First hand view of the Civil War's third year
938746
This is an examination of the third year of the Civil War in the words of those who lived during this sanguinary time. The third year featured bloody battles--Chancellorsville, Gettysburg, Chickamauga--and two battles that severely harmed the Confederacy--Gettysburg and Vicksburg.

One senses the despair of people like Frederick Douglass, as he lashes out against President Lincoln on the subject of black soldiers (pages 431-434) and the frustration of troops like Thomas Dodge of General Burnside's ill-fated Mud March (as Dodge says [page 6]: "It seems that Mud is really King"). On the Mud March, it is poignant to read General George Meade's sense of pain for Burnside's failed maneuver. We read Lincoln's letter to General Hooker (pages 18-19), after having named Hooker as commander of the Army of the Potomac, in which he gently chides Hooker for his politicization, his naked ambition, and his statement that the government needed a dictator.

Gettysburg? We read General Williams' letter indicating his support for Meade's having been named to command the Army of the Potomac, after Lincoln accepted Hooker's resignation. One of the more interesting of the pieces are entries in the diary for July 1-4 made by English observer Arthur Fremantle. He noted General Longstreet's concern about Pickett's Charge--and the aftermath of that failed venture. Then, there is the correspondence between Robert E. Lee and President Jefferson Davis over Lee's offer to resign as commander of the Army of Northern Virginia.

The last entry is a letter from General Sherman to General Grant, in which Sherman implored Grant to stay in the West, away from the politics of Washington DC.

Some additional features--a chronology of the year and some biographical notes.

All in all, a nice compendium for those who wish to experience the Civil War through the eyes and ears of those who lived it.
4829520
This author decided to emphasize the battles and accomplishments of Gen. Jeb Stuart and his cavalry regiments for the year leading up to the battle at Gettysburg. Akers spends extra time and effort in describing each of the strategic battles and the decisions and actions of Gen. Stuart during that year. He shows how the 12 months was the peak of the Confederate General and his cavalry at the top of the Civil War and how with more supplies and some luck the South might have been able to bring the North to negotiate peace. From the North point of view that was never going to happen, and with the appointment of Gen. Meade before Gettysburg and then the arrival of Gen. Grant and the turning of the tide the South was destined to fall. Gen. Stuart received blame for the loss at Gettysburg, but the fact he died in battle in May 1864 makes it a question for the historians to ponder. Gen. Lee always had high regard for Gen. Stuart.
798437
This was the third in the series and covered the time period of the civil war. When I got to the middle of the book I started skimming or fast reading til the end as it was mostly describing the civil war battles, and also battles with the Indians. It carried the series til the end of the war and completed the series but I didn't think it was as well written as the first two. When the book ended-it just ended and for me didn't seem like the ending.
  I also kinda thought this being the third book perhaps the author would have added letters coming back to the author of all of the letters. I also don't think someone writing these letters would have gone into so much detail to all the battles described-unless she was copying from the newspaper she was reading.
 I am glad I read it though to complete the series.
292014
Students of the Civil War know that the state of Kentucky was distinct from both North and South during the conflict.  Less well known is how the whole region of the West near the Ohio and Mississippi rivers was as well.  In "The Rivers Ran Backward," Christopher Phillips shows the extent to which the West was a distinct section of the country before the war and that it was divided into Northern and Southern sections only in the war's aftermath.

While there were wide-ranging opinions concerning slavery in the region, most in the West were relative moderates on the question, with few abolitionists or fire-eaters.  Phillips describes the politics of the late antebellum period.  There was heavy Southern influence in the southern parts of Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio, with slaveholding not unknown even in those nominally free statesthe author recalls cases of an Indiana man and an Ohio man eventually fighting for the Confederacy when the war came.

The war itself was traumatic in Missouri, Kentucky, and elsewhere in the border region.  Phillips looks at the secession debate in the slave states that remained in the Union.  Life was unsettled to say the least in the region during the war, with localized skirmishes and community strife, guerrilla warfare, and strained friendships between unionists, secessionists, and neutrals.  Both armies attempted to occupy parts of the region during the conflict, with conscription evaders and deserters adding to the chaos.  Phillips describes the politics of the slaveholding but Union states of Missouri and Kentucky during the war and notes the effect of the Emancipation Proclamation in those places.  The election of 1864 is also discussed.

Phillips describes how the region known as the West during the antebellum period later came to think of itself as divided at the Ohio River between North and South in the decades following the conflict.  While the war was traumatic for the entire nation, it was especially so for those borderlands that saw more than their share of the fighting and that contained people in close proximity with differing (or no) loyalties.  "The Rivers Ran Backward" is a well-researched volume examining the war in an important part of the country and would be enjoyed by those with a keen interest in the Civil War.
443548
R3 isn't your everyday history of the Civil Way  its a serious read. The work is as detailed as any ever read by the reviewer. The first R(ebellion) is  skirmish by skirmish, engagement by engagement and battle by battle description of time, location and people over the period from 1861 thru 1865 in Beaufort County, SC  which some believe was the birthplace and cradle of secession.  Interestingly this area from November of 1861 through the end of the War of the Rebellion was a Union stronghold  the Department of the South Atlantic Naval Operations.
The volume outlines how Beaufort County became the experimental location for the second R(econstruction), the initiative with all its false starts, corruption and most importantly success, once again detailing the events, people and, places and events which unfolded. The era of fusion politics, its leaders and initiatives leading to the countys golden age are described in detail.
leading to the third R(edemption). This period during, during last quarter of the 19th century, details the opposition leaders seeking the reestablishment of the old South through disenfranchisement of freedmen through the Jim Crow era.
Again a serious read  but worth the time  waiting (im)patiently for Volume 3!
2781022
"A Woman's Civil War" was a fascinating view of the American Civil War through the eyes of a Confederate civilian. Cornelia lived in a town that was captured by the Union, then freed by the Confederates, then captured again by the Union, and then freed again. She described the events with vivid details that made me feel as if I were watching the events unfold.

There was a lot of suspense due to the constant uncertainty of what would happen in the next day, or even in the next minute. Would the Union soldiers take all of her food? Her house? How would she get more supplies when she refused to swear a loyalty oath to the Union general making his headquarters in town? How would they get firewood when their trees and all of their out-buildings were demolished for Union fires? Would the battle rolling over their front yard end in tragedy for the family or freedom from occupation?

Her diary showed what life was like near the battle fields and under occupation for a well-to-do gentlewoman with nine children and a husband who was a Confederate officer. Her expectations in how she would be treated by friend and foe alike showed the differences in manners back then...and how those manners changed over the course of the war. Her comments also showed how people at the time viewed the war and how the "why we're fighting" changed somewhat over time. Some of her remarks reminded me of things still being said today.

In the Reminiscences section (which picks up were the diary ends), she lived for a time in an area relatively untouched by war. It was interesting to see the contrasts with what she'd become used to.

Since she wrote this diary for her husband and later for her children, she sometimes didn't include information that they would have known. She also sometimes related news as she heard it that was incorrect. However, there were endnotes at the back that gave the correct or needed information on battles, events, who various people were, and information about them.

Cornelia did refer to God and think over Christian theology as it related to her dead child and events around her. I found her thoughts an interesting part of the overall book.

I'd highly recommend this well-written and fascinating book to history buffs, those interested in the Civil War, and to anyone who thinks it sounds interesting.

Reviewed by Debbie from Different Times, Different Place Book Reviews (differenttimedifferentplace. blogspot. com)
1637196
This a first person narrative of one the most important eras of our nation's history. One must put aside one's moral perspective about the issue of slavery and learn the emotional reasoning behind the actions of the Confederate Southerner. Many were not themselves slave owners, nor were they supportive of the institution of slavery. The vast majority of the Southerners who took up arms were doing so to fight off what was, to them, an invasion of their Sovereign State(s) by a Federal Army. There were many and varied reasons for the secession of the Southern States. Some, as in the case of Virginia, were not for secession, but only voted for it after Lincoln called for the raising of an army specifically to invade the South.
This book will be an enjoyable read for any who are American History, Civil War or Military History buffs.
3885570
Very interesting, well written read & first hand look into the lives of 2 men who fought during the Civil War.
1988635
The Civil War has always been of interest to me.  My great-grandmother's older brother was wounded at the Battle of Shiloh and died a month later, so there is a personal connection.  This book gave me a much better appreciation of what he would have experienced, as well as an understanding of what warfare was like in 1862.
1744935
A must read or listen to anyone interested in the American Civil War....the three volume set is THE ONLY publication of its kind....
577114
I had been told for many years that this a good account of the Civil War written by a talented writer.  My friends were correct in their assessment.  The rebelling of, the second most important event of our history is as fresh now as it was when it was written.  The picture of U.S.Grant that is painted by his writings puts the lie to the picture painted by the mostly Southern historians wrote many widely used history texts.  Perhaps he was not the best President that has held the Presidency but, he was by no means the worst.  He was one of the best Generals that have ever served.  He was the equal of any General who served in that tragic war.
168761
"The New York Times Disunion: A History of the Civil War" is a collection of opinion articles regarding the Civil War. It was a series put together by the New York Times that ran in the paper from 2011 to 2015. Editor Ted Widmer with Clay Risen and George Kalogerakis compiled the pieces to create this book. The format makes for accessible reading. The topics are interesting and uncomfortable relevant today. I had to remind myself that these are a mix of history and opinion but nonetheless, it is a way to learn about the Civil War from slightly different angles and not as covered topics. Each writer has their own style but it was still easy to move from one piece to another. Overall, this is a well done presentation with information that is both familiar and unfamiliar.
4724661
This is an old book, published in 1963 for the centennial of the U.S. Civil War. In less than 300 pages (but pages that can move slowly due to the modern reader's unfamiliarity  of the events of the 15 years preceding the war, it reveals how Lincoln evolved into a reluctant war president, with abolishing slavery immediately throughout the U.S. not his primary goal, and how Jeff Davis evolved into a reluctant advocate of secession as the only way to protect slavery. The politics of the 1850's describes a situation that amazed me in some of its parallels with current politics. Back then, the Democratic party had North-South divisions, with the former being willing to tolerate slavery, at least in states that already had it, while the Southern branch came to insist on the right to expand it and protect it forever. The current Republican party has its own deeply-felt factions, with the anti-federal government, anti-social liberalism, and pro-military adventures in the Middle East being paramount concerns that seem to have weakened it as a national entity even while it holds both houses of Congress and many governorships. The 2016 election will reveal whether that faction can draw enough loyal voters to run things for the next four to eight years, or whether the Republican party must split into two or three different expressions of conservative ideals, with one of those groups eventually finding a formula popular enough to regain the White House in the future. If you are a Civil War "buff" find a copy of this volume. It will help enormously in understanding the run-up to the war, and the opposing "principles" which motivated each side. It was not written with a particular Northern bias, although it laments that Southern leaders could not recognize that slavery was doomed to extinction in the first few decades after the war anyway, as technology and changing economic conditions had foreshadowed as much as ten years before the conflict. To the Southerners, winning the right to expand slavery was key to prolonging its profits by eventual colonization of nations and islands south of the USA. I came away from this book keeping my respect for Lincoln, increasing my respect for Jeff Davis and Stephen A. Douglas, and wondering if the modern GOP's stands against abortion, gay marriage, Obamacare, immigration, federal government powers, Islam, and the avoidance of war with Iran will doom that party in the near future, or save it. Their 2016 platform could be their version of pro-secession, pro-slavery disaster, or it could re-ignite a social conservative movement that mobilizes millions. Anyway, here is a book about the USA 155 years ago that has some relevance to major political choices facing us today.
889884
Loved how both sides of the civil war are presented. I have lived 25 years in the deep south and 26 years in the midwest. Both places taught the history of the civil  war totally different. Nice to see positive and negative presented equally.
2369863
As one book rather than several volumes, it is a great read, giving insight into the American Civil War. Based on fact makes it believable. A series of books to take to that I could not put down through literally hours of reading. interesting way of writing - each volume relates to the opposite side - North and South - until the last where it switches back and forth. with a series of this magnitude there has to be some repletion of plot and there is but not enough to kill the interest of the reader.
4555269
The author's focus is Tennesseans and Tennessee during the Civil War. The large majority of his work presents the motivations, sentiments and reactions of Middle and West Tennessee people to the war. Though some effort was made to include them, the pro-Union element of East Tennessee is too much under-represented. The extensive utilization of letters and dairy entries of soldiers, officers and civilians expressing the at the time reactions of Tennesseans to the war's events and progress shows a very "personal" aspect of the war and provides a "feel" for the times
as experienced by those who lived through it.
3743168
This is an interesting treatment of Civil War battlefields, providing background, tour information, and the author's perspectives.  The chapters on each battle are the right length, and the graphics are very helpful.  A very worthwhile purchase.