HONORABLE MENTION; 2014; ALBERT CASTEL AWARD In 1885; a former president of the United States published one of the most influential books ever written about the Civil War. An entire generation of Americans had eagerly awaited his memoirs and it has remained so popular that it has never gone out of print. Historians then and now have made extensive use of Grant’s recollections; which have shaped how we understand and evaluate not only the Union army’s triumphs and failures; but many of the war’s key participants. The Memoirs of Ulysses Simpson Grant may be a superbly written book; Frank P. Varney persuasively argues in General Grant and the Rewriting of History; but is so riddled with flaws as to be unreliable. Juxtaposing primary source documents (some of them published here for the first time) against Grant’s own pen and other sources; Professor Varney sheds new light on what really happened on some of the Civil War’s most important battlefields. He does so by focusing much of his work on Grant’s treatment of Maj. Gen. William S. Rosecrans; a capable army commander whose reputation Grant (and others working with him) conspired to destroy. Grant’s memoirs contain not only misstatements but outright inventions to manipulate the historical record. But Grant’s injustices go much deeper. He submitted decidedly biased reports; falsified official documents; and even perjured himself before an army court of inquiry. There is also strong evidence that his often-discussed drinking problem affected the outcome of at least one battle. General Grant was an outstanding soldier and; so we have long believed; a good man. History’s wholesale acceptance of his version of events has distorted our assessment of Rosecrans and other officers; and even of the Civil War itself. Grant intentionally tried to control how future generations would remember the Civil War; and in large measure he succeeded. The first of two volumes on this subject; General Grant and the Rewriting of History aptly demonstrates; however; that blindly accepting historical “truths†without vigorous challenge is a perilous path to understanding real history.
#1109512 in Books 2012-11-06 2012-11-06Original language:EnglishPDF # 1 9.00 x .31 x 6.00l; .85 #File Name: 1609498585224 pages
Review
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful. Excellent coverage of a forgotten operationBy James G Horn JrI have lived much of my life in the area and have family connections with Gettysburg. That said; I had only hazy knowledge of the Harrisburg part of the campaign. This book is probably about all that we will get until the 200th anniversary roles around; but fortunately; it is excellent in its coverage of the Union side of the operation. The Confederate side is covered fairly well; but there is apparently a shortage of documentation.I would have liked the maps to printed larger; when you have to squint to read a unit label; it tends to distract from an overall appreciation of the situation covered. Having traveled up and down I-81 numerous times; I have some idea of the terrain and how the campaign fit together; but there is no map coverage south of Shippensburg. It would have been nice to have had an introductory map of the whole area south to Hagerstown with indications of the areas covered by the smaller maps.Besides filling in the coverage of the Civil War; readers should note the shortcomings of the militia system on display. Despite the relatively simple requirements of the period; the PA and NY militias did not shine. Although quality varied; in general units panicked easily; often in the face of inferior numbers. After several encounters; they tended to settle down; but it is clear that the senior officers with experience could not use the militia like regular troops until they had those encounters. Proponents of the modern militia movement would do well to give sober consideration to this experience.3 of 3 people found the following review helpful. An interesting prelude to the battle.By Roland MacholdI enjoyed this book; because I learned something new about the battle and indeed the Civil War itself. I am well read on the battle of Gettysburg and was aware of General Ewell's northernmost probe towards Harrisburg; but I wasn't aware of how close it had come to success before he was recalled to concentrate the Confederate forces for the larger battle ahead. If General Mead's advance towards Gettysburg had been a day or two late; it is likely Harrisburg would have been taken by the Confederates; with profound political effects. It was instructive to me to see how poorly prepared and led the local militias were; though they labored mightily to perfect their defenses. Also; it was interesting to note the impact of poor intelligence and rumors on the course of the confrontations.0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. Very good explanation of part of the Gettysburg CampaignBy Mark DyeWingert; like Scott Mingus; has a knack for burrowing into a relatively small subject; operations on the edge of the battle of Gettysburg; and put them in a tactical and operational context. One should remember that the battle at Gettysburg was in part the result of not capturing; either or both; the bridge at Harrisburg and the one at Wrightsville (Mingus' "Flames Before Gettysburg"). Wingert explains the how and why the Confederates failed by digging into original sources overlooked by others. His maps seem properly scaled to the page; unlike some of the other books in the History Press series which shrink them down to the point of uselessness. Maps and period pictures are often extended with modern photos that are well produced. And; while there are many pictures of bearded generals that actually led the fighting; there are no pointless pictures of Lee and Meade.
