Rating: 
Summary: An Excellent Civil War Novel
Review: "Promise of Glory" is a highly illustrative novel in many aspects. Moreau is particularily adept at character description and development and battle scene descriptions. It's almost as though he has battle experience himself. His accuracy and thoroughness are to be admired. Moreau's approach to describing the battle - the novel switches gears from one side to another and from one general to another - is particularily effective and keeps the reader turning the pages. This isn't exactly a minute-by-minute, blow-by-blow description of the battle; it isn't meant to be. Rather it examines the vaious generals' thoughts and decisions - or lack thereof - all the while giving the reader what he needs to know about how and why the battle took place. For that alone it is worth the read. Moreau's dialogue - some fictional, some historically documented - is great and adds depth to the characters and battles. A note to the tools who deride Moreau for his "similiarity" to Shaara: Instead of wasting your time writing hundreds of book reviews, of which at most *tens* of people will read, try and write a novel yourself and come up with a completely unique and new genre of writing style. Comparisions of Moreau's book to other Civil War writings are to be expected. But to more or less accuse Moreau of copying Shaara's writing style and characters shows you for what you really are: Trekkies who spend your time trashing others' work because you yourselves are more than likely failed authors.
Rating:
Summary: An Excellent Civil War Novel
Review: "Promise of Glory" is a highly illustrative novel in many aspects. Moreau is particularily adept at character description and development and battle scene descriptions. It's almost as though he has battle experience himself. His accuracy and thoroughness are to be admired. Moreau's approach to describing the battle - the novel switches gears from one side to another and from one general to another - is particularily effective and keeps the reader turning the pages. This isn't exactly a minute-by-minute, blow-by-blow description of the battle; it isn't meant to be. Rather it examines the vaious generals' thoughts and decisions - or lack thereof - all the while giving the reader what he needs to know about how and why the battle took place. For that alone it is worth the read. Moreau's dialogue - some fictional, some historically documented - is great and adds depth to the characters and battles. A note to the tools who deride Moreau for his "similiarity" to Shaara: Instead of wasting your time writing hundreds of book reviews, of which at most *tens* of people will read, try and write a novel yourself and come up with a completely unique and new genre of writing style. Comparisions of Moreau's book to other Civil War writings are to be expected. But to more or less accuse Moreau of copying Shaara's writing style and characters shows you for what you really are: Trekkies who spend your time trashing others' work because you yourselves are more than likely failed authors.
Rating:
Summary: An Excellent Civil War Novel
Review: "Promise of Glory" is a highly illustrative novel in many aspects. Moreau is particularily adept at character description and development and battle scene descriptions. It's almost as though he has battle experience himself. His accuracy and thoroughness are to be admired. Moreau's approach to describing the battle - the novel switches gears from one side to another and from one general to another - is particularily effective and keeps the reader turning the pages. This isn't exactly a minute-by-minute, blow-by-blow description of the battle; it isn't meant to be. Rather it examines the vaious generals' thoughts and decisions - or lack thereof - all the while giving the reader what he needs to know about how and why the battle took place. For that alone it is worth the read. Moreau's dialogue - some fictional, some historically documented - is great and adds depth to the characters and battles. A note to the tools who deride Moreau for his "similiarity" to Shaara: Instead of wasting your time writing hundreds of book reviews, of which at most *tens* of people will read, try and write a novel yourself and come up with a completely unique and new genre of writing style. Comparisions of Moreau's book to other Civil War writings are to be expected. But to more or less accuse Moreau of copying Shaara's writing style and characters shows you for what you really are: Trekkies who spend your time trashing others' work because you yourselves are more than likely failed authors.
Rating: 
Summary: A tactical look at what generals were thinking at Antietam
Review: "Promise of Glory" tells the story of the Battle of Antietam (a.k.a. Sharpsburg) from the perspective of virtually every general on both sides of this pivotal Civil War battle. The exception would be the chapter where two noncommissioned officers find Lee's Special Order No. 191 wrapped around a bunch of cigars. The comparisons of "Promise of Glory" to the Civil War novels by the Shaaras is inevitable, and Moreau certainly fosters such comparisons when McClellan and A. P. Hill reminisce about how they courted the same girl and palled around with Burnside back at the point (a la the Armistead/Hancock/Reynolds friendship in "The Killer Angels"). The strength of Moreau's book is not when his characters wax philosophical about the notion of "glory," but when they make tactical decisions on the battlefield. In this regard Jackson and Hooker stand out as the most compelling characters. Hooker's reputation is enhanced the most by the narrative since his character is allowed to focus the most on the "missed opportunities" motif that best describes any thoughtful consideration of the Federal efforts at Antietam. The characterization that least rings true is that of McClellan, who seems to be a bit too happy at times for someone who is so worried about making a wrong military (or political) move. Like the actual battle of Antietam, "Promise of Glory" just sort of ends, with Lee ready for the renewed assaults from McClellan which will never come. The move of the Army of Northern Virginia back across the Potomac is covered in an epilogue, which, like the prologue, is a terse report from Lee. When you finish reading this novel you certainly have to wonder about how the Confederate successes at Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville made Lee forget how close his army came to disaster at Antietam. Moreau's novel is sufficiently different from the Shaara novels to suit my taste, and is certainly vastly superior to Reasoner's recent Civil War soap opera focus (all too briefly) on the same battle.
Rating:
Summary: A tactical look at what generals were thinking at Antietam
Review: "Promise of Glory" tells the story of the Battle of Antietam (a.k.a. Sharpsburg) from the perspective of virtually every general on both sides of this pivotal Civil War battle. The exception would be the chapter where two noncommissioned officers find Lee's Special Order No. 191 wrapped around a bunch of cigars. The comparisons of "Promise of Glory" to the Civil War novels by the Shaaras is inevitable, and Moreau certainly fosters such comparisons when McClellan and A. P. Hill reminisce about how they courted the same girl and palled around with Burnside back at the point (a la the Armistead/Hancock/Reynolds friendship in "The Killer Angels"). The strength of Moreau's book is not when his characters wax philosophical about the notion of "glory," but when they make tactical decisions on the battlefield. In this regard Jackson and Hooker stand out as the most compelling characters. Hooker's reputation is enhanced the most by the narrative since his character is allowed to focus the most on the "missed opportunities" motif that best describes any thoughtful consideration of the Federal efforts at Antietam. The characterization that least rings true is that of McClellan, who seems to be a bit too happy at times for someone who is so worried about making a wrong military (or political) move. Like the actual battle of Antietam, "Promise of Glory" just sort of ends, with Lee ready for the renewed assaults from McClellan which will never come. The move of the Army of Northern Virginia back across the Potomac is covered in an epilogue, which, like the prologue, is a terse report from Lee. When you finish reading this novel you certainly have to wonder about how the Confederate successes at Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville made Lee forget how close his army came to disaster at Antietam. Moreau's novel is sufficiently different from the Shaara novels to suit my taste, and is certainly vastly superior to Reasoner's recent Civil War soap opera focus (all too briefly) on the same battle.
Rating:
Summary: Bloodiest Day Revisited
Review: If you are looking for a historical account of the Battle of Antietam this is not the book to read. If you are looking for a minute by minute, unit by unit account of this book, you are looking at the wrong book. This is a great novel on the men that fought the battle and the horrors of the battle. You see the battle through the eyes of many prominent civil war officers such as Lee, Longstreet, Jackson, Hood, McClellan Porter, Hooker, Burnsides and both the Hills. Moreau gives great descriptions of the battles and the men that fought in them. The nice thing is that this book isn't bias toward one side or the other. It's not another book written with the Lost Cause in mind, it shows the battle from both sides. There are similarities to the Killer Angels, Gods and Generals and The Last Full Measure, which is fine because those are all great books too. This book can squeeze into the trilogy as a good account of the battle of Antietam. I recommend this book to civil war buffs and anyone who is looking for a good book to read.
Rating:
Summary: Bloodiest Day Revisited
Review: If you are looking for a historical account of the Battle of Antietam this is not the book to read. If you are looking for a minute by minute, unit by unit account of this book, you are looking at the wrong book. This is a great novel on the men that fought the battle and the horrors of the battle. You see the battle through the eyes of many prominent civil war officers such as Lee, Longstreet, Jackson, Hood, McClellan Porter, Hooker, Burnsides and both the Hills. Moreau gives great descriptions of the battles and the men that fought in them. The nice thing is that this book isn't bias toward one side or the other. It's not another book written with the Lost Cause in mind, it shows the battle from both sides. There are similarities to the Killer Angels, Gods and Generals and The Last Full Measure, which is fine because those are all great books too. This book can squeeze into the trilogy as a good account of the battle of Antietam. I recommend this book to civil war buffs and anyone who is looking for a good book to read.
Rating: 
Summary: Interesting, but not entirely successful, Shaara pastiche
Review: Moreau apparently set out to write the battle of Antietam exactly as Michael Shaara wrote the battle of Gettysburg. His characterization of generals is identical (the down to earth Longstreet, the fey, religious Lee) and his writing style and general's-eye viewpoint are, I think deliberately, similar. But Moreau is not as good a writer as Shaara was. Some of his characters are wooden -- his characterization of Jackson is particularly flat. He does pretty well with action scenes and battle narratives, but he overuses certain phrases: everyone always "bawls" orders, everyone has "great, dark" eyes. I found his reconstruction of the battle to not much resemble nonfiction accounts I have read by Sears, Wert, Catton, etc.: Moreau seems to have simplified the action considerably for the sake of his story. What happened to the Stonewall Brigade, and what happened to the sunken road? This is certainly a readable book, but overall it's not a complete success.
Rating:
Summary: A Civil War masterpiece
Review: Moreau's command of the language is amazing. Few authors can so ably portray battle in such vivid detail. His depth of description offers the reader a front row seat to the scene. As an avid reader of historical fiction, I highly recommend this to fans of that genre. With all due respects to other authors of similar novels, I think it fair to say that this work is equitable in all respects. It would be quite unreasonable to claim one work more accurate than another since neither author actually was present at the time of the event. Rather different perspectives of one historical moment offers a variety of viewpoints, thus creating a more accurate composite of what took place in that setting. Enjoy!
Rating:
Summary: A Civil War masterpiece
Review: Moreau's command of the language is amazing. Few authors can so ably portray battle in such vivid detail. His depth of description offers the reader a front row seat to the scene. As an avid reader of historical fiction, I highly recommend this to fans of that genre. With all due respects to other authors of similar novels, I think it fair to say that this work is equitable in all respects. It would be quite unreasonable to claim one work more accurate than another since neither author actually was present at the time of the event. Rather different perspectives of one historical moment offers a variety of viewpoints, thus creating a more accurate composite of what took place in that setting. Enjoy!
| 
