Gettysburg: A Novel of the Civil War

Rating:
Summary: Good effort at timeless "What If"
Review: For the past 141 years, the debate has raged around various "what-if" scenarios for the Battle of Gettysburg. This book confronts the possibilities of what MAY have happened if a few decisions had been decided the other way and is certainly a fascinating framework out of which spring many more potential hypothesis. The personal sagas woven into the battlefield narrative were necessary to make the points and keep it interesting to the non-military historian reader. But some scenes, indeed, seemed contrived and based on well-known and obvious facts. Others were the products of legend that are rarly, if ever, provable by known facts. But overall, the battlefield scenes were compelling, real, and well-rounded.

The book went to great lengths to avoid political commentary that would subject it to being criticized for leaning one way or another, and to me, this was somewhat of a disappointment. Perhaps Gingrich will delve into these issues in the coming volumes as they are compulsory when discussing the battlefield decisions that were made.

Overall, it was an extremely interesting book and well-grounded in reasonable inferences from what we know happened on those hot July days in 1863. I commend Gingrich and Forstchen for bravely - and adeptly - tackling such a large military historical debate. I am waiting for the next release.

Rating:
Summary: One of the best civil war books I have ever read.
Review: Gettysburg by Newt Gingrich and William Forstchen is so addictive it should have a warning label. It sucks you in to its world so completly I was up until 2AM reading and could not believe what time it was when I finally got around to looking. Gettysburg portrays an alternate history where the South wins a major victory. I can't wait for the second book of this 3 part series to come out. Lee marching on Washington with U.S. Grant there to meet him. The geography described in the book is exact. I live about 2 or 3 miles from Union Mills and the pond and mill described in the book are still there. The Baltimore pike from Littlestown to Westminster winds up the steep hill the Confederates were entrenched on. Littlestown is about 1 mile from the MD line. Also just so everyone knows Tawneytown is pronouced corectly in the opening dialogue of the movie Gettysburg, everyone around here knows if you are a local or not by how you say that towns name and they actually get it right in the movie.
Littlestown actually was involved in the real battle of Gettysburg in a small way: On The Morning Of June 26th A Band Of Confederates Entered Littlestown The Advance Of Early's Division, Ewll's Corps, The Army Of Northern Virgina, Which Were Crossing The Maryland Line Into Pennsyvania. On The Morning Of June 29th General Kilpatricks Division Of The Union Calvary Bivouacked For The Night Around Littlestown. Kilpatrick And General George Custer Both Lodged At The Barker House. The Next Morning In Union Mills Maryland, General Jeb Stuart Received Word From His Scouts That A Large Force Of Union Calvary Had Been Spotted In The Vicinity Of Littlestown , A Local Teenager A 16-Year-Old Herbert Shriver Volunteered To Guide The Confederates On A Detour Around Littlestown By Way
Of Hanover. Stuart Did Not Know That Kilpatricks Forces Were Already On The Move To Hanover, General Kilpatrick Was Also Unaware Of Stuarts Detour To Hanover And Both Were Quite Suprised When They Clashed In What Was Known As The Battle Of Hanover....

After Learning That Stuarts Troops Were Defeated At Hanover General Slocum's Corps Of 13,000 Infantry Entered Littlestown That Evening And Was Dispatched To Gettysburg The Next Day. General Sedgewick's Sixth Army Corp Of 15,000 Also Passed Through Littlestown On Thier Way To The Battle Of Gettysburg.

After The Battle, Hundreds Of Wounded Soldiers Were Brought In Ambulances From Gettysburg And Placed On Railroad Cars At Littlestown. General Daniel E. Sickles Who Had Lost A Leg At Little Round Top During The Battle Of Gettysburg Was Among The Wounded Treated In Littlestown. Hanover by the way actually has a street named after JEB Stuart where a battle really did occur that Stuart lost. The authors must have visited the area personally to get everything so accurate. Anyhow buy this book.

Rating:
Summary: Transported me to the past--and I loved every minute of it..
Review: Gettysburg is a fine novel, rich in history, and to me it was sooo believable! In fact, I kept asking myself, why didn't Lee really make those very decisions?

I've read a lot of great, good, and so-so Civil War novels...this one borders on great, and I gave it 5 start for the sheer enjoyment it gave me. Definitely it SCREAMS for a sequel.

Alternate history that follows closely true history with a key change is a treasure to find. Gettysburg is a great example of such a book...I'd love to see more from this winning team of Gingrich/Forstchen! If ONLY they would write a novel based on the moment that General Winfield Scott asked Lee to head the Union Army, and Lee said he'd think about it...when he submitted his resignation, Scott told Lee he was making the biggest mistake of his life. What if Scott had talked him into it and Lee had joined the Union instead of the Confederacy? That's a book I'd love to see. (I'm writing this in case Gingrich and Forstchen ever read the reviews of this book!)

Anyway, you cannot go wrong with this book. It is never boring, highly creative, the characterization is strong, and the subject very intriguing. And I DO imagine we'll see a sequel. Enjoy!

Rating:
Summary: Active history at its finest
Review: Gettysburg: A Novel of the Civil War accomplishes in expert fashion that which it set out to do. It masterfully transforms the passive history of mere names, dates, places, and seemingly foregone conclusions into a vibrant and exciting brand of living history. Having met Newt Gingrich at a book signing in Atlanta for Gettysburg and listened to a brief dissertation on the subject matter, his vision of active history IS indeed plausible and nothing short of engrossing.

Having enjoyed The Killer Angels and Gods and Generals, it was refreshing to be introduced to intriguing military commanders of the Army of the Potomac OTHER than Joshua Chamberlain such as Brigadier General Henry Hunt, Commander of U.S. Artillery, General Hermann Haupt, Commander of U.S. Military Railroads, & who could forget the brazenly impetuous, if not foolishly cavalier "hero" of Gettysburg - General Dan Sickles, Commmander of the III Corps. The authors bring this eclectic bunch of leaders of The Army of the Potomac, along with arguably their best leader in Winfield Scott Hancock and the hopelessly incapable George Meade, to life in a most skillful writing style.

As for the CSA, Gingrich hits the nail on the head when he writes from Robert E. Lee's perspective: "I have four men who are supposed to be my direct instrument of command. One is still trying to find his way after losing a leg, the second is sick, the third is bullheaded and not fully committed to this operation, and the fourth, well the fourth has simply disappeared." It is with this perplexing scenario that we are thrust into Lee's quandary of being, for the first time, not oly in the enemy's land, but also without any truly dynamic leaders under his command. This, invariably, is where the stale world of passive history ends and the vibrantly unpredictable world of active history begins. Enjoy.

"Convince your men that they can win. Convince the enemy they cannot win and the battle is half decided before the first shot is fired."

Rating:
Summary: a dissapointing read
Review: I admit, I am a civil war buff. I understood the language, tactics, terms, etc. within this text. Though my relatives fought for the north, I believe I am not biased in my view of the war. For example, I enjoyed Bernard Corwell's series written from a southern viewpoint.

This book is so blatantly slanted toward the south it is aggravating. The northern leaders are inept, while the southern are deified. Pickett is a timeless hero while Chamberlain is a drone. Sedgewick as a competent commander? The only northern leader with a clue is Sickles, whose mistakes at Gettysburg cost the north huge losses in reality. Funny, he was a politico - perhaps Gingrich wanted to portray a politician favorably for selfish reasons?

I also found the use of the first name disquieting. Longstreet should be referred to by surname, out of respect. Calling him Pete to the reader is too familiar and inappropriate.

I found the last 100 pages or so tough to stomach. Historical fiction is one thing, this goes too far and misses the mark.

Rating:
Summary: What if, not
Review: I am a big fan of alternate history. This process, if done well, makes one think out the actual history then what could have been if... The success of this process rests on the fact that the writer takes an event and reshapes it via a turn of events that did not, but could have happened. When a writer makes characters change their personalities, this loses its credibility. Gingrich and Forstchen made such a change in Robert E. Lee's personality. There was never a chance that REL would have listened to Longstreet's idea of flanking. REL never could conceive of losing a battle with the north, at this point. He could, however, conceive losing the war, due to attrition but not this battle. The tactical changes post-Jackson were never the same for the Army of Northern Va., as they were prior to Chancellorsville. With 100 pages to go, I put this book down. I just could not get past the issue of Lee's personality.

The Killer Angels book by Sharra puts Gettysburg to shame.


Rating:
Summary: Gingrich Delivers
Review: I did not buy this book, a friend who is crazed about anything related to the Civil War subtlety recommend it by putting it in my hand saying really, "you will like it". Unconvinced that I would be interested in a Civil War battle of anything by Newt Gingrich for that matter, I took it home. This book takes hold of you unmercifully, and in my case reluctantly, and does not let go. The character development is remarkable. You will fret over every agonizing decision and cringe at every gory, and I do mean gory, detail. Three cheers for Gingrich and William Forstchen on their alternative history, I'm convinced - they can tell a great story.

Rating:
Summary: Honest...
Review: I don't think this book rewrites history at all. The guy below is mad. The North kicked the crap out of the South? That's going a bit far. Indeed, the North won the war. No one disputes that. But..."kicked the crap out of?" I mean, the fact remains that families in the North had a lot more graves to visit after the war was over. Despite having about 1,500,000 more men enlisted than the South had, the North still managed to have about 16,000 more combat casualties. But when a side has over 2.5 million men going up against 1 million, they SHOULD win the war for crying out loud. The South had arguably better generals though... It shouldn't have even been a fight. How so few men managed to keep in a heated war with an army twice as big is to me, win or lose, rather stunning. That's what makes these stories interesting. Not who won or who lost...

Rating:
Summary: Exciting read, but some distractions
Review: I found this book to be a very engrossing read, hard to put down. Anyone who enjoyed "Killer Angels" will like this book. It is written in the same quick style, building suspense as it moves from location to location. As a military officer who has closely studied the Gettysburg battle and its associated contextual factors, and also walked the ground a few times, I was impressed with the authors' portrayal of the strategic, operational, and tactical aspects of the battle.

However, I thought there were too many distractions in the book to overlook. The maps were ill-placed and too few. The placement of the photos, with no captions, added absolutely nothing to the narrative. Finally, I felt that the authors were overly repetitive in their use of too many cute phrases. Horses never came to a stop--they were always "reined in." There were never 50 men/cannons/casualties--it was always "half a hundred." Some other interesting phrases sounded great when used the first time, but caused disappointment when the exact same unique phrase was used in the very next paragraph.

Overall, despite these drawbacks I recommend this book to anyone with an interest in the battle at Gettysburg, or the entire Civil War for that matter.

Rating:
Summary: A Surprisingly Powerful Epic
Review: I have to admit, I was surprised and pleased when I read Gettysburg by Newt Gingrich and William Forstchen. Their previous effort at alternate history, 1945, did not do very well, primarily in my opinion because that book was slapped together in haste to try to sell books based on Speaker Gingrich's name and fame.

Not so this offering. The premise is simple. On the second day of the battle, Lee does not assault the Little Round Top. Instead, taking Longstreet's advice, he sends a goodly portion of his army round to the far right flank of the Union Army, seizing its supplies and cutting it off from Washington. What follows is a hellish bloodbath which is all the more searing to the Civil War buff as one sees what happens to familiar charecters such as Chamberlain, Hood, Armestead, and others. I cannot recommend this book enough. It is nothing less than a counterfactural Killer Angels.

It is also, irritatingly, the first of a trilogy. Now we'll have to wait for the narrative of the second volume, to be named apparently Grant Comes East.