5 comments about Civil War in the Ozarks.

1. Recommend your read this one and recommend you add it to your collection. This work covers aspects of the Civil War often times overlooked. I is a wonderful starting place for a study of the War in this part of the country. Needless to say, it does need to be supplemented with further reading, but it is certainly a good start. Highly recommend



2. "Civil War in the Ozarks" by Phillip W. Steele is an excellent read, and is written for the average reader who wants to gain a comprehensive knowledge of the Civil War. I enjoyed this book!



3. A "must read" for anyone interested in the Civil War in general, and the Civil War in the Ozarks region in particular. I especially liked Steele's writing style. Steele has a talent for delivering a lot of historical information while keeping the reader turning the pages wanting to know more. A very good book!



4. This book is designed for the average guy or gal off the street (from high school age to adult)to learn the bare basics about Ozarks Civil War heritage. Elite scholars may find it too simple, but hey... history belongs to all our citizens, not just professors and other professionals.



5. Treats some of the stories of the Civil War in the west without explaining the larger issues. This is an inexpensive book, but not necessarily a good value.

3 comments about Through Dakota Eyes: Narrative Accounts of the Minnesota Indian War of 1862.

1. A number of years ago, I was privileged to take an Internet class on the Dakota War of 1862 that was being taught by none other than Mr. Gary CLayton Anderson. After the course was over he took us to all the battle sites, trading posts, and places where treaties were signed. The good professor had a very great knack for evoking the visuals. That is a tendency that has carried over into his books. To write this book he has spent literally hundreds of hours combing through manuscripts, museum archives, and musty old books and newspapers in order to find first hand accounts of Minnesota's only Indian War. The results are absolutely stunning. The Dakota warriors and tribal chiefs who waged war on the whites come across not as peaceful children of nature or even as blood thirsty savages, but as men of flesh and blood. Although there are heroes and villains in this book, there are times when it is very difficult to tell them appart. At the same time as Chief Little Crow countenanced bloody massacres of women and children he secretly ordered his foster brother to save as many of them as he could. In addition, there were very few "hostile" Indians who didn't have some white people or Americanised Indians they desired to protect. Most of the people in this book seemed only interested in protecting their families and friends. One of the most sympathetic figures proves to be a Dakota "half breed" known as Joseph Coursolle or Hinhankaga, depending on which language you spoke. To Coursolle, after his daughters were taken prisoner by "hostiles," getting them back became his obsession, one understandable to any parent. The most fascinating thing about this book was that there were Indians who favored the whites and whites who favored the Indians. Coursolle, whose mother was Dakota, would go on to become a Corporal in the US Army, serving as a scout and a sniper against the men who had stolen his family. And among the "hostiles" hanged at Mankato was a white man who had been adopted into the Dakota Nation. In closing, this book reveals what happened in all it's complexities and brutal truth. History, no matter how hard one may try to change it to fit one's own politics, is so complex that even the characters you come to know intimately can still surprise you. No matter how hard some people may try, it cannot be pushed into a box. I am very much surpised that noone has tried optioning this book for TV or a movie. It would make a very powerful tale.



2. Historians discovered many years ago that oral history is a vibrant cornucopia of information. Even better, integrating oral history into traditional modes of inquiry opened up more chances for earning a Ph.D., or getting that career making book contract. In the case of "Through Dakota Eyes: Narrative Accounts of the Minnesota Indian War of 1862," oral history is the only game in town. Every selection in the book is an oral story from Indians or mixed-blood Indians about the disastrous uprising that killed hundreds of soldiers, settlers, and Indians. One of the editors of "Through Dakota Eyes" is none other than Gary Clayton Anderson, the premier scholar on Dakota history. As usual, Anderson goes above and beyond the call of duty in researching the narratives, providing background color on the people involved (and also providing information about what happened to these people after the uprising, something I greatly appreciated).

   For nearly a century after the uprising, articles and books concerning the 1862 war only used white narratives as sources of information. There is definitely nothing wrong with relying on these narratives; they are invaluable sources of information on the uprising. The white narratives also reveal the tragic dimensions of the conflict, showing how innocent men, women, and children died (or persevered) in especially brutal ways. With the addition of these Indian narratives, however, historians can now go inside the camps and meeting places of the Dakotas intimately involved in the conflict.

   The narratives are lumped into distinct categories dealing with different stages of the uprising. Each category then provides a succinct description of that particular phase of the war. With each narrative, the editors provide a small capsule of information on the person telling the story, allowing the reader to understand that person's place in the overall scheme of things. It is recommended to read the endnotes for each narrative, as they provide excellent information on each narrative. Excellent maps and pictures of many of the people involved also help the reader to understand the accounts.

   Some of the narratives are more helpful than others. A few are difficult to understand due to poor grammar or contradictory information. Several of the narratives appeared in newspaper articles or as testimony in a case against the government in 1901, and there is a possibility that someone altered or changed them as they saw fit. That does not mean there are not any "WOW!" moments found here. In Cecelia Campbell Stay's account of the attack on the Redwood Agency (also known as the Lower Agency, where the killing began in earnest on August 18th), Cecelia describes seeing the sunlight flashing on the bayonets of Captain Marsh's patrol as they headed to their doom at the ferry crossing. Another narrative, now widely used in accounts of the uprising, comes from Wowinape, the son of Little Crow (the leader of the warring Dakota). Battle narratives allow the reader to feel as though they are at Fort Ridgely, New Ulm, or Birch Coulee as the cannons roar and the bullets fly.

   As the editors point out, many of the mixed-blood Indian narratives identify a central tension of the conflict, namely the division between Indians who adopted white modes of civilization (the farmer Indians) and those who stayed true to traditional Indian values (the blanket Indians). Many of the mixed-blood Indians worked closely with whites; they feared the war parties of the traditionals just as much as whites did. As the war began to wind down, it was the mixed-bloods along with some full-blooded Indians who confronted the warring Indians, forcing these hostile forces to turn over their white captives in an effort to make peace with the military forces sweeping into the area.

   This is an absolutely essential book for anyone interested in the Minnesota 1862 uprising. Actually, anyone writing a paper on this conflict without using this book as a source could find themselves in hot water. Since the editors graciously organized the narratives in chronological order, there is no reason someone unfamiliar with the conflict and its principal figures would have any difficulty understanding the book. Gary Anderson and Alan Woolworth have made an important contribution to Indian scholarship with this impressive tome.




3. This book has some wonderful narratives from the very people who were caught up in the middle of the uprising in Minnesota in 1862. The author does a good job of explaining how the book is laid out. You definitely need to read the intro to understand this. While I was reading the book, I felt as though I was there in the middle of it with all those involved. I don't excuse what was done, but I have a better understanding of what horrors the indians went through that drove them to this place. I would definitely recommend this book.

5 comments about Lincoln's Virtues: An Ethical Biography.

1. Having been educated in the mythology of Abraham Lincoln, I anxiously ordered this supposed "biography". What a disappointment. It is little more than a hypocritical opinionated essay attempting to rationalize the inconsistent and criminal conduct of one of our worst Presidents. It must be remembered that the myth of Lincoln is that he somehow "saved" a union (which was voluntary and from which a democratic majority in the Confederate states had withdrawn)by instigating a "Civil War" resulting in the death of more than 600,000 human beings and the destruction of much of the South. Supposedly, the War was fought over slavery. But, both before and during the War, Lincoln stated that the war was not over this issue. Furthermore, as is typical of those trained in the law, the statements he made prior to the War about black people were so ambiguous that no one can fairly comment on his ethics or principles. What we do know is that this megalomaniac insisted upon the use of force and warfare to enforce his political theories. He believed black people were inferior. He openly espoused sending the Negroes back to Africa. Only in 1862, when it appeared the North was in jeopardy of losing his personal war did he sign the Emancipation Proclamation, an "executive order" which could not have the force of law. It freed the blacks only in the rebellion states. Ethical, obviously not. Cynical and politically self serving, obvious so. Bombing civilians in the South. Destroying civilian food supplies and means of production. No problem. Suspending habeas corpus. Locking up dissident editors of newspapers. No problem. Screw ethics. Murder for political purposes, then claim it was for the cause of abolition. Where did he stand before the War while Seward and others put themselves on the line for the abolition of slavery? He contended it was protected by the Constitution. As a lawyer he was correct. Why then did he not use his supposed personality and powers of persuasion to seek an Amendment or propose that, as recognized property under the law, slaves be purchased and freed? This book is only the most recent apology for this madman. Page after page the author extolls Lincoln with his own personal hyperbole, excusing Lincoln's misconduct. As a result of Lincoln, the blacks were supposedly "freed". Freed into what? Freed how? A century later the black population of this country was still fighting for its freedom, voting rights, against segregation, and the racial divide remains. How did this happen? When violence is involved, the memory of human beings is long. In many parts of the "old south", as a result of the assault upon them by Lincoln, they are still fighting this war. Lincoln, the hypocrite. Lincoln, the murderer. Lincoln, the war criminal. Lincoln, the depressed megalomaniac. It is just a matter of time before historians will be attempting to rewrite the history of George W. Bush, a man much like Lincoln, whose egomaniacal sociopathic personality and actions resulted in the death of countless human beings. In the case of Lincoln, history was rewritten to claim the death and destruction was necessary to free the slaves. With Bush, the weapons of mass destruction will also disappear and history will likely claim the war was fought to "free" the Iraqis by killing, maiming and dislocating more than four million human beings. Ethics, what a joke.



2. William Lee Miller is an academic who writes in an understandable style. In "Lincoln's Virtues" the historian examines in clinical detail the ethical cosmos of the railspiltter from the West who rose to the White House in the nation's darkest hour.
   Miller shows that Lincoln held two principles as sacred to those virtues enunciated in the Declaration of Independence: the Union which was indissoluble and predated the formation of states; the right of every American to be free. Lincoln fought hard for the black race in a racist society beyond a 21st century person's ken. He thought slavery wrong from an early age and will live forever for his authorship of the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863 and support of the 13th amendment to the Constitution freeing slaves.
   Lincoln as a congressman in the 1840s opposed the Mexican War as unjust. He was an enemy of the Polk administration's Manifest Destiny hubris. As a Whig politician for most of his career his great hero was Henry Clay of Ky. who managed to get the Compromise of 1850 passed. Lincoln deplored the Kansas-Nebraska act of 1854 which nullified the Missouri Compromise of 1820. The Kansas-Nebraska Act was the brainchild of Lincoln's racist 1858 opponent for the Senate in Illinois: Stephen A. Douglas. With Kansas-Nebraska it became possible for slavery to be extended into the territories entering the Union. Lincoln also opposed the Dred Scott decision and the fugitive slave act.
   Miller shows how skillful a politican Mr. Lincoln was as he sought political power while at the same time moving the country forward to a more just and democratic society. His strong defense of the Constitution and the Union led to the waging and winning of the Civil War. Miller's portrait of Lincoln makes clear to this reader why he is our greatest president!
   Lincoln is sometimes been attacked for racism but those critics who cast aspersions on him fail to realize the type of white supremacist society in which he was immured.Without Lincoln the United States as we know it would probably not have survived the major challenges of secession by eleven states and a horrific civil war.
   Lincoln, teaches Miller, was a kind man who abhorred cruelty to animals and human beings. The sixteenth president was merciful to soldiers who fell asleep on guard duty. Had he lived, reconstruction in the southern states would no doubt have been less severe than it was. Lincoln rarely held grudges grasping the moral if not the doctrinal teaching of Christianity. He had the skills of a great author/poet. Lincoln's speeches soar higher and probe deeper into the American psyche than do those of any other American Chief Executive.
   This outstanding book should be read in tandem with the author's second volume on Lincoln entitled "President Lincoln." Read these books slowly and absorb their content. One wishes their was an Abraham Lincoln to cast his stovepipe hat in the presidential ring in the current frenzied contest for the Oval Office!



3. This book describes the age and circumstances Lincoln grew up and ruled in. It does this with great detail and numerous of small accounts and that's what makes it interesting to read.
   
   Throughout the book suggestions are made of Lincoln's thoughts and at some point this gets annoying, as there are no survivors to tell the tale of the man they knew. And how good do you have to know someone who's living to judge him on his virtues, let alone someone long gone.
   
   The ethical propaganda makes me deduct one star from this wonderful written book that can teach us a lot about the times and the decission making in our lifes. Whether Lincoln's virtues were based on the ones William Lee Miller writes about is something we'll never know...



4. Instead of a passive retelling of Lincoln's life, Miller examines Lincoln's choices, and how they made him the great man he became. Highly recommended.



5. This is a fascinating read. Lincoln deserves to be on Mt Rushmore.
   I was impressed with Lincoln's ability to run the political rat race, all the way to presidency, and yet keep his moral torch so bright.
   
   Lincoln's Virtues is a unique biography, because it focuses on Abraham Lincoln's political and philosophical ideas instead of the chronological history described in typical biographies. Most Americans know Lincoln lived in a wooden cabin, led the North to victory in the Civil War, and emancipated the slaves. However, not many know how shrewd a politician Lincoln was, and how effective a debater he was.
   
   The book analyzes Lincoln's speeches with a focus on how he was able to stand for his beliefs while at the same time not alienate the mainstream public. His speeches were not as zealous and emotionally charged as the New England abolitionists' were; however, his moderate stance was the most practical and effective way to achieve the emancipation. While he made compromises, he never abandoned his core values. He believed all men were created equal and that one should always do the right thing. This book vaulted Lincoln to the top of my `most admired people' list.
   
   Besides learning Lincoln's beliefs and virtues, the reader will enjoy the great political debates decorated with wit and humor. The writing by author Miller is vivid and animating: you just traveled back in time to 1859 and are sitting in the auditorium listening to the speech by the great man from Illinois.

2 comments about John Hunt Morgan and His Raiders.

1. Details details.. I wish this book had more of them. I was a bit disappointed in getting this hardcover to see that I could read it in a couple of days. The pages go by fast as they cover Morgan's daring raids throughout Kentucky and the north. I was hoping to get more information than the quick coverage of the events that Morgan and his raiders went through. I would have liked to get some insight from his companions in the field and also from his enemy. This book seems to summarize Morgan and probably isn't the best when it comes to dates and details. It is important to suggest this book for anyone looking to read about a different Confederate cavalry commander instead of Mosby or Stuart that doesn't want to get into serious details. Perhaps this book exemplifies Morgan himself. It was short and fast. Morgan started his command quickly and finished quickly.



2. GREAT BOOK! HARD TO PUT DOWN! Covers the "Thunderbolt of the Confederacy" John Hunt Morgan from Tompkinsville, KY to Greeneville, TN. This little book has more in it than a 800 page novel. If you are interested in Morgan's Raids or Civil War activity in the Kentucky - Tennessee area, this is a MUST READ!

2 comments about Jefferson Davis in Blue: The Life of Sherman's Relentless Warrior.

1. A fascinating and first rate biography of this little known Union leader by newcomer Whitney and veteran writer Hughes.
   The authors follow Jefferson C. Davis from an enthusiastic young soldier in the Mexican War to his outstanding leadership at Ft. Sumter and throughout the Civil War.
   Excellent reading for any history buff!



2. This is a biography of an obscure figure from the American Civil War who had a famous name. Jefferson Columbus Davis was no relation to the Confederate president, and stayed loyal to the Union, rising the the rank of brevet Major General. He's probably best known as the culprit in the murder of William Nelson, another Union army general, in 1862. There was, however, more to Jefferson C. Davis than that, as this admirable biography shows.

   ...

   Jefferson C. Davis was from Indiana. He enlisted in the army young, and participated in the battle of Buena Vista as a private in his Indiana volunteer regiment, distinguishing himself so much that he was considered for an appointment to West Point. When that fell through, Davis was directly enlisted in the regular army as a second lieutenant of artillery, and spent the years between the Mexican war and Fort Sumter studying and learning to be a soldier. He was part of the garrison of Fort Sumter, and this notoriety positioned him for a brigade command of Indiana state troops. He led them through the battle of Pea Ridge, and never looked back, concluding the war in command of the Fourteenth Corps during the March through the Carolinas, and during the battle of Bentonville. After the war, he was Alaska's first military district commander, and briefly fought the Modocs on the California-Oregon border.

   The authors do a wonderful job of bringing Davis, and his many contradictions, to life. He was a demanding soldier, and a hard taskmaster, but he appears to have generally been a fair and decent person. There is the one incident where he shot Nelson dead, but the authors lay out the course of events, and frankly the whole thing sounds provoked. Nelson was disliked by a lot of people, apparently, to the point that when he was shot, there weren't very many calls for his killer to be brought to justice. The whole thing is laid out in considerable detail. And where Davis emerges as a surprise is in his competence as a soldier. Though his troops were routed at both Stones River and Chickamauga, at Pea Ridge it was Davis who stopped Louis Hebert's attack on the Union left, and at Jonesboro it was Davis who broke the Confederate front. At Bentonville he again held off the main Confederate assault, though with some help. Frankly I was surprised: he turns out to have been a pretty good general, and generally well-liked by the troops, even though he *never* praised anyone for anything, and apparently thought bravery nothing extraordinary. In his defense, he was brave himself.

   There is one shortcoming in this book. There is a lack of maps to illustrate the text. The authors try to detail battlefield maneuvers from Buena Vista to Bentonville, with no tactical maps at all, and only three general area maps, none of which are particularly helpful. Only one of the maps even deals with the Civil War. This unfortunately makes the text a bit hard to follow at times. Other than that, I would highly recommend this book for the Civil War scholar. It's definitely worth the money.

1 comments about Mary Todd Lincoln: Her Life and Letters.

1. The correspondence of Mary Todd Lincoln reveals much about her personalty, and also demonstrates her memory's occasional fallibility. Includes letters dating from the 1840s and into her widowhood. Rewarding for the specialist. A general reader will probably want to dip into the book occasionally rather than read long sections at a time.

2 comments about Atlanta (Voices of the Civil War).

1. These books are some of the best that I've ever read! the books are full of eyewitness accounts of battle, camp life, campaigning, and camraderie with some humor thrown in. Each book gives accounts by the soldiers themselves, and that's what makes these books so great! The books also have battle maps are divided into sections. Each section tells about a part in the campaign. At the begining of each section there is an introduction to the campaign. Again, htese books are great and i highly recommend them!



2. These books are some of the best that I've ever read! the books are full of eyewitness accounts of battle, camp life, campaigning, and camraderie with some humor thrown in. Each book gives accounts by the soldiers themselves, and that's what makes these books so great! The books also have battle maps are divided into sections. Each section tells about a part in the campaign. At the begining of each section there is an introduction to the campaign. Again, htese books are great and i highly recommend them!

5 comments about From Ashby To Andersonville: The Civil War Diary And Reminiscences Of Private George A. Hitchcock, 21st Massachusetts Infantry.

1. I wish there were more diaries from soldiers written as well as this one. Hitchcock had a flair for writing and describing his events as a soldier very well. Hitchcock diary takes the reader on a long journey from enlisting in summer of 1862 to his final discharge in December of 1864. Throughout the journey Hitchcock brings to life the daily soldier grind, picket duty, camp life, fighting, being captured and the tough life of being a prisoner at Andersonville. I found the several chapters on Andersonville to be the most interesting in the book as it acts as a great resource of information for daily life at the prison. Hitchcock's daily diary writing is usually quite short and he doesn't write long narratives as compared to other soldier accounts. Sometimes I had wished he had written more details on the fighting, although his explanations of the fighting during the battle of Cold Harbor were very descriptive and I could easily vision the horrors. In other situations, Hitchcock was brief about his experiences at Fredericksburg in 1862 although he didn't see much fighting there. His best work on that subject came about from descriptions of the city and the hardships endured there. Overall, this book is an excellent source of information for those seeking insight about soldier life in the Civil War and books like this are priceless.



2. I found "From Ashby to Andersonville" a particulary moving and interesting book. The experiences of the civil war private who wrote the original diary encompass a remarkable amount of the war, both East and West. The tale told is rich in the real human drama of that life in all its day to day trials and tribulations and occasional joys. Editor Ron Watson keeps the reader oriented by insightful forwards to each chapter establishing the context of the place and time. From it I have a much better sense of the ebb and flow of that great war. Few books do I plan to re-read, but this is one of those.



3. Few books have captured my interest and emotion as this one...a young man tells his personal tale of the Civil War ~ revealing his code of ethics, bravery, love of country, and the horrors of war. The editor provides an excellent backdrop with well-researched, newly-revealed historical data about the war. A MUST read!



4. Insightful account of one young soldier's Civil War experience. His experiences as a prisoner were riveting and heartbreaking....you believed you were alongside of him. Editor did a wonderful job of including historical context. It was terrific!



5. George Hitchcock had a talent for describing the country side and people. His journal is a fascinating, personal account of bravery and adventure of a soldier during the Civil War: a descriptive story of suffering, courage and endurance - sometimes in situations of mismanagement and confusion.

5 comments about Sherman: A Soldier's Passion for Order.

1. The difficulty for those of us interested in studying the American Civil War is that the available bibliography is overwhelmingly large. One could begin reading as a child and reach adulthood and continue reading until death or senility interrupted the exercise without completing all of the published titles! Life is too short to read poorly written books!
   
   With that observation in mind, it is a welcome experience to occasionally come across a worthwhile one volume biography of a major historical figure and "Sherman: A Soldier's Passion for Order" fills the bill perfectly. The author, John F. Marszalek, is a history professor at Mississippi State University.
   
   While it may strike some as odd that a historian employed on a campus located in the Deep South chose to write about General William T. Sherman, it is worth remembering that "Uncle Billy," himself, was a man of contradictions. Sherman tried and failed at many occupations during the antebellum period. One of the few successful and easily the most satisfying positions that he held was as the superintendent of a military academy located in Louisiana. But for the crisis of secession and war, Sherman would have been pleased to remain at the academy as a Southern gentleman and an accepted member of local society. The war came, however, and Sherman resigned his position and donned the blue Federal uniform. As a Union general, Sherman became the scrouge of the same South that he had so admired and enjoyed.
   
   Sherman was adopted into the family of a prominent Ohio politician following the death of his father. This was the first of many disruptions in his life. His adoptive parents compelled him to change his actual first name from "Tecumseh" (after the celebrated Indian leader and warrior) to William. Marszalek sees many of Sherman's subsequent choices and decisions as part of a determined effort to create and maintain continuity, stability and order. As much as he loved the South, Sherman viewed secession and disunity as a form of anarchy that needed to be crushed. Similarly, the Indian tribes threatening the settlement of the frontier needed to be suppressed. Late in his life, Sherman resisted his wife's repeated entreaties to have him convert to Catholicism.
   
   Marszalek also treats Sherman's friendship and eventual estrangement from Ulysses S. Grant. Sherman was devoted to the military and grew disillusioned when Grant chose to pursue a political career during the Reconstruction Era. Although both Grant and Sherman lived long enough to write memoirs, Grant's memoirs are better known on account of his superb ability as a writer. Unlike Grant, Sherman's own book generated more controversy than praise upon its publication (Grant defended Sherman's book, however, as providing accurate accounts and descriptions of events) and is not read as often today.
   
   I have had the good fortune to have visited Grant's residence in Galena, Illinois and the former Galt House (the hotel still exists, but it has relocated to a much larger building several blocks away) in Louisville, Kentucky, where Grant and Sherman studied their maps and plotted the strategy that resulted in the eventual Union victory. Marszalek's book helped bring some of these same details to life for me as a reader. Recommended.



2. In this book, the author takes us on an in-depth tour of the life and times of William Tecumseh Sherman. In doing so, he lets us see Sherman as a boy living in poverty; as a nine-year-old foster child; and as a student, young soldier, husband, father, failed businessman, Civil War General, and aging military hero. In the end, we find that Sherman was very much like the rest of us: a man with hopes, dreams and fears of his own, and certainly not the crazed and often despised General who, according to legend, burned Atlanta to the ground and wantonly ravaged, pillaged, and plundered the South.
   
   True, Sherman did order that all inhabitants of Atlanta be evacuated [705 adults (few men), 860 children, and 79 slaves], but that was to prevent snipers from killing his soldiers. And he did order that all facilities which could be used to support the war effort be destroyed (e.g., the railroad station; factories producing uniforms, munitions, railroad tracks; etc.). But that only amounted to about one third of the structures in Atlanta. And he did march the bulk of his 60,000 man army to Savannah living off the land. But he did so to help bring the Civil War to a speedy conclusion with minimum loss of life by severing the logistic supply lines across the South. And his orders were not to burn or destroy any private property, no matter what the inhabitants "said", as long as they were not fired upon.
   
   And finally, and most revealing: When Confederate General Joseph E. Johnston was given the authority to surrender all remaining Confederate armies to General Sherman, Sherman met with him and developed what he thought were acceptable surrender terms. He forwarded them to Washington to obtain the necessary authorization only to find that his terms were considered much too soft on the South by then Secretary of War Edwin Stanton. Stanton went so far as to send a letter to the New York Times accusing Sherman of TREASON and then attempted to have General Grant relieve him of his command. Grant met with Sherman but avoided doing so.
   
   According to the evidence, then, William Tecumseh Sherman wasn't the crazed villain many in the South consider him to be. And maybe, just maybe, he was the best friend the South ever had, or at least he tried to be. In any event, after reading this biography, one can only wonder how many people now living in the South, who vilify Sherman's memory, owe their very existence to the fact that he decided to make war on property rather than on their forefathers.



3. Sherman made war on women and children. He had his troops burned houses to the ground, turned a blind eye to the looting his men did, burned crops to the ground, destroyed any livestock he couldn't use and left the civilian population to starve to death everywhere he went in the South.
   Sherman had town halls burned so there were no accruate records as to how large the population of the town he burned was. Sherman also removed large numbers of civilians (women and children)who worked at the New Manchester and Roswell, Georgia Mills, North; where many of them died of exposure or starvation. On the trip North many of these New Manchester, Roswell, Georgia Mill women workers were raped.
   I am not a sympathizer for the Southern Cause during the American Civil War. However, I do believe that Sherman is a war criminal and shouldn't be idolized which this book does.



4. William Tecumseh Sherman was an unusually good soldier. With the exception of Grant, he prosecuted the war as the South never imagined a Yankee could. He realized early on that this war would be long and brutal. He also realized that it would profoundly change the very nature of the United States.

   John Marszalek gives the reader a man who never stops trying. From soldier to banker, from school teacher back to soldier, Sherman was a man who did his best all the time. He suffered quite a few set backs, some of them material, yet he always rebounded and it was this resiliency, this durability, that enabled him to persevere in his desire to end the Civil War in the only way he knew it could be ended, with the total destruction of the Confederacy.

   Between Grant's war of attrition and Sherman's war of annihilation the rules of warfare were simply rewritten. Sherman was one of the greatest generals the Civil War produced. The story of his life is the story of a warrior. Seen by most historians as simply a destroyer, Marszalek justifiably points out that he just may have been one of the very best friends the South had.

   You will enjoy this exceedingly well written book about an amazingly adaptive and creative man, one who fought hard for what he believed in and in so doing, laid the foundations for America as we know it today.




5. Marszalek's narrative of the life of Union General William Tecumseh Sherman focuses on order. It is Marszalek's contention that Sherman's early life left him with a lifelong fear of the disorganized, and that, for this reason, he strove to find and maintain order throughout his life. It is a compelling argument, and certainly worthy of consideration. Sherman WAS a stickler for order and discipline--his Civil War record testifies of that. Marszalek succeeds admirably in linking Sherman's earlier life to his later obsession with having things the 'right way.'

   As a biography of Sherman, however, this volume falls short in many respects. Sherman's Civil War career is given only about 200 of 500 pages. The account is sparse, and seldom is enough detail given that anyone without a previous knowledge of Sherman's campaigns would be able to understand what is being narrated. The last 100 pages or so of the book are disappointing--instead of a detailed description of Sherman's later life, there is a rambling string of thoughts with little or no reference to very important events. Sherman's promotion to the rank of lieutenant general (and later full general), his appointment as chief of the army, and his post-war relationships with men such as Sheridan and Schofield are only vaguely alluded to, and are not actually treated as separate events. When describing Grant as the President of the United States, Marszalek expects the reader to be familiar with events surrounding his coming into the presidency. Grant's, Sheridan's, and even Sherman's wife Ellen's deaths are not described until the very last chapter, and then (with the exception of Ellen) with no more detail than the simple statement that they were dead.

   Despite this failure of the latter part of the biography, Marszalek's work nevertheless is valuable. His analysis of Sherman's psyche is, for the most part, good (at least apart from the fact that nearly every early event in Sherman's early life is described as an 'omen' of things to come), and the argument he advances for why Sherman turned out the way he did is sound. Marszalek speaks at great lengths of Sherman's total war policy, but in this it seems, to me at least, that he is misunderstanding. His analysis of Sherman's military genius and the development of his strategy is admirable, but I do not agree with his labeling the advance on Atlanta total war. To me, at least, total war was the march to the sea, was the 50-mile swath of devastation left by Sherman's 'bummers' as they consumed everything of value in their path. Still, even if the label of total war is erroneously applied to all of Sherman's independent campaigns in 1864-65, Marszalek's examination of these campaigns, and examination what made Sherman proceed the way he did, is very thought-provoking.

   I cannot call this the perfect work on Sherman, but I do believe it is good. Despite any other flaws, Marszalek is fair in his treatment of Sherman, and in that respect triumphs. In short, this is a good biography of a great man, and, even considering the disappointing last several chapters, worthy to be labeled good Civil War history.

5 comments about The Truth About Jesse James.

1. An interesting and well researched Jessie James alternate history. Ms Duke cites her sources and lays her cards on the table....... I beleive she proves her case. A must read for James scholars, Knights of the Golden Circle researchers and outlaw hunters...... What a story!!!!!



2. A few copies of this book appeared with different cover and a different title. The earlier title was Jesse James History Mystery: Did He Fake His Death. Perhaps a more fitting title for this book would be Betty Duke in Wonderland. In this volume Duke takes us through the looking glass and down the rabbit hole. She uses a lot of smoke and mirrors. Duke would have us believe that Robert James, the father of Frank and Jesse James, did not die in California in 1850 as history relates. Instead he faked his death, acquired a new wife and began a second career as a Methodist (not Baptist) minister. Robert James becomes the father of the real James L. Courtney and then the real James L. Courtney morphs into someone named Haun.
   
   Jesse James, of course, was not shot and killed by Bob Ford on April 3, 1882, and the real Jesse James morphs into James L. Courtney, the great grandfather of the author. Jesse James did not marry his cousin Zee Mims, but Zee married a cousin of Jesse's Wood Hite. Wood Hite, according to Duke, is the man who is really buried in James' grave in Mount Olivet Cemetery in Clay County, Missouri.
   
   If this is not too confusing for you to follow, don't worry there is still a lot more smoke, mirrors, magic lanterns, secret societies, and coded diaries that are sure to disorient you. Quantrell (her spelling, not mine) did not die in Kentucky at the end of the Civil War, and "Bloody Bill" Anderson was not killed in Ray County, Missouri on October 26, 1864. Both men survived, took new identities, and had long careers in Texas and elsewhere. There is much, much more of this sort of mania in the book, including large doses of the Knights of the Golden Circle, myths, treasure tales, etc., etc., etc.
   
   Not only is this book bad history, but it is bad writing as well. Duke has apparently never made the acquaintance of The Chicago Manuel of Style, or any similar guide for writers. Her punctuation, footnotes, bibliography, grammar, organization, etc. leave much to be desired. A large number of her footnotes cite various internet sources, many of dubious validity. Very few of her footnotes for books give page numbers, and for newspapers she often only cites the year, but not the month and day. She cites at least one work of fiction as if it is a valid reference for historical matters, and several of the books listed in her bibliography are totally unreliable.
   
   Much of the material in the book is not the work of Betty Duke. She quotes pages and pages of other people's work. Some of this she says she has permission to use, but she is totally mum on the subject of permission in other cases. Some of the writers that are quoted at length may want to take issue with Duke about this. It is also interesting to speculate about how the five living great grandchildren of the outlaw Jesse James will feel about Betty's claim that she is also the great granddaughter of Jesse James.
   
   In summary, this book will likely be remembered as a burr (the size of a giant tumbleweed) under the saddle of the history of the Old West. This book has been repudiated by The James Preservation Trust,which preserves the family history of the Jesse James family, and this book has been reviewed unfavorably in The James-Younger Gang Journal, by noted historian and book critic Nancy B. Samuelson, author of The Dalton Gang Story, and by the Wild West History Association of professional historians.



3. someone should have proof read book before it went to print.and the more i read the more i beleave the auther is grasping at straws that her g-grandfather is jesse james.



4. Following many years of exhaustive research, Betty Duke's book now gives us the real story of Jesse James. This book details so much evidence regarding the events in the life of Jesse James, after the supposed "assassination" in Missouri, that the history books may need to be re-written. We find him to be much alive, living in Texas, raising a family, and then leaving clues for those after him, regarding his true identity. This book will cause the reader to re-think what he has been told regarding the life of Jesse, the preacher's son from a little town in Missouri. Perhaps, the reader will even be inclined, like myself, to dig into his own family's history. I highly recommend this book to all history buffs, and those who want to want to blaze the trail in search of the real Jesse James.



5. One word... WOW! Would I recommend this book? YES! History buffs or just Jesse James enthuses will be in for a treat! Betty Dorsett Duke's "Jesse James Lived & Died In Texas" convinced me back in 1998 that Jesse James didn't die in 1882, (I was a skeptic before) but her new book, "The Truth About Jesse James", should convince everyone, even if you are skeptic like I once was! Like the title, it is the TRUTH! From the beginning to the end I could hardly wait to turn the page to see what was going to happen next -- it's defiantly a GOOD read and will be timeless book.
   
   Many things impressed me with this book, I learned a lot of historical information about Jesse James, before his so-called passing which was defiantly a treat. I expected to be drawn right into the day he was supposedly shot. The research the author put into this book! Wow! Working at a community college, I see and edit history papers for peers all the time, this book would definitely be considered an "A" paper. Why? Betty Duke's research is very well done by the way it is presented and most of all you don't get bored, things stay interesting. I was very pleased with the citations, credits and how she used them properly. I wish more people would write like this.
   
   One thing that caught my attention after I read the book was a letter written by Emett Hoctor to Betty Duke, the author about this book. Mr. Hoctor was the man that pioneered the search for the truth about Jesse James through DNA testing back in 1995. Mr. Hoctor had chosen Professor Starr to head the project, and from his letter to the author he was obviously disappointed in Starr's work. The letter Mr. Hoctor wrote can be read by the public on the author's Web site: http://www.jessejamesintexas.com/emmett_hoctor_review.jpg
   
   In conclusion, I highly recommend this book to everyone interested in the TRUTH about Jesse James and his life. This book captures it all and if you are wondering if Jesse lived on after 1882 or died this book will seal the deal. I personally, feel comfortable now about what happened to Jesse James and I feel everyone will feel this way too after reading this book!