No comments about Lincoln: The Biography of a Writer.

5 comments about Jim Bridger: Mountain Man.

1. it was a rather hard read and need more details, but a OK read on Jim Bridger. Would like to have detais on Morman fights ect.



2. I just finish reading this book. I thought it was very excellent and intriguing about Jim Bridger. A man, who took no pleasure in killing, following the number one rule, "Survival of the Fittest and Kill or be Killed. I would've like to have gotten more information on his wife and children. It's sad about what happened to his daughter and that he was widowed twice. But it's good to know that his last years were spent with his children and grandchildren. I was brought almost to tears upon reading the final chapter of this book. I'm very fascinated with the Mountain Men and the Indian women they married.



3. So far so good. The book tells the life story of Bridger, which is what I wanted to see.



4. I'd like to give the book another star, but just don't think I can. I found it an interesting and well researched description of Bridger's life. It has both an excellent index and references. The author gave a fair and balanced assessment of Bridger. It appears that some previous books on him might have been unfair or too praiseworthy about his life. Somehow the descriptions lacked a little spark, although there are a number of vivid passages. Perhaps this has to do with the fact the book was written 100 years after Bridger's death. In fact, this book is now 30 years old, and I believe the author wrote his first book on similar topics back in the 30s. Nevertheless, it's a good and complete description of Bridger's life.
   
   One of the sadder aspects of the story is near the ending when the author reveals that during the last 10-15 years of Bridger's life no writer took the opportunity to interview Bridger. He was in his sixties and seventies, I believe, but was a rather ignored individual, except by his family. He had an exceptionally good memory. Someone missed the opportunity to get more of his rather amazing life straight from the source. The 2-3 page description of his last years, and his desire to keep moving summarize his deep need for adventure and discovery.
   
   He was apparently quite a wit and teller of tall tales. Only four of five of his short tales are found in the book. Interestingly, he told many of his stories in sign languages to the indians.
   
   The book contains on chapter of the famous Hugh Glass incident. It's worth reading if you have not heard it. The story was incorporated into a movie, A Man Called Horse , starring Richard Harris, in a slightly different form. I also found the long passage on "medicine wolves" quite intriguing.
   
   I think this book might disspell a notion that the indian's scalping and body mutiliations of their enemies was derived from copying Europeans might be false. I read such an explanation in another book written at about the same time as this one. However, here we find repeated references to such carnage. In fact, it seems this savagery also been deeply engrained into the mountain men and other early frontiersmen. I suspect such carnages placed on one's enemies has deep roots in all of human history.



5. Bridger is a larger than life character. The author portrays Bridger as a character who was unimpressed with developed society. His treasure was the mountains and the mystery of an undeveoped land and people. His humility and lack of concern for unbelievers of the wonder of the mountains aligns him with someone who has a tremendous fishing hole but doesnt want anyone to fish it dry.

5 comments about Bloody Bill Anderson: The Short, Savage Life of a Civil War Guerrilla.

1. The authors appear to have done their research, and present the story in mixed third person objectivity and first person period prose. For the casual reader who has an interest in Civil Warfare, or more specifically, the Kansas-Missouri Border War, this is an entertaining book. For the scholar, it must be taken with a grain of salt. The authors have taken literary license to the extreme in their description of scenery, battlefield and camp site conditions, personal conversations, et cetera. Although the essence of news-worthy situations are, more often than not, accurately portrayed in historic newspapers, the use of quotes and eye-witness accounts are often biased and stretch the truth. The authors appear to continue in this vein of sensationalistic reporting. There is no way the authors could know of the detailed conversations that took place between officers, combatants, and/or farmers, and thus, their factual portrayal of these more intimate situations must be questioned. If they had told the story entirely in the third person, this book would be good and much needed reference. As presented, with interjections in the first person literary style, the book lacks a degree of credibility. This is unfortunate, as it is a great story of guerrilla warfare and otherwise well-written. 170 pp., Stackpole Books (1998).



2. Great biography of a Western Civil War barbarian. When it came to being ruthless during The American Civil War, Bloody Bill broke all bounderies. Not for the weak of heart!!



3. Thomas Goodrich did an outstanding job of researching his subject. I've read many other accounts of Anderson, but this is the most complete and revealing. It's unfortunate that Stackpole insisted on bringing Castel into the mix, as the two men's writing styles are so different. The end product, though the best work so far on a fascinating man, doesn't equal Goodrich's original work.



4. This book reads like a romantic western novel. A description of Anderson: "Dressed entirely in black- hat, velvet shirt, pants, boots- he was lean and sinewy and looked taller sitting in the saddle of his large black horse than his actual height of five ten." (p. 11, hardback edition) It continues like that for another 150 pages or so. The only thing missing is voluptuous maidens.
   Castel's biography of Quantrill doesn't read like this, and Goodrich's "Black Flag" doesn't really have much style at all, as it is mostly quotes from primary sources. I don't know why they felt the need to write this the way they did, but it ruins the story. Both authors have done their work in researching, but the writing leaves much to be desired. A definitive account of Anderson still needs to be written.



5. Bloody Bill Anderson was a product of savagery in the early days of the Civil War's influence on Kansas and Missouri. The border war there was bloody and brutal. An eye for an eye conflict that escalated beyond anyone's imagination. The region was devastated. The atrocities that men were willing to commit against each other on both sides of the fratricide in that area are horrendous. Rocketing out of that soup came Bloody Bill. He is the prototype of a deadly psychopath. He was sadistic, ruthless and devoid of conscience.
   
   Castel and Goodrich have outdone themselves in taking what little historical data is available to present as thorough an accounting of Bill Anderson's life as you're likely to find. They hone in on two of his most infamous rampages around Centralia, Missouri. You'll believe you were an eyewitness. However, they don't fabricate the stories or engage in fiction. The book is thoroughly researched and very credible in every detail. They could only have exceeded in this endeavor if there were more firsthand historical data to draw from.
   
   Fact is Bloody Bill was a real individual and these events really did transpire. You will be transfixed even as you are horrified.

5 comments about All for the Union: The Civil War Diary & Letters of Elisha Hunt Rhodes.

1. Just finished reading "All for the Union", and it's well worth the effort. A quicker, light read -but highly interesting and lives up to its buzz.
   
   I won't repeat the very good commentary in previous Amazon book reviews, but I will offer these observations:
   - As this diary is a day-to-day account by a front line Union officer, I'm surprised at how much idle time there was- especially during the winter months (ala Revolutionary War).
   
   - It's amazing that units in the same corps can be so frequently rotated in & out of the front line battle. During the siege of Petersburg, the rotating (and advancing / retreating) was frequent. My thought when reading the book was that the high-level Generals better know what they are doing, as the unit leaders closer to the front probably DON'T have much visibility into "big picture" plans and tactics.
   
   - Glad I never have to rely upon foraging off the land, and eating hard tack and other nasty field provisions. Tough folks, these soldiers. Especially my people, the Irish, who suffered bad injuries when playing horse games on their days off..
   
   Enjoy this very good Civil War book!



2. We have works on the Civil War written by generals (e.g., the memoirs of Ulysses Grant and James Longstreet) and other officers (E. P. Alexander, Moxley Sorrell). However, equally valuable is the view from the bottom, by the foot soldiers. From the Confederate side, the paradigm example is Sam Watkins, "Company Aytch". From the Union side, Elisha Hunt Rhodes fills the bill. He rose through the ranks, and his diaries and letters provide a first-hand, ground-level view of the war in the east. As the Introduction by one of his descendants notes (Page xv): "He participated in every campaign of the Army of the Potomac from Bull Run to Appomattox with rapid promotions up to the rank of colonel in 1865."
   
   Incidents are described plainly and with an eye from the front. On pages 15 and following, he describes the march to Bull Run, the state of the troops, the weariness experienced on that march. Then, the battle itself and aftermath are described in an economical manner. Here and after, his observations of fellow soldiers and officers is most useful, giving the reader a sense of what he was perceiving.
   
   On pages 106 and following is his description of his regiment's (2nd Rhode Island) and his corps' (VI Corps under General John Sedgwick) march to and role at Gettysburg. While the corps arrived late, its uniting with the rest of the Army of the Potomac was a great morale boost for the Union forces, as this Corps was the largest in the northern army, bringing it to full strength at this bloody conflict.
   
   Then, his description of the bloody battle at the Wilderness, where he took the measure of Grant, after vicious fighting. In his diary on May 7th, 1864, he noted (page 138): "If we were under any other General except Grant I should expect a retreat, but Grant is not that kind of soldier, and we feel that we can trust him." In that phrase, he captures nicely the bulldog tenacity of Grant as a General, and identifying what was different from him compared with other commanders of the Army of the Potomac.
   
   His rendering the campaign in the Shenandoah Valley, where General Phil Sheridan jousted with Jubal Early's forces is is insightful. He speaks of the classic surprise assault on the Union position while Sheridan was off consulting with Washington. The surprise attack rolled up the Union lines for a time, although the VI Corps held pretty well. His description of Sheridan's role is interesting, as his simple coda for this indicates (page 185): "Hurrah for Sheridan!"
   
   And, finally, these lines (page 221): "Glory to God in the highest. Peace on earth, good will to men! Thank God Lee has surrendered and the war will end soon." Thus, his response at Appomattox Court House.
   
   As with Sam Watkins' observations, so, too, with Rhodes'. These observers provide a valuable and insightful perspective on the war from the ground level. Well recommended for those interested in the soldier's view of the Civil War.



3. Whie the Army of the Potomac suffered the usual soldier hardships we also have to realize these soldiers suffered some very bad generals in comparison to the Army of the Tennessee. We see the participants sense of this in the memoir. It is best placed in the heirarchy of the Civil War memoirs it must be placed beside Sam Watkins's "Co. Aytch." High praoise indeed.



4. Anyone who is interested in the Civil War has to read this book. All for the Union is the diary of Elisha Hunt Rhodes and covers the four years that he spent in the Union army. Entry by entry, the reader can watch Rhodes go from an enthusiastic young man, to hard, weary soldier. Appalled by the death and destruction early in the book, by the end, laying down to sleep between the dead and dying barely justifies a comment. A wonderful read.



5. If you are interested in more than big names and big battles this book is well worth reading. Elisha Hunt Rhodes shares his experiences from his enlistment as a boy having never been away from home until his mustering out as a man having earned the rank of Col. He writes in an honest straight forward manner about every aspect of daily life. His strong belief in duty, sense of right and wrong and his ever important sense of humor show in everything he writes. He's an optimist that made it through the war with all these attributes intact. Thankfully for us he kept this diary so that we can understand a little more about life during the Civil War.

5 comments about When in the Course of Human Events: Arguing the Case for Southern Secession.

1. I just finished this book yesterday. I have found that there is already 50+ 5 star reviews of this book, but I could not refrain from writing one myself.
   
   This book was simply amazing. I could hardly put it down. It is definetly NOT a history of the Civil War, from a military standpoint. It IS a history of the War from a political standpoint. The major arguement is whether secession is legal or not under Constitutional law. That is a question best left to the book. Though the author does make a pretty strong arguement in favor of secession being legal. Using historical precedents that predate the war, as well as the thoughts on the subject concerning the Founders.
   
   I will that I was impressed by all the new information about Lincoln that I had not known. The more I read about Lincoln, the REAL Lincoln, the less I like about him. This book also deals with the subject of Reconstruction. It is informative, and has sparked my interest in learning more about the period immediately following the war.
   
   I give this book a well-earned 5 stars!



2. This is book seems to me like a manifesto on why the KKK was justified in terrorizing black people. Everyone who knows anything about Lincoln knows that he wasn't a racist but, he also was willing to do whatever had to be done to perserve the union. No President before or since has had to deal with such an issue. The man live through and extremely tough time period, politically and personally. I found this book offensive and demeaning to a historically great president. Our some of Charles Adams arguments true? Yes. But, to make such claims as the freed blacks brought on their harsh treatment after the Civil War is absurd. Racist and people who still believe the South will rise again, for whatever reason, will like this book.



3. As a historian, I have learned that the heart of any great work in history lies in the ample and accurate use of primary sources, and primary sources are the great strength of this work. While countless tomes have debated the perceived moral sides of the Civil War and the motivations of the various actors, this work goes back and investigates the motives of the primary players in this time from their own words and writings. This gives the work an excellent realism and accuracy.
   
   The author, Charles Adams, has earned a reputation as one of the leading economic historians in the field, particularly in the area of taxes. He utilizes this background to investigate the American Civil War, and comes to some very striking conclusions, many that defy the politically-correct history of today. His thesis postulates that the Civil War had its primary cause not in slavery or state's rights, but rather in cold, hard economic concerns.
   
   He shows that the North used its supremacy in Congress in push through massive tariffs to fund the government, and that these tariffs fell much harder on the export-dependent South than upon the insular north. In fact, the total revenue from the "Compromise" Tariffs on the 1830s and 40s amounted to $107.5 million, of which $90 million came from the South. Despite by this, the majority of the revenue was spent on projects far from the South.
   
   According to Adams, this disparity finally pushed the South to seek its own independence. Supporting this conclusion is the fact that the South enacted extremely low tariffs throughout the war, whereas the north enacted the Morrill Tariff of 1861, which enacted tariffs of as much as 50 percent on some goods.
   
   Adams also chronicles the oft-overlooked excesses of the Lincoln Administration, and compares them to the actions of Julius Caesar. While this initially made me quite skeptical, his plentiful, primary source-based examples overcame my qualms. Using the letters and reports of the times, he tells how Lincoln suspended habeus corpus, trod roughshod over the Constitution, jailed thousands of U.S. citizens who dared disagree with him and even wrote a warrant for the arrest of the Chief Justice of the United States.
   
   Adams also ably uses the viewpoints of British and other Europeans to describe different contemporary views on the struggle. These provide excellent outside insight.
   
   On the whole, readers will find the book a superb and scholarly analysis, providing fresh insights into the motivations and causes of the defining war in American history.



4. This book was superb. I would write a short description and/or critique; however, much of what I have to say has been covered in earlier reviews. Every student in the south should be required to read this book. Our ancestors were not traitors. We held the true government of the founding fathers on our backs in every battle.



5. Southrons, hear your country call you!
   Up, lest worse than death befall you!
   To arms ! To arms! To arms, in Dixie!
   Lo! All the beacon-fires are lighted,
   Let all hearts be now united!
   To arms ! To arms! To arms, in Dixie!
   
   Advance the flag of Dixie
   Hurrah! Hurrah!
   For Dixie's land we take our stand,
   And live or die for Dixie!
   To Arms! To Arms!
   And conquer peace for Dixie
   To Arms! To Arms
   And conquer peace for Dixie
   
   Hear the Northern thunders mutter!
   Northern flags in South winds flutter!
   To arms ! To arms! To arms, in Dixie!
   Send them back your fierce defiance!
   Stamp upon the accursed alliance!
   To arms ! To arms! To arms, in Dixie!
   
   Advance the flag of Dixie
   Hurrah! Hurrah!
   For Dixie's land we take our stand,
   And live or die for Dixie!
   To Arms! To Arms!
   And conquer peace for Dixie
   To Arms! To Arms
   And conquer peace for Dixie
   
   Fear no danger! Shun no labor!
   Lift up rifle, pike and saber!
   To arms ! To arms! To arms, in Dixie!
   Shoulder pressing close to shoulder,
   Let the odds make each heart bolder!
   To arms ! To arms! To arms, in Dixie!
   
   Advance the flag of Dixie
   Hurrah! Hurrah!
   For Dixie's land we take our stand,
   And live or die for Dixie!
   To Arms! To Arms!
   And conquer peace for Dixie
   To Arms! To Arms
   And conquer peace for Dixie
   
   Swear upon our country's altar
   Never to submit or to falter,
   To arms ! To arms! To arms, in Dixie!
   Till the spoilers are defeated,
   Till the Lord's work is completed!
   To arms ! To arms! To arms, in Dixie!
   
   Advance the flag of Dixie
   Hurrah! Hurrah!
   For Dixie's land we take our stand,
   And live or die for Dixie!
   To Arms! To Arms!
   And conquer peace for Dixie
   To Arms! To Arms
   And conquer peace for Dixie

5 comments about Grant Takes Command: 1863 - 1865.

1. It is almost amazing that even after nearly 40 years, this book still stand the test of time as one of the best studies of General U.S. Grant's tenure as the military commander of all Federal forces. The book starts off from the Chattanooga campaign in late 1863 and moving on to his promotion as overall commander and his attachment to the Army of the Potomac for the rest of the war. By this move he clearly determined that General Robert E. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia will be his primary target and a key to overall victory for the Union. Bruce Catton does a wonderful job in narrating each event in a clear and colorful way that make this book a joy to read.
   
   Best part of Catton's writing is the way he make individual characters stand out in a way that most pertaining to the event at hand. We understand how Lincoln and Grant bonded so well, how even Meade and Grant worked well on surface and why Grant kept his eye on the ball when grinding Lee down to earth.
   
   This book is a follow-up to Catton's earlier work, Grant Moves South which was published 7 years prior to this book and captured Grant's military activities from the beginning of the war to end of the Vicksburg campaign in 1863. As part of the two book set, Bruce Catton continued to captured the essence of Grant's military chronicles with clarity and understanding that any reader can appreciate.
   
   For anyone interested in the American Civil War, this book is sure to be part of your mandatory reading material and the best part is that its really is a great reading book.



2. "Grant Takes Command" is the second of two volumes by Bruce Catton on Grant's Civil War service and the third volume of a trilogy on Grant's military career (beginning with Lloyd Lewis's "Captain Sam Grant"). However, this volume can easily be ready by itself. Catton picks up the story in the fall of 1863 with Grant's successful raising of the siege of Chanttanooga, following which President Lincoln picks him for a third star and command of all the Union armies.
   
   Grant is the latest in a long series of Union commanders, most of whom have been badly beaten by General Robert E. Lee and his Army of Northern Virginia, and none of whom have been able to bring superior Northern resources effectively to bear on a slowly weakening Confederacy. In fact, as Grant takes command, the war has not yet been won and could still be lost.
   
   Grant will be the commander that Lincoln has long sought. Lincoln's telling exchange with an aide, repeated by Catton, lays out why. Grant is the first general to take the supreme command who will work in harness with Lincoln and in full acceptance of Lincoln's constraints as President of a democracy in the midst of a civil war. Grant is prepared to take full responsibility for the conduct of the missions of the armies, and without setting up an alibi in advance for possible failure. And as it becomes apparent in the course of Catton's absolutely superb narrative, Grant understands the terrible math. Lee and his army are too proficient to be easily beaten; great persistance will be called for. Grant grasps the essential truth that Lee's army is the Confederate center of gravity, and the corallary that Lee's requirement to protect Richmond ultimately limits his ability to maneuver. Further, Grant is able to cause the Union armies to work at a common design, denying Lee the ability to reinforce Virginia by drawing on other theaters of war. The result will be a long, grinding, and exceedingly bloody campaign stretching from 1864 into 1865, as Lee's army is slowly bludgeoned to death.
   
   Catton's narrative does not spare Grant his errors; in the 1864 campaign, Grant underestimates both Lee's abilities as a general and the difficulties of conducting campaigns on such a huge scale. Grant has to learn the job of Army commander in chief on the move; the unnecessary casualties of Cold Harbor and the repeated failures to flank Lee out of position in Virginia are proof of the learning curve. But Grant's great gift is his refusal to be deterred from his objective; he pins Lee at Petersburg and uses the Union armies of Sherman and Sheridan, among others, to destroy the Confederacy's means to make war.
   
   "Grant Takes Command" was first published in 1960, and the details of the history of the Civil War have evolved since then. However, Catton's prose has stood the test of time. This is a truly magnificently told story on an epic scale and a highly recommended treat for the Civil War enthusiast and the casual reader alike.



3. In this superb second volume on Grant's war-time service, Bruce Catton shows how Grant devised and executed the grand strategy that ensured we'd be one country.

   Beginning at Chattanooga, Catton chronicles Grant's successful battle to save a beleaguered federal army there and his selection as head of all of the armies of the Union.

   The strategic plan, the overland campaign, the investiture of Petersburg and the finale with Lee at Appomattox are chronicled well.

   What Catton does very well here is focus on Grant the General-in-Chief. We see how Lincoln and Grant are drawn toward each other through a shared and fundamental understanding of what it would take to win the war and the will to do it -- incredibly a trait Lincoln could find in no other General selected to head the Army of the Potomac.

   The actual management of the Union's armies and efforts is given great attention. Even the Civil War devotee who knows a lot about the battles of the war will appreciate this focus on grand strategy, army management and the particular and singular attributes possessed by Grant to manage the affair to a successful conclusion.

   A wonderful book, as is it's predecessor, "Grant Moves South."




4. This is a well-researched account of the last two years of the Civil War (1863-1865). The harsh realities of the battles and living conditions are especially given great detail here. The final days of the war and the surrender of General Lee are extremely poignant as the author examines the tattered remains of the once invincible Army of Northern Virginia. The exchange between the victors and the vanquished at Appomattox is the highlight of the book. The author also takes pains not to overlook any of Grant's military blunders such as Cold Harbor and gives an even-handed viewpoint throughout. I recommend this book for anyone who is interested in the darkest days of our nation's history.



5. A change in Focus--Grant takes the Reins

   Until 1864, the Army of the Potomac had never won a campaign. Each Union attempt to capture Richmond drove south, was repulsed, withdrew to Washington, found a new general, and tried again. After his successes at Vicksburg and Chattanooga, Grant came east to a promotion, to general in charge of all Union Armies.

   Grant brought a different focus, and Catton defines this superbly in this book, drawing on many of Grant's memoranda to other officers, as well as President Lincoln. Catton captures the essence of a Grant campaign: hold on to the enemy, grasp and retain the initiative, and always move your logistics aggresively forward.

   Catton also tries, albeit weakley, to show that Grant was not a "pure" attritionist. He offers examples of Grant's desires to push west and sever Richmond from the Shenandoah. Catton explores the political reality of uncovering Washington to a Confederate thrust, while attacking the logistics that sustained Confederate armies, while Sherman simultaneously attacked Atlanta and its strategic railhead. Catton states that after the battle of Cold Harbor Ggrant's numerical superiority was at its lowest level, but he does not provide the hard math to support this stance. On the other hand, Catton shows well the manuever warfare used by Grant to slip away after Cold Harbor, steal a march, and get across the James River before Lee, stripped of his cavalry, could discover the move and react.

   This book does a very solid job of capturing Grant's determination, his unyielding efforts to impose his will on the leaders and staff of the Army of the Potomac, and to integrate the political realities of volunteers, political appointee generals and a presidential election with the cold hard reality of constant campaigning.

   A good read not just for students of the martial art, but for any leader who must address the Sisyphean task of invigorating old "we've always done it that way" people with a new ethos and drive.

5 comments about Cigars, Whiskey and Winning: Leadership Lessons from General Ulysses S. Grant.

1. This book is a quick read. I particularly enjoyed the author's focus on Grant's ability to react, adjust and adapt. Staying away from Grant's presidency was a good idea until the end. Even then, the author contrasts Grant's leadership style as a General to President and why he failed (at least historically) as a politician. What I didn't like about the book was the lack of reference to God. I understand that not everyone is firmly rooted in "the Word", but its absence leads to more questions...at least for me. Overall, thought provoking, mildly insightful and interesting. I heartily recommend Lee's Leadership Lessons. It is the best book of this style I have ever read.



2. I've never been a fan of "lessons" books and here is yet another. There are some interesting and informative quotes of/from Grant, but the lessons are, at best, better than average for such a book. -- Louis J Sheehan



3. Grant may have been a poor President, but he was a great General. This book expounds the leadership principles of his war years. Grant was not only decisive, but he could also admit to mistakes. His treatment of his fellow officers shows he was a born leader. In three years, he rose from being a store clerk to a four star general. He did this using his courage, common sense, and good decision making. Lincoln may have saved the Union through his political leadership, but U.S. Grant saved it militarily with his good leadership.
   
   This is a easy to read book. The book is in excess of three hundred pages, but most of the pages are not full. Some two hundred and fifty principles are detailed in the leadership of U.S. Grant. Too bad Grant did not use some of these principles in his Presidency.



4. Kaltman has done the research for you and put it all in a great lesson by lesson format. Any leader can refer to this book for day to day operations.



5. Very good read for anyone in management.
   Uses the Civil War memoires of U.S. Grant to illustrate management skills and practices.
   Very interesting. Excellent gift for men.

5 comments about Lee's Lieutenants: A Study in Command.

1. Bah, humbug. Having read the original 3-volume works (my parents gave it to me for Christmas of 1954), and re-read it from time to time, I found this abridgement unsatisfying and almost a mockery of the original. I recommend that any person seriously interested in the Army of Northern Virginia spend the additional money for the original.
   
   I supposed the current work would be satisfactory for a newcomer to the Civil War and might even give this work five stars. Freeman was the undisputed giant with respect to Southern History, also writing the 4-volume set "R. E. Lee, A Biography," and editing the 52-volume set of the "Southern Historical Society Papers," which is usually purchased as an adjunct to the 130-volume "War of the Rebellion, Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies." All of these are still available (for up to $2,500.00), and they are indispensible for the committed Civil War Historian.
   
   Freeman's prose is as lively and readable today as it was when he wrote in the 1930s and 40s. In fact, I would give five stars to all his works including "George Washington" and "The South to Posterity." I am not sorry I purchased the LL abridgement, as it is of course a good read, but not the reference the original was.
   
   So buy this abridgement, but then move up to the original or buy the original in the first place.
   
   Freeman develops all of the subordinate commanders of the Army of Northern Virginia, with a particular emphasis on Stonewall Jackson. Personnel from Major Pelham on up are treated with sympathy and respect even when their battlefield performance was not up to par. It is as if Freeman was emulating his hero, Robert E. Lee, who spoke kindly whenever possible about his people. There is no attack-dog writing here, but the reader will be able to form valid and accurate judgments from Freeman's evidence and commentary. Many of the generals featured in this work are not household names, not having been spectacular failures or featured prominently at Gettysburg. Officers like Ramseur, Rodes, Pegram, Anderson, Rosser, Early, A.P and D.H Hill, Pender, Gordon, Mahone and Field all come alive in Freeman's work, lightly in the abridgement, but thoroughly in the original.
   
   There is much to learn here, and much to be proud about for all Americans, Union and Confederate.



2. Even though the original three-volume version of Douglas Southall Freeman's "Lee's Lieutenants" is not absolutely punctilious about bowing before the altar of Twenty-first Century political correctness, if ever a historical study and a historian deserved five stars, it is this history and this historian.
   
   The book that has generated this review, however, is not the book that Freeman wrote but an abridgement, this is to say, about 800 pages rather than the 2,395 pages, plus CXLIII pages of introductory material and photgraphs, to be found in the three massive, dignified, black volumes issued by Charles Scribner's Sons at the height of the World War II paper shortages.
   
   As an abridgement of a masterpiece, this book isn't bad. But it is not the real thing.
   
   Even a little bit of Freeman is still a good thing, so four stars--but seek out Freeman's real, three-volume "Lee's Lieutenants"!
   
   LEC/AM/8-08



3. I have not read this abridgement. I gave it two stars because it is still Douglas Southall Freeman, more or less. I have read the three volume set twice now and no doubt will go through it again in the future. In three volumes this is a classic of the genre, books that set the standards for all the others, just like Shelby Foote's three volume compendium. An abridgement of this type is for the novice set. My opinion is that everyone who is interested should get the three original volumes. I believe they can still be found or at least ordered.



4. .....your time, and money, will be well used. Stephen Sears has done a one volume abridgment of one of the greatest works in the English language, and done it quite well. When this book came out in 1998, it filled a gap; Richard Harwell had written one volume versions of Dr. Freeman's other two masterworks back in the 1960's.
   
   For the uninitiated, "Lee's Lieutenants" is the history of The Army of Northern Virginia told from the viewpoint of those who served under the command of General Robert E. Lee. Douglas Southall Freeman's magnum opus "R.E. Lee" had been published in the late 1930's; Dr. Freeman was afraid that the "other generals" would be forgotten [and some would have been], so he published the three volumes of "Lee's Lieutenant's" during WWII. It quickly became a standard work for historians, and for students at every military academy on Earth. It was required reading at West Point for years, and may still be.
   
   The first two thirds of the volume focus on Stonewall Jackson, and the last one third on James Longstreet; that is proper. The others are not forgotten, which was the idea in the first place; John Bell Hood, A.P. Hill, D.H. Hill, JEB Stuart, Jubal Early, Dick Ewell, Billy Mahone, "Maryland" Steuart, Wade Hampton, Fitzhugh Lee, John Brown Gordon, etc., etc., etc. Dr. Freeman made the point that not every Confederate General was a hero, and that many mistakes were poured out of a bottle. Alas, he was right, BUT, there were far more good than there were bad and indifferent....
   
   Following Mr. Harwell's model, Sears had cut out all the footnotes and appendices, most of the bibliography, and much of the dialog. For 99+% of readers, this book is all you will need, or want. It will give you an excellent overview in a well written manner. I own three copies. Still...But... The full three volumes are absolutely definitive. They are not difficult to find at a decent price ["R.E. Lee" is difficult, and "George Washington" impossible]; I own two sets. While I heartily recommend the full version, I have to recognize that most people don't need to go that far. Read this; it may make you want more, and the full story will make more sense if you've read this first.



5. The abridged volume of Lee's Lieutenants is an excellent title for anyone interested in Lee's Army of Northern Virginia. I have looked at the original 3-volume series and the only difference as one earlier reviewer points out is that the footnotes have been taken out. Given that Douglas Freeman was the editor of a Richmond, Virginia newspaper, one would expect several pages of footnotes. However, the book's essence is still retained.
   
   Freeman covers the army's life from the Seven Days' Campaign in early 1862 to the bitter end at Appamattox in April 1865. He mentions just enough detail of the battles for the reader to comprehend the importance and result of each engagement. The deeper focus is on the main officers in Lee's army and their relationship with Lee and each other.
   
   The narrative is free flowing and is easy to read without being simplistic. Indeed, while the book is just over 800 pages, I found myself reading several pages on many occasions.
   
   If you are looking for a book about the Confederate side of the Civil War's Eastern Theater, then this is your read! The only gripe I had was the few maps - there could have been more and could have been more detailed. However, there are plenty of books out there on specific engagements that can make up for the difference.
   
   Read and enjoy. Highly recommended!

5 comments about The Avenger Takes His Place: Andrew Johnson and the 45 Days That Changed the Nation.

1. Short political biography of Andrew Johnson traces his political roots up to the time of his ascension to the Presidency after Lincoln was shot. Means shows how sharp the contrast between the adulation of Lincoln in his martyrdom and the mingled concern and neglect of Johnson in his Presidency.
   
   That is, at first. But Means also shows how Johnson's character, political stances, and political personality quickly made him unignorable, shaped the immediate transition period (from war to peace, disunion to union, Lincoln to Johnson), and eventually led to the impeachment and failure of both Johnson's reunification and Republican Reconstruction (covered briefly in an epilogue--this is not a history of Reconstruction). Means also does a good job of capturing the frantic rumor-driven national environment in which these events played out.
   
   Jay Winik's excellent April 1865: The Month That Saved America casts a broader net over Lincoln's assassination, the last days of the Civil War, and the beginning of Johnson's Presidency.



2. I was looking forward to reading this book as I wanted to expand my knowledge of Andrew Johnson and the period immediately after Lincoln's death. Unfortunately this book is neither successful popular nor serious history. It is not particularly well-written and the author lacks the authority or gravitas to make his judgments seem trustworthy. If time is our most valuable commodity, then save yourself a little and read something else on this period.



3. This is a nice survey about Johnson and the situation he found himself in April 1865. This is partially a Johnson bio -the start of the book, though interesting, focuses on Johnson pre-presidency, leaving less time for the 45 days of the start of his administration (or, rather, finishing Lincoln's plans). So, if you are looking for super in-depth coverage or brand new research material, this is not your cup of tea. But, it's a well written book, and some of the the old newspaper clippings dealing with Lincoln and Johnson are fun to read.



4. Shortly after Lincoln's murder, while the entire country reeled from rumors that Lincoln's death was the result of a huge conspiracy that involved Confederate leaders, Herman Melville published "The Martyr," an ominous warning to all those who might've been involved. The "Forgiver"--Lincoln--has been murdered. "But the People in their weeping/ Bare the iron hand/Beware the People weeping/When they bare the iron hand." Why? Because "The Avenger [now] takes [Lincoln's] place."
   
   Andrew Jackson was that terrible Avenger--or so the radical Republicans who wanted the South punished even before Lincoln's assassination hoped. There was good cause to think that Johnson was the man to crush the South. Few politicians had been as vocal about the need to punish treason with a hangman's noose than Andy Johnson, Tennessee's military governor. Moreover, the Republicans believed they could control Johnson in a way that Lincoln always successfully resisted: after all, Johnson was a backwoods lout who'd actually been drunk at his own inauguration! So the consensus was that the Avenger was in place: a President who on his own wanted to punish the South, and who could be manipulated by bloodier-minded, vengeance-seeking northern Republicans.
   
   As author Howard Means points out, however, things didn't quite work out as planned. Johnson proved much more independent than Washington powerbrokers anticipated, and his hang-'em-high attitude toward the South proved to be more rhetorical than real. In fact, his plan for reconstruction pretty closely mirrored the 1863 suggestions Lincoln had left: a 10% solution (readmittance to the Union upon the election of new state governments voted in by at least 10% of eligible voters), and constitutionally guaranteed freedom for blacks. Johnson's stubborn refusal to endorse radical Republican plans to enfranchise blacks led to congressional resistance and then impeachment. After the first 45 days of his presidency, Johnson was increasingly powerless. It would take several administrations for the presidency to recover.
   
   Means' account of the "45 days that changed the nation," as his book's subtitle has it, is well-written. The trouble, however, is that it says virtually nothing that hasn't been written about elsewhere, is severely limited in its documentation, and (bizarrely) doesn't really begin to focus on the 45 days until midway through. It's almost as if there are the beginnings of three books crammed between two covers: a bio of Johnson, an account of the national chaos and confusion following Lincoln's murder (Means shines here, and is to be commended), and (finally!) the conflict between Johnson and the Republican congress over Reconstruction. When it comes to this final point, Means' argument ultimately is that Lincoln probably could've pulled off what Johnson attempted. "It wasn't policy that would bring [Johnson] down so much as it was lack of political skills" (p. 212).* Perhaps. But it takes a lot more arguing than Means supplies to give this conjecture weight.
   
   All in all, then, an interesting but not terribly essential book.
   ________
   * To his credit, Means goes on to provide three other reasons besides lack of diplomacy for why Johnson's moderate Lincoln-inspired plan for Reconstruction failed (pp. 206-225)



5. Andrew Johnson was one of our worst Presidents. In this book, author Means relates the personality of Andy Johnson, and his failings in the leadership role. Johnson was the aftermath of the great Presidency of Abraham Lincoln. To be judged according to what Lincoln did was a gave injustice to Johnson. However, Johnson's personality was not suited to a leadership role in such a viotile time. Johnson was personally brave, and was a thoughtful man. However, once he took a position, he never changed or compromised. This made him an unsuccessful leader in a time when the nation was changing so much. His moderate policies pleased no one, least of all his former enemies.
   
   This is a nice read about a transition time in American history. There have been many, but this one was probably the foremost time when a personality did not take charge and shape the destiny of the country.

5 comments about Nathan Bedford Forrest: In Search of the Enigma.

1. I am a highly biased reviewer due to the fact that I drew the maps for this book. I deeply thank everyone who has purchased this book and/or given it a positive review. It warms my heart that there are still real Americans that can appreciate a real American hero, and not cave in to the forces of Political Cowardice.



2. Being a Civil War buff, I greatly appreciated the angle Davison and Foxx took to capture the lost story of Nathan Bedford Forrest. Forrest was a pivotal character in the war, yet so much of his story has been swept aside in light of General Lee and other figures who were more recognized or perhaps more publicized. This is a must read for Civil War aficionado's and those just diving into the pages of history because it is so well written and ties Forrest into so many important historical happenings. Bravo! Write another one!



3. The authors did a great job of trying to put the pieces of a very interesting warrior. Bedford was that a warrior. This is now my favorite book on Forrest. I have read many. They have come close to telling it as accurate as I have read. They had respect for him as a leader for battle but also recognized he had failings in temperament. He was a more agressive Patton in battle. He did slap soldiers for being out of line and maybe even as a coward. This is a more total history of the man and if you want to read a book that a movie could be made this is it. It is nearly unbelieveable that he was able to do what he did with no military background just common sense and will to fight and win. It is a shame that his history could not be told exactly as it was without some unknowns in the background. It is good for the North that the leaders of the Souith did not recognize his ablility until it was to late. A very readable and interesting book about the Civil War in the west.



4. I picked this book up and almost returned it after looking at the campaign maps. They were well made but gave me the impression this was a bland recounting of every little military move by Forrest. Luckily I kept the book and found a gripping story of his life, personality and campaigns. I felt like I really had an idea of what kind of person or leader he was after reading the book. This is an excellent story. It was one of those books you hope never ends.



5. For anyone with an interest in the Civil War's most interesting character , General Nathan Bedford Forrest , this new book is a MUST ; "Nathan Bedford Forrest , In Search of the Enegma" , by Eddy W. Davison & Daniel Foxx (and forward by Ed Bearss) !!
   
   I own many books , old & new , on General Forrest's life and activities . This is the very best that I have ever read on this topic . There are plenty on good ones and some are on very specific topics , such as the new books "Forrest's Escort & Staff" , by Michael R. Bradley and "Men of Fire" , Grant & Forrest at the Battle of Fort Dolelson , by Jack Hurst ! These 2 new books concerning General Forrest are excellent & are must reads for "Forrest entheusists" , but are basically on very specific topics concerning Forrest . "In Search of the Enegma" covers Forrests life , with emphasis on the civil War , of course , but is in search of The Man , behind the legend !
   
   It is extremely well written , in every way , but I must comment on the way that "battles & engagements & troop activity" of General Forrest's are described ! Everyone with an interest in General Forrest has read about his part in battles at Shiloh or Brice's Crossroads or the Tupelo & Memphis Raid ,for example . I have from several good books ! I have never had such normally "complex battle situations" ; with moving men & horses & confussion & indecisions & mistakes & foul weather & poor communications & heroism & bravery & inactions & retreats----so clearly described & made more understandable than ever before ! Davison & Foxx turn a battle into a "moving picture in your mind" ! You are "there" & you "feel" the situation . You understand more about the "Why's" of how these battles & engagement , concerning Forrest , turned out as they did & its very interesting reading & not "dead facts" !
   
   These two authors , Davison & Foxx , give first hand accounts , often from "non-famous" soldiers & civilians , recorded long after the war , that add "something new or a different prespective" on General Forrest ! The indepth research is fantastic ! You find out from Union reports , just what was being discussed concerning Forrest & his command , as certain actions were about to take place or were happening ! You see how unique Forrest was in almost always "creating the illusion" of haveing a much , much larger force than was reality , to his enemy . Also , you see how confussing Forrests actions & objectives were to the opposite side in a conflict !
   
   Just a splendid work on Nathan Bedford Forrest , by two excellent researchers & story-tellers !
   
   A MUST Read , for anyone interested in Forrest !
   
   Just the over-all best book on this topic of Nathan Bedford Forrest , that I have ever read ! Highly recommended to all who want to know & understand more on "Forrest The Enegma" and Forrest The Man !