Rating: 
Summary: Another Sears Classic
Review: After finishing Sear's account of the battle of Gettysburg, I can assure you that you will certainly not be dissapointed by the author's latest addition to his brilliant collection of Civil War writings. To all those who know Sears, you will expect and receive the same insight on the battle as well as the same "story-telling" ability that few possess.
Sears seems very specific in his appraisals and critisims of Generals in their performence during the battle. On the Confederate side, Sears directs much blame towards A.P Hill and his reluctance to become actively involved in his III Corp's actions and coordinations in all three days of battle (men like Ewell,Stuart, Heth, Iverson and others get their fair share while Lee gets his usual critisim). Sears attempts to vindicate Longsreet for the majority of his actions saying that "at Gettysburg, Longstreet was the only one of Lee's corps commanders who lived up to his expectations."
On the Union side, Sears directs fierce critisisms towards Howard and his ineptitude as commander on the first day as well as instilling no confidence in his 11th corps in the next two. And while other accounts sometimes gives the 11th Corps alittle credit during their fight (or sacrifice on July 1st), Sears doesn't have much (Slocum is also critisized as Sears argues that his subordinate officers of the 12th corps rose to the challenge far more than he did.) For his praise, Sears isn't much different than other writings except for the fact that he does praise Doubleday's performance on the 1st day slightly more than other books have, calling it Doubleday's "best day of the war" (and also credits Vincent's entire brigade and the 140th NY, not just the 20th Maine for saving Little Round Top, to continue the general trend of defeating the stigma of "The Killer Angels").
All in all, this was a great book but I did have a few problems with it. One being that I don't care if you've read 1 book or 20 books on Gettysburg, since every account is different, i am always a large advocate of alot of maps and specific ones. Sears points out the general engagements in his maps but nothing more. And 2nd, I still thought that Noah Andre Troudeau's Book last year on Gettysburg was just alittle bit more interesting because he used more individual stories than Sears did. Sears certainly championed the battle, the intentions and thoughts of the commanders, and some interesting sub-plots, but fails to mention a couple interesting stories (like that of Henry Burgwyn, the boy-colonel of the 26th NC and Sgt. Amos Humiston of the 154st NY, the fallen Union soldier at Gettysburg who was famously later found with a picture of his children in his hand that he placed there as he died) and facts that i think make the battle so much more powerful. All in all I give it 5 stars and I hope everyone interested in the Battle of Gettysburg (or who want to begin their interest in it) will see this book as another great addition to your bookshelf.
Rating:
Summary: Another great look at Gettysburg!
Review: Being a fan of Stephen Sears I was anxious to get my hands on this book as I have read many others of his. Sears style is clear, concise and interesting. Covering the great battle, Sears tackles a lot of ground from Lee's desires to take the war north of Virginia, Stuart's Cavalry operations, Union leadership, Confederate and Union positions, early marches and finally the battle itself. Sears always brings his words to life and this book is a great example of that. I liked reading about Lee's intentions as to why to press into Pennsylvania, Union leadership and Longstreet's approach to handling Lee's orders. These were just a few of the many great chapters inside this informative and entertaining book about the Battle of Gettysburg. 5 STARS!!!
Rating:
Summary: Another great look at Gettysburg!
Review: Being a fan of Stephen Sears I was anxious to get my hands on this book as I have read many others of his. Sears style is clear, concise and interesting. Covering the great battle, Sears tackles a lot of ground from Lee's desires to take the war north of Virginia, Stuart's Cavalry operations, Union leadership, Confederate and Union positions, early marches and finally the battle itself. Sears always brings his words to life and this book is a great example of that. I liked reading about Lee's intentions as to why to press into Pennsylvania, Union leadership and Longstreet's approach to handling Lee's orders. These were just a few of the many great chapters inside this informative and entertaining book about the Battle of Gettysburg. 5 STARS!!!
Rating:
Summary: Insightful and Detailed
Review: Gettysburg is aimed toward readers familiar with the Civil War who want detailed information not available in general histories. Prospective readers should not expect much information about the personalities on the field, political environment, and events external to the Gettysburg campaign. Gettysburg opens with an excellent discussion of the options available in Mid-May 1863 and the reasons why the Army of Northern Virginia invaded Pennsylvania instead of aiding the deteriorating situation in the West. Next, the narrative and excellent maps of the armies movements leading to the battle comprise the best explanation of why and how the battle came about that I have encountered. The chapters to this point of the book by themselves are well worth Gettysburg's price. Another section of special note is the preparations for Pickett's Charge which cast the Army of Northern Virginia as short-sighted and near bumbling. Robert E. Lee does not fare well throughout this book. Besides Lee, Sears is also hard on Ewell, A.P. Hill, Stuart, and numerous divisional and brigade commanders causing my opinion of Southern leadership to fall a notch. Since the South lost a battle it should not have fought, such a critical eye is justified. The performance of the Army of the Potomac's command is described as a mixed bag too. However, besides the usual heroes such as Buford, Hancock, and Gibbon, Meade is clearly described as having out-generaled Lee rather than being a figurehead along for the ride as some other authors have described. In other cases, Sears puts some contributions in perspective. For example, while clearly identifying Chamberlain and the 20th Maine as heroes, he emphatically states they did not single-handedly win the battle of Little Round Top. An enormous amount of detail is packed into the book, sometimes more than I care to know or can absorb in one sitting. However, sometime in the future if I want to refresh my knowledge of the battle, I am glad to know that this book will be on my bookshelf. Sear's Gettysburg is one of those books that I will periodically refer to and reread for the rest of my life
Rating:
Summary: Well written
Review: I have been a Civil War "buff" since I was in middle school, but never really got into studying Gettysburg. I've read a couple books on the subject, but never found it all that compelling. Sears' book is different. While I am still not a person that will read every little detail about Gettysburg, this book really opened my eyes to the importance of the individual soldier at the battle, the importance of one move of a brigade by a general. Sears writes in a way that makes you feel as if you are right there. Unlike some other history works, it is an entertaining, and yet still informative, read.
Something else I enjoyed about this book was Sears was not afraid to give his opinion. Now, this is true of most historians, but Sears was actually willing to criticize anyone and everyone, not just popular targets like Dan Sickles. Sears pointed out mistakes by R.E. Lee, James Longstreet, O.O. Howard, A.P. Hill, and others. Sears also did a good job of giving credit where credit was due, but it did not come off as idol worship. Often times, historians go out of their way to sing the praises of certain generals, especially at Gettysburg, but Sears does not do this. He writes up the battle as it occurred and points out the good and the bad, but never dwells on it or lets it detract from the overall picture.
In closing, this book is certainly a good introduction to the battle. It is highly detailed, but is still a good read and moves along. I am a fairly slow reader, but even I got through this pretty quickly because it really is a page turner. It also features some helpful maps which I often relied upon.
Rating: 
Summary: Excellent Starting Place
Review: I'm not exactly sure why every book on Gettysburg "has" to plow new ground in order to be accepted. Perhaps its because the grognards feel they have to read everything written about the battle and are disappointed if they don't learn something new. Not everyone wants, or needs, to delve into new research. New research, after all, can be flawed. Unless you follow Civil War scholarship through the peer review process, you may take as gospel something that doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Sears' _Gettysburg_ doesn't have much in it that's new, but that's not necessarily a bad thing! Those of us who have studied the Civil War for some time tend to forget that every few years we _need_ an easy to read, single volume history of important battles that utilizes current research. _Gettysburg_ by Stephen Sears is such a book. The first book I read about Gettysburg was _They Met at Gettysburg_ by Gen. Stackpole. It was a bit out of date even when I read it, and it was terribly slanted against certain historical figures, but at the same time it was engaging and very easy to read. That book started me on a 15 year discovery of the American Civil War. Reading _Gettysburg_, I was reminded of how I felt when I read Stackpole's book. I really wish that this book had been my first introduction to the battle. It may not be a must read for every Civil War enthusiast, and it is certainly _not_ as detailed as Pfanz or Hess' books (nor is it meant to be) but it's definitely an important contribution to the field. Someone coming at Gettysburg for the first time could do _much_ worse than this volume. The book begins where _Chancellorsville_ leaves off, with Sears showing the opening moves of Lee and Hooker. Sears' view of Hooker is rather more positive than that of most writers, an off shoot of his argument in _Chancellorsville_ that Hooker has long been the victim of character assassination. (I see that at least one reviewer finds Sears' arguments in _Chancellorsville_ about Hooker hard to take. In a recent article in Military History Quarterly, Noah Andre Trudeau acknowledges the validity of Sears arguments. Apparently the peer review process is slowly coming around to the idea that the view of Hooker coming unglued at Chancellorsville needs to be reassessed.) In just over 500 pages (not including the index, notes, or orders of battle) Sears discusses the campaign leading up to the battle, the battle itself, and a little about the battle's aftermath (which I felt could have been done in more detail). His writing style is perhaps the books best attribute. You won't get bogged down in the minutae of the battle, or fall asleep due to lifeless prose. Even having known most of what Sears had to say, I found the book engaging. The maps by Greg Skoch are plentiful and clean. I was surprised, and pleased, to see a good overview map of the battle of Winchester, June 13 - 15, 1863. I've read other accounts of Gettysburg that mention this engagement, but usually they don't bother including a map. This was a pleasant surprise. The illustrations and photographs are all from the period. The included sketches were all done by someone present at the battle. This is a very nice touch. For anyone starting to look at the Civil War (and for many that begins with Gettysburg), I have no hesitation in pointing them to _Gettysburg_ by Stephen Sears. If they get into it in a serious manner, then I'll point them to Pfanz and Hess, but if they go no further than Sears they are still well served.
Rating:
Summary: A respectful look at those who fought.
Review: If this is the first or only book you read on Gettysburg, then a wise choice you have made. Within this book are historical background that led to the North's great victory, the military tactics of each side, the faults and achievements of generals and enlisted men, and finally the human faces of those who fought and suffered. Sears' documents the plundering by Lee's army against the Northern inhabitants. The southern officers extorting U.S. backed funds from town leaders upon threat of town destruction, while only occasionally leaving confederate bills that were already nearly worthless in their own states. This information is contrary to many simplified versions of supposed southern chivalry. Sears makes clear why credit is due to General Meade for out-generaling Lee. Sears too raises questions about Lee's lack of foresight in planning for the battle. Gettysburg is where some of Lee's character traits (e.g., his preference for hands off leadership, and vagueness in giving orders) eventually doomed his campaign. It is also disappointing to see Lee's inability to admit failure and his trying to spin success from the defeat. I am reminded of the true story of when then President Eisenhower gave a tour of the battlefield to former British Field Marshall Montgomery. The latter surveyed the sight of Pickett's charge with incredulity as to how a charge command could have ever been issued. "What would you have done to me if I had given such an order?" asked Montgomery to his former commander. Eisenhower quickly replied, "I would have fired you!" Politically, Eisenhower regretted this statement because of his southern constituency, but he spoke the truth. Any one of us who have walked the battlefield could see at once the folly of Lee's plan of attack, and Meade's wisdom to remain prepared. Finally, Sears' book is most noteworthy for his reminder throughout the text that Gettysburg is ultimately a story of humans, their faults, their bravery, their commonness to those who now live. These men were sons, fathers, husbands, and not just statistics. This is what I believe to be the most important story of Gettysburg and the Civil War. I'll leave it to others to play imaginary war games of the battle on their computers, or act as weekend mock soldiers.
Also recommended, by Sears, McClellan; William Davis, "Look Away! A History of the Confederate States of American;" and Roy Blount, Jr.'s, Robert E. Lee.
Rating:
Summary: A respectful look at those who fought.
Review: If this is the first or only book you read on Gettysburg, then a wise choice you have made. Within this book are historical background that led to the North's great victory, the military tactics of each side, the faults and achievements of generals and enlisted men, and finally the human faces of those who fought and suffered. Sears' documents the plundering by Lee's army against the Northern inhabitants. The southern officers extorting U.S. backed funds from town leaders upon threat of town destruction, while only occasionally leaving confederate bills that were already nearly worthless in their own states. This information is contrary to many simplified versions of supposed southern chivalry. Sears makes clear why credit is due to General Meade for out-generaling Lee. Sears too raises questions about Lee's lack of foresight in planning for the battle. Gettysburg is where some of Lee's character traits (e.g., his preference for hands off leadership, and vagueness in giving orders) eventually doomed his campaign. It is also disappointing to see Lee's inability to admit failure and his trying to spin success from the defeat. I am reminded of the true story of when then President Eisenhower gave a tour of the battlefield to former British Field Marshall Montgomery. The latter surveyed the sight of Pickett's charge with incredulity as to how a charge command could have ever been issued. "What would you have done to me if I had given such an order?" asked Montgomery to his former commander. Eisenhower quickly replied, "I would have fired you!" Politically, Eisenhower regretted this statement because of his southern constituency, but he spoke the truth. Any one of us who have walked the battlefield could see at once the folly of Lee's plan of attack, and Meade's wisdom to remain prepared. Finally, Sears' book is most noteworthy for his reminder throughout the text that Gettysburg is ultimately a story of humans, their faults, their bravery, their commonness to those who now live. These men were sons, fathers, husbands, and not just statistics. This is what I believe to be the most important story of Gettysburg and the Civil War. I'll leave it to others to play imaginary war games of the battle on their computers, or act as weekend mock soldiers.
Also recommended, by Sears, McClellan; William Davis, "Look Away! A History of the Confederate States of American;" and Roy Blount, Jr.'s, Robert E. Lee.
Rating:
Summary: As good as you'd expect
Review: If you've read Sears other books, you might expect this one to be excellent, and it is. See Friedman's review for details.
Rating: 
Summary: So What ????
Review: Not badly written, but given the vast body of works on Gettysburg it would seem that a general history should offer something new: new insight, opinions, whatever. This volume offers nothing new at all. It adds nothing to Gettysburg scholarship, and in many ways merely repeats hackneyed old themes and prejudices. One cannot but wonder if this title was added to the Sears catalog simply to sell more books. Certainly anything with "Gettysburg" in the title will sell, even if it is rubbish. I would not quite ascribe that word to Sears' book, in that it is a decently-constructed narrative, but it is not a serious historical analysis at all. It is, in the end, just another mediocre (at best) general work on the battle, and I doubt whether that is really needed on anyone's shelf.
On a positive note, my copy was free. If you can obtain it for that price, it is worth the money.
|
