5 comments about A Slave No More: Two Men Who Escaped to Freedom, Including Their Own Narratives of Emancipation.

1. Frederick Douglass and Harriet Jacobs are among a handful of former slaves in the Old South who wrote famous narratives of their lives in slavery and their ultimate escape to freedom. It is a rare and important event to find additional first-person narratives that document the efforts of slaves to become free. The noted historian David Blight had the good fortune to become aware of two such narratives which had previously been held close by the families of their authors. Blight has published these accounts in his recent book "A Slave no More" (2007), together with background information on the manuscripts, a discussion of the lives of the authors following their escapes from slavery, and a brief history of Emancipation during and following the Civil War.
   
   The attraction of this book lies more in the narratives than in Blight's commentary. The narratives were composed by John Washington (1838 -- 1918) and Wallace Turnage (1846-1916). Washington and Turnage both discuss their lives in slavery and the factors impelling them to make their escape. The narratives do not extend to the subsequent lives of the narrators in freedom. The narratives are written in a non-literary style which nevertheless have great power from their very simplicity. Neither man was writing for the public. Their accounts of slavery offer the opportunity to get to know two people who did not make it into the history books but whose storyies have much to teach.
   
   The narrative of John Washington, which he titled "Memorys of the Past" is the more literary of the two. Washington vowed to escape from slavery when his mother was sold away when he was a child. Washington spent most of his early life as an urban slave in Virginia working as a house servant,in a tobacco factory, and in an inn, among other places. With the advance of the Union army through Fredericksburg in 1862, Washington saw his opportunity to cross the river to the Union lines. He became an aide to several Union officers and ultimately established himself with his wife, who had been born free, in Washington D.C. Washington's narrative has some excellent portrayals of the movements of the soldiers on both sides and of his experiences with the Union army.
   
   Turnage's account is untitled and substantially less polished that Washington's. Turnage spent most of his time in slavery in the deep south near Pickensville, Alabama. He was a field hand and subjected to more cruelty and violence than was Washington. His account is replete with descriptions of whippings given to himself and, especially, to women. Witnessing and receiving these whippings made Turnage determined to escape. Turnage made at least four unsuccessful attempts at escape before he succeeded, after each of which he was punished with increasing severity. In the first several attempts, Turnage went west to try to reach the Union lines in Corinth, Mississippi. He nearly succeeded but was returned to his master on each occasion. Turnage finally succeeded in a daring attempt to reach Mobile Bay, the site of a great Union naval victory. Turnage had to cross snake-infested swamps and achieved freedom only when Union soldiers rescued him from the sinking makeshift boat in which he had been riding to freedom. Turnage offers a graphic, gritty account of his escape and of the harshness of slavery in the deep south. Importantly, Turnage does not show bitterness towards his oppressors. He writes at the outset of his narrative: "I do not mean to speak disparagingly of those who sold me, nor of those who bought me. Though I seen a hard time, it had an attendency to make a man out of me." (Blight, page 213)
   
   In his introductory material, Blight retells and expands upon the narratives of Washington and Turnage. Through laborious historical research, Blight also describes the lives of the two men and their families after their escape. Washington spent most of his life as a painter in Washington D.C. and was active in the church and the developing African-American community. His five children went on to careers, with his youngest son enjoying success as a science teacher and athletic coach. Turnage had a much more difficult time of it living in the overcrowded, disease-infested sections of New York City and witnessing the deaths of his mother, wife, and several children. One of his daughters was able to "pass" for white, and she was the source for recovering her father's manuscript.
   
   Blight also offers an interesting discussion of the Emancipation Proclamation which focuses on the immediate reaction to it in African American communities in both North and South. I found Blight's discussion somewhat broader and more polemical than it needed to be to elucidate the narratives of Washington and Turnage. But most of his discussion makes for interesting reading.
   
   Washington and Turnage wrote inspiring narratives of their journey from slavery to freedom. Blight has done a service in making these narratives available to the public. This book will be of interest to readers concerned with American slavery, the Civil War, and African American history. Readers unfamiliar with other slave narratives may wish to explore Frederick Douglass's autobiographies and the volume titled "Slave Narratives," both of which are available from the Library of America.
   
   Robin Friedman



2. Recently two new important African-American slave narratives have come to light, published here along with scholarly commentary for the first time. They are considered significant by historians because they support a theory that slaves played a role in bringing about their own freedom. Traditionally slavery is thought to have ended with Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation - Lincoln freed the slaves, we are taught in school. However, is it possible that the slaves themselves played a role in their own freedom, that their own actions, conscious or not, helped bring about Emancipation? This is what today many historians contend, and these two narratives support that view. "For most slaves", Blight says, "freedom did not come on a particular day; it evolved by process." It was the process of waves of slaves escaping into Union lines as the war moved south, often forming shanty towns of "contrabands" (as the Union called escaped slaves, they were initially classified by the north as property). Eventually something had to be done about the"contraband" and Lincoln signed some limited laws that gave them freedom, which eventually morphed into the Emancipation Proclamation. But it was the slaves desire for freedom, willing to risk life by escaping, that forced the issue of Emancipation. Further, many of these freed slaves then took up arms and joined the Union army. It is estimated over 700,000 of the nearly 4 million slaves found freedom through this "process", the remaining 3.3 million achieving freedom with the 13th Amendment.
   
   Whatever the historical debates, these narratives are interesting and even thrilling. Although not as well written as Frederick Douglass, in many ways the adventures of these young men are more real and tangible - as private documents they were not written to be published, not filtered through an editor. They were meant for friends and family and thus have a rough, raw real edge to them.
   
   David Blight has done a great service to historians and the public by both publishing the original sources and summarizing and expanding on them. Each of the two narratives has a corresponding chapter that re-creates the narrative in more detail and clarity for the modern reader. In addition there are two chapters that examine what happened to the men after the war including some fascinating pictures. No two slave narratives are alike and these will surely not disappoint as important historical case examples and thrilling stories. America has two new unsung heroes representative of 100s of thousands who sought and found their own freedom.



3. This book makes the Civil War period and slavery come alive, partly through the real voices of 2 emancipated slaves, and partly through the consumate writing skill of the author. The level is just right: carefully documented sources (endnotes) that authenticate the story, plus a wonderfully accessible writing style that is clear, never boring, and quietly compassionate. This is an engaging book I recommend even to those having only a casual interest in history.



4. The book provides an in depth look at the lives of two black men who were determined to escape slavery. The book also reveals the hopelessness experienced by slaves in their daily lives. It also exposed the cruelty of slave owners, who were considered in all other respects to be genteel and upstanding citizens in their community.



5. History buffs in general will find "A Slave No More" a highly valuable read. For students of American history, and particularly for those who are interested in the Civil War and Reconstruction period, this book is must reading. There are not many first-person accounts by former slaves available to us. This volume contains two such narratives, hitherto unpublished: one is by Wallace Turnage and the other is by John Washington, both former slaves who found their way to freedom during the Civil War. David Blight presents them here in their original form "with virtually no changes to the grammar and spelling," although he has done some minor editing in their structure (primarily providing paragraph breaks) to assist in reading.
   
   The reader is not, however, immediately thrust into the narratives themselves. Blight spends the first 162 pages introducing us to the two writers, using genealogical data, and to the context in which the narratives were written. Turnage's and Washington's escape to freedom occurred during the chaos of this nation's most bloody war (over 600,000 casualties) and amidst a political and cultural conflict (state's rights and slavery) which had been ripping the country apart for many decades. It is, I think, essential to understand the plight of the Black slave on a personal level, to understand what it means to be someone else's "property," completely and totally subject to someone else's will, to recognize and accept that slaves were not thought to be fully "human." Blight does an outstanding job of providing the necessary background for the narratives.
   
   I recommend this book to all readers who love the study of history. It is a valuable contribution to the genre.

5 comments about Lost Victories: The War Memoirs of Hitler's Most Brilliant General.

1. Let me first say, that I am one of those who considers Field Marshal Erik von Manstein one of the best operational minds to have fought in the Second World War. His achievment in the post-Stalingrad months (Dec 1942- Feb 1943) will go down as a classic in mobile warefare. Enough has been written about his 1939 operational plan to invade France to fill a volume. In short, he was the consumate military professional.
   
   Which is why it pains me to offer only a 3 rating to his memiors. Don't get me wrong. The memior reads very well; the translation is excellent, and the prose is easy. My main complaint lies with the memior's content. I first read Lost Victories twenty years ago and took most of what Manstein wrote as fact. However, as I read more and more about not only the Wehrmacht, Germany, and Hitler, I began to doubt the narrative that von Manstein and the Feld Herren as a whole have been put to paper. This memior is long on ommisions, and short on introspection. Like other senior officers, Manstein piles the blame on the most senior Wehrmacht leadership while conviently excusing himself. The sad fact remains that von Manstein rarely vocalized any complaints concerning the Nazis treatment of men like Fritsch or Bloomberg (his former superiors sacked by Hitler), the introduction of the swatiska on thier uniforms, the establishment of the Waffen SS, or the treatment of Polish civilians, Jew, or captured officers. In his memiors, Manstein does take a few pages to offer his criticisms of Keitel (OKW) and von Braunstisch (OKH), yet not once did he explicitly critique in name the poor tactical generalship of either General Hoepner -the 4th Panzer Army Commander and his immediate commander during the initial stages of Barbarossa, or Field Marshall von Leeb -the overall commander of the Northern Army Group. This I thought was rather odd considering that these 2 men at that stage of the war still excercised complete freedom of movement. Manstein vaguely critiques the "High Command" (ie either the OKH or Hitler himself). Like other generals, Manstein leveled his stongest critiques on those that were dead, and thus couldn't defend themselves.
   
   The Chapters covering Stalingrad at the battles along the Don are the most dramatic of the memior. Many do find fault with Manstein's decision not to relieve General Paulus of command of the 6th Army in November-December 1942. This was a period of high drama and emotion, when as most experts believe that the 6th Army could have broken out of Stalingrad. It was also the period of greatest danger when the entire front was collapsing back to Rostov. Manstein's reasons for not relieving Paulus are clear enough -namely he didn't have the authority to do so. The other reason, which he barely skirts around is the fact that the Soviets had nearly a half million men, 3000 guns, and 2000 tanks around Stalingrad. If the 6th Army did breakout, this vast force would be unleashed and the entire Don Bend as well as von Kleists Army Group in the Kuban would have been become a giant tomb for the Germans. Manstein after the war could have offered this terrible but truthful fact to the public, but instead said the sacrifice of the 180,000 men of the 6th Army was never an option. Somehow I do not believe him.
   
   The last area of criticism is leveled at von Manstein's decision to back Zeitzler's (OKH) and Hitler's decision to strike at Kursk. In his memiors, he does say he strongly desired to wait until the Soviets struck first and then offer a counter blow on "the back hand". That is, he wished to conduct another mobile counter attack like he did earlier in March at Kharkov - this time from the Northwest and drive the Soviets offensive forces Southward into the Black Sea. This operation, brilliant in conception and most probably would have had sufficient motorized forces to execute was never considered. Hitler couldn't stomach the idea of giving another inch of territory (Manstein's plans included a planned withdraw initially so he could spring his trap), instead followed Zeitzler's idea of a pincer attack on the Kursk sailent. For some reason, von Manstein allowed himself to initially concur. Again, I find this strange. Manstein never was one to keep quiet when considering other people's failures. OKH's Kursks attack lacked imagination, was totally predictable and lacked any strategic value. On paper it looked like the "safe" plan. Even if it was successfull, Manstein, Zeitzler, Guderian, and most of all Hitler knew the Soviets had sufficient strength to bleed the outnumbered German's white. Manstein's plan, on the other hand, had all of the makings of a classic battle of annihilation, which could have bought Hitler another year, or maybe even a stalemate in the East.Yet, Manstein offered little defense of his plan.
   
   Finally, von Manstein like Guderian, Halder, Kluge, Rundstedt, et als. said he had no prior knowledge of the Final Solution, Russian Slave Labour, and the killing of POWs. He says very little, but does offer up evidence of the Soviet's own crimes while he commanded the 56th Panzer Corps in the Courland. As time goes by, I find this harder and harder to believe.
   
   Overall, the reader will have to judge for himself. Of all the memiors, this one is the best written, and there are many times where one can see Manstein's genius as he discusses in his cool, rational prose the many tactical and strategic problems he faced. He is also very kind when ever he writes about the enlisted soliders who served under him, especially the German NCOs. He was never an "armchair" general. Both as commander of the 38th Infantry Corps, and the 56th Panzer Corps he led from the front, and made his decisions based upon first hand knowledge. It was also heartbreaking to read about the death of his only son in 1943. While Erik von Manstein had many faults, he was anything but the stiff, monocoled Prussian caricture that some in the West like to paint of the Prussians. He was a brilliant yet flawed general. His memiors should be read, but critically so. While reading the memiors it is also good to keep in mind that her served one of the cruelist dictators of the 20th Century.



2. German Field Marshal Erich von Manstein wrote "Lost Victories" in 1955, ten years after the end of the Second World War and eleven years after he had been dismissed from command on the Russian Front by Adolf Hitler.
   
   Von Manstein served in the German Army from 1914 through the First World War, the bitter interwar years, and the major campaigns of the Second World War in Europe. He was, by all accounts, a master of the operational level of war, whether as a commander or as an outstanding staff officer. His memoirs are still in print at least in part because his narrative powers were equal to the task of describing the military operations in the Second World War in which he participated. "Lost Victories" may provide as good an account from the German side of the War in Europe as we are likely to get from a participant. His understanding of the huge battle waged over an immense manuever space in Western Russia is almost as unique as the nature of the fighting itself. If his account is tinged with some "I" and "me", that is perhaps to be forgiven in an autobiography by a man who saw all too clearly the wasted strategic opportunities to conduct a war with a defined and achievable political purpose.
   
   This book is highly recommended to students of the military art and of the Second World War.



3. It is a "must read" strategy book by the one of the best WW2 German generals. It is not the full memoirs. Still it is a 5 star (great) reading.



4. Lost Victories is an excellent first-person memoir of some of the critical battles of the Second World War. Its primary focus is on the Eastern Front in Russia and the Ukraine; von Manstein speaks some about the attack on France in 1940 and opines on what might have been done with England thereafter, but for the most part, his command was in the East.
   
   This is not a starter treatment of the Second World War, and it will appeal only to those readers who are looking for an in depth discussion of certain topics. It is not a comprehensive treatment of the war -- von Manstein naturally only discusses theaters in which he was involved directly, and the book generally focusses on military matters, leaving political topics for others. It also proceeds in some detail, occasionally even providing a division-by-division account of battles. That was sometimes more than I wanted, and I found it possible to skim some of the more detailed parts without sacrificing the overall discussion, however.
   
   Those readers who seek a deeper understanding of the military conflict in the East will be rewarded. I found two features of the book particularly compelling. The first is the lengthy discussion of the Stalingrad endgame (the German Sixth Army was already encircled by the time von Manstein arrived on the scene). The second is the author's discussion of Hitler's strengths and (mostly) defects as a supreme military commander. There is a chapter devoted to this discussion, but the comments and impressions that von Manstein sprinkles throughout the other chapters are even more telling.
   
   I had two small critcisms. First, the book would be more enjoyable with more and better maps, so that those of us who don't have a deep familiarity with the geography of southern Russia and the Ukraine can better place the action. There are a few maps, but they aren't always well-placed in the book and they often don't include all of the key locations.
   
   Second, I wanted more discussion of Operation Citadel (Battle of Kursk), which was one of the critical engagements of the war. I think that von Manstein's actually wrote an in-depth discussion of this battle, but that the editors of this edition chose to replace it with a shorter discussion that the author wrote later for a magazine. That would explain why this chapter is uncharacteristically brief and why its style seems out of place with the others.
   
   Overall, this is a fascinating read, and it has enriched my understanding of the war on the Eastern Front.



5. Lost Victories is superior to Guderian's Panzer Leader and also better than 'Panzer Battles'. The early chapters on the planning and evolution of the Polish and French campaigns is remarkable. Manstein accomplished the near impossible at Sevastopol and almost the impossible at Kursk where (as was often the case) his carefully laid plans were perverted by the powers above. His firm stance against getting German armies sucked into city fighting beginning with Warsaw were tragically forgotten by Stalingrad. His theories about mobile defence, attacking on the other side of a river to defend a bridgehead etc... were revolutionary for their time. It may have been a different story in Normandy in 1944 if Manstein had been in charge rather than the hodge podge of commands which included the discredited Rommel and the over the hill Rundstedt. One of the main reasons the Germans were defeated is that experienced, brilliant generals like Manstein were eventually replaced by yes man that far from strengthening Hitler's position hastened his downfall.

5 comments about Patton: A Genius for War.

1. I've been facinated by history since grade school and just fell in love with this book. Patton was an amazing character and one of those rare individuals that only comes along every hundred years or so.
   
   This book is very long, but gives as complete a biographical picture of Gen Patton as possible. It details his entire life, from childhood through WW1 and WW2 all the way until his untimely death. Sadly his career was constantly derailed by lesser gifted generals like Ike or Bradley. If you are a history buff or Patton fan, then this book is for you.



2. I had never read anything regarding General Patton, but after having watched the movie "Patton" again, I went to find the best biography of Patton available. I read many of them, but BY FAR, this is the best available. A work of biographical art: reveals the humanity of Patton the warrior, and reviews his place in history without prejudice.
   
   Sincerely recommended to everyone who wishes to read an excellent biography of General George S. Patton.



3. This is by far the most comprehensive and enjoyable biography I've read on General Patton. Mr. D'Este has painstakingly recorded the entire life of one of the greatest battlefield commanders in history. As the New York Times Review states "...he neither damns nor beautifies his subject". There's no better way to sum up this work. It's brilliant and fair. I'm looking forward to the author's new book on Winston Churchill that should be arriving this year.



4. I for one, certainly do not agree with Alistair Horne's phrase,"Revisionism at best" with regards to this book.
   As mentioned by earlier reviewers, Carlos D'Estes book traces the Patton family history to soldiers in earlier times. That General Patton was influenced by these family heroes is without doubt. In fact, it explains a lot about the man's sense of destiny, responsibility, and continual need to excel at whatever he attempted.
   More than a quick sketch of a complex man, this is a biography worth reading and studying.
   Patton was one of his kind.
   An invaluable book to anyone seeking to understand Patton on and off the battlefield.
   Well written, I couldn't put it down.



5. Patton is often described as "controversial". To those who have never fought in war, or perhaps even just engaged in competitive sports, or who otherwise have only a sort of normal, everyday idea about how people ought to act, I suppose he is: Arrogant, sometimes outwardly cruel, demanding, competitive, a taskmaster, single-minded, agressive, angry, all the rest. I've never fought in war, but I've played my share of competitive sports (a paltry parallel, but the best I can do). In sports, everyone (if they're lucky) had a coach like this somewhere along the way, and they most likely took more lessons away from that man or woman than all the colorless middle-of-the-roaders combined. They most likely achieved things under that person's direction that they didn't know they had the capacity to do. They most likely recall details about that person many years later, after they've forgotten most of the others. When the old team-mates get together, that's who most of the stories are about (many told as being funny, now - not so at the time).
   
   To me, that's Patton: An American original who just barely escaped being a bombastic buffoon. He avoided that fate and scaled the heights of history because he was a born leader of men - one who either broke them (rarely), or got the best out of them (much more often); because he knew his business inside-out; because he worked at it day and night; and most of all, because finally, he WON.
   
   I think that this intensely personal essence is what is most completely captured in this book. It fills in many of the overlooked or understated details from the well-known George C. Scott movie, and adds much new material besides. An excellent book, worthy not only as a war biography, but as a study of what it honestly takes to do REALLY well at any endeavor in life.

5 comments about Lee.

1. Not much is written about Lee, the man, and this book solves that problem. Excellent.



2. Magnificent
   5+ Stars.
   I originally read Douglas Southall Freeman's 4 Volume biography of Robert E. Lee 35 years ago. I was so impressed with both the author and the General that I have been a Civil War buff ever since. Recently, after rereading James Robertson's biography on General A.P. Hill, my interest in Lee was again piqued and I picked up the abridged version of Douglas Freeman's Pulitzer Prize winning classic to refresh my history of Marse Robert. Although I was walking old literary ground, I was amazed at how wonderful it was to again read about the amazing life of one of America's true icons. Absolutely magnificent in all respects. Richard Harwell's abridgement of the 4-volume biography was masterful in every since. Harwell captured both the beauty and depth of Freeman's style without diminishing any of the wonder or essence of General Robert E. Lee the man and General. Extremely well crafted in all respects that none of the Freeman magic was lost or diluted.
   Freeman's style was to view the Civil War events through Lee's eyes, ears, and available information rather than examine events through post war after-the-fact analysis: What did General Lee know at the time with the information he had and could "feel". Without going into an in-depth biographical review of General Lee, suffice it to say Mr. Freeman captured the essence of both Robert E. Lee the man and general. He artfully examines how Lee reacted to various situation and how his prior experiences and nature influenced both his decisions and personal relationships. All in all the absolute best biography ever written on General Robert E. Lee and a requirement in any Civil War expert or buff's library.
   Note: The final 4 chapters are an incredible summation of what made Lee, Lee. Freeman gets to the nub of it all in beautifully written concise statements. The most amazing thing of all is that the characteristics of what made General Robert E. Lee great are as timely today as they were back then. In the pantheon of great Americans he stands tall, very tall.
   Must read for anyone interested in the Civil War. Harwell's abridged version of Freeman's masterpiece is wonderful and although 600+ pages is really a rather quick read due to the excellent writing. I found it very hard to put down and read the entire book in only 3 days. Do yourself a favor and read a magnificent biography on a true American icon.



3. I preface my remarks by explaining that I am an avid reader of the history of the period from pre-revolution to post civil war.
   
   This book is very readable and not only offers concise detail but also gives terrific insight into the state of the Union and Confederacy during Lee's life. I couldn't put it down, and have since ordered others as a gift.
   
   Lee was truly a one of kind gentleman and American, and had Virginia not been in the south or neutral, he ultimately would have led the Union forces.
   
   It is a must read.



4. "Lee" is an excellent one-volume abridgment of Douglas Southall Freeman's epic four-volume life of Confederate General Robert E. Lee. Freeman's original work, published in 1934, was based on over two decades of research into Lee's correspondence and military dispatches, and clearly benefited from contacts with friends, family members, and veterans of the Civil War who had known Lee in life. Richard Harwell's abridgment, at nearly 600 pages, is still an heroic length, but far more managable for the general reader.
   
   The Lee that emerges from this biography is a man who very consciously drew his sense of duty and responsibility from his Revolutionary War forebears. His father, "Light House" Harry Lee, was one of George Washington's cavalry commanders. His wife was a step-granddaughter of Washington himself. Lee knew genteel poverty as a youth, and the burden of caring for younger siblings and an invalid mother. Lee finished second in his class at West point, the result of the disciplined application of an excellent mind and the conscious molding of a self-controlled personality into an officer and a gentlemen in the very best sense of those terms.
   
   Lee's exploits in the Civil War have overshadowed his long apprenticeship in arms, following his graduation from West Point in 1829. As an engineer officer, Lee spent the pre-war years working on a variety of military and civil engineering projects around the young United States, learning the challenges of planning and logistics. His superb performance in the Mexican War on the staff of Commanding General Winfield S. Scott made his reputation in the Army, and gave him opportunities for line assignments in the cavalry he would otherwise have not seen. However, the glacial pace of peacetime promotion prevailed, and by 1861, Lee was only a Colonel. His talents were such that he was immediately considered for general officer command as the Civil War loomed.
   
   Lee's decision to go with his native state of Virginia at the breakup of the Union is one that may be opaque to present-day readers; Freeman does his best to explain Lee's reasons. Freeman's narrative likewise does justice to Lee's increasingly central role in the conduct of the Confederate military effort. The bulk of this volume covers the Civil War, and Freeman does not spare Lee his faults in what was by all accounts a remarkable effort against the odds. Lee was an exceptional strategist and logistician, but his preference for delegating battlefield management to subordinates cost him in a number of battles, especially later in the war as less experienced men took command. Likewise, Lee paid a price for his reluctance to enforce his will on stubborn subordinates. Freeman highlights Lee's conduct of civil-military relations with the Confederate Government in Richmond.
   
   Freeman's account of Lee's brief life after the Civil War may be especially illuminating of the man. Lee accepted the military outcome of the war and got on with his life, in the face of grief over losses, personal poverty, and sometimes studied insults from victorious Unionists. He lent his still considerable talents as an administrator, and his reputation, to small Washington College, saving it from extinction and turning it into a first-rate college for the young men of the South.
   
   Freeman's scholarship, especially in his analysis of the Civil War, is now somewhat dated. However this book is still very highly recommended for its insights into the personality and character of Robert E. Lee, man and gentleman.



5. From the time I was a toddler close to 60 years ago, I was taught that Robert E. Lee was, except for Jesus Christ, the greatest man who ever lived. A lifetime of study has confirmed my parents' opinion...I am NOT unbiased about General Lee. If Robert E. Lee was the greatest man, Douglas Souhthall Freeman was the greatest Civil War author, and he's not unbiased, either.
   
   Anyone reading this probably already knows Lee's story...born of a great mother and a useless father whose earlier greatness was long forgotten... raised in aristocratic poverty....West Point with no demerits...30+ years in the Army as an engineer, with brief combat in Mexico...offered command of the Union Army...a man who cried as he followed Virginia out of the Union...took over the Army of Northern Virginia a year into the war and made it, man for man, the greatest fighting force the world has ever known...held off a vastly larger, and better supplied, Army for three years...surrendered, then set the example for his men in becoming citizens of one nation...accepted the Presidency of a small college, and, in the five and a half years he had left, started it on the road to becoming the world-class school it is today...served God to the end, suffering his final heart attack while running a Vestry meeting at the Church pastored by one of his old generals.
   
   In 1915, a young newspaperman named Douglas Southall Freeman accepted a contract to write a 75,000 word biography of General Lee. Born in Lynchburg, the son of one of Lee's troops, he had learned about the General at a young age. Twenty years after starting, Dr. Freeman finally finished his 1,000,000 word biography, and saw it published in four volumes; those four volumes ARE definitive, and the greatest biography in the English language.
   
   Richard Harwell, who knew Dr. Freeman, made this one volume abridgment in the 1960's [and also a very fine one volume version of Freeman's "George Washington"]....it is very probably the best one volume study of Lee available, for which Harwell would give ALL the credit to Dr. Freeman. OK, what is lost in the abridging? Fair question if you're spending your money for this...I'm going to round numbers. Freeman takes 400 pages for the first 54 years [100 for Mexico], 1,600 for the war, and 400 for the last five and a half years. Harwell has roughly 100 [27 for Mexico], 400 and 100. Lost are the footnotes, the appendecies, the bibliography, much of the dialog, and most of the redundencies....
   
   Should you buy, and read this? Definitely. There are a LOT of one volume biographies of General Lee, ranging from kid's versions, to good, bad, and indifferent. Two or three are by men who actually met him. Harwell has done a superb job. Now the real question....do you need to read the whole four volumes? If you are a poor soul like me, you already have. Your best bet would be a used set, but if affordable, they may not be in good shape, and if in good shape, they may be expensive. [I was lucky to find a decent set for $35]. ["Lee's Lieutenants" is easy to find at a good price, and "George Washington" is impossible]. There were badly overpriced paperbacks available, but I'm not sure they still are; there is a beautiful leather bound edition in print, but you can imagine the price. The four volumes are definitive, and very readable....while you're deciding, read this first...

No comments about When War Becomes Personal: Soldiers' Accounts from the Civil War to Iraq.

5 comments about War As I Knew It.

1. flamboyant and irrealistic data of german losses ( see german sources ...KTB/OKW. etc. )



2. Whereas we've all heard the weak-kneed, faint-hearted, army deserter types condemn Patton as bloodthirsty, this book reveals Patton the intellectual, the man who believes deeply in his mission and destiny, and one who is prepared to sacrifice life and limb in order to to honor his role in the history of the world.
   I found this book to be highly insightful, educational, entertaining, and motivating. I learned about strategy and received an interesting and unique glimpse into the mind of a truly great man. Patton was the cream of the crop - well educated, strong, courageous, and determined, and he had the intelligence and wisdom to back his decisions up. Would that we had a fearless leader like this today.



3. Patton' memoir of his role in WWII. Written shortly before his death in Dec 1945 and published by his wife. Patton example of leadership is applicable to all leaders and all leaders would benefit by reading this book. Appended to this book are copies of Patton's general orders for the conduct of the 3rd Army in Europe which includes some very good practical advice for the fighting soldier and commander.



4. George S. Patton, Jr. died December 21, 1945 in Heidelberg Germany of injuries sustained in an automobile accident on December 9th of that year, a day before his scheduled return to America. His writings included a "full diary from June, 1942, until Dec. 5, 1945" and the manuscript of the book "War As I Knew It". The book was first published in 1947. "The text [of the published book] ... is ... precisely as it came from the General's swift pen with the single elimination of a criticism of one officer who, if he erred, most splendidly atoned." (xiv: Introduction by Douglas Southall Freeman)
   
   The text lacks any detail of actual battles, other than broad movements at the level of Corps and Division. It is very much a rough overview, as the title suggests, of Patton's experience as a General in WWII. Its value derives from Patton having written it, more than for what is written within it. It is not the great book (we may imagine) he would have written later had he lived.



5. Unfortunately, Patton doesn't describe the battle planning to the degree I had hoped. Too much high level discussions of this Battalion and that Regiment. But some good insight into his relationship with Monty and Ike.

5 comments about American Caesar: Douglas MacArthur 1880 - 1964.

1. This superb biography examines the many sides to General Douglas MacArthur (1880-1964); superb commander in war and peace, vain malcontent, and megalomaniac. The author begins by examining his famous father`s service in the Civil War. Then we learn of MacArthur's upbringing and days at West Point (graduating first in his class in 1900), and his reckless bravery during World War I. As the author shows, MacArthur was a progressive-minded superintendent at West Point from 1919-1922, and chief of staff during the 1930's (where his aide was Major Eisenhower). Then we learn of his skilful island-hopping as commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific during World War II. My late uncle served in the Philippines and cursed MacArthur's name 50 years later, but Mac was talented and sparing of his soldier's lives. Ironically, his greatest success may have been as military governor of occupied Japan, where he helped implement democratic reforms. Then came his blundering command in Korea (1950-51) where he misread Chinese intentions and went over President Truman`s head - for which Truman rightly fired him. Mac had previously doubled-crossed President Hoover over the Bonus Army and made juvenile threats to President Roosevelt over retaking the Philippines. In his last years, he advised against action in Vietnam. As the author shows, a complex figure, talented but flawed.
   
   William Manchester (1922-2004) was a superbly readable historian, who used a nice mix of quotes, memos, messages, and family life to describe MacArthur. The result is a well-crafted, balanced account of a man the author probably disliked but admired. Readers should also consider the author`s other superb books, THE GLORY AND THE DREAM, ARMS OF KRUPP, etc.



2. I could not put the book down... Douglas MacArthur's life from beginning to end was so interesting... His life had meaning... Say anything you wish about his personality but his accomplishments during his life will never be out done... Well written book.. and well worth reading...



3. General Douglas MacArthur is one of the few military figures in American history who, even today, evokes heated partisan responses. The title of the headline for this piece clearly tells where this writer is on the partisan divide. The nickname "Dugout Doug" goes back to the days when after the Japanese invasion of the Philippines General MacArthur got himself out of harm's way, with a due fanfare, while his subordinates and the troops for the most part got left behind to face the brunt of the Japanese forces. It was not pretty. This story and many others are detailed in the late journalist William Manchester's biography of the general.
   
   The history of the United States has produced a few military figures who were flamboyant. It has also produced a fair number with some military skills. It is, however, unusual to have the two come together as they did in the self-advertised grandeur of MacArthur. Europe has had some familiarity with the `man on horse back'. One thinks of France, in particular. In America that notion, at least publicly, has not been presented by military leaders while in uniform. MacArthur was an exception. Manchester is not incorrect to see that if there were such a candidate for the role of Caesar (or its modern variant, Bonaparte) in the United States MacArthur by skill, élan and appetite fit the bill. That thread runs through the whole story line here.
   
   No one can question that MacArthur had exceptional military skill in both World Wars, especially his role in the Pacific in World War II. One, however, should note, and note carefully his role in dispersing the Bonus Army in Washington, D.C. in the early 1930's. That might provide a taste of what the American Caesar had in store if he ever took power. Furthermore, one should note that MacArthur was well out of his element when he faced essentially `unconventional' armies in Korea. Call it `limited warfare' if you will but he totally underestimated his North Korean and Chinese opposites in the age of new `warfare'. Later American generals faced, and are today facing, similar conditions. And making the same wrong estimation. That MacArthur's reputation has mainly survived his Korea debacle owes more to hubris, including his own, than reality. In any case, read this book to get a flavor of the old American Army and its most well known general.



4. william manchester & his work are a national treasure. i picked this up after being blown away by manchester's 3-volume churchhill series.
   
   few historians can produce a work like this that's both painstakingly researched & scholarly and so well-written and absorbing. be it churchhill or maccarthur, manchester always takes the long view in terms of how his subject fits in the pantheon of great leaders.
   
   this volume about america's greatest general of the last century provides both a great history of the time period (wwi-korea) as well as a colorful & in-depth look at one of the great personalities of american history. as with churchhill, macarthur is complex, courageous, brilliant and flawed.



5. This is perhaps the best biography of an American ever written. Manchester juxtaposes the good MacArthur (the military genius and patriotic family man) with the bad MacArthur (the megalomaniacal general whose lapse led to his entire air force being destoryed on the ground at Leyte; not even his wife called him "Douglas"). MacArthur is still one of the most polarizing figures in American history; I have spoken to WW2 and Korean veterans who either love him or hate him. This book is a study of greatness. No matter your opinion of MacArthur, one cannot deny the fact that he graduated from West Point with one of the highest averages ever, or how his post-war control of Japan shaped that nation's history. An excellent look into the life of an American Hero/Villain.

5 comments about Rampant Raider: An A-4 Skyhawk Pilot in Vietnam.

1. It is not by accident that The Naval Historical Society has chosen to pick this book for publication. Riveting, hard hitting, and as worthwhile time spent as anything read in decades. Not for the pacemaker impaired !



2. Rampant Raider: An A-4 Skyhawk Pilot in Vietnam
   
   Like Steve Gray, I went through the exact program approximately a year later and made the 1968 Bonnie Dick cruise in a sister A 4 squadron and knew him. Though the book is an accurate account at that time of the syllabus from OCS, primary, basic, advanced jets, the RAG, SERE school and even combat, I found the book loaded with unnecessary minutia i.e, as if written by a reporter following Steve around as to what time chow was served, details of the O course, pages of technical data on the pressure chamber, number of fuel cells in the F-11A and fuel selection switches including cockpit switcholgoy, weapons data and tactics beyond necessary for most readers or most navy pilots.
   
   I even found myself skimming pages. Though perhaps worthwhile as a keepsake, it includes a lot of meaningless info, like the A-4 LABS gear, nukes release shape profiles etc. Rampant Raider sorely ignores in many ways the actual flavor of what the Navy flight program and squadron life was about including shipboard life especially "ready room" life and liberty along with it's humor.
   
   On several occasions Steve makes reference to the term "College Boys" versus NAVCAD/prior enlisted which is used by Marine DI's and not between fellow students and officers is unfortunate and sophomoric. Unfortunately Steve fell into what can be referred to the as the typical NAVAD persecution syndrome. Having several former NAVCAD's in our squadron, one got tired of their continued whinny NAVCAD junior birdman complex...like get over it you're a Naval Officer now, we're on the line in combat lets move on. Quite obviously Steve to this day and not fully recovered.
   
   It seemed Steve was far more interested in preparing a quasi NAVAIR manual for a NATOPS quiz? There was a saying, if you had trouble falling asleep just pick up your NATOP's (aircraft) manual and within 10 minutes you'll be out. I found that to be true reading Rampant Raider. Writing a memoir is a balance and it's not all about the syllabus and aircraft systems and technical data. Though the book in a technical sense is accurate and well done in that respect, personally I felt the human element and personal interplay was lacking and in many ways far more relevant.
   
   If you're interested in being a Navy or Marine pilot, I would suggest two books that better capture the real flavor of navy pilots and the flight program, "Flights of Passages" by Samuel Hynes and "Bogeys and Bandits" by Robert Gandt. One, the WW II exploits of marine fighter pilot from training to combat in the Pacific and the other of an F-18 RAG class. Having been there in between time wise, the trails and tribulations haven't changed much other than the aircraft, and what sets Naval Aviation apart is far better captured in these two books and enjoyable reads.
   
   Dennis



3. It helps to have some background in naval aviation to fully appreciate the level of detail early in the book, but the story evolves into a gripping account of the air war over North Vietnam - all of its tension, frustrations and exhiliration.



4. I have always had an interest in the Vietnam War since I visited the country in 1995 with the Semester at Sea program. I was lucky to be one of the first groups of American students allowed to visit since the war. It was a mystery to me... It piqued my interest on how much the war impacted my parents' era, but more so, helped me begin to understand what it meant for my Grandfather to be a part of the war. My Grandfather was Captain of the USS Bon Homme Richard while Mr. Gray was aboard. I was recommended his book to get a better understanding of the war and the life of a pilot. I learned so much and especially loved reading about the pilot's lingo, living aboard the carrier, views on the combat missions, and also about how it felt to be in the war. I always ask my Grandfather questions about Vietnam and this book helped describe that world in a way I could relate. I am grateful to have a better understanding and have even more respect for all of those that have served our country. (My Grandfather has also written a book about his WWII submarine experience - Luck of the Draw by Captain C. Kenneth Ruiz).



5. Thus far there have been precious few memoirs written by Yankee Station attack or fighter pilots. Thankfully we now have Stephen Gray's marvelous chronicle of flying combat over North Vietnam with the 'Rampant Raiders' of VA-212. Gray's book is not only a spellbinding, enjoyable memoir of the life of a Naval aviator circa 1967-69 but also literate and readily accessible to boot.
   
   Initially serving as an EM flying in Sea King anti-submarine helos, Gray applied for the NavCad program and eventually trained to be a Douglas A-4 Skyhawk pilot. The first part of Gray's book details the training he underwent that transformed him into an attack pilot. He has a marvelous way with words. His descriptions of aviation tactics, weapons and training could have been full of 'pilot talk' but instead are simply and clearly presented. You don't need to have an aeronautical background to enjoy this book.
   
   In January 1967 Gray, still green behind the ears, found himself assigned to Attack Squadron 212 led by the legendary Homer Smith. VA-212 was part of Air Wing 21 on board BonHomme Richard. Once on Yankee Station Bonnie Dick's air wing started flying the first missions of what became a record-breaking cruise. Flying more sorties than any other carrier air wing, Air Wing 21 dropped six million pounds of ordnance and downed a record number of North Vietnamese MiG fighters. The cost was heavy: fifteen pilots killed or captured, two of them from VA-212 including Homer Smith.
   
   Gray's descriptions of that record-breaking cruise are gripping and well-done. He takes the reader inside the cockpit to give an intimate view of air combat.
   
   Gray ends the book with BonHomme Richard returning stateside. Presumably there's a volume 2 in the wings covering his second Bonnie Dick cruise. One hopes so!
   
   In summary, I can't remember when I have read a better written combat memoir than RAMPANT RAIDER. If you want to know what it was like to fly combat over North Vietnam circa 1967, buy this book. It's a great piece of writing; I'd give it six stars if that was allowed! Bravo Zulu, Mr. Gray!

5 comments about Alexander the Great: Son of the Gods.

1. This book was a five hour read for me, and that was perfect. I learned a good deal about Alexander the Great, but was never bored or bogged down in the minutia. The authors possess a great talent for summarizing without feeling like you're missing out on the details.
   
   Highly recommended.



2. Easy to read and go thru without all the dryness of a lot of history books. I would highly recommend this book to anyone who is first getting into this subject.



3. I'm an Alexander buff and have read over two dozen books about this stupendous historic figure and one of the most fascinating and remarkable men who has ever lived. If I had to choose just one book to recommend to a novice who is interested in Alexander but doesn't want to be bogged down by mind-numbingly dry academia, this is the book. The writing is lucid, non-academic, insightful and full of anecdotes that modern readers can relate to and enjoy. The professional overall page layout with the first-rate photographs, illustrations and maps draw the reader into Alexander's world. In terms of combining easy to understand illustrations with top-notch writing, this is the definitive Alexander biography for the layman and Alexander buffs alike.
   
   Although a great all-around book about the Macedonian king and conqueror who came to rule 90% of the known world in his time, this isn't the definitive book for the serious Alexandrian. If you want to dig really deep, there are more in-depth and scholarly writings from the likes of Robin Lane Fox, Peter Green, J.F.C. Fuller, Paul Cartledge, A.B. Bosworth, Mary Renault, N.G.L. Hammond and others. Still, this is the book I'd recommend to people who want to get started with Alexander but don't know where to begin. It's clear, easy to absorb but leaves plenty of room for the reader to be imaginative about what he or she is taking in - the true mark of a great book. Highly recommended!



4. Two classical scholars have collaborated, using the resources of the Getty Museum of Los Angeles, to provide in a short compass a stunning presentation of the present state of knowledge of the life and times of the greatest general in the history of the world.
   
   Full-color illustrations, with informative identifications, accompany every page. The treatment of sources is short but exemplary: the reader is informed to what extent sources disagree and who wrote them. Most impressively the archeological work of the last few decades is incorporated into the traditional story seamlessly and with great authority.
   
   It is unfortunate that the maps are by no means adequate to convey the meaning of the text: places, provinces, battlefields are mentioned and described but absent from the rudimentary maps.
   
   The reference value of this beautiful work of art is enough to justify its purchase.



5. This is a fantastic book and certain gives a valuable insite into Alexander the Great and Ancient Greece. You can tell from the level of detail within the book that the authors have tried to give the read as much information about Alexander and his life as one of the worlds greatest conquers.

   A must read!!

2 comments about Heinrich Himmler: The SS, Gestapo, His Life and Career.

1. A fascinating insight into the mind of the madman Himmler. A must read for any student of World War II. Part of the incredible Himmler / Goebbels / Goering series by Roger Manvell & Heinrich Fraenkel. Great book.



2. I read this book as part of a class I took on Nazism. This is truly an engrossing account of the life and times of Himmler. This is the tale of how one young boy can turn into one of the Nazi leaders, and head of the SS. This was one of the best books I read in my course, and best books I've read period. It is informative and entertaining, pick it up.