Fascinating and Accessible History
|
I came to this book as a Brit who knew little or nothing about the American Civil War and it certainly did its job for me. The wealth of detail is facinating, the analysis of the reasons for the war illuminating and the conclusions explaining the victory of the North are coherent and convincing.
I came to a realistion of how important the American Civil War was. How different the world would be today had the South prevailed.
It also depressing how little we seem to progress, for example in terms of atrocities committed, how different was the American Civil war to the conflicts in the former Yugoslavia.
Two complaints were 1) I found the temporal progress of the war a little difficult to follow at times, i.e. which events were occurring simultaneously and 2) in my paperback edition the maps are basically unreadable.
One piece of advice for non-US readers, make sure you have a detailed map of the US to hand while reading.
Definitely recommended
|
|
Understanding the American Civil War
|
Wow. This book is the definitive book to read about the American Civil War. It gives a clear understanding into the lead up to the civil war. The abolition of slavery and the need to preserve the union is fully covered.
I was interested in the chapters about the iron clad boats and the part England played in building these boats.
The civil war was more complex an issue than I had previously understood but McPherson style of writings helps you understand the complexity of the war.
The battle casualties are horrifying with each side suffering 20 to 30 percent casualties.
If you only buy one book on the civil war this is it. However such is the book you will want to delve further in to the civil war
|
|
|
One of the finest historical volumes I have ever read on any subject
|
|
This is one of the finest historical volumes I have ever read on any subject. McPherson's strengths are are threefold: firstly his research is astonishing in its detail and expertly referenced, secondly he writes with wonderful clarity and linguistic dexterity, and thirdly he remains passionately impartial about his subject. The only weakness I can think of in this superb work is the extremely poor quality of the maps and diagrams some of which are nearly illegible, responsibility for which rests with the publisher (Penguin). Those seeking an easy read focusing primarily on the famous battles of the Civil War might be better off looking elsewhere (such as the Osprey volume "The American Civil War"), because while McPherson does cover military matters extensively, he is at least if not more concerned with an analysis of the political and social climate surrounding them and in this respect his book must surely stand out as an astonishingly well researched and scholarly work. Which is not to say that this book is anything other than a compelling read - despite the wealth and density of detail, Macpherson writes with elan and lucidity for over 850 brilliant pages. Thoroughly recommended, even if you will need at least a week of solid reading to get through it!
|
|
|
Ignore review below
|
Nothing could be further from the truth. This is a scrupulously fair examination not only of the conduct of the war, but also the political, social, financial, industrial, ethnic (etc etc) background to the conflict. He praises the bravery of rebel soldiers, the genius of Confederate commanders such as Jeb Stuart, Stonewall Jackson and Robert E Lee; he describes how the South was at an enormous disadvantage, with its comparative lack of factories, railroads, arsenals and other industry necessary to waging war. Also, tellingly, he NEVER ONCE moralises about the 'Peculiar Institution' of slavery, merely presenting the opinions of almost every political/geographical group, from Southern Democrats to Northern No-Nothings.
As for his absurd and naive charge that this is a cobbling-together of others' research - words fail me. As the author explains in his bibliographical note, there is a slew of literature on the American Civil War; indeed, after Jesus and Shakespeare, Abraham Lincoln is the most written-about person in the English language. The author has obviously pored over thousands of primary sources AS WELL as other people's work. The reviewer below has obviously been influenced by the extensive footnotes, which often explain to the reader where that research has come from and gives advice for further reading on the issue being discussed. The achievement of Mr McPherson to simplify and synthesise this enormous range of works is quite phenomenal. There are histories of the Civil War that run to ten or more volumes - this is a mere 880 pages.
And what a read! McPherson the narrator writes with such a lightness of touch that you barely know he's there. His language and style are deceptively simple, never grating. The story flows seemlessly; even quite complicated issues of 19th Century American politics are handled with a clarity that makes things clear even to someone (like me) with little knowledge of the subject.
This is, quite simply, a magnificent achievement. If you are interested in the USA, the Civil War, military history, warfare in general, or just interested in a rattling good read, I wholeheartedly recommend 'Battle Cry of Freedom'. (As, indeed, does almost everybody else on this page, save one).
|
|
Is this the best book on the subject? I hope not
|
I am not in a position to say whether this is the best book on the American “Civil War” as one reviewer here says, having only read three books including this one, on the subject. It is certainly very extensively researched and annotated and abounds in comments form contemporaries-quotations, extracts from diaries etc. This is so much the case that it is arguable that McPherson did not so much write a historical account as piece together as produce a series of quotations from eye-witnesses and those who lived through events and has interspersed them with a linking narrative and his own biased comments. The book is rather like a printed version of popular tv histories where dramatic footage is interspersed with aging eye witnesses making their truncated and edited comments on past events. In other words this is a documentary rather than a history and it has the surreptitious bias of a modern newspaper. Interestingly, the back cover of the penguin edition gives visible support to this by producing in the popular type of the US at that time (Galliard?) for the name of the publications 6 promotional puffs. The worst thing about the kind of bias in a book like this is that it is very difficult for a layperson to argue, since it is not a question of untruths or errors but of truths not mentioned or facts ignored, and McPherson is too good at his job to leave anything out which is well known. Many are also likely to think that this is a fair account since the writer takes pains to give it the superficial appearance of being so. There is no officious sabre rattling or trumpet blowing about this book. It appears to be sweetly reasonable while relentlessly pursuing a pro-Northern line from beginning to end.
Nearly every famous quotations and many obscure ones from the war can be found in the pages of this book. As a mine of quotations it is certainly second to none. The only exception that comes to mind is the remark made by one Southerner on hearing of Lincoln’s condemnation of rebellion and disloyalty-“if rebellion is always wrong, then God save the King!”. Stonewall Jackson referred to the South’s attempt at independence “the Second War of Independence”, an aspect of the struggle which McPherson does not address with any seriousness. The issue is by no means dead. In recent years the state of Vermont has begun to mutter about secession from the Union. At the Vermont Independence Convention held on October 28th 2005 in the state capital, Thomas Naylor declared that “South Carolina and the Confederate states had a perfect right to secede”.
I was not surprised after 550 pages of pro-yankee journalism to find McPherson belittling a notorious statement of Northern malice. This is the infamous invitation to the rape of women in the occupied South made by the commander of Union forces in occupied New Orleans. It is termed euphemistically by Mc Pherson as “an incident” and “Butler’s women’s order”. : The writer notes that it “intensified British upper-class alienation from the North” (Is McPherson suggesting that the British middle classes of the time more sympathetic to a bit of rough treatment of snooty belles?) Butler’s statement ran as follows: : “any woman who persisted in the practice of insulting Northern soldiers shall be regarded and held liable to be treated as a woman of the town plying her trade” Even today, with two world wars and countless horrors between then and now, this order sounds appalling and is appalling. It is also historically significant since it breaks the very codex which Gibbon in Decline and Fall had so proudly noted a hundred years before as the hallmark of civilized behaviour-soldiers in the eighteenth century refraining from attacking or molesting civilians. But McPherson who is always more understanding of Northern outrages than Southern ones-finds what he calls “considerable provocation” for Butler’s declaration. What can this “considerable provocation” be? Something pretty drastic to justify an invitation to rape one would think. Nothing less than murder and terrorism surely? Not exactly. Southern provocation was “climaxed by a woman who dumped the contents of a chamber-pot from a French-Quarter balcony on Fleet Captain Farragut’s head.” This would be hilarious if the writer were not so serious in believing this largely excuses Butler’s order. McPherson does not tell us how many women were raped as a result of the green light given by their commander. I am sure that if the history had been in reverse the reader would have received a very different account.. Apart form the relentless bias of the book, it is poorly served by the publishers: the photographs are cramped and mostly anyone’s second choice, more seriously, the maps of the battlefields are so poorly printed as to be almost unuseable. Maybe that suits McPherson’s belief that battles are not half so important as they are made out to be by most historians. Like Tolstoy in War in Peace he sees them and portrays them as a lot of sound and fury and confusion-decisive battles do not take place in this account. Gettysburg is presented as just one more bloody conflict rather than the decisive battle is its traditionally presented as being. Far more important for McPherson is the calibre of generals-this seems to him to be all important, not that he is over-enthusiastic about Southern generalship. It is not brilliance on the part of Lee but timidity, incompetence and rivalry among Northern generals which is here offered as the major clue to the slow progress of the Northern war effort. As for Lincoln, needless to say he, he is the hero of the story, as infallible as the Pope. If McPherson ever criticises Lincoln, I missed it.
This may be, as one reviewer claims the best book on the subject. If that is true I am very sorry to hear it.
|
|
|
United States | 
United Kingdom | 
Canada