Rating: 
Summary: Disappointing and very biased
Review: Seeing all the great reviews of this book, I read it and found many things disappointing with it. The prelude to the war is actually very well ordered and readable. Right off the bat though, McPherson shows that he is applying revisionist standards to the whole conflict. The Civil War was in the 1860's, not the 1990's, but McPherson judges the conflict by today's standards. In case after case, McPherson bends over backwards to downplay the actions of the Union cause. Grant and Sherman applied total war in the last year of the conflict, which viewed from afar was necessary, but McPherson applies a different standard to the Confederacy in every way. I agree with the comment here that the Confederates had legitimate grievances and acted accordingly when they were invaded. The issue of slavery is dealt with in a predictable fashion, in a good vs. evil way instead of a more even handed approach. For those who want a great history of the war itself, try Shelby Foote's great trilogy (sorry it is NOT biased towards the south, it is impartial, which is why some are hostile to it) and especially Bruce Catton's Army of the Potomac trilogy, which brings the war to a human level.
Rating: 
Summary: Solid History
Review: Battle Cry of Freedom was a song sung by both side during the American War. Of course, they both used different words. But the music was popular, even if the lyrics were different. It seems that, even in the midst of this war, Americans had much in common. But not enough, to avoid this war.In "Battle Cry of Freedom", the author does an excellent job portraying the views of all sides and tracing the American Civil War back to General Scott's victory over Mexcio 25 years earlier. While slavery was always an issue in America, after the Revolution many felt it would eventually wither on the vine. The constitution prohibited the slave trade after a few years, many northern states outlawed slavery within their borders, and with the coming industrial revolution, slavery was seen as inefficient and costly. With Scott's victory, however, the land available for slavery increased dramatically. When this land increased, the fighting between regions in Congress increased as well. Here is where this book is so different from most books on this topic. "Battle Cry of Freedom" goes into detail about many possible routes history could have taken. The author discusses southern attempts to invade Cuba, a former doctor/lawyer who recruited men to take over Nicaragua and individual invasions of Baja California. The South felt that these expansions would create more land where slaves could be held and would have the added bonus of preventing war within our borders while we fought nations outside of them. Indeed, but for a corrupt offical who wanted a bribe before he would consider selling Cuba, we might have purchased Cuba from Spain 160 years ago. "Battle Cry of Freedom" also discussed many other facts, not found in most Civil War books. I particularly liked the discussion of foreign policy of the Union and the Confederacy. Both "countries" focused their attention on England and France. I never knew how close England or France came to recognizing the Confederacy. Lincoln did. He actually changed battle plans at least once to prevent France from recognizing the Confederacy. The author also does a good job discussing how, as the war progressed, the aims of both sides changed. The south armed freed slaves and trained them as soliders. If this war was about preserving slavery, how could they do that? The North, on the other hand, fought to preserve the Union. Soliders quit, in droves, when Lincoln proposed freeing the slaves in rebelling states. Soldiers were also aloud to quit at the end of their enlistments, which ran for three years. I never knew that soliders could quit in the middle of the war, on the eve of victory. Over and over this book surprised me with little facts which I never knew. This is this book's great strength, and part of its weakeness. In a way, there is almost too much here. If you read any particular chapter I think you will find that it is well written and interesting. Together, however, not all the chapters flowed smoothly. The author will talk about the campaigns on the front in one chapter, and the talk about the peace movement in the next. By necessity, he would jump back and forward in time as he discussed these different issues. This can be confusing. As such, I had a mixed view on this book. As a historical reference, it is superb. As I said, each chapter, on its own, is excellent, "five stars." But, because the organization of the book did detract somewhat from its overall message, I gave it "four stars." Compared to most books out there, "Battle Cry" is very good. I just don't think it is excellent, but it was worth the read and worth buying.
Rating: 
Summary: The first history textbook I read cover to cover!
Review: I am a University student and in the fall of 1999, this book was the main textbook in a Civil War History class that I took. Having grown up about 20 minutes from Appomattox, I thought I knew my fair share of Civil War history. Turns out I never knew how wrong I was. This book takes on the Civil War from a unique perspective -- James McPherson calls a spade a spade, and doesn't seem to lead toward either side of the fight. McPherson carefully details how the war got started, how it was fought, what the Civil War experience meant to the people that lived it, and how the south lost it. If you're willing to take on a book this size (600+ pages and no visuals), I highly recommend it. This book got me started on being really interested in Civil War history, and even in today's time, things outlined in this book are highly relevant. The only things that I think might be missing from this book are accounts of the women who lived through the Civil War. He only briefly skims the surface on this, and the women's involvement in the war (even just through writing letters and making their men feel obligated to stay in the fight) was essential to understanding the psyche and motivations of the soldier at the very least. Overall this book was one of the most interesting books I have ever read. If the Shelby Foote books are overwhelming (or you have already read them) and you want a good solid unbiased history of the Civil War, this book is the best bet. Hope this helps!
Rating:
Summary: Amazing.
Review: It has been years since I read this book, so I will not write a lengthy review. I must say though that this book is the most amazing history of the Civil War that I've ever read. If you are a serious historian of the civil war or merely a dilettante this book is a must read.
Rating:
Summary: Best Political History of the Civil War
Review: James McPherson's "Battle Cry of Freedom" is the best work on the politics of The Civil War available. For example, McPherson spends nearly the first three hundred pages of the book on the events, political and otherwise, leading up to the firing on Fort Sumter. As a result, his book gives the war a proper context that is lacking in many other works. His descriptions of the battles themselves tend to be brief overviews rather than extensive studies. But there are countless other volumes by other authors available for those whose interest primarily lies with the shooting war itself. McPherson would rather focus on why the North ans South decided to fight it out and once they did, how the war evolved slowly from an attempt to put down an insurrection to a holy quest to end slavery. No other period in American History has seen as many political changes of earthquake proportions as The Civil War. This fact often gets lost in the tales of epic battles, almost mythical generals and incredible sacrifice. What McPherson has done is place the great painting of the war in a proper frame to give one the whole picture. As such, it is vital reaading for anyone interested in the War and its effect on American History.
Rating:
Summary: 'Down With the Traitor, Up With the Star!'
Review: When I first came into contact with this volume over ten years ago, I thought the hype of it being 'the best single volume treatment of the Civil War' just a little too much. I thought back to all that I had read by Bruce Catton, and thought, 'no way.' After reading it and keeping it in my library, however, the hype was correct, it is the best one volume history of the War of the Rebellion and a thoroughly enjoyable read. I still am partial to Catton, as he knew the veterans he writes about from his boyhood in Michigan, and Mcpherson does not really capture the heartbreak of the gigantic losses (to put these in perspective, if a similar event happened today, losses would be over 5 million dead, based on population percentages), nor does he capture the agony, chaos, and exhilaration of combat. However, it is still a most valuable volume and his treatment of the political side of the war is nothing short of superb. He proves, for example, with documentary evidence from both sides, that while the war was waged by the north to restore the Union, the root cause of the war itself was slavery, its maintenance, and its resumption as an international trade. While the rank and file southerners did not join the army to fight to maintain slavery, and only ten percent of the southern population owned slaves to begin with, that ten percent controlled ninety percent of the wealth in the south and ran the new Confederacy. Reading the book and checking McPherson's references is interesting and quite enlightening. This volume is a monumental achievement and should be on the shelf of every Civil War enthusiast. It is highly readable and highly recommended.
Rating:
Summary: Still the Best
Review: What more is there to say about BATTLE CRY OF FREEDOM? Written in 1988, it has become THE one volume interpretation of the American Civil War. It is written in an easy, engaging style, it is fast paced, and it includes almost every aspect of the war that could concievably be included in a single volume. I am studying for a Phd in American History, I specialize in the American Civil War and after all these years the first work I turn to when I need a fact checked or a date confirmed is still BATTLE CRY OF FREEDOM. If anyone, like me, is interested in the Civil War, they must read and own a copy of McPherson's finest work.
Rating: 
Summary: A cleverly hidden ideology
Review: I gave this book 3 stars because of the amount of work that was required to write it. It is a work from a biased perspective. The Civil Rights movement in the 1960s made a profound impact on McPherson and in nearly all of his works and lectures on the American Civil War the theme of the abused African American lies just under the surface. He does not understand the mindset of the typical southern soldier, 99.9% of whom cared not one whit for the institution of slavery, but rather fought an invading Union force on the basis of honor and principle. To this day McPherson *still* does not understand the southern people. On November 3, 1999, McPherson appeared on a Pacifica Network radio broadcast. Also on the broadcast was Ed Sebesta, alias "The Crawfish," which the United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC) considers "a notorious hater of all things Confederate who operates a Web page that is especially slanderous of the UDC." On that broadcast, Professor McPherson said: "I think I agree a hundred percent with Ed Sebesta, though, about the motives or the hidden agenda -- not too deeply hidden, I think -- of such groups as the United Daughters of the Confederacy and the Sons of the Confederate Veterans. They are dedicated to celebrating the Confederacy and rather thinly veiled support for white supremacy." It is a shame that McPherson can not see beyond his own deeply held misconceptions of the southern people who fought the Civil War nor the southern people of today. "Battle Cry of Freedom" is revisionist history told through the prism of the Civil Rights struggle of the 1960s. Try a search here at Amazon and on the web in general to get a flavor of McPherson's writing. If you are among the "politically correct" you should enjoy this book.
Rating:
Summary: Unique extensive portrait of the Civil War Era
Review: I sat down to read Battle Cry of Freedom expecting to get a retread of a Bruce Caton novel. I was very wrong and happy of it. Mr. McPherson, to say the least, covers it all. From the socioeconomic issues to the political issues to the leaders and battles themselves. He is nothing less then brilliant in his research and application of it. However, this is not a book for the hardcore reader of minute details of battles. He does give those details of the major engagements, but he just barely touches others. The book always goes back to the home front and how the war affected them. If you think you've read and learned everything about the war and that era, I recomend this book. You will be pleasently suprised.
Rating:
Summary: Still the best
Review: I loved this book in 1988 and having just reread it I find myself impressed all over again with the magnitude of McPherson's achievement. He's taken a daunting, complex subject and done it justice in one (admittedly hefty) volume, without slighting that complexity or loosing the thread of his narrative. Books about the Civil War can easily become either a military buff's recitation of battles and marches, or a dull delving into sociopolitical causes and results that loses sight of the IMPORTANCE of battles. McPherson is careful to avoid these pitfalls. In readable, clear prose the first third of the book gives a fascinationg account of the social, political, and economic climate leading up to the war. He even writes about technology, architecture, transportation. After getting this 'lay of the land' the reader is ready to put the conflict on a solid grounding of context. Without it, any account of the war would risk becoming a meaningless hash of dates, names, and blood. The following account of the war itself keeps a careful eye on political and social events in the two capitols as well as events on the battlefield, and how the two affected each other. Of particular interest is the continuing story of the Confederacy's diplomatic attempts to gain recognition as a nation, perhaps as a prelude to actual military involvement by a European power such as England or France. This was a real possibility during the first part of the war, and naturally the last thing the Union wanted. But this is just one thread among many that he deftly weaves through the narrative. A masterful, engrossing book. Southerners who object to this book are, I think, really reacting to its lack of Gone With the Wind-type moonshine. This is an objective work of history, and that always ruffles some feathers. One of the best history books I've ever read. One wishes McPherson had been contracted to write the next volume in the Oxford History of the United States, for when you get to page 862, you are left wanting more.
|
