a very pretty girl who ...stuffed snow down my neck. Oh, how I wanted to get to know her and ask her out on a date! But I was far too shy"



4. This was a good book, and a very easy read. I enjoyed going on the journey with the author, and I am a better person for having read it. That being said, for whatever reason, I was expecting something a little different. I guess with all the war movies and Ken Burns documentaries, I was thinking it might be longer and more "exciting." I feel bad even typing that, since the title clearly says "sixty days in combat," and it is sixty days more than I ever served. I'm still glad I bought it and read it, but if you are looking for something a little more comprehensive, try a different book. Overall, a good read and an interesting take on one man's experience in WW2.

5 comments about Phil Sheridan and His Army.

1. I have been reading about the Civil War and Indian Fighting Generals for over half a century. There is absolutely nothing new here. Any bright High School kid could have written this book in a good library.

   
   In addituion to this criticism, I find a combined error and omission that is typical of academic authors who try to write about everything and everybody. This author states that General Sheridan never got to the scene of the 1876 Indian War. On the contrary read Willert as to exactly where and when he did. Furthermore, related to this is the fact that Sheridan arrived belately because of the riots in New Orleans that took him there. Hutton missed this and its significance, which could have lent the added ingredient to his work that would have made it significant. Sheridan in the earlier Indian War on the Southern Plains cooped up the reservation Indians so they couldn't join the hostiles in the field. He would undoubtedly have done the same (in time - he did it belatedly at War Bonnet Creek) and prevented one of the key elements of Custer's disaster (i.e. too damned many Indians).

   
   Big reputations are made on this sort of actually superficial copying, partly because of an old boy netword, one suspects. The victims are fundamentally ignorant readers. There is little that can be done about this before the fact, which is what reviews are for.




2. I read this book several years ago and have nothing but fond memories. I recall it being informative and well-told, altogether an easy read.
   
   As for the claim in another review that has Hutton making an erroneous statement that Sheridan never visited Custer Battlefield, just take a look at pages 328-329 and then eat your words. Also, the New Orleans riot was 1866 (July 30th based on the information I found on the Internet), so your inference here was also incorrect.
   
   Anyway, I can unhesitatingly recommend this book.



3. This book is detailed and well researched. It covers Sheridan's entire career and and is not boring or over detailed. If you like to read about Indian Wars on the Great Plains, this book will please your quest for good reading.



4. No. 3 in the postwar Union Army pantheon after Grant and Sherman, Sheridan gets an in-depth review here.
   
   The man who said, "The only good Indians I ever saw were dead ones" would become Commander in Chief of the Army during the height of the western Indian wars. Read this book for further insight about his attitude toward Indians, as well as earlier post-Civil War service as a Reconstruction department commander in New Orleans.



5. Phil Sheridan was a sociopath who wanted to murder the battered remnants of Lee's army just before the surrender. His bloodlust was later satisfied when he was turned loose on the American Indian. Pure genocide. I'm not sure we have ever produced uglier little man in our 400 years in this hemisphere.

4 comments about Lee.

1. I enjoyed this book very much, as it gave a good overview of the entire life of Robert E. Lee and not only the war years. It included quotes from letters that he wrote to family members, as well as things other people wrote about him at the time, and that added to the flavor of the book and gave a good sense of what kind of man he was. I especially enjoyed reading the brief biography of his father and how the book included commentary on what was happening elsewhere to give a well-roundedness to the life of Lee. However, I felt the author's commentary on reconstruction went on a bit too long. The author's tone was very "pro" Lee and, in that vein, he criticized others, which I don't think was necessary to get the point across. Altogether, I enjoyed this book and it has inspired me to want to seek out more information, not only about Robert E. Lee, but about the Civil War in general, and about other leaders during those times.



2. An excellent, thorough, effecting biography of a great American. There are many individuals in our nation's history who commanded armies and adulation during their lifetimes which we would be hesitant to call "Hero" - often times these individuals serve their own interests first, inspired by their own egotism (as contemporaries to Lee, Beauregard and Sheridan come to mind). R. E. Lee was of a different mold, born into a proud family humbled by the financial misfortunes of his father, Revolutionary War soldier "Light Horse" Harry Lee (who served time in prison for debts), R. E. Lee's entire life was conducted out of a primary sense of duty: Duty to his family, his God, and his country. Throughout this work, Dowdey convincingly argues that Lee's position must be interpreted within the framework of the Virginia society in which he was raised. When Virginia seceded from the Union (unwillingly, the majority voted to remain in the Union until Lincoln called for force of arms to march on Virginia's soil) Lee saw it as his duty, as a Virginian, to go with his native state and family. This despite the fact that Lee was strongly in favor of working within the framework of the Republic and in favor of an emancipation plan, even after General Scott had offered Lee command of the newly forming Union Army. This work by Dowdey is much more than a biography of one of our great historical figures - it is also a convincing commentary on the politics of the time. Lest we forget, Northern Radical Republicans shared the responsibility for committing the country to the catastrophe that was the American Civil War - in many cases, worked to achieve that end. Even at the point of firing on Fort Sumter, a reasonable, compromise approach (keeping the same objectives in mind) could have retained the key Southern and border states of Virginia, Kentucky and Tennessee in the Union (or at least out of the Confederacy). However, Lincoln, acting on behalf of the Radical Republicans, committed the country to a fratricidal war that degenerated into a four-year atrocity committed on the native population. Sumner, Stevens, Stanton - these men cared nothing about preserving the Union or bettering the human condition. They cared about subjugating one section of the country to serve the interests of the Northeastern financial-industrial complex. Dowdey convincingly argues that the ACW was the end of the federated Republic envisioned by the founding fathers and the beginning of the special interest group Democracy that persists to the present day. The majority of the nation (including Lincoln and Lee) was in agreement on the slavery issue - an evil existed which had to be eliminated in a controlled manner over time. In fact, the Virginia state government was on the verge of approving an emancipation plan in 1832 - only to be foiled by fears generated by Northern abolitionists promoting violence (conveniently enough, calling for action in sections of the country far from their own families). The Radical Republicans played the slavery card to stain the South, ensuring that sectional strife would continue to divide the country for as long as possible, providing opportunities for political exploitation. This is a great read, and stands the test of time in answer to more recent works (e.g. Nolan's Lee Reconsidered) which seek to denigrate Lee's status in history in order to cast a more favorable light on Lee's opponents. Any question as to Lee's motives, especially his "decision" (in reality, there was no decision to be made) to continue fighting through the siege at Petersburg and the retreat to Appomattox, are thoroughly answered. Lee's life was consumed by his sense of duty. Lee trusted wholly to the Providence of God and his life was service for the public good - anything else was not worthy of consideration. Consider Dowdey's work on Lee well before considering later attempts at revisionism.



3. An excellent, thorough, effecting biography of a great American. There are many individuals in our nation's history who commanded armies and adulation during their lifetimes which we would be hesitant to call "Hero" - often times these individuals serve their own interests first, inspired by their own egotism (as contemporaries to Lee, Beauregard and Sheridan come to mind). R. E. Lee was of a different mold, born into a proud family humbled by the financial misfortunes of his father, Revolutionary War soldier "Light Horse" Harry Lee (who served time in prison for debts), R. E. Lee's entire life was conducted out of a primary sense of duty: Duty to his family, his God, and his country. Throughout this work, Dowdey convincingly argues that Lee's position must be interpreted within the framework of the Virginia society in which he was raised. When Virginia seceded from the Union (unwillingly, the majority voted to remain in the Union until Lincoln called for force of arms to march on Virginia's soil) Lee saw it as his duty, as a Virginian, to go with his native state and family. This despite the fact that Lee was strongly in favor of working within the framework of the Republic and in favor of an emancipation plan, even after General Scott had offered Lee command of the newly forming Union Army. This work by Dowdey is much more than a biography of one of our great historical figures - it is also a convincing commentary on the politics of the time. Lest we forget, Northern Radical Republicans shared the responsibility for committing the country to the catastrophe that was the American Civil War - in many cases, worked to achieve that end. Even at the point of firing on Fort Sumter, a reasonable, compromise approach (keeping the same objectives in mind) could have retained the key Southern and border states of Virginia, Kentucky and Tennessee in the Union (or at least out of the Confederacy). However, Lincoln, acting on behalf of the Radical Republicans, committed the country to a fratricidal war that degenerated into a four-year atrocity committed on the native population. Sumner, Stevens, Stanton - these men cared nothing about preserving the Union or bettering the human condition. They cared about subjugating one section of the country to serve the interests of the Northeastern financial-industrial complex. Dowdey convincingly argues that the ACW was the end of the federated Republic envisioned by the founding fathers and the beginning of the special interest group Democracy that persists to the present day. The majority of the nation (including Lincoln and Lee) was in agreement on the slavery issue - an evil existed which had to be eliminated in a controlled manner over time. In fact, the Virginia state government was on the verge of approving an emancipation plan in 1832 - only to be foiled by fears generated by Northern abolitionists promoting violence (conveniently enough, calling for action in sections of the country far from their own families). The Radical Republicans played the slavery card to stain the South, ensuring that sectional strife would continue to divide the country for as long as possible, providing opportunities for political exploitation. This is a great read, and stands the test of time in answer to more recent works (e.g. Nolan's Lee Considered) which seek to denigrate Lee's status in history in order to cast a more favorable light on Lee's opponents. Any question as to Lee's motives, especially his "decision" (in reality, there was no decision to be made) to continue fighting through the siege at Petersburg and the retreat to Appomattox, are thoroughly answered. Lee's life was consumed by his sense of duty. Lee trusted wholly to the Providence of God and his life was service for the public good - anything else was not worthy of consideration. Consider Dowdey's work on Lee well before considering later attempts at revisionism.



4. As the previous reader wrote, this book is a homage to Robert E. Lee which exactly don't make it a very good biography if the author was too much in love with his subject. Certain sense of objectivity goes out the window. It doesn't helped that the author proves to be rather pro-southern in outlook which heavily tainted his approach. The book read very well though but much of the author's work sounds very dated compared to the newer works on Lee - that reduced Lee into something more human. I think authors like Clifford Dowdey seem to be outdated as the Civil War moves into a more objective outlook.

2 comments about Quiet Hero: The Ira Hayes Story.

1. S.D. Nelson, tells the story of one of the five Marines (and one Navy corpsman) who raised the flag on Mount Suibachi during the battle for Iwo Jima.
   
   Hayes was from Arizona and a Pima Indian. Sent to the government run Phoenix Indian School as a teen, Hayes was a shy and lonely young man. He joined the Marines following Pearl Harbor and was sent into the Pacific war theater. Nelson recreates the historic flag-raising and subsequent media frenzy when the three surviving Marines returned home. Felix de Weldon's statue of Rosenthal's photograph became the Marine Corps Memorial in Arlington, Va. Hayes faced great difficulty adjusting to life following the war and died within ten years of the flag-raising. He is buried at Arlington Cemetery.
   
   This is a book that will be of great interest to those kids with an interest in the military and WWII. The illustrations make the book accessible to kids of all reading levels. An author's note at the end includes photographs of Hayes, the island of Iwo Jima as well as Rosenthal's famous photograph. A bibliography is also included which is an excellent way to demonstrate how authors cite their sources.
   
   While watching the movie, "The Sands of Iwo Jima," recently, I was very interested in the scenes of the fighting on Iwo Jima.
   
   In the movie as John Wayne and his men arrive at the summit of Mount Suibachi, Wayne's character calls for a detail to find a standard and raise the flag. As Wayne hands them the flag the shot is perfectly framed to include three men receiving the folded flag.
   
   The real Rene Gagnon, Ira Hayes, and John Bradley, the three survivors among the five Marines who raised the flag on Mount Suribachi, were the ones receiving the flag in the scene.
   
   Rewinding and doing the freeze frame thing, I was struck by a small detail in the scene. The two men on the left are looking directly at John Wayne as he hands them the flag. Their faces are fully visible. Ira Hayes is on the right and looks up briefly but for the rest of the time they are on screen, he keeps his chin down, not looking toward the camera at all.
   
   Nelson's book makes a point of describing Hayes's very shy nature. Without knowing anything about their involvment in the film, I was interested at the body language of a man, ill at ease in the limelight.



2. In his latest book, the award winning children's author, S.D. Nelson, presents a story that is obviously close to his heart. QUIET HERO details the life of Ira Hayes, one of the six young soldiers who raised the American flag on Iwo Jima during WWII. The colorful illustrations carry readers of all ages through Ira's childhood experiences in a boarding school for Native American children to the island battles of the Pacific Theater where he fought bravely with his battalion. While Nelson does not hide Ira Hayes' shortcoming, the vibrant, almost tangible texture of his pictures lovingly capture the spirit of Ira's story and his attention to historic details convey a potent admiration of this American Hero.
   
   I have found this book to be both entertaining and educational for young readers.