The Civil War: A Concise History
Louis P. Masur
Hardback, 136 pages

From the Publisher: Louis P. Masur’s The Civil War: A Concise History offers a masterful and eminently readable overview of the war’s multiple causes and catastrophic effects. Masur begins by examining the complex origins of the war, focusing on the pulsating tensions over states rights and slavery. The book then proceeds to cover, year by year, the major political, social, and military events, highlighting two important themes: how the war shifted from a limited conflict to restore the Union to an all-out war that would fundamentally transform Southern society, and the process by which the war ultimately became a battle to abolish slavery. Masur explains how the war turned what had been a loose collection of fiercely independent states into a nation, remaking its political, cultural, and social institutions. But he also focuses on the soldiers themselves, both Union and Confederate, whose stories constitute nothing less than America’s Iliad . In the final chapter Masur considers the aftermath of the South’s surrender at Appomattox and the clash over the policies of reconstruction that continued to divide President and Congress, conservatives and radicals, Southerners and Northerners for years to come.

The fine folks at Oxford sent me Louis P. Masur’s The Civil War: A Concise History and I have to admit when I first looked at it I was bewildered that anyone would have the audacity to write a “concise” history of our Nation’s second greatest struggle and do so in less than 100 pages (not counting the bibliography, notes, and index.) Even though the book was accompanied by quotes of paise from Gary W. Gallagher and James M. McPherson, I was still skeptical. After reading it, I am rather happy they did send it! Masur’s book is every bit as good as Gordon S. Wood’s concise history of the American Revolution, The American Revolution: A History (Modern Library Chronicles). The first chapter of Masur’s book, Origins of the American Civil War, is as fine of a presentation as I have read: succinct, forceful, concise, and effective. I will be sure to offer this to my A.P.U.S. History class next year as a select reading. I highly recommend the book as it is just published and on sale!

]]> http://www.blog4history.com/2011/01/the-civil-war-a-concise-history/feed/ 0 http://www.blog4history.com/2011/01/george-washington%e2%80%99s-first-war-his-early-military-adventures/ http://www.blog4history.com/2011/01/george-washington%e2%80%99s-first-war-his-early-military-adventures/#comments Sat, 22 Jan 2011 21:10:22 +0000 Chris http://www.blog4history.com/?p=2868

George Washington’s First War: His Early Military Adventures, David A. Clary; Simon & Schuster; 352 p.

George Washington was a brash, self-confident, driven, and often daring and dashing young man, he was also at times indecisive and prone to make a bad judgment call or two. David A. Clary’s George Washington’s First War: His Early Military Adventures is a well balanced presentation of a young Colonel Washington who cut his teeth on the back-country of Virginia and the Ohio Valley, the future speculator and Revolutionary war hero thrived on achieving personal advancement and success. Washington earn some of what he wanted, but ultimately realized he could never get all of it as a “provincial” member of the British Army.

However, controversy did surrounded the young commander, such as the massacre of French soldiers near Tanaghrisson by Mingos after they had surrendered to Washington. Yet, by the end of his journey during the French and Indian War, and his heroic leadership during Braddock’s blunder, and the retreat, Washington had gained the confidence and learned what true leadership was.

George Washington’s First War: His Early Military Adventures is an excellent read and an insightful look at the growth of an American legend, though as the author notes, he was just a boy who became nothing more than just a man.

It is very easy for academic historians to mock this special need, and Harvard historian Jill Lepore, as a staff writer for The New Yorker, is an expert at mocking. Her new book, which mingles discussions of the present-day Tea Party movement with scattershot accounts of the Revolution, makes fun of the Tea Party people who are trying to use the history of the Revolution to promote their political cause. From her point of view, “What would the founders do?” is an “ill-considered” and “pointless” question.

As Wood notes, for Lepore the ideas behind these movements are a kind of historical “fundamentalism” that wishes to look back and to somehow teleport or transport today to yesterday, or in this sense to the great past. To conjure up the past in this way means, for Lepore, that it is the ultimate in the simplification and dumbing down of history so as to accept that women could not vote and blacks were slaves (as was the case in 1776). That to look back and ask what the Founder’s would do is an obtuse act. Therefore as Wood observes, throughout her book Lepore’s implicitly asks “Don’t these Tea Party people realize how silly they are?”

So, perhaps, for Academic snobs such as Lepore the only good movement is a Liberal movement? Anyway, a very interesting review of what looks like an interesting, though probably flawed, book that I can’t wait to read.

[Pauline Maier is the William R. Kenan, Jr. Professor of American History. She received her Ph.D. from Harvard University in 1968]

In 1997 Alfred A. Knopf published Maier’s American Scripture: Making the Declaration of Independence, which I did not read until a year and a half ago for my Constitutional History graduate class. American Scripture was well researched and well written. American Scripture was on the New York Times Book Review editors “Choice” list of the best 11 books of 1997 and a finalist in General Nonfiction for the National Book Critics’ Circle Award. Maier’s most recent work is a fantastic follow up. Her research is simply awesome with as daunting an index as you’ll see that makes Ratification far more impressive than American Script and a book that places Maier in elite company as a constitutional historian. What I love about the book is it nicely fills a void of sorts by not focusing on the Constitutional Convention, but instead ob the complicated and often intricate ratification process where the people did indeed debate and ultimately select the Constitution as the law of the land.

American Scripture: Making the Declaration of Independence
by Pauline Maier

As an AP US History teacher I find Maier’s work incredibly useful and frankly it will take me years to properly incorporate some of the chapters in the book. In particular I loved the sections about the Virginia and New York ratification process and the depth in which she goes. There is so much in this book that every time you pick it up you will undoubtedly pick up on something new.

From the Publisher:

When the delegates left the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in September 1787, the new Constitution they had written was no more than a proposal. Elected conventions in at least nine of the thirteen states would have to ratify it before it could take effect. There was reason to doubt whether that would happen. The document we revere today as the foundation of our country’s laws, the cornerstone of our legal system, was hotly disputed at the time. Some Americans denounced the Constitution for threatening the liberty that Americans had won at great cost in the Revolutionary War. One group of fiercely patriotic opponents even burned the document in a raucous public demonstration on the Fourth of July.

In this splendid new history, Pauline Maier tells the dramatic story of the yearlong battle over ratification that brought such famous founders as Washington, Hamilton, Madison, Jay, and Henry together with less well-known Americans who sometimes eloquently and always passionately expressed their hopes and fears for their new country. Men argued in taverns and coffeehouses; women joined the debate in their parlors; broadsides and newspaper stories advocated various points of view and excoriated others. In small towns and counties across the country people read the document carefully and knew it well. Americans seized the opportunity to play a role in shaping the new nation. Then the ratifying conventions chosen by We the People scrutinized and debated the Constitution clause by clause.

A top notch book and one destined to pick up some awards down the road in my hopeful opinion.

Deliver Us from This Cruel War:
The Civil War Letters of Lieutenant Joseph J. Hoyle, 55th North Carolina Infantry
Front Cover
BY: Joseph J. Hoyle, Jeffrey M. Girvan

Title: Deliver Us from This Cruel War: The Civil War Letters of Lieutenant Joseph J. Hoyle, 55th North Carolina Infantry
Publisher: McFarland, 2010
ISBN: 0786447575, 9780786447572
Length: 233 pages

Joseph J. Hoyle enlisted in the Confederate Army in May 1862 as a private. By the time of his death in September 1864, he was serving as a lieutenant in the 55th Regiment North Carolina Troops. The personal letters of this soldier, supplemented by the editor’s overview of the events and actions of the regiment, offer a view of the common soldier as well as battlefield and camp culture. The letters also reveal, among other things, how this former schoolteacher urged his fellow soldiers forward at Gettysburg despite a sense that the cause was lost.

Jeffrey M. Girvan is a social studies professional development specialist with Prince William County Schools in Virginia.

McFarland and Mr. Girvan have given us one of the better first hand accounts of the Civil War that I have read in some time. Reminiscent of Stephen E. Ambroses A Wisconsin boy in Dixie: Civil War letters of James K. Newton, Girvan’s subject, Joseph J. Hoyle, is an exception and prolific writer who had some interesting and keen insights of the war. Girvan does a far better job of editing his book than does Ambrose, but nonetheless they are counterparts to a degree.

Hoyle was a spiritual man who loved his wife Sarah deeply, but found himself in the middle of a Civil War that would ultimately claim his life. The letters are often touching and poignant, and though Hoyle’s religious belief allow him a somewhat unusual reaction to war, the battlefield did test his convictions and the length of the war his resolve, though he never stopped believing in the fight and wrote home many times as a correspondent to a local newspaper.

Girvan offers up a nice introductory essay that touches on the historiography of social history of the Civil War soldier, and then continues with excellent historical overviews for each chapter along with solid historical exposition. The presentation is very solid with nice illustrations and maps, and Girvan’s timely and informative elicitation makes this book an excellent contribution to Civil War soldier studies.

–Chris Wehner

Head Shot: The Science Behind the JFK Assassination
Author: G. Paul Chambers
Binding: Hardcover
260 pages (illustrations)
ISBN: 978-1-61614-209-4

Author joins a crowded study area concerning the loan gunner (Lee Harvey Oswald) theory since the Warner Commission report. Book after book has challenged the evidence that has been provided in support of the loan gunman theory. Chambers book is well researched, well written, and his handling of the scientific evidence is stellar, however, I am still not convinced that anyone has proved without a doubt that there was some conspiracy and that there was another shooter.

G. Paul Chambers, PhD, is a contracted NASA research physicist for the Energetic Materials and Detonation Science Department of the Naval Surface Warfare Center in Maryland. As a research physicist specializing in Condensed Matter and Radiation Sciences at the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, DC.

The next book is of the genre that not only do I love, but my students do as well.

The Man Who Shot the Man Who Shot Lincoln: and 44 other forgotten figures in history
Author: Graeme Donald
ISBN 10: 1849081700
Publisher: Osprey Publishing
288 pages
Binding: Hardcover

The so-called “forgotten” or unknown elements of history are always interesting and offer students and educators alike, some interesting stories to share with their peers. As an educator I ways use, when applicable, such books when lecturing in order to hopefully re-engage the student and keep their interest.

Donald’s book is a nice addition to the genre and will be of use to most any educator.

From the publisher:

We have all heard about the great generals of military history, and those whose heroic deeds changed the course of war. This is not their book. Instead, this offbeat and engaging book reveals the stories of 46 bit-players of military history: Hitler’s personal pilot, Hanna Reitsch; Pierre Basile, the crossbowman whose arrow hit Richard I; Major John D Barry, the Confederate who mistakenly gave the order to fire upon General Stonewall Jackson, and Lee Duncan, who rescued a puppy from the German trenches of World War I and took him back to America, where he became famous as Rin Tin Tin. If you think you know your history, prepare to think again.

Finally, a couple of nice Civil War books from McFarland.

Gettysburg as the Generals Remembered It: Postwar Perspectives of Ten Commanders
Author: Robert P. Broadwater
ISBN 978-0-7864-4995-8
appendix, notes, bibliography, index
203pp. softcover 2010

From the publisher:

This is an examination of reminiscences of the primary leaders on both sides at the battle of Gettysburg and a comparison of these reminiscences to the historical record. Many generals presented statements written decades after the Civil War, when the Gettysburg Campaign was the topic of historical research and personal controversy. This comparative history illuminates how history is shaped as well as how the famous battle unfolded.

The selected offerings are as follows:

The Comte de Paris, USA
General Oliver Howard, USA
General Henry W. Slocum, USA
General Abner Doubleday, USA
General Daniel Sickles, USA
General David Gregg, USA
General John Newton, USA
General Daniel Butterfield, USA
Major General John Gibbon, USA
Lieutenant General James Longstreet, CSA
General Fitzhugh Lee, CSA

I thought the selections were solid and the offerings provided for some interesting reading, with that said, is this a “must have” book, not sure, but well worth it for the collector or librarian.

Glory Was Not Their Companion: The Twenty-Sixth New York Volunteer Infantry in the Civil War
Author: Paul Taylor
ISBN 978-0-7864-4924-8
54 photos, maps, appendices, notes, bibliography, index
231pp. softcover (7 x 10) 2010

This is the softcover reprint of the 2005 hardcover release. Taylor’s regimental history was well received in 2005 and after thumbing through it and reading several chapters I was very impressed. Taylor’s writing style is fluid and very readable, and his research as solid as could be asked. Highly recommend this regimental history.

FROM HC: Narrated by Liev Schreiber, the series tells the extraordinary story of how America was invented, looking at the moments where Americans harnessed technology to advance human progress—from the rigors of linking the continent by transcontinental railroad, the internet of its day, to triumphing over vertical space through construction of steel structured buildings. “America The Story of Us” is also a story of conflict—with Native American peoples, slavery, the revolutionary war that birthed the nation, the Civil War that divided it and the great world war that shaped its future. “America The Story of Us” takes a look at the forces that have shaped our nation—the people, places and things that created this most astounding country. It’s a tough and thrilling adventure.

Each “Docudrama” presents several historic stories as it weaves the historical narrative of how this country came to be. Some stories inspire and awe, others challenge the historical senses and do so in impacting ways. The injection of numerous Hollywood stars and influential political figures was effective, though at times odd. But nonetheless, this did not take away from the presentation.

I am already in the process of designing lessons, activities, and worksheets for use in my regular and AP US History classes. I will be sure to share those over the course of the coming months.

MORE: “America the Story of Us” is produced for History by Nutopia. Jane Root is Executive Producer, Michael Jackson is co-Executive Producer and Ben Goold is the Showrunner for “America The Story of Us.” For History, Nancy Dubuc, David McKillop and Julian P. Hobbs are Executive Producers. “America The Story of Us” is being presented by Bank of America.

I’m going to go out on what should be a well occupied limb ready to break under the weight and say that Donald Stoker’s The Grand Design: Strategy and the U.S. Civil War will win award(s) next year. Stoker’s book is not just keenly researched, but he handles the war policies and strategies of the North and South in a fairly unique way.

From the publisher:

In The Grand Design , Donald Stoker provides a comprehensive and often surprising account of strategy as it evolved between Fort Sumter and Appomattox. Reminding us that strategy is different from tactics (battlefield deployments) and operations (campaigns conducted in pursuit of a strategy), Stoker examines how Abraham Lincoln and Jefferson Davis identified their political goals and worked with their generals to craft the military means to achieve them–or how they often failed to do so. Stoker shows that Davis, despite a West Point education and experience as Secretary of War, failed as a strategist by losing control of the political side of the war. His invasion of Kentucky was a turning point that shifted the loyalties and vast resources of the border states to the Union. Lincoln, in contrast, evolved a clear strategic vision, but he failed for years to make his generals implement it. At the level of generalship, Stoker notes that Robert E. Lee correctly determined the Union’s center of gravity, but proved mistaken in his assessment of how to destroy it. Stoker also presents evidence that the Union could have won the war in 1862, had it followed the grand plan of the much-derided general, George B. McClellan

Books have dealt with how and why the North won and the South lost, tactics, and strategy, but no other book I have read brings it all together within the political and strategic grand policies(or lack thereof) of each.

Stoker brings the startling yet obvious realization quickly to light when he points out that for a period of time when the war started Lincoln and the North had no real strategy. What was the North’s political objective? How and why does it change and how did this inform military strategy, operations, and tactics? If the North could have developed a grand strategy quickly and placed the proper instruments of war into place they could have won sooner. The South on the other hand had a clear grand strategy, and if I read Stoker correctly, but they were uneven in employing it. What is also clear, though not original in this work, is the failure of Davis and the evolution and success of Lincoln as a “grand strategist.”

I could go on and on about this truly unique and excellent work. I highly recommend it. Bravo Mr. Stoker.

Mr. Davis attempted to cover the first 50 years of the 19th century by following the narratives of 6 events: Burr’s trial, Weatherford’s War, the Madison Mutiny, Dade’s promise, Morse’s code and Jesse’s journey. Mr. Davis sought to provide “a portal into the times” in which each event unfolded. These are what he calls “overlooked.”

Mr. Davis has not written a history book in as much as he has a political op-ed piece. Davis starts off with President Obama’s election and throughout the book brings up politics of today and compares it with the past; and he takes events from the past and compares them with today. For example, Davis compared several events from American history with the terrorists attacks of 9/11. Here are those examples: William Weatherford’s “massacre” (Mr. Davis wording) at Fort Mims when Creek Indians stormed the fort and killed over 500 (265 armed militia) but spared the blacks so they could enslave them. Mr. Davis also compares a Seminole Indian attack in Florida against American soldiers as another 9/11 like event. I’m sorry, but how attacks by soldiers (warriors) against soldiers (and yes some settlers who understood the danger) is comparable to a radical Islamic terrorist attack against unarmed civilians whose only crime was going to work compares is beyond me!?

In his “Introduction,” Mr. Davis correctly points out that back in 1776 there were “many founders” who would have “been perfectly at home owning Barack Obama, his wife Michelle, and their two little girls and perhaps selling all or some…” Historically inaccurate? No, the straw man here is easily disposed. Well done Mr. Davis! Of course, Davis fails to point out that some founders did not own slaves: John Adams, Samuel Adams, Alexander Hamilton, and Thomas Paine. But the point here is Davis’s agenda, it’s “gotcha” history with his own political twist. As if the man is telling us anything new.

Now he does actually get into some interesting stuff with his 6 narratives only his constant injection of politics into his narrative ruined it; at least for me.

Davis then reveals the shocker that Washington (who freed his slaves upon his death) and Jefferson (who could not as he technically no longer owned them upon his death due to massive debts) would surely have been two of those who would have had no problem with the above scenario and would have even taken part. I don’t know how often Washington sold his slaves or if he ever broke up families (and the same goes for Jefferson), but Mr. Davis better know. Does Mr. Davis know that by the time the Revolution and Constitutional Convention are completed and the nation holds its first elections, the fact that anyone was voting on such a massive scale was unprecedented in world history. Remember, most of the world was “ruled” or lived in anarchy.

Mr. Davis then wraps it up by pointing out the hypocrisy of the founding when Obama himself, had he lived back in the day, would have only been “three-fifths of a man” when the counting of population took place for representation in Congress. Never mind that all the racists Southerners wanted all blacks to be counted as an entire human being as it would have benefited them.

Another and final example I will provide, every time (maybe I missed one or two when he didn’t) when Davis compares an event that was bad within something from modern history he does so with only Republicans. In his discussion on “presidential vendettas” he brings up Nixon and Bush, never mind FDR who had political opponents jailed.

The book is nothing more than a political expression of Mr. Davis and a good example of “presentisim” and activism that has no place in historical scholarship.

If you want a good book on this time period, take a look at David Walker Howe’s What Hath God Wrought: The Transformation of America, 1815-1848.