Customer Reviews (8)

War of Ego's: The War Between the Generals
This book is a very good peek behind the Allied military commanders in WW2. Author Irving shows the friction that existed among the British, French and US Generals, President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill. As Churchill once said "the only thing worse than fighting with allies is fighting without them". Indeed.

Given the different national interests during and post war, it is inevitable that disagreement arose during the conduct of the war. This book examines those differences in a very accessible, easy manner. Although the author is English, I found him to be very honest about the strengths and weaknesses of both American and English sides. The US and British both certainly agreed about the French and DeGaulle. Four stars - it seemed to include too much gossip about which general was sleeping with whom.

Irving pretty much sums up the current outlook on the Allied Leaders - they got the job done. It wasn't easy, perhaps it could have been done better and they tried to do the best possible job showing that there were no serious disagreements, all was harmonious, no finger pointing. Everyone swallowed their pride and bit their tongues at different points. Perhaps there is no overall hero, but then, aside from the Nazis, there was no overall villain either. I highly recommend this book for serious students of WW2 Western Front. This is more of a character study than one of tactics or weapons, so it helps to understand those before delving into this book. A good loaner from the library or a friend.

The war within the war
If nothing else, this book gives a new appreciation of Eisenhower as "chairman of the board" and the conficts he faced with and amongst his leading generals. Ike was a master manager in balancing the egos of Monty and Patton, and getting the best from each. Irving used the private, unpublished letters and diaries from many sources, claiming Patton's Papers had been "sanitized". He goes into the extraciricular activities of Ike with Kay Summersby and Patton withJean Gordon, his wife's neice. Irving shows the personal relationships with the generals and the staff, such as Everett Hughes long term friendship and advocacy for Patton. While David Irving is politically incorrect these days, this work is very good and worthwhile reading and shows what a good author can do with dispelling myths and writing history.

The Inner War
David Irving's "The War Between The Generals" focuses on personal rivalries, strategic disputes, national conflicts and other forces that threatened the Allied command from within.

Irving's writing style is superb, with the pacing and detail of a thriller novel and the facts and insights of real history.Why can't more historians write like this?

The most serious Allied dispute dealt with Eisenhower's "Broad Front Strategy", in which Anglo-American forces would move across large sectors of France in the final push into Germanny vs. Montgomery's "Full Blooded Thrust", wherein a huge Allied Army would march on a narrow axis directly into the Ruhr Valley to capture and destroy Germany's industrial region.

This broad front vs. full blooded thrust originated out of each commander's national needs.Montgomery knew that the British Empire teetered on the edge of bankruptcy and was down to her last manpower reserves.A quick victory in Europe would thus preserve the Empire.

Eisenhower sought to maintain the Anglo-American coalition and pursue a low risk strategy of incremental advance across the entire Western Front. Eisenhower also wanted to maintain the autonomy of American commanders like George S. Patton.Ultimately, Ike decided that America, the major contributor of men, material and money, would call the strategic shots.

The arrogance and incompetence of the French is examined in great detail.Shockingly, De Gaulle routinely fed the names of dissidents who loved France but not De Gaulle to the Gestapo so as to eradicate any rival political forces.

Irving packs in great details such as the German V-1, V-2 and V-3 superweapons, the Allied VX proxmity fuses and many other fascinating facts.

I highly recommend this work of history as it demonstrates how the Allies first had to overcome themselves before they could vanquish the Axis Powers.

Appreciate Ike for what he was
This was the first book by David Irving which I read, with great trepedation given his reputation as a Holocost debunker. However, it is an excellant book which should be read by anyone seeking to understand Eisenhower's role in the Second World War. Ike had never led troops in combat, was promoted over many others, to achieve Allied High Commander. His skill lay in his ability to manage such diverse personalities as Patton and Monty. And that quality is detailed in this book as never before. Ike's skill and forebearance is detailed in this book and my appreciation of it gains with each passing page. It is a people skill which allowed Eisenhower to hob nob with the regular GI as easily as with George Marshall and FDR. And he could manage such diverse personalities as Patton, Bradley, Clark and Monty without blowing a gasket. This is a must read for the WWII student. Irving has done a magnificent job.

A good book.
I read this book, here in Brazil.Even being an (unemployed) agronomist, I love to read Military history.This book shows you, many things about the generals who fought against Hitler in non soviet Europe.
David Irving talks about Eisenhower, De Gaulle,etc.The failures in this book are such things, like don't tells about many details in military affairs.Other tipical failure happens in chapter 16, when Irving claimed that Germany's tanks were better then US's tanks.In some topics, they were, but when you have 20 american Sherman tanks, against a single Panther tank, you must see America had to win that war.All German's tanks had tecnical failures and, they didn't had enough spare parts. ... Read more

Product Description

Product Description
In Obama's Wars, Bob Woodward provides the most intimate and sweeping portrait yet of the young president as commander in chief. Drawing on internal memos, classified documents, meeting notes and hundreds of hours of interviews with most of the key players, including the president, Woodward tells the inside story of Obama making the critical decisions on the Afghanistan War, the secret campaign in Pakistan and the worldwide fight against terrorism.

At the core of Obama's Wars is the unsettled division between the civilian leadership in the White House and the United States military as the president is thwarted in his efforts to craft an exit plan for the Afghanistan War.

"So what's my option?" the president asked his war cabinet, seeking alternatives to the Afghanistan commander's request for 40,000 more troops in late 2009. "You have essentially given me one option.... It's unacceptable."

"Well," Secretary of Defense Robert Gates finally said, "Mr. President, I think we owe you that option."

It never came. An untamed Vice President Joe Biden pushes relentlessly to limit the military mission and avoid another Vietnam. The vice president frantically sent half a dozen handwritten memos by secure fax to Obama on the eve of the final troop decision.

President Obama's ordering a surge of 30,000 troops and pledging to start withdrawing U.S. forces by July 2011 did not end the skirmishing.

General David Petraeus, the new Afghanistan commander, thinks time can be added to the clock if he shows progress. "I don't think you win this war," Petraeus said privately. "This is the kind of fight we're in for the rest of our lives and probably our kids' lives."

Hovering over this debate is the possibility of another terrorist attack in the United States. The White House led a secret exercise showing how unprepared the government is if terrorists set off a nuclear bomb in an American city--which Obama told Woodward is at the top of the list of what he worries about all the time.

Verbatim quotes from secret debates and White House strategy sessions--and firsthand accounts of the thoughts and concerns of the president, his war council and his generals--reveal a government in conflict, often consumed with nasty infighting and fundamental disputes.

Woodward has discovered how the Obama White House really works, showing that even more tough decisions lie ahead for the cerebral and engaged president.

Obama's Wars offers the reader a stunning, you-are-there account of the president, his White House aides, military leaders, diplomats and intelligence chiefs in this time of turmoil and danger.

From the Washington Post
By Steve Luxenberg, September 22, 2010:

President Obama urgently looked for a way out of the war in Afghanistan last year, repeatedly pressing his top military advisers for an exit plan that they never gave him, according to secret meeting notes and documents cited in a new book by journalist Bob Woodward.

Frustrated with his military commanders for consistently offering only options that required significantly more troops, Obama finally crafted his own strategy, dictating a classified six-page "terms sheet" that sought to limit U.S. involvement, Woodward reports in Obama's Wars.

According to Woodward's meeting-by-meeting, memo-by-memo account of the 2009 Afghan strategy review, the president avoided talk of victory as he described his objectives.

"This needs to be a plan about how we're going to hand it off and get out of Afghanistan," Obama is quoted as telling White House aides as he laid out his reasons for adding 30,000 troops in a short-term escalation. "Everything we're doing has to be focused on how we're going to get to the point where we can reduce our footprint. It's in our national security interest. There cannot be any wiggle room."

Read the full Post news report on Obama's Wars. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (80)

A Great Read and Great Reporting
This is a fantastic book. Woodward has a unique ability to put the reader "inside the room" with the participants. You get the sense that you are actually attending high level meetings and seeing reactions first hand. The book focuses on the wars in Iraq and Afganistan but there is also a wealth of information about other aspects of the Obama Presidency -- I found the material on how the initial team was chosen and the inauguration especially interesting.

Anyone who wants to understand more about Obama and his foreign policy team, or who wants insight into how wars are conducted at the hightest level should read this book.

Great pratical read while all players are still in office.
Excellent book and you can trust the sources. Amazing how a good idea can die a thousand deaths when people tip-toe around or back-stab each other, and bad ideas take an undieing life of their own as no one can figure what we are trying to do in Afghanistan to then know how we can get out.Some of Obama's top military officers border on the impertinent, insubordinate, my-agenda-first--one or two resignations from the Joint Chiefs was (is) in order.

If You Care about National Security Decision Making, Read this
Bob Woodward proves once again his ability to get insiders to talk. Obama's War is an important account of recent history about a key decision President Obama faced. Despite a down economy and a war weariness on the part of the American public, he is being asked to recommit to the effort in Afghanistan that was started in 2001. Does he send more troops? How many? What are the goals? What is the strategy? For how long does America's commitment run? And what does an ongoing commitment look like?

Woodward takes the reader behind the scenes to the strategy review sessions that take place among the top advisers: SECDEF Bob Gates, NSA James Jones, SECSTATE Hilary Clinton, CENTCOM Dave Petraeus, ISAF Commander Stanley McChrystal, Chairman of the JCS Mullen, and administration officials GEN Lute, Rahm Emanuel, and many others. There are deep divisions but also thoughtful and thorough discussions. The President himself is very ambivalent about a long term expensive commitment that he will have to pass on to HIS successor and distract his administration from domestic goals. Yet, he campaigned on a promise to properly resource Afghanistan and criticized the Bush administration for concentrating too much on Iraq and forgetting about where the genesis of 9/11 was -- Afghanistan -- and where the al Qaeda threat still remains -- along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. He puts in his own handpicked General, Stanley McChrystal, to turn things around. Yet when McChrystal comes up with his assessment, detailed here in Afghanistan Commander's Assessment, the president is not sure he wants to send in so many additional troops that McChrystal is requesting.

Some in the Obama administration argue that the president is "being rolled" by the military. They think that Obama is being boxed in where he HAS to give McChrystal what he wants. However, think about it from the point of view of the military. They were rolled by Bush/Rumsfeld through 5 years of war in Iraq and Afghanistan, given a counterinsurgency mission without the resources to effectively carry it out. Rumsfeld goes so far as to dictate individual unit assignments for the theater -- holding back on most them for the initial Iraqi invasion. When Iraq started looking like a failure the military leadership were criticized for not standing up to Rumsfeld and telling him the truth about what was happening and how to stop the losses. THEY had been rolled. So, having learned from that catastrophe, they took a stand on Afghanistan and told the president this is how it needs to be if he wants to achieve his objectives in Afghanistan.

Obama's Wars will be studied in the military schools and by senior national security policy makers for years to come. The decisions made will be evaluated, in due time, on their success and failure. Understanding the decision making process and the issues involved is a major contribution of Woodward's latest. Highly recommended.

If you like this book from Woodward, also recommend U.S. Army U.S. Marine Corps Counterinsurgency Field Manual by none other than GEN David Petraeus, USA.

Best Behind The Scenes View
Just finished reading "Obama"s Wars". There are parts that will scare the living daylights out of you. There are parts that will show the total lack of understanding
of the problem by political and military. There are parts that will make you angry!!
You getbetter picture of the frustration felt by our military (the best in the world) where in many areas are having to fight with their hands tied behind their
backs. THERE IS NOT ONE DULL PARAGRAPH IN THE WHOLE BOOK!

GreatDescription into the inner workings of NSC
Bob Woodward did extensive research to gain insider knowledge into the workings of the National Security Council and its long deliberations to reach a decision on the Afghanistan Strategy. His extensive experience as a journalist takes the reader through a detailed description of the the battles between the uniforms, the Obama insiders and members of the State Department.It showed the difficulty of reaching consensus, especially for a relatively inexperienced President. This book can be easily read and understood by anyone with some knowledge of politics.Overall a great book. ... Read more

Product Description
master historian gives readers a fresh new picture of the Civil War as it really was. Buell examines three pairs of commanders from the North and South, who met each other in battle. Following each pair through the entire war, the author reveals the human dimensions of the drama and brings the battles to life. 38 b&w photos.


From the Hardcover edition. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (24)

Just Plain Bad
This book purports to explode some Civil War "myths" but really only substitutes its own mythology for the popular mythology of the Civil War.The scholarship of this book is horrible.Other reviewers have already pointed out how Buell mangles the story of the Lost Order before Antietam to suit his own agenda and his twisted view of Lee, who, while far from perfect, was still an excellent general and an even better engineer.This book is simply a political agenda (or, worse, a juvenile attempt to get attention by contradicting popularly-held views) dressed up as history with no substance whatsoever.It's pure "shock-jock-ism" with no credible scholarship to back it up.Even Bernard Cornwell's historical scholarship is better than this...and he's writing novels!If you're going to write something claiming to be historical fact, or even an objective judgment based on historical fact, at least do some research first.This guy is a hack.

Reevaluation of Generals
This is an intriguing book, although not without some controversy.The method is to examine three pairs of generals, one each from the Union and Confederate armies--East and West--at different levels of command.The two top generals at the end of the Civil War,Ulysses Grant and Robert E. Lee are one pair.Two generals of armies in the West--George Thomas with the Union and John Bell Hood with the Confederates--are profiled and compared.Finally, two generals in the East--Francis Barlow and John B. Gordon--are compared, each at Division or Corps command level.

The end result is illuminating.Certainly, Robert E. Lee is not treated kindly.Grant comes in for some hits, as well.Nonetheless the criticisms are handled pretty well and the author does credit each for their strengths.

At the lowest level of command, Barlow and Gordon, we get an interesting tratment of two commanders who may not be as well chronicled as others.Nonetheless, each served with distinction and both were certainly interesting character studies.

Finally, and maybe most controversial, is the juxtaposition of Thomas (Southern born, despised by his family and mistrusted by some in the North) and Hood.The latter is a perfect example of the "Peter Principle," where one gets promoted above one's level of competence.A terrific division commander, Hood was overmatched as an army (and probably even as a corps) commander.Buell's treatment of Thomas is almost over laudatory.To be sure, the record is clear that Thomas was a stalwart, at whatever level of command he held; he excelled from the start of the Civil War, with his crushing of Zellicoffer's army at Mill Springs to his smashing victory over Hood at Nashville. Nonetheless, the treatment of Thomas is perhaps a bit "over the top," despite his genuine accomplishments and the shabby treatment that he received from Grant and Sherman toward the end of the war.

In the end, a very interesting book, marred mainly by the overenthusiastic treatment of Thomas (even though, I would argue, Thomas deserves much more credit as a general than he is often given).

Thought-Provoking; But Are Descriptions of Events Misleading
I enjoyed Mr. Buell's book.As a number of people have noted, the author provides perspectives on Generals Lee and Grant that may be unfair in some respects but are often thought-provoking.The portions on General Thomas explain his greatness in a way I had not read before.

On the other hand, the book's description of a single incident causes me great concern about how much the reader can rely upon the author's descriptions of other events throughout the book.

That one event concerns the so-called Lost Order.On September 9, 1862, General Lee, then at Frederick, MD, issued seven copies of the order (Special Orders No. 191) to his commanders, including D.H. Hill and Stonewall Jackson, directing them to split up and attack Harper's Ferry, VA from three directions, thus dividing his army into four parts.Jackson, not realizing that Lee issued a copy of the order directly to Hill, also issued a copy of the order to Hill, Jackson's subordinate.Hill received the copy of the order from Jackson, but the copy from Lee was somehow lost.Beginning September 12, the Union army moved into Frederick.Incredibly, on September 13, a Union soldier camped on the outskirts of Frederick by chance found the order lying in a field, wrapped around some cigars.The order was ultimately forwarded to General McClellan, leading ultimately to the Battle of Antietam (Sharpsburg) on September 17.

I do not profess to be a Civil War expert, but both books I had read about this incident clearly stated that it was never determined whether Hill received the copy of the order from Lee and therefore should be blamed for its loss.On the one hand, according to those books, Hill always adamantly maintained that he never received the order, and his adjutant supplied an affidavit to that effect.On the other, Lee's adjutant, R.H. Chilton, maintained that, although he did not have a specific recollection or documentary evidence, he was confident that he must have received confirmation that the order was delivered to Hill.Beyond that, no other evidence turned up.No courier confessed carelessness, and the identity of the owner of the cigars was never determined.See, Sears, Landscape Turned Red: The Battle of Antietam, pp. 111-115 and Appendix I; McPherson, Crossroads of Freedom: Antietam, The Battle that Changed the Course of the Civil War, pp. 107-108.

It is certainly fair for an author to suggest that one scenario or the other is the more likely one (in view of the explicit, albeit selfserving, testimony of Hill and his adjutant, I would be inclined to conclude that Hill did not receive the copy of the order, and that in the rush of events [Lee's army was splitting up and moving out] Lee's adjutant did not notice that he did not receive confirmation of receipt).Mr. Buell does not do this, however.Instead, giving no hint of any uncertainty or controversy, he relates one hypothetical scenario as firmly established fact:"Hill . . . received two copies of the special order. . . .Hill snorted at the inept staff work of the high command and tossed away the redundant order.A staff officer retrieved the document and used it to wrap his cigars.When Hill and Lee's army got underway the next morning, September 10, the package was left behind."Buell, pp. 111-112.

Again, I am no expert, but if Messrs. Sears and McPherson are correct in describing the available evidence, Mr. Buell's description is, with all due respect, misleading.He presents the story as gospel, adding vivid details (Hill "snorted" and "tossed away" the order; a "staff officer" retrieved and reused it) that lead the reader to believe that he is relying upon an account by a witness (presumably the messenger or Hill or a member of Hill's staff), when there apparently was none.

This disparity, in turn, causes me to wonder how many other times in the book Mr. Buell may have used similar, apparently misleading techniques to present hypothetical scenarios as fact without alerting the reader that uncertainty exists.

As I have emphasized, I am only a layperson interested in the Civil War.James McPherson apparently did not complain about Mr. Buell's treatment of the Lost Order incident (the book cover includes a blurb by Mr. McPherson praising the book; I have not been able to find his original review), so perhaps I am being unfair.If anyone has other thoughts, I would be delighted to hear them.

Biased and not evenly written, too much on Lee and Grant
Great book which analyzes six of the top generals in the civil war. Warrior Generals gives you a glimpse into their heads before, during and after battles. Excellent companion to Foote and McPherson, must read for American Civil War buffs.

Good, thought provoking
Buell analyzes three COnfederate and three Union soldiers with six very different leadership styles.

Buell gives a title to each of the six different men and they are:

The Yoeman: Ulysses S. Grant
The Aristocrat: Rboert E. Lee
The Knight-Errant: John Bell Hood
The Roman: George H. Thomas
The Cavalier: John B . Gordon
The Puritan: Francis C. Barlow

Buell researched this book heavily, including delving into the National Archives to the point that he actually found boxes of papers from the Civil War that had not even been opened since they were packaged and delivered after the war, a fact that I find amazing given the vast number of books written on the war every year.

Buell is quite clear in his book that Robert E. Lee was vastly overrated and quite possibly incompetent (he never says it outright but he infers it). I agree that Lee has been overrated by some, but his incompetence is refuted, in my mind, by his track record against a much larger, better equipped army over the course of the war. To his credit, Buell does not lay the blame for the vast number of casualties in the Seven Days Battles in the Peninsular Campaign on Lee - which I consider fair consider that he was forced to take charge during the battles due to the wounding of Confederate General Joseph Johnston. Lee can't really take the blame for a situation he did not create.

Buell also is extremely critical of Grant, sometimes in a contradictory manner. At the beginning of the book he is critical of Grant's strategy as unimaginative at the end of the war (press Lee constantly, despite the constant casualties since Lee could not replace his casualites and Grant could easily replace his own - it quickly became a numbers game and denied Lee his famed mobility) and then, towards the end of the book he praises it.

Buell's favorite is obviously Thomas, a brilliant organizer who built the army that literally simultaneously destroyed the Confederate Army of Tennessee (under Thomas) and was the core of Sherman's famous March to the Sea through Georgia. However, he was ultimately relieved of command by Grant for being too deliberate - a conclusion that I share with Grant. Buell, however, believes that it was an unjust firing. (Grant believed that action was often more important than preparation - sometimes true, sometimes not, but Thomas never seemed to be prepared enough...)

Although I disagreed with many of his conclusions, I did enjoy Buell's book. It was informative and well written. ... Read more

Product Description
Hero, adulterer, bon vivant, murderer and rogue, Dan Sickles led the kind of existence that was indeed stranger than fiction. Throughout his life he exhibited the kind of exuberant charm and lack of scruple that wins friends, seduces women, and gets people killed. In American Scoundrel Thomas Keneally, the acclaimed author of Schindler’s List, creates a biography that is as lively and engrossing as its subject.

Dan Sickles was a member of Congress, led a controversial charge at Gettysburg, and had an affair with the deposed Queen of Spain—among many other women. But the most startling of his many exploits was his murder of Philip Barton Key (son of Francis Scott Key), the lover of his long-suffering and neglected wife, Teresa. The affair, the crime, and the trial contained all the ingredients of melodrama needed to ensure that it was the scandal of the age. At the trial’s end, Sickles was acquitted and hardly chastened. His life, in which outrage and accomplishment had equal force, is a compelling American tale, told with the skill of a master narrative.Amazon.com Review
Politician, man about town, war hero, and murderer: Dan Sickles led many lives, some of them improbable, turning disaster to advantage. Thomas Keneally, whose novels have been populated by heroes and outlaws alike, vividly captures Sickles's life and times. A Tammany politician, for good and ill, Sickles earned national notoriety for gunning down his friend Philip Barton Key, the son of Francis Scott Key, in what his peers in Congress took to be an excusable crime of passion. Sickles made a glorious comeback with the Civil War, when the regiment he raised distinguished itself time and again under fire at places such as Chancellorsville and Gettysburg--where, defying orders in a bold maneuver, Sickles helped secure the Union victory. "His tendency toward berserk and full-blooded risk was partly characteristic of the city he had grown up in, the age he lived in, and his own soul," writes Keneally. Admired by no less than Mark Twain, Sickles figures only as a footnote in many histories. Ably recounting his triumphs and defeats, Thomas Keneally brings him front and center in a tale that will delight Civil War buffs. --Gregory McNamee ... Read more

Customer Reviews (38)

Interesting, yet disappointing (2.75*s)
This biography of Dan Sickles, fairly well known in the mid-nineteenth century as a playboy, political operative, and Civil War general, is at least as frustrating as it is interesting and entertaining. The author establishes rather quickly that Sickles had developed an unusual persona by an early age. He was dapper, handsome, fastidious, socially adept, and good at speechifying - all of which served him well as a lawyer, a political operative for the Tammany Democratic machine in NYC, and as an assistant to James Buchanan, the US ambassador to England, where he constantly dashed about several European nations attempting to purchase Cuba for the US. However, Sickles can be viewed far less charitably. It can be said that he was a schmoozer, opportunist, and manipulator, which served him well in his hardly unknown penchant for womanizing, not to mention his very questionable financial dealings, including embezzlement and fraud. He quite literally took advantage of the adulation of the beautiful, talented fifteen-year-old Teresa Bagioli, the daughter of a family with whom he had lived for a while, by marrying her just before he left for England at age thirty-three. In this early phase of his life, the book proceeds at a madcap pace as Sickles' dashes to his various assignments and assignations. This is symptomatic of a real lack of depth and perspective that characterizes much of the book.

Most of the book is devoted to the short, but involved, period from Sickles entry into Congress and Washington society in 1857 to his wounding at Gettysburg on July 2, 1863. Sickles was elected to Congress on the coattails of Buchanan as a pro-Western expansion, pro-Southern Democrat, and of course on the Tammany ticket. NYC with its large immigrant population and businesses interested in Southern staples had not swung over to the Republican Party with its strain of nativism, in addition to its anti-Southernism. Sickles, as always, lived beyond his means in Washington, but via his stunning, genteel wife, they moved into the upper echelons of Washington society. Over the next two years, Sickles virtual abandonment of his wife and her subsequent affair with the aristocratic Barton Key, son of the famous Francis Scott Key and a prominent district attorney, are tragically played out at some length, which finally resulted in Sickles stalking Key in Lafayette Sq and shooting him, while Key begged for his life. The author insists that his subsequent acquittal was the first successful temporary insanity plea in a US murder case. In actuality his prominent legal team simply overwhelmed the local prosecutor, not to mention that defending one's honor with lethal force was viewed as acceptable raw justice in that era. Sickles with a certain amount of histrionics played the role of wronged male to the hilt, but by far his greatest concern was his suddenly diminished social and political standing. As the author notes, Sickles own infidelity and his calculated forcing of Teresa to write a letter of confession were not a part of the proceedings.

Southern secession rehabilitated Sickles. He may have been pro-Southern, but his Unionism overrode that. After Fort Sumter, he became a leading pro-War Democrat but more importantly immediately volunteered to recruit and lead a regiment of NY militiamen. The author sheds no light on his readiness to assume such a responsibility, but there is no doubt of his vigor. It is at this point that Sickles first lobbies Lincoln in the White House to help in this endeavor, but that was only the first of what became regular visits throughout the War as a member of Mary Todd Lincoln's small social group. Sickles saw action in the Virginia Peninsula Campaign in the summer of 1862 and in the disastrous Battle of Chancellorsville in May, 1863, but Gettysburg was his defining moment. As Maj. Gen of the III Corps, Sickles controversially deployed his men contrary to Gen Meade's orders, resulting in his position being overrun and him having a leg destroyed by a Confederate cannonball. However, as the author indicates, the debate continues even today as to whether Sickles helped or harmed the Union effort. He did receive the Medal of Honor in 1897 for his heroism on that day, July 2, 1863, no doubt in part due to his immediately beginning an intensive lobbying campaign with Lincoln, Congress, etc concerning his prescient actions and the hesitancy of Meade, which he continued for years.

The author clearly views Teresa as a sympathetic, mistreated figure. She returned to the Sickles estate in NYC before her husband's trial, where she lived her remaining years with their daughter Laura. She and Sickles quickly reconciled, not without much public scorn, but he virtually ignored her once the War began. She apparently lived with tuberculosis for many years before succumbing in 1867 at the age of thirty-one. Her continued devotion to Sickles is nothing less than remarkable.

Sickles had nearly fifty years to live after the War. Much of what he became involved with in those years was based on his notoriety and political connections. He took seriously his role as military governor in both South and North Carolina during Reconstruction, 1865-1867, where he was forced to confront the intransigence, and even violence, of rural Southerners toward the freedmen. He was compelled to resign by Pres Johnson for his too vigorous policies. He was the US Minister to Spain from 1869-1874. Again, the purchase of Cuba was on the agenda. There, he married his second wife and had two children with her. When he returned to the US from living in Paris in 1879, she remained behind, having tired of his philandering. He served in Congress for one term, 1893-95, and was the chairman of the New York State Monuments Commission, where he apparently stole $28,000 of commission funds.

Sickles unconscionably turned his back on his daughter Laura, who struggled after the death of her mother, turning to alcohol. Upon her death in 1891 in a small rented room in Brooklyn, the author points out that he could not be bothered with her funeral. That scenario emphasizes the main shortcoming of the book, that is, an absence of the real Dan Sickles in the pages. Was he only a manic, insensitive rogue?If so, why? Cataloging his movements, numerous interactions, and assignments is insufficient. At times, there is detail overload, as in trying to explain troop movements. What little background there is on the politics and sociology of the War period is good. For the most part, the last fifty years of his life is presented in such a compressed, sketchy format as to be of little use. As said earlier, the book has a certain appeal, but is also disappointing in many ways.

Scoundrel ? (It's a bit much to call the man Scoundrel)
Other readers seemed to have summed up most of the basics of this book: The man's philandering ways, the political and military history and author's compassionate portrayal of Teresa Sickles (the 1st wife). I shall offer more of a personal opinion. I found this to be a decent book but a bit difficult of a read at times. Some of the sentence structure was a little odd, I thought. I often had to read a sentence over more than once to get the proper meaning of what the author was trying to convey. I think this is due, perhaps, to the writers style. I'm not sure because I have not read other books he has written. As a female, I found the portions about Teresa Sickles to be interesting. Maybe there was more letters and information available regarding Teresa than the 2nd wife for the author to research and that is the reason why more was written about her. I did find the first half of the book much more interesting. I wished there would have been equal time regarding the portion of the book concerning Gettysburg-perhaps a bit more detail for this is what most people associate the man with.
Personally, I am still wondering why the author chose the name "Scoundrel". While Dan Sickles was, without doubt, a philanderer, and a manipulative man who often took credit for things he didn't have as large a role as he surmised and, certainly told some untruths in his life, I think the word "scoundrel" is a bit much. A scoundrel is someone who is evil and, while he had character flaws, I don't think his intent was evil. Even the murder of his wife's lover could be said to be not as much evil as it was a spontaneous act of anger. It seemed that whatever Dan Sickles did, he was passionate about and more often than not, whether by charm or determination, he got what he went after and was pretty good at his endeavors except for the marital sort. This tends to be a trait of highly successful people, who, also are known to put their passion for their work well above the passion for their spouse. This is as true today as it was back then. Actually, as I was reading this, I was thinking that many of the things he did is not un-like politicians or celebrities of today with all the fanfare and attention of the times. The difference, now, is the way society looks at the woman in question. That has changed a lot of things.

Self-Indulgent & Badly Edited Paceless Piffle
Self-Indulgently Written:

"The innocuous, enthusiastic, chatty letters Theresa wrote";

Badly Edited:

The so-called publishing icon, Nan Talese, let the following stand - as is:

"The Irish icon & escaped political prisoner handsome & oratorical
Thomas Francis Meagher";

Paceless Piffle:

Page 120 meant there were another 200 pages to go.No way.Bye.

A Biography Chopped with a Sickle
I am very interested in the period of American history around the Civil War. In a sense, the 1863 battle of Gettysburg was the "turning point" of that conflict (though many will argue that the war was over before it started because of the North's economic advantages and others will argue that had this or that decision in battle been made or not made, the Confederate's army would have been more effective, and so Lincoln might not have been re-elected in 1864).

I would argue that it was the second day of the Gettysburg battle which was the most critical, and that General Pickett's charge on the third day was irrelevant -- unless of course you happened to have been killed during it.

The key to that second day's pivotal battle was the positioning of Major General Dan Sickles' III Corps in a salient in front of Little Round Top, at the south end of Cemetery Ridge. Lee didn't expect it to be there. Longstreet whom Lee ordered to make a flank attack around that ridge, didn't expect it to be there and bloodied his corps fighting against it. The Union leader, Meade, ordered Sickles to hold the south end of that ridge, and he didn't expect III Corps to be there either.

So I bought this book to learn more about this General Sickles, why he did what he did at Gettysburg, what historians thought about it, and what he made of his life before and afterward. I thought, like others, that the high point of Dan Sickles' life was at Gettysburg.

Turns out, according to author Keneally, the high point of Sickles's career / life actually occurred 4 years prior to the battle of Gettysburg. Then-Congressman Sickles shot his wife's (Teresa) lover, who was the son of Francis Scott Key who wrote our National Anthem. Everyone knew it - knew Sickles was guilty of murder. At his trial, which was a celebrated event in Washington, D.C., his lawyer (who later became Lincoln's Secretary of War) based the defense of Sickles on the idea that Sickles was insane with jealousy at the time of the murder. This was the first use of the insanity defense in a murder trial, and it worked. Sickles got off. He later forgave Teresa, but had separated from her.

I guess when author Keneally wrote about this part of Sickles' life, he ran out of interestor ideas, as this episode and not the battle of Gettysburg was the focus of his book American Scoundrel. Coverage of Sickles' actions at Gettysburg and his post-war political, administrative, and ambassadorial career receive scant coverage. I wanted to know why and how Sickles had such excellent political connections when many thought it was he who had nearly lost the war.

Keneally's style of writing is engaging, but his prose is nearly devoid of any analysis of why Sickles did what he did. I didn't learn anything from this book, except about the murder trial, and I wasn't interested in that. I should have saved my money and read about Dan Sickles in Wikipedia.

Facts as Slippery as Dan
Thomas Keneally's Dan Sickles is a notoriously slippery character but after reading this work all I know about Sickles is that he was an intriguing opportunist that led something of a charmed life. If you are at all familiar with the American Civil War, you probably know that no one can defend Dan Sickles. A Tammany Hall, machine politician, financially unstable, the first murderer whose acquittal incorporated "temporary insanity" and a scrupulously unfaithful husband who deserts his children from two marriages, he was, to say the least, a less than savory character.

But he was also amazingly successful. Part of a United States delegation to Britain, twice elected to the US Congress, in the late 1850's and again, almost 40 years later, in the early 1890's, a Major General of Volunteers during the Civil War and a purported Hero of Gettysburg, Reconstruction Governor for both North and South Carolina, Minister to Spain in the Grant Administration and confidant of Mary and Abraham Lincoln, this man definitely had the ability to get along with people. So what was it about this man that guaranteed him such a long term, 50 year, stable platform for success?

Unfortunately the author never gets around to answering this question. The author spends almost all his time exploring the softer, negative interpersonal issues surrounding the General and little time, if any, on the subject of this book, the General himself. Evidentially he was not all bad or he couldn't have accomplished what he did. But the author elects to spend 50% of the book, almost 250 pages, describing his wife's adulterous affair and Sickles' trial for the murder of his wife's lover and then blitzkriegs through the remaining 50 years of his life when he accomplished so much of what is listed above. And that is why this book struggles so badly so many times.

Aside from the materially unbalanced approach to Dan Sickles, there are numerous, serious errors of fact in the all too short time the author spends on Sickles military career.It is easy to forgive the first five or so but with an Internet providing research at one's fingertips, when the Civil War related errors break into double figures, the lack of simple research casts a pall on the other 95% of this work. The book is, after all, about the service of a Civil War General. Too much of this book is about how Dan the Horrible didn't support his adulterous first wife after Dan's trial for murder. It's a truly odd recurring theme throughout this work right up until the last page, last sentence, even though the author details that Sickles took her back and provides for her until her death.

As this work unfolds one begins to suspect that it is much more a biased narrative, a work of suppositions and unnecessary character assassinations, possibly a poorly written novel or soap opera, than it is a serious work of history or biography. This man was a Corps Commander of 15,000 Union troops and those men loved him. Why was that? He fought at Chancellorsville and lost a leg at Gettysburg. Why treat these actions so superficially? He was deeply, and cynically, involved in electing President Rutherford B. Hayes. Where is that? Speaking of missing, where is the footnote support for suggesting Sickles seduced Mary Todd Lincoln, Abe's deranged wife, in the White House? And what about the assertion that Dan was a pimp? These are the author's unsubstantiated words, not mine, and again you guessed it, no footnotes to prove the assertion.

How much of this work is fact and how much of it is fiction is quite difficult to ascertain. What I do know is that the research on certain portions of this work is so weak it casts serious doubt about the author's agenda in the rest of the book.
... Read more

Product Description
The book has no illustrations or index. Purchasers are entitled to a free trial membership in the General Books Club where they can select from more than a million books without charge. Subjects: United States/ History/ Civil War, 1861-1865/ Campaigns; Generals; History / United States / Civil War Period (1850-1877); Biography ... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

It Often Takes A Military Man
One can effectively argue that one cannot have an inimate understanding of a general to write his biography without being a military man first. After one reads this book, one comes away with a vision of how Jackson lived, prayed, and led, with all military terminology academically broken down for the layman. I recomend both this book as well as Robertson's account for in-depth reading and research.

Excellent Civil War book
This book covers a lot of ground, it's well written and is never dull.Colonel Henderson knew his subject very well.

This is the book for any person who loves Stonewall!!!
I have been a fan of the American Civil War for over five years, and I have read many books on the subject and especially on Stonewall Jackson.I have never found a book more thorough about both subjects in my life.Theauthor dives into several contravercies like:Why did the Civil Warstarted,Did Stonewall fall asleep at the Seven day Battle?He alsodoesn't just stick to Stonewall, he also talks about other importantfigures in the Civil War.So if you are interested, kinda like, or afanatic about Civil War and Stonewall Jackson like I am, I would recammendthis book to every one! ... Read more

Product Description

Since it was first published in 1952, Lincoln and His Generals has remained one of the definitive accounts of Lincoln’s wartime leadership. In it T. Harry Williams dramatizes Lincoln’s long and frustrating search for an effective leader of the Union Army and traces his transformation from a politician with little military knowledge into a master strategist of the Civil War. Explored in depth are Lincoln’s often fraught relationships with generals such as McClellan, Pope, Burnside, Hooker, Fremont, and of course, Ulysses S. Grant. In this superbly written narrative, Williams demonstrates how Lincoln’s persistent “meddling” into military affairs was crucial to the Northern war effort and utterly transformed the president’s role as commander-in-chief.

Customer Reviews (13)

Listen to me, Everyone

There are so many people that dance across the stage of the Civil War. So many names come up again and again in the story, and its hard to know and remember each general's particular contribution and role in the War.

This is a GREAT BOOK for explaining Lincoln as Commander in Chief and is relationship with EACH ofthe Generals along the way.

This book is well written, and is GREAT for learning of the Generals and their style's.

This book doesn't get bogged down in the boring minutiae of every little statistic along the way.

BIG PICTURE, and how the Generals fit into Lincoln's plans.

So many books get bogged down into this battle or that person and its hard to rise above and see that BIG PICTURE of how the war could be won.
Lincoln had the big picture, and this book proves he was even a better strategist than his career military officers.

If you're looking for a GREAT BOOK, about Lincoln's relationship with his Generals, and their style.......

THIS IS THE BOOK. IT'S A MUST READFOR YOU CIVIL WAR BUFFS.

Enjoy!

Lincoln the war strategist.
Excellent history from a famous historian.Lincoln was not just a great politician, but he was an excellent war strategist.If he had been a general, he would of held his own with the greats such as Lee, Jackson, Sherman, and Grant.In this book, Williams details the interactions of Lincoln, Stanton, Halleck, and such generals as Pope, McClellan, Grant, Sheridan, and Sherman.Lincoln kept an eye on all orders going to these generals and contributed positively to the strategy of the union.When a general screwed up (McClellan, Pope, Burnside, Hooker), Lincoln was there to make suggestions and work with these leaders.It is amazing the patience Lincoln displayed with these huge ego leaders.Some even thought they had more sense than their leader.Lincoln's brillance shins through on all these interactions.He displayed a fatherly attitude toward these individuals.

This is great history by a well known historian.This should be one of the books read by all Civil War historians.Lincoln is the center of all these crisises.The reader can't help seeing the brilliance of our most famous president.

History Repeats, Presidents Need Good Generals
Though this was written in the 1950's and is a classic piece of scholarship on the subject, the comparisons to current events and the war in Iraq are striking. The easy style of this scholarship makes it very accessable and interesting "history" even for those who aren't seeking to research history, and the intimate portrait of Lincoln and the various military men and politicians discussed is the furthest thing from "dry history" and a great read.

Empty Bookstore
This was favorably discussed in the WSJ as a real gem in Lincoln history.Written in the 1950's it has withstood the test of time.BLAHHHH !I wish I had seen it in a bookstore, since opening it to any page would have revealed a Flatland.The style of writing is pure "University Dessicate".Paul Johnson should take a look at Lincoln.$25 plus fees taxes shipping--did I mention fees, handling, fondling, etc. costs gone.

Solid, Unsentimental History
This is not a history of the war or a detailed description of the battles (see Foote's trilogy for that).It's just what it says it is -- a history of Lincoln's dealings with his generals.

At the onset of the war, the US had almost no army, few weapons, no officers trained in large strategic warfare and an outmoded system of command.Lincoln himself had no real military experience.It took time and many blunders before Grant marched south in 1864 with a clear strategy for ending the war behind the most powerful, well equipped army in the world.

Lincoln was highly intelligent and had an innate strategic vision that outclassed all of his generals (the prime objective was to destroy Lee's army, not capture Richmond).Lincoln took his commander in chief role seriously and often took an active part in the campaigns, at least before he finally found Grant.The strengths and (mostly) weaknesses of McClellan, Hallack, Buell, Fremont, Banks, Burnside, Hooker, Rosecrans, and others are explored in just the right amount of detail.

While Williams concludes that Lincoln was our greatest war president, there is no hero worship in this book.He relies on facts, as shown by telegrams (Lincoln lived at the telegraph office during battles), letters, journals and memoirs.Lincoln wrote some wonderfully pithy telegrams, like the one to Grant as he was flanking Lee's army down to Petersburg ("Hold on with a bulldog grip, and chew and choke as much as possible").

This book is very well written and moves along at a smart pace.It's certainly one of the best Lincoln books.Although out of print, I was able to get a new hardcover through Amazon. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (6)

Was it the General Staff?
I found this book to be very readable and thoughtful.However, the most fascinating point was the data on combat effectiveness that led TN Dupuy to write the book.The primary conclusion is that the German General Staff was "the" reason for the effectiveness of the German army.In fact, the Germans had a very unbalanced army, and their biggest failing may have been in logistics, the quintessential staff activity.
One of the data points that Dupuy discusses is that after roughly August of 1944 the Americans were the equal of the Germans in combat effectiveness when they had tactical air cover.I think this tells us two things, first that experience counts a LOT in running a war.Remember, the Germans had been fighting hard since 1939.German accounts tell us that their takeover of Austria - the Anschluss - was a mess.Because this was unopposed it amounted to their first large scale maneuvers after WWI, and they weren't very good.They effectively got their training in Czeschoslovakia, Austria, and Poland.The Americans got their training in North Africa, Sicily, and Italy.They started out terrible, but got better over time.By August 1944 their army (and I emphasize army, not infantry) was as good as the Germans.The second thing Dupuy's statistics tell us is that the Americans organized their army differently.For some reason, there is a tendency to credit the German army with better fighting capabilities because their infantry was better than the Americans (it probably was) and their tanks were better on a one-for-one basis (they were MUCH better).One of the biggest reasons for diminished American infantry effectiveness was their incredibly bad replacement system, whereby new recruits were sent up to units engaged in combat without time to be trained in local conditions or incorporated into their units.As Martin Creveld has documented, these soldiers were slaughtered.They frequently died or were wounded before the rest of the men in their new unit knew who they were.On the other hand, from the beginning, American artillery was much better than the German, and the American tactical air support was infinitely superior.Similarly, while American tanks were individually inferior to German tanks, there were a lot of them.Although many accounts of tank warfare would have you believe that tank warfare is about individual duels of tank on tank, like two knights jousting, this is not the case.It is about bringing firepower to bear in critical and dangerous places.If you lose two tanks to their one, but you have three tanks, you get to apply firepower where it matters, not the other guy.Similar things can be said about tactical air cover.If you can bring in a fighter bomber, and they can't, you "win".The last scene in Finding Private Ryan where the fighter bomber takes out the tank may have been exaggerated, but in an operational sense it was very accurate.Critics seem to think it isn't fair if you have more of a weapon than the other side does.I wonder if these same people would be willing to evaluate the excellent Polish cavalry which was decimated in 1939 fighting against German tanks and conclude that therefore the Polish army was better.The Americans utilized different weapons systems differently from the Germans, but were in fact VERY effective once they learned.I think the Americans AND the Germans learned not in staff school, but by doing on the battlefield - an incredibly difficult and dangerous job.
In short I think the book is a very good read, but I think you can disagree with the conclusions.

A Monumental Study of the German General Staff
Trevor N. Dupuy's work, "A Genius for War: The German Army and General Staff, 1807-1945" is a first rate look at German military theory and practice over roughly a century and a half.Dupuy's central thesis is that Germany's General Staff created a institution of military excellence designed to produce officers with exceptional strategic abilities.Dupuy's research is exhaustive and lends credence to his argument.For instance, the fact that both Erich Ludendorff and Max Hoffman independently came up with the same strategy to counter the Russian attack before Tannenberg is attributed by Dupuy to Germany's General Staff system.This book is filled with keen insight that will delight military historians and casual readers both.

There are better books about the General Staff
This is an interesting and well written book that purports to address the question of why the German military was superior to all other armies, in victory and defeat, for more than 125 years.Dupuy claims that it was the result of the institutionalization of military excellence in the General Staff.In the end, Dupuy's claims are not well supported by his text.It is not at all clear why the German General Staff was superior to the French (or that of any other country's) military leadership.The relationship between the German General Staff and the average foot soldier is also unexplored.If the Staff was the key element, why couldn't they lead the Turkish and/or Austria-Hungarian armies to victory in WWI?The idea of making the General Staff a scientific instrument from which men of ability and energy would naturally rise to the top was clearly a great strength of the German military, but it doesn't tell the whole story of German military successes during this period.

I would argue that this book is not so much about the General Staff as about the relationship between the Staff and the political leadership of Germany/Prussia from 1815 to 1945.There are short vignettes of most of the General Staff leadership, and much of the book is taken up describing the political machinations between the military and political leadership.The strongest parts of the this book are the discussion (and consequences) of the loss of civilian control of the German military after the Franco-Prussion War, and the confused political and military maneuverings after the defeat of Germany in WWI.If one is truly interested in learning about the General Staff, this is not the best choice.This book does not describe the General Staff as an institution (i.e. the details of how it functioned).Better references are listed by some of the other reviewers.Overall, an interesting and easy read, but it misses it's stated mark.

My strongest impression after reading this book is that English language biographies of Scharnhorst and Halder need to be written.

A clear, concise summary
The impetus for writing this book came while Trevor Depuy was constructing a mathematical model for a World War II wargame based on the records of actual engagements between the Germans and Allies.Much to his surprise, he learned that even after several years of total war, homeland bombardment and facing numerically superior enemies, the Germans still retained a 30% edge in combat effectiveness.That is, on the battlefields of Europe in 1944, 100 German troops were the equivalent 130 US or British troops.He wanted to know how and why these "defeated" German armies could fight so well?

The answer to the riddle of superior German combat effectiveness, Depuy says, has nothing to do with genetic or cultural traits of aggressiveness or obedience to authority, as others have suggested.Rather, he argues that the superiority was a deliberate product of the German General Staff, which was incredibly successful in its mission of institutionalizing military excellence through extremely competitive officer selection processes, advanced training, an emphasis on military history and individual initiative in combat, and a commitment to objectivity in planning and analysis.Indeed, Depuy says the General Staff was able to institutionalize military genius, usually found only in rare individuals such as Hannibal, Gustavus Adolphus, Napoleon and others in the pantheon of military greats.As abhorrent as Nazi policies may have been - and as culpable as the officer corps may have been in the atrocities of the Nazi regime by either direct collaboration or failure to intervene - Depuy argues that nothing can take away from the fact that the German army consistently out-planned, out-manuevered, and out-fought the Allies.Moreover, they often accomplished these feats against incredible odds, including significantly smaller forces, lack of air superiority, and the complete compromise of their operational plans through successful Allied code-breaking efforts.

It should be noted that while Depuy's work is highly readable and sound on facts, it is far from original.His citations - which are few and far between - come almost exclusively from secondary sources.Depuy doesn't make any significant contribution to our understanding of the General Staff, its genesis, development and accomplishments beyond what Ritter ("The Sword and Scepter"), Craig ("The Politics of the Prussian Army"), Goerlitz ("A History of the German General Staff") and others have already made.These three sources, in particular, clearly were the foundation of Depuy's work, although he does, at times, take issue with some of their conclusions.

Its lack of originality doesn't mean the book is without value or virtue.Indeed, for those looking for a concise review of the history of the German General Staff with a distinct focus on how it influenced combat effectiveness, and not wishing to delve into a book long on details and thoroughly academic in nature, Depuy's "A Genius for War" may be the right book for you.If, however, you are interested in a more complete study of the General Staff, including the critical issues of civil-military relations and one that puts German military developments in the context of the European state system of the times, this reviewer would strongly suggest that you stick with Craig, Ritter and Goerlitz.

More than military history
I would like to add these points to the comments of the Texas reviewer:

This is more than military history - it's a rigorous and convincing demonstration that organization matters, and the correct approach to organization development can affect the course of history.

The book had its beginning in Dupuy's discovery that his standard simulation did not match the facts. Rather than ignorethe discrepancy, he set out to find out what was wrong with the simulation, and the result is this admirable book.

Counter-historians can ask what would have happened if the king of Prussia had not been able to have Gerhard von Scharnhorst head his Military Reorganization Commission after the disastrous defeat of 1806.

Authors between projects can ask themselves why there is no biography in English of Scharnhorst. ... Read more

Product Description
The turbulent and bloody years between 1913 and 1923 saw the battle for the independence of Ireland. This book tells the story of the 'Troubles' and the struggle for power, first against the occupying British forces, beginning with the Easter Rising, and then in a violent and bloody civil war that tore the country apart and whose resonances are still with us today.

When the outset of World War I delayed Home Rule for Ireland, a faction of Irish nationalists took direct action. On Easter Monday 1916 a rebellion was launched from the steps of Dublin General Post Office and the existence of an Irish Republic proclaimed. The British drove the rebels back and they surrendered just over a month later. But this was not the end of the issue. Irish nationalists in the shape of Sinn Fein and the IRA took political power in 1919 with a manifesto to claim Ireland back from an English 'foreign' government by whatever means they could. The 'Troubles' of the Anglo-Irish War made heroes of Michael Collins and Eamon de Valera, who were cast as freedom fighters against colonial oppression. While that war ended with the Government of Ireland Act (1920), and the opening of a separate Parliament in Dublin in 1921, negotiations between Unionists and Protestants over the Treaty were fraught, and divisions between the two Irish factions an open sore. When Irish Protestant Sir Henry Wilson, the government's advisor on security matters, was shot dead by two IRA men, civil war followed. Terror and counter-terror operations ensued and in the short bloody battles of the period there were more deaths than in the preceding years of struggle for the Free State.

As well as the troubled path to independence and the creation of the Irish Free State, this book includes information on the various factions and the Irish Volunteer Forces. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

Packed with rare photos, modern paintings and digital maps detailing conflicts
Peter Cottrell edits THE WAR FOR IRELAND: 1913-1923, a survey of the country's complex, bloody struggles when Irish nationalists fought the British for independence before battling their kinsmen for its future. Any history collection featuring Irish history will find this packed with rare photos, modern paintings and digital maps detailing conflicts. ... Read more

Product Description
Do you know:

Which state was the first to secede from the Union?

Who the Mata Hari of the Civil War was?

Which Bible passage Southerners most often used to justify slavery?

You'll find the answers to these intriguing questions and more in 101 Things You Didn't Know About the Civil War. Packed with fascinating details about the people, places, and events that defined our nation's most contentious conflict, this tell-all guide reveals the inside scoop on the:

• Issue of slavery and its impact on the war
• Great--and not-so-great--leaders and generals
• Battles fought and lost--and fought again
• Particular horrors of this war
• Women, children, and African Americans in the war

Complete with a helpful timeline, 101 Things You Didn't Know About the Civil Waris your go-to guide for facts of the war that dramatically altered the course of American history. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

Great book!!!!
I am half Irish and I wanted to know some trivia, history, etc. before I go to visit Ireland.This book is fantastic!!!

essentual facts
This is one of the best written little books on the civil war, great facts on about every thing you would want to know written in down to earth language,easy to read very informative. Information on the battles , commanders, music on the battle fields and much much more a great book of facts very interesting

Be careful....
I have a book by the same author called "The Everything Irish Book," and it's pretty much the same. So if you have that one,don't get this one too! Great books though. ... Read more

Product Description
Yermolov is a legend in Russia. A man who rose from obscurity to command armies and conquer provinces, he was the epitome of a military man of action. To his enemies he was a byword for brutality, but, to his homeland, a hero.

His memoirs are as dramatic as his rise to fame and fortune. Disgraced and exiled by the mad Czar Paul he was brought back into service only to witness Russian defeat at the battle of Austerlitz in 1805. Honoured and advanced by his new patron, the dashing Czar Alexander, Yermolov then made rapid progress. He witnessed at firsthand Napoleon's invasion of Russia in 1812 but went on to see revenge completed when the Russians marched into Paris in April 1814.

When peace was declared in Europe, this hard and capable soldier was sent into the Caucasus to conquer Chechnya, sparking Russia's long and complex struggle to govern this unstable region.

Yermolov was a talented general who captured the spirit of his times in his brilliant and engaging memoirs. His acidic wit, acute powers of observation and grasp of drama make this book stand out as a unique source on the wars which defeated Napoleon and made Russia a superpower.

Contains 5 maps and 20 illustrations. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

Valuable First-Person Memoir From a Russian General in the Napoleonic Wars
This well-written (or edited and translated) account by Alexey Yermolov is valuable in understanding the Russian efforts against Napoleon.Yermolov's memoirs were produced from his detailed diary kept throughout the Napoleon Wars.Unfortunately, Yermolov's memoirs for the period 1813 to 1815 during which he served in the campaigns that pushed through Germany to Paris have been lost -- a tragedy for historians.Yermolov served in all the Russian campaigns against the French except for Suvorov's in 1799 in Northern Italy and Switzerland.

The memoirs cover the actions seen and experienced by the writer and therefore lack a great deal of context which historians need in making use of this book.It is extremely useful for its ancedotal information, however, and to add information from the Russian side in the various battles and army movements.In effect, this work is only of minor interest to readers other than dedicated historians and persons interested in the Napoleonic Wars.This is a useful primary source rather than a book that would be interesting to the general reader.

Yermolov writes with vigor and does not shrink for offering the reader his unvarnished opinions.In that respect he provides a great amount of color to the drab recounting of actions in the East.In addition, his governorship of Georgia and actions in the Caucasus from 1815 to 1820 provide information on the problems in that region -- some of which persist to the present day -- that help put the Russian Empire's subjugation of non-Russian ethnic groups into proper perspective.

I recommend this book only those readers and historians that have a specific interest in the French-Russian conflicts during the Napoleonic Wars or in the history of the Caucasus.

A Shining Star in a Nest of Vipers
Ravenhall books is clearly becoming one of the leaders in the publication of Napoleonic literature.For this volume, the added plus of having Alexander Mikaberidze involved with publication is an added incentive for having this outstanding memoir in anyone's historical library.

There is a dearth of first-hand information in English on the Russian army of the Napoleonic Wars.Some very important information is finally coming to light, and this volume highlights how valuable that information is in understanding not only the Russian participation in that long conflict, or, more correctly, succession of conflicts between Napoleonic France and her allies, and the Coalitions that continued to rise after each defeat to attempt to 'beat the French,'but in understanding the Russians themselves, no mean feat.

The Russian army was certainly at the forefront of that effort.Defeated badly, if not disastrously, in 1805 and 1807 and outlasting the French in the campaign of 1812, suffereing just as badly as the Grande Armee did, the Russians were at the forefront of the allied effort in 1813-1814.

General Yermelov is one of the most interesting of the Russian commanders and his story not only deserves telling, but is necessary to understanding the Russian effort.Present in every major campaign of the Napoleonic Wars, his memoirs are much more accurate than anything from, for example, Russian General Benningsen, and they also complement very nicely Sir Robert Wilson's accounts of 1807 and 1812, as well as Clausewitz's account of 1812.

The Russian general officer corps could be a treacherous place to exist.Favor from the Tsar was necessary, and Alexander himself could be an 'iffy' proposition.One observer during the period noted that even if Alexander put you on his 'spit' list, you felt bound to thank him for it.Yermelov, a very competent commander and soldier, not only surviced in that nest of vipers, but thrived, and was undoubtedly one of the best of the Russian field commanders.His memoirs deserve to be read and reread for the period.

This volume is highly recommended.Additionally, if Alexander Mikaberidze's name is on a book, I would highly recommend anyone buy it. ... Read more

Product Description
The book has no illustrations or index. Purchasers are entitled to a free trial membership in the General Books Club where they can select from more than a million books without charge. Subjects: History / General; History / United States / Civil War Period (1850-1877); History / United States / Civil War Period (1850-1877); ... Read more

Product Description
The Napoleonic Wars saw almost two decades of brutal fighting, from the frozen wastelands of Russia to the wildness of the Peninsula; from Egypt's Lower Nile to the bloody battlefield of Waterloo. Fighting took place on an unprecedented scale across Europe, and over the entire period of the wars Napoleon led his Grand Arm¿e and his allies against almost every European nation, and against varying coalitions. This book provides a comprehensive guide to all the major armies of the Napoleonic Wars, of France, Britain, Austria, Prussia, Russia, Spain and Portugal. Covering the changes experienced by the armies over the period, the author details the organization, infantry, cavalry, and artillery of each. With stunning original artwork of the often glorious uniforms worn into battle, period illustrations or the equipment used, and photographs, this is a beautiful and in-depth study of the armies that fought in the Napoleonic campaigns. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

Could have been so much better...
I have recently bought this book after searching for a good source book on the Napoleonic wars. I was after something that was complete in terms of armies that fought in the Napoleonic wars, and also in troop types. As this was supposed to be a compilation of earlier Osprey Napoleonic titles I thought this was a good guess.

When I received the book I was impressed with the weight, format, etc. However content was a bit lacking for me, as I wanted information to model and paint toy soldiers. The book covers all main countries involved in the wars, as well as major arms, i.e. infantry, cavalry, artillery, etc. However I was a bit disappointed with the coverage of each of the main types of arms and the less well known troops. For example there were no picture of Austrian Grenzer or artillery. There are a lot of reproduction prints and paintings, as well as 2 page dramatic paintings of actions that are a bit limited in terms of scope and what they show. There is a substantial amount of text that discussed the armies, etc which appears quite solid.

All in all I would rate this as average. Considering the soruce material that the book had to draw on it could have been so much better. A good introduction to the armies of the Napoleonic Wars but if you were looking at using this as source material for modelling, etc you probably need to look for something a bit more comprehensive.

One of the best histories on armies of the Napoleonic Wars
This is one of the most affordable books and it is lavishly illustrated books about armies in the Napoleonic Wars. It covers all of the major armies and even a brief description of the minor ones.This one covers the basics of the armies of that period and all of them are well illustrated. In this type of book with this price is realy affordable because I can tell you that illustrated books of this period are usually priced beyound range of the collecter of books on Napoleonic armies or wars.It has all the basics and would go great with any library.

Armies of the Napoleonic Wars
I wasn't sure about this book at first.It almost appeared as cheesy with all the artwork (original art not period pieces) but then after reading the text, I really enjoyed this book.The fact that the title implies the book is an illustrated history lead me to think the book would depend on the artwork, but that really isn't the case.The text is well written and really helps the reader understand how armies were orgainized during the Napoleonic wars.The French army, for instance, underwent many significant changes under Napoleon's direction.It rose from the ashes of defeat in the mid-eighteenth century to be the foremost land army in Europe, a position is held in the late seventeenth century.

The book goes on to detail each of the major European powers and how their armies were organized and fielded.Each nation did things a bit differently based on several contributing factors, but in the end all the differing styles and politics were blended into a coalition that eventually defeated Napoleon at Waterloo.

This book is a must have for any who has an interest in Napoleon or the Napoleonic era.Napoleon is one of those polarizing figures in history that historians cannot get enough of.His charisma, charm, genius, flaws, failures, all capture the immagination.For this reason books on his age will always come forth.It is the book such as this that takes a unique approach to an aspect of the age and analyzes it with precision, and incorporates it into a concise, readable volume such as this.Military historians will also find value in this book as the art of warfare is presented in a way that illustrates the changes armies made from the mid to late eighteenth century then on into the nineteenth century.For example, Prussia's army was a mere shadow of what Frederick the Great had worked so hard to achieve.

This book would be a welcomed addition to any historian's bookshelf. ... Read more

Product Description
You don't have anything like this yet!

Check your collections. Never before has such a unique assembly of rare documents been available. WAR IN THE PACIFIC brings to life the story of the heroic actions of the men who fought the relentless war against Japan in World War II.

Includes recorded memories, photographs, maps, and actual reproductions of 20 rare key documents and memorabilia: the dispatch to General MacArthur to abandon the Philippines, the “Pocket Guide to Australia” issued to US army and navy forces in 1942, and much more!

WAR IN THE PACIFIC is being released to coincide with the much-anticipated 10-part mini-series coming from HBO in March.

War In The Pacific 1941-1945 looks at the relentless war against Japan in the Pacific Islands which formed an integral part of eventual Allied victory in World War II. Setting the scene with the unprovoked Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and the almost simultaneous attack on US bases on Guam and Wake Island, it then goes on to document the bloody battles fought in the jungle islands of Guadalcanal and the Philippines and the seas of the Pacific.

As fortunes turned in 1942 the Allies fought hard to regain lost ground and the intensity of battle did not waver. It tells the story of the heroic actions of the men who toiled on the islands, the names of which have now become synonymous with bloodshed, hardship and unstoppable spirit which eventually resulted in victory for the Allies: Guadalcanal, Tarawa, Rabaul, Guam, Iwo Jima and finally Okinawa.

This fascinating and heart-wrenching story is brought to life by the addition of 20 carefully selected facsimile pieces of memorabilia ranging from military orders to propaganda leaflets dropped by the Japanese on US troops to the personal diaries and letters home of both generals, officers and ordinary soldiers. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

Most coverages of the topic don't contain nearly this amount of visual documentation
With its handsome illustrated slipcase and packed with documents, maps and memorabilia from the war, WAR IN THE PACIFIC: 1941-45 is a winning survey blending a coffee table book format with a narrative packed with photos and 20 pull-out documents from the war covering key points. Most coverages of the topic don't contain nearly this amount of visual documentation, making this a top pick for any military history collection.

Historical Eye Candy and Informative Text
It's difficult to believe that "War in the Pacific," a new oversized book from Osprey Publishing which coincides with the recent HBO special, is only 56 pages long because it packs in so much information regarding the Pacific conflicts of WWII.

The chapters - which begin with "Imperial Japan," end with "The Japanese Surrender" and cover every major battle in between -- are only two pages long (10 inch by 11 inch pages, that is) and consist of concisely informative text along with a plethora of sidebars and photographs.

For example, the chapter regarding the protracted battle for the island of Peleliu has a timeline, sidebars on both Major General William Rupertus (the commander of the 1st Marine Division which initiated the US assault) and Captain Everett Pope (whose company of Marines captured "Hill 100"), and two photographs of the initial invasion (one showing the landing craft under fire before landing ashore and another showing the "alligator" vehicles and the Marines just arriving on the beach).There is also a photograph of some marines advancing on the beach (very slowly, according to the text which mentions the strong Japanese defenses), another of an unnamed Marine who bears a haunted expression (the text mentions that the battle cost the US nearly 2,000 casualties and more than 8,000 wounded), a contemporary photograph of the weapon used by the US Marines during the battle (an M1919 Browning machine gun), and one photograph showing the devastation the battle wreaked on the island. The chapter also contains a detailed color photograph of a Navy Cross, the highest US Navy decoration, which was awarded to 69 participants in the Peleliu battle.

Other chapters include short biographies of Japanese commanders.

The book also contains two folders of historical treasures: a plethora of facsimile documents directly related to the conflict, including desperate radio messages sent from Iwo Jima, a telegram addressed to the naval units in the Hawaii area regarding the attack on Pearl Harbor ("AIRRAID ON PEARHARBORXTHIS IS NO DRILL"), and a letter written by General MacArthur to his wife just before he set out to liberate the Philippines.Of especial note is the first draft of Roosevelt's "Date of Infamy" speech where the reader can see - among other things -- that the man himself scratched out the banal words "world history" and replaced them with compelling and unforgettable word "infamy."

Also included is a copy of the Central Pacific edition of "Yank" magazine (a widely circulated weekly made available to all servicemen overseas during WWII), a "Pocket Guide to Australia" (issued to servicemen serving under MacArthur), and a poster advertising a US loan drive.Within the text are several helpful maps as well.

In his foreword, Captain Dale A. Dye (senior military advisor for the related HBO special) mentions that the war in the Pacific has been "overshadowed by the more accessible and understandable campaigns in Europe." He hopes that with the publication of "War in the Pacific" that "some much-needed light [will be shed] on the service and sacrifice of the gallant men and women who served in the Pacific War."Richard Overy's book should go a long way towards making that happen: it's an excellent introduction for those with no prior knowledge of the conflicts and at the same time, alluring eye candy for those already familiar with it.

This review is also published at [...].

Compact history and engaging design
In March, 2010 HBO is airing the new mini-series, The Pacific, produced by Tom Hanks & Stephen Spielberg. The program is sure to spark a wave of new interest in America's Pacific campaign during WWII. History enthusiasts looking for an introduction to this subject will be well served by this new coffee table book from Osprey Publishing. Those already familiar with the history will enjoy the many photographs, historic objects, and the book's easy-reference organization of info. War in the Pacific, by Richard Overy offers a compact history in an engaging design.

The text has a scrapbook (or maybe government file) quality with color maps, photos, and historic objects to illustrate the story. Each military operation receives a two page spread. There are four or five paragraphs of descriptive text and about seven photos with descriptive captions. Mini biographies of military commanders stand out from the main text, appearing as if they are on cards with paper clipped portraits.

I am especially impressed by the inclusion of facsimiles of period documents and publications. Having read the military records of my grandfather's WWII Army battalion, I can say there is something uniquely immediate and enlightening about reading such primary source material. The book is bound with three pockets holding copies of telling documents such as: a December 8, 1941 telegram from the US Commander-in-Chief Pacific Area warning naval units of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, FDR's notes for his speech to Congress, pages from several battle reports, radio message transcripts, a letter from General MacArthur, and the Japanese Instrument of surrender which ended the war.

Also included is a full copy of the March 9, 1944 issue of Yank Magazine, a propaganda poster, a big pull-out map of the Battle of Midway, and a pocket guide to Australia which was issued to US forces to familiarize them with their allies.

Table of Contents:
Operations Map: Japanese Expansion
Imperial Japan
Pearl Harbor
Blitzkrieg in Asia
Corregidor: Fall of the Philippines
Battle of Coral Sea
Battle of Midway
Battle for the Solomons
Guadalcanal
Operations Map 1943
Operation "Cartwheel": War for New Guinea
Island Hopping in the Pacific: Gilbert and Marshall Islands
Operations Map 1944
Marianas: Defiance to the Death
Battle of the Philippine Sea
Battle of Peleliu
Recapture of the Philippines
Battle of Leyte Gulf
Operations Map 1945
Iwo Jima
Firebombing of Tokyo
Okinawa
The Atomic Bombs
Japanese Surrender
Index ... Read more

Product Description
Exploring the Civil War can be fascinating, but with so many battles, leaders, issues, and more than 50,000 books on these subjects, the task can also be overwhelming. Was Gettysburg the most important battle? Were Abraham Lincoln and Jefferson Davis so different from each other? How accurate is re-enacting? Who were the worst commanding generals? Thomas R. Flagel uses annotated lists organized under more than thirty headings to see through the powder smoke and straighten Sherman’s neckties, ranking and clarifying the best, the worst, the largest, and the most lethal aspects of the conflict. Major sections are fashioned around the following topics:

• Antebellum: Investigates the critical years before the war, in particular the growing crises, extremists, and slavery.

• Politics: Contrasts the respective presidents and constitutions of the Union and Confederacy, the most prominent politicians, and the most volatile issues of the times.

• Military Life: Offers insights into the world of the common soldiers, how they fought, what they ate, how they were organized, what they saw, how they lived, and how they died.

• The Home Front: Looks at the fastest growing field in Civil War research, including immigration, societal changes, hardships and shortages, dissent, and violence far from the firing lines.

• In Retrospect: Ranks the heroes and heroines, greatest victories and failures, firsts and worsts.

• Pursuing the War: Summarizes Civil War study today, including films, battlefield sites, books, genealogy, re-enactments, restoration, preservation, and other ventures.

From the antebellum years to Appomattox and beyond, The History Buff’s Guide to the Civil War is a quick and compelling guide to one of the most complex and critical eras in American history. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (10)

BUY THIS!
I used this A LOT when I was taking a class in college about the Civil War! GREAT BOOK!!!

Excellent starting place for the novice and refresher for the long-time student
There have been more books written about the Civil War -- or the War Between the States, or the Rebellion, or the War for Southern Independence, whichever you prefer -- than about any event in U.S. history. It's both a key subject for academic historians and a point of fascination for amateur readers of history. That being the case, it's difficult to come up with an entirely new approach, but Flagel comes close. He's one of the academics but also obviously a "buff," and he takes the approach here of collecting more than thirty "Ten Best" and "Ten Worst" lists about all aspects of the War and its preliminaries and aftermath. The result is a large number of short, often anecdotal, well-written articles and sketches which the reader will have difficulty putting down. The "Top Ten Surgical Tools and Medicines," for instance, will take you into discussions of mercury poisoning, the fact that the Confederate Army ran its own distilleries, and the procedure of amputation. The "Ten Most Significant Battles" are selected in terms of their consequences, and while any list like this one will start arguments, Flagel does a good job of defending his choices. Nor does he restrict himself to the military side of the War; the "Top Ten Acts of Government" allows him to show the relevance of the Homestead Act, Lincoln's suspension of habeus corpus, the Emancipation Proclamation, and the Thirteenth Amendment. Small factoids are scattered throughout and nearly every statement or assertion is sourced -- though mostly to other secondary sources. This is exactly the sort of book that is likely to have you jotting down subjects and books for further perusal.

Not bad introduction to the Civil War
If you're just getting started studying the Civil War, this is a good book for you.The best part of the book includes the lists for best movies, and best books on the Civil War, as well as the best and worst generals.It's a great way to get started analyzing the Civil War.If you're already knowledgeable about the Civil War, except for the occasional list, most of the stuff you've covered already, or already read, or was already familiar with.I enjoyed the lists of best books, best movies, and best and worst generals, but I learned nothing new from this book.

Great survey of civil war
Not just for history buffs, but for anyone with a general interest in learning about the important people, places, and causes of civil war.Concise, well-organized.Readable style.Makes a handy reference on civil war, also.

The War
This book is a great way to jump into the Civil War (at least it was for me). It has just the right amount of detail and allows me to continue my investigation (which was limited to the battle at Gettysburg).It came up a little short is style and approach but it gets the job done. Speaking as one who always wanted to give more time to this epoch but did not know where to go next, this covered the battles, the people, and the country before and during the war.It also piqued my interest in other battles and put a couple more sites on my "Must Visit" list.At the current price, it is a good deal and does what it purports to do. ... Read more

Product Description
Generals in Bronze: Revealing interviews with the commanders of the Civil War.In the decades that followed the American Civil War, Artist James E. Kelly (1855-1933) conducted in-depth interviews with over forty Union Generals in an effort to accurately portray them in their greatest moment of glory.Kelly explained:"I had always felt a great lact of certain personal details.I made up my mind to ask from living officers every question I would have asked Washington or his generals had they posed for me, such as: What they considered the principal incidents in their career and particulars about costumes and surroundings."During one interview session with Gen. Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, Kelly asked about the charge at Fort Damnation.Gen. Chamberlain acquiesced, but then added, "I don't see how you can show this in a picture.""Just tell me the facts," Kelly responded, "and I'll attend to the picture."And by recording those stirring facts, Kelly left us not only his wonderful art, but a truly unique picture of the lives of the great figures of the American Civil War. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (19)

Audio CD Version: Fascinating!
I thoroughly enjoyed the audiobook of GENERALS IN BRONZE. The material is interesting and entertaining, and narrator Patrick Cullen does a first-rate job.

Although the book is listed as "by William Styple," he is the compiler and editor; most of the actual narrative was written or recorded by artist James Edward Kelly. Kelly was a child during the American Civil War, and, having considerable artistic talent, he was hired as an illustrator while still quite young. Many of his pictures were of Civil War subjects. He worked with attention to detail and even studied briefly under Winslow Homer. Later he tried his hand as a sculptor and wound up being commissioned for various statues of American heroes.

Fortunately for posterity, Kelly asked many questions of his subjects and kept detailed notes. Many of these notes are included in this book, fleshing out stories of historical events. Kelly also describes the appearance of his subjects with the eye of a portrait artist, and gives more than a few insights into the characters and personalities of famous men.

Although the subtitle is "Interviewing the Commanders of the Civil War," not all the famous subjects were of that time period. Other notables include Thomas Edison and Teddy Roosevelt. Kelly lived until 1933, and quite a few of the interviews were conducted in the late 19th century or early 20th century. How strange it seems when he describes an aging Civil War General cooling off in front of an electric fan or stepping off an elevator! But this reminds us that the Civil War occurred during the Industrial Revolution (indeed, partly because of it), and technology was changing rapidly in the decades following the war just as it is now.

I am thankful that Kelly's writings were preserved. William Styple did an outstanding job of organizing them into an enlightening book. My only complaint about the audiobook is that the only illustation is the one on the cover. I see elsewhere that the hardcover edition has 16 pages of illustrations and I'd like to see them.

A Fantastic Book
I knew noting about William Styple, nor did I know anything about James Edward Kelley, the famous artist. Sytple, while doing research in The New York Historical Library, found boxes of handwritten notes and diaries - all by Kelly.Styple then undertook the daunting task of assembling a book from Kelly's voluminous interviews with famous Union Generals, which were conducted as he sketched them. Styple has done something wonderful in bringing Kelly to light and, by extension, the thoughts and expressions of many fine Union officers. One gets a real sense of being in the room as Kelly and - for example - General Grant talk about the Civil War, other military personnel.Human faces are put on historical figures in a moving and immediate way.

My first contact with this book was from Audible.com, where I downloaded it, so I could listen to it in my car during long commutes.The audio version (read beautifully) was a wonderful introduction to Kelly and his acquaintences with most of the top Union Generals. Kelly was an artist of the first rank, and - as he sketched generals such as Grant, Sheridan, Sherman, Chamberlaine, Hancock, et al., - he then wrote out what transpired.The result is just breath-taking.And, after hearing the audio version, I had to get the book.I wanted to see some of Kelly's sketches, and also the bronze bas-reliefs and sculptures that he later created.

One interesting sidebar: when Kelly was a young art student, he had the opportunity to be instructed in paiting and drawing by Winslow Homer.After each lesson, Homer would ask Kelly sharply: "Will you remember this?Will you ever forget it?"Kelly remembered well.And this is a book I will long remember and never forget.Highly, highly recommended.

Generals in Bronze
Outstanding book, get a better feel of what the Generals were thinking during the Civil War.

A window into the past
It is hard to add anything new to what has already been written in the reviews, although I would say that not only does the book have excellent insight into many of the key Federal officers that fought in the war, but it is a window into 19th Century post war culture. James Kelly, the sculptor and artist who is at the center of the book, vividly recounts how he meets these gentlemen. Most of the time he must use calling cards to announce his arrival before he is called in- something wholly archaic in our modern casual society. There are other tidbits that are fascinating. One general whom he calls on uses a fan and a block of ice to keep cool as he answers Kelly's questions.
Speaking of these questions, we the readers are very fortunate in that Kelly had studied the war and often asked the same questions we would. He was a small boy during the war, and these men were his heroes. We meet these men as real people, not just as names in a book. I do agree with one reviewer who writes that there is too much detail, but there again, it is the details that make the book come alive.
My only regret (but it is a very small one) is that Kelly was so prejudiced against Southerners that he only recounts his meeting with one of them, and absolutely refused to sculpt any ex-Confederate officers. However, given his time and how he felt about the war, such feelings are understandable. It is instructive that most of the men he talked with did not share his extreme negative views about Confederate veterans.
I would recommend this book for any seasoned Civil War enthusiast, as they would be familiar with the controversies and issues Kelly recounts. But Styple does a great job as editor and so perhaps even a novice might be able to wade through some of this and get something from it.
Speaking of Styple, he deserves much credit for bringing this book into print, as he had to wade through all of Kelly's material to publish it. Not only that, but Styple researched Kelly's life and found that Kelly died a pauper with an unmarked grave! Styple was able to remedy that and recently had a grave marker erected for one of the finest sculptors our country ever produced.

A "Must Read" for Civil War Enthusiasts
As a young boy in New York City during the Civil War James Kellyfantasized about being a soldier and fighting for the Union.His passion for the heroes of that war continued into his adult life. A noted artist and sculptor, Kelly went on to immortalize a great many of them in ink and bronze.

Kelly was also a unique historian.He could obtain from these men details and circumstances of events that an ordinary reporter could not.As he had them pose for his sketches, he told them that in order to get the picture right he had to know every detail.Then, as he was drawing he would write down their comments in his journal.

In this way he gleaned fascinating insights from them that will change your view of the war.Here are some examples.

We know that several generals turned down command of the Army of the Potomac during the period 1862-1863.Kelly found out in his interviews that one of the conditions of command was the stipulation that the general had to pledge that the war would not end until after the [presidential] election of 1864.

I have always wondered why there were so few casualties during the bombardment of Fort Sumter.Why didn't the big guns of the fort not inflict any damage on the Southern batteries?The answer is that the Secretary of War under outgoing President Buchanan [1856-1860] was a Southern sympathizer.In his last days in office he had ordered that the powerful casement guns in the fort be removed and replaced with old ships' guns.

Kelly obtained intimate details of the battles and why things happened the way they did as well as vivid images of life in combat.One general described having a horse shot out from under him."He was hit as he reared.He went down over his front legs and blood shot from both nostrils like water from a pump".

This is a "must read" for all afficionados of Civil War history. ... Read more

Product Description
Before his spectacular career as General of the Union forces, William Tecumseh Sherman experienced decades of failure and depression. Drifting between the Old South and new West, Sherman witnessed firsthand many of the critical events of early nineteenth-century America: the Mexican War, the gold rush, the banking panics, and the battles with the Plains Indians. It wasn't until his victory at Shiloh, in 1862, that Sherman assumed his legendary place in American history. After Shiloh, Sherman sacked Atlanta and proceeded to burn a trail of destruction that split the Confederacy and ended the war. His strategy forever changed the nature of warfare and earned him eternal infamy throughout the South.

Sherman's Memoirs evoke the uncompromising and deeply complex general as well as the turbulent times that transformed America into a world power. This Penguin Classics edition includes a fascinating introduction and notes by Sherman biographer Michael Fellman.

"Because [Sherman] was a ruthlessly sharp intellect and a writer of considerable power, his memoirs succeed in presenting a vivid picture not only of his actions and reactions, but of the world through which he moved with wit and bluster and broadsword."--Michael Fellman, from the Introduction ... Read more

Customer Reviews (35)

What a Heartless Individual!
But, what an historical figure. No Presidential aspirations, nothing. But destruction and devastation to win a war. Hmmm. Today, his actions would be considered barbaric and uncivilized. Consider what's going on at the Mexican border, now.... Maybe Sherman could straighten it out, hmmmm...

Memoirs of General Sherman
The book was in good condition (as I ordered) excellent price,it arrived in a resonable amount of time. I am very satisfied with my over all experience and I would recommend them to all future buyers.

Sherman reveals himself
W T Sherman, General, U S Army was a most impresive commander. His memoirs go a long way in explaining some of the 'whys' of the great campaigns he led. And lead he did. The general went so far, on occason,as to eschew use of a tent and slept on the ground with his men using only a tent-half. The letters in the book provide insight into Lincoln's, Grant's, Sherman's et al's thinking on many issues related to the prosecution of the Civil War. A great American wrote a great book.

Memoirs of William Tecumseh Sherman
I'm amazed at how beautifully the people of that time period used our English language, so different from current day prose with all it's crudities. A wonderful picture of the thought and sympathies of the time and so different from what my expectations were, based on my readings of the Civil War and afterwards. Great experience!

Little more to say...
If you enjoy reading then you should get this book. Its subject matter, the American Civil War and the many characters in that great tragedy, is fascinating enough by itself, but what makes this book extraordinary reading is the amazing grasp and skill of the writer. General Sherman's narrative brings to life the day to day experiences of the officers and men engaged in one of history's epic struggles, the outcome of which resonates in our world still. ... Read more

Product Description
There is a chapter of World War II history that remains largely untold, the story of the fourth largest allied military of the war, the only nation to have fought in the battles of Leningrad, Arnhem, Tobruk and Normandy. The story of millions of young men and women who gave everything for freedom and in the final victory lost all. In a cruel twist of history the monumental struggles of an entire nation have been forgotten, and even intentionally obscured. This book redresses the balance, giving a comprehensive overview of Poland's participation in World War II. Following their valiant but doomed defense of Poland in 1939, members of the Polish armed forces fought with the Allies wherever and however they could. With previously unpublished first-hand accounts, information never before seen in English, and rare photographs, this title provides a detailed analysis of the devastation the war brought to Poland, and the final betrayal when, having fought for freedom for six long years, Poland was handed to the Soviet Union. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (16)

worthy but flawed
This is a book certainly worth reading and is a worthy effort, but it is far from perfect. I think folks who gave it a perfect 5 stars have their own agenda which does not include an objective review of the merits of the writing, research, or tone of the book. One can see this from the reviews that are not really reviews.In sum, this is certainly not in the same league as Norman Davies or Richard Lukas' scholarly contributions to WW II Polish history.
"No Greater Ally" by Kenneth Koskodan is a work that presents new information about the WW II-era Poland. It is new in the sense that it is not widely known or spoken of in U.S. authored history of that time. My father was in General Anders second armored division, as well as in the special forces (Cichociemni) and the AK. He did not tell me much about his exploits, but he did tell me that the history of WW II was significantly skewed by the U.S. and the U.K. and the Polish contribution grossly diminished. Being a good little American public school student, and buying into the U.S. view of WW II, I did not entirely believe him and thought he was exaggerating - until the past few years. This book is yet another confirmation that he was correct.
Koskodan writes: "So much have the heroic accomplishments of Poland and the devastating suffering inflicted on Poland during the war been distorted, obscured and dismissed, that much of the truth remains misrepresented at best and completely unknown at worst. The truth of Poland's war efforts has been so obfuscated that the commonplace misstating of facts and printing of errors goes unchecked and unchallenged."
Kenneth Koskodan is of Polish descent. However, he is not a historian and it shows. The book is written emotionally and he makes statements that are not always referenced by facts or PRIMARY sources. He does make use of many selective and secondary sources, some of them of very dubious credibility (e.g. Long Walk: The True Story of a Trek to Freedom by Slavomir Ravicz). I think that this lack of training as a historian and his so-so writing detract from a story that has to be told better than this. His editors did not do a great job of catching repetition and there is some unevenness in style and tone, making me wonder if some of the material was simply re-written by the editors at Osprey.
Because of the relative quick fall of Poland at the beginning of the second World War, and because Poland and its citizens were muzzled by the Soviets, who sought to distort and diminish their contribution to that war. That contribution has never been fully acknowledged, and aside from history buffs, Polish Americans, and Poles, I am not sure anyone much cares about historical accuracy (e.g. does anyone much care about or the pitiful behavior of the Vichy French? To the contrary there are movies extolling the free French though - but pitifully little about the Poles). Hence, for his acknowledgement of the Poles' efforts, Koskodan deserves kudos. He does set about trying to correct the inadequately understood and under-appreciated role played by the Poles, as well as to correct some downright stupid assertions found in the history books. These include the notion of Polish horse-mounted cavalry charges against German tanks seen in Nazi propaganda and the fact that the Polish air force was destroyed at the beginning of the war. The truth about the latter is fascinating - but I won't spoil that truth in this review.
Accurate accounts of civilian experiences were perhaps even harder to come by. People who left Poland after the war, like my father, feared Soviet reprisal for their families and feared for themselves as well. It is notable that AFTER the war, when Poland had been "liberated" by the Soviets, the Polish puppet government arrested 150,000 remaining members of the AK. No wonder my father refused to return to Poland until the late 1980s, when Solidarity and the Polish pope helped boot the communists out of power.

Koskodan confirms much of what I had read in the works of Allen Paul, Norman Davies, and others and helps to answer the questions about why history books painted a pathetic picture of Poland's mounted cavalry defense against the blitzkrieg (making them comical); why it is seldom, if ever, recorded that nearly 20 percent of the RAF airmen were Poles; how the Poles made the breakthrough at Monte Cassino, after THREE other armies tried and failed, and that Poles supported the Allies in nearly every major conflict during WWII? It also helps to explain why they then they got shunted aside in the end, their fate being decided by "the big three." Koskodan, S.M. Plokhy, Norman Davies, Paul Allen and others, opine that very possibly the major Polish contributions to the Allied cause were ignored out of Allied embarrassment. If they came to light, the question as to why they handed their greatest ally over to the Soviets would have had to be answered.
Once again, as in several recent histories that take a hard, dispassionate look at what happened post WW II, Roosevelt comes off as being stubborn, elitist, dismissive of Poles, and sadly naïve. The great FDR presented Stalin, the greatest mass-murderer in history, to the American people as a kindly "Uncle Joe" and he banishes his ambassador (Arthur Bliss Lane) who dared disagree with him about the suppression of Katyn and other atrocities. Parenthetically, Lane went on to write a book "I saw Poland Betrayed" - a devastating indictment of FDR and US behavior in WW II.
One of the most poignant parts of the book - and one that is very rarely told - is how Polish displaced persons were shabbily treated after the war by the same allies with whom they fought. This last rang very true. This displaced person remembers it well.

Great Work
An enlightening work which balances personal reflection with historical research to create a more accurate picture of World War II and the contributions of those who were not so fortunate to write the tale.I would highly recommend this work as an easy read and fascinating history.

Remember Poland!
Poland suffered more than any other nation in World War II.The war began with Nazi Germany invading Poland in 1939.The war ended with Poland being handed over to Russian Communism for the next 45 years.The Polish people remember Katyn 1940 when over 20,000 were killed by the Russians.Now they must deal with the tragic plane crash that killed the current leaders in Katyn 2010.This book tells the story of how the Polish military forces fought endlessly to help the Allied cause during World War II and were rewarded by being denied the honor of marching in the end of World War II victory parade in London.This book reminds us that Poland fought for our freedom, but Poland herself has only been free and independent since 1990.I recommend this book for all of us who need to know more about how Poland fought for our freedom but lost her own freedom.

The Overlooked
Never have a people been as overlooked in history books, particularly in the history books covering WW11, as the Polish people.My father served in the Free Polish Forces and books such as this make his sacrifice worthwhile.The Poles after bloody battles were occupied in 1939 by both the Germans and the Soviets, but never surrendered as their Government went into exile.They fought on as partisans, resistance fighters, Warsaw insurgents (1943 Ghetto Uprising and 1944 Warsaw Uprising).They fought as soldiers, paratroopers, amoured personnel, bombers, spys, pilots and sailors alongside their British allies in all Western theatres against Germany.Since 1943 they fought alongside the Soviets, and participated in the defeat of Berlin.They saw bitter defeat in France (1940) and Narvik (1940), but saw victories in North Africa, Italy (they took Monte Cassino) and Normandy (they beat the German panzers in Falaise).They gave the allies the Enigma Machine codes, which seriously undermined the German war effort. In return their country was handed over to the communists.The Poles were dismissed in history as easybeats and sickenly portrayed as collaborators that hunted down Jews.A complex history has been simplified and usually in favour of the negative.During the recent Normandy landing ceremony the ignorant French President failed to invite the Polish President and, thereby, insulted the Polish veterans who attended.This was one of several slights to those who, like my late father, fought for the freedom of others to ensure their own freedom.Books like this are very few and overdue for publication in English.I am of part Polish extraction and am very in interested in Polish history.I wish more people knew about the Poles and their contribution to WW11 rather than continue to make stupid and negative comments based on ignorance.

Betrayed and Forgotten
The author's writing style is very biased and opinionated, which makes it difficult to read at times.It appears that this style is to counter the current perceptions/ misconceptions on the reportedly poor fighting quality and effort by Poland at the beginning of World War Two.Would have personally preferred that the author taken a more neutral stance and objectivity in explaining what was initially stated what the current perception is and then state what the Polish actually did.This way the reader can make their own informed decision if they agree with the author's findings.

The author does bring to light the Polish attempts to prepare against a German invasion, but were suppressed by their supposed British and French allies, who simply wanted to avert a war and appease the Germans.As a result, the Polish were unable to have sufficient soldiers on duty once the invasion began.The author does point out that Poland withstood the German invasion longer than the French and English defended France, who had over 6 months to prepare.Poland did capitulate once they were also invaded by Russia and could not fight a two front war.Had the Russians not invaded, Poland would have held out longer, but in the end without British and French military intervention, Poland still would have been overwhelmed by the better equipped and trained modern German Army.

The author does refer to a questionable source on page 41 on the German losses while invading Poland.The direct combat loss of 674 tanks, 285 aircraft, and 11,000 trucks and motorcycles appears to be inflated.Are we to believe that the Germans lost over 300 vehicles and 15 tanks everyday for 35 days due to enemy fire in the invasion of Poland, especially with a lack of their own tank and anti-tank weapons?Are we to believe that the Polish air force, in obsolete aircraft, shot down over 15 aircraft everyday until they ceased operations on 17 September?Tanks may have broken down and planes lost due to accidents and other mechanical failures, which are not direct combat losses as the author/ source refers to.Fortunately, this is the only blatantly questionable part of the book.

Chapter 2 and the rest of the book make it worth reading.The author's interviews with Polish veterans bring to light many details of the oppression, suffering, and betrayal that they endured.Those who could not escape Poland were often arrested, sent to work/ death camps, or simply executed by both the Germans and Russian occupiers.The Polish partisans organized and trained, but were again hunted by the Russians near the end of the war.Stalin wanted to control Poland and the elimination of the Polish partisans was needed to exert domination.This becomes very apparent in Chapter 9 where the author describes the Warsaw uprising in 1945.

It is interesting on how some of the Polish military initially escaped capture through Romania and Hungary to reach France and England.The betrayal of the French is described initially with their refusal for military action when the Germans invaded Poland, but again after France surrendered.The Germans demanded that Polish soldiers fighting in France were to be turned over and the French Government complied.Instead of letting the Polish soldiers escape to England, the French Government attempted to detain and arrest the Polish soldiers.

The English were more accepting of the Polish soldiers and pilots.The Polish pilots would later prove to be valuable allies in defended Britain from the air battles in 1940.

The description of the Russian gulags and attempts to recruit the Polish slave labor to join the Allied cause is also interesting.The 2nd Polish Corps was formed by these slave labors taken by the Russians in 1939 thru 1941 from Poland.Stalin wanted to use the Polish soldiers as cannon fodder, but they were able to make their escape to the Middle East and once properly fed and equipped, fought bravely and effectively in Italy.

Post war politics and planning resulted in Poland being ceded to the Russians and Stalin's plan for conquest.The Polish people, who were the first to fight against the Germans in 1939, endured atrocities by both the Germans and Russians, fought and died to defend England, liberate Western Europe, and capture Italy, were betrayed and could not return safely home under Stalin's oppressive Communist controlled Poland.

The author does a good job telling the story of Poland in World War Two and how they endured and fought for not only their freedom, but others too.Their sacrifices and bravery should be remembered and not forgotten.

... Read more

Product Description
This is an OCR edition without illustrations or index. It may have numerous typos or missing text. However, purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original rare book from GeneralBooksClub.com. You can also preview excerpts from the book there. Purchasers are also entitled to a free trial membership in the General Books Club where they can select from more than a million books without charge. Volume: 2; Original Published by: W. Blackwood and Sons in 1866 in 363 pages; Subjects: United States; Virginia; Biography & Autobiography / Military; History / Military / General; History / United States / Civil War Period (1850-1877); ... Read more

Customer Reviews (7)

A good read
If you're a civil war history buff as I am, this is a "must have".Heros von Borcke's story is over-blown and very self-serving, but it does give good insight into some of the operations of Jeb Stuart and for that, the rest may be forgiven.I liked it very much.

Von Borke's Book
I only wish I had known this book was Volume II of the story to start with.Now the search for Volume I.He also has a slight flair for the dramatics.The basics are there.It still makes for a good read and some insight into the General.

Memoires of Heros von BorckeA
A very interesting book describing the confederate battles from Heros's viewpoint serving under Jeb Stuart.
Even more so as he is a relative of mine.

A Superb Account of Stuart's Cavalry
In his personal narrative of his time spent with General JEB Stuart during the Civil War, Heros von Borcke gives the reader excellent insights into thewar from the Cavalry rider's point of view.Additional background knowledge of certain battles does prove helpful has Heros does not always give a clear description of battle or the lay of the land.Maps would also aid greatly when he speaks of riding from town to town.Overall, the book was well worth the read.His vantage point enables him to faithfully detail to the reader an accurate picture of General JEB Stuart which makes the read quite intriguing.Borcke places the reader in middle of major battles and brings him along on his daring expeditions with Stuart.He gives his account of the war vividly and memorably, inserting those things that must have been mundane to him like the humor of others and the weather conditions.

A truly great memoir
This is a wonderful memoir of the author's year and half of active service on the staff of the legendary Confederate cavalry General, J. E. B. Stuart.Von Borcke was an aristocratic twenty-six year old former Lieutenant in the Prussian Army when, in 1862, he took passage on a blockcade runner to Charleston.With little command of English, and having burned all of his letters of introduction just prior to his vessel's inspection by Yankee blockaders, Von Borcke presented himself at Richmond unknown and friendless.He was eventually placed as a civilian adviser to Stuart, and soon became a commissioned officer on the staff, and one of Stuart's closest confidants.A giant of a man--he weighed 220, and must have been very tall--he was a gallant and chivalrous fighter.He seems to have been in the thick of every melee, and was often entrusted with special courier assignments by Stuart.Through this, we get wonderful glimpses of many of the great heros of the Southern side, including Lee, and especially of Stonewall Jackson, who shows a wonderful sensitive side to Von Borcke, not often seen by others.The author lyrical prose is delightful, especially when describing the beautiful Northern Virginia countryside, and the many fine families than dwelt in the area.The brilliant, and wonderfully-readable prose is more the remarkable due to fact that this book is in translation from the original German.No where did I find the translator's name, but whoever did it deserves high praise indeed.I have never read a Civil War memoir that was better, though Henry Kyd Douglas' "I Rode with Stonewall" deserves mention for its merit also.This is a wonderful must-read, and would be an excellent book for even those who are but casually interested in the history of the Civil War. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

Excellent biography of not so hot general/politician

Stephen A. Hurlbut was a controversial figure throughout his whole life. He seemed incapable of giving anything more than mixed results in all his endeavors. Born in South Carolina, he practiced law in Illinois beginning in 1845. He served as a Whig in the state legislature just prior to the Civil War, and then was appointed brigadier general of volunteers in 1861. He served in northern Missouri for a time, but had little understanding of guerilla warfare. He did much better at Shiloh defending the Union left. He also commanded well at Corinth and Meridian, but failed to seize the initiative after the Confederates were defeated at Hatchie's Bridge. Although he was loyal and dutiful, he was not a strong leader of men. He was also a heavy drinker, which got him into hot water. He was extremely harsh toward southern sympathizers, blacks, and Jews, and it was a mistake making him commander of the Department of the Gulf in September 1864: he was charged with corruption and was antagonistic toward the Louisiana authorities. His drunkenness was also becoming a major handicap. After the war he became a Republican leader in Illinois and helped organize the GAR. He was a minister to Colombia, 1869-72, and then minister to Peru during the Peru-Chile War, where he drunken behavior was an embarrassment to the US. He died in Lima in 1882. Jeffrey Lash's account of Hurlbut's life is informative and well written and pulls no punches.Except for having the ability to organize for his political causes, this southerner with a Yankee heritage was only mildly competent in as well as out of uniform. Lash's efficient and well-fitted biography is better than Hurlbut probably deserves. Recommended.

Politicians and generals- has it changed?
Stephen Augustus Hurlbut - forger, card cheat, extortionist, profiteer, and falling-down drunk - Lincoln's and Grant's politician general.His personality shortcomings illuminate military campaigns, occupation, reconstruction, and politics in the Civil War years - before, during, and after - and hold lessons for future "administration" of occupied lands. ... Read more