Customer Reviews

Lincoln's Generals (Gettysburg Civil War Institute Books)

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The editor, Gabor Boritt, notes what this book is about in his introductory remarks (Page xv): "This book takes a hard look at the interaction of five leading generals with their Civil War commander-in-chief." The five? George McClellan, Joseph Hooker, George Meade, William Sherman, and Ulysses Grant.

The first chapter looks at the relationship between George McClellan and Lincoln, and is written by Stephen Sears. The chapter notes the rather strange relationship, as Lincoln needed to get up to speed in his role as commander-in-chief. He had a strange relationship with McClellan, whose psychological quirks did not help him. McClellan did not perform well as a field general and was, in the end, fired.

Joseph Hooker? He was an intriguer and a good division and even corps commander. As an army commander? He did not succeed at Chancellorsville. The chapter by Mark Neely described the pressure from Lincoln for aggressive action and the problems facing Hooker in being aggressive. The third chapter explores the relationship between Lincoln and Meade, and is written by the editor himself. Lincoln's desire for an aggressive attack on Robert E. Lee's retreating forces created a tension between Lincoln and Meade. Boritt believes that, in fact, Lincoln was right, but that Meade was a cautious soldier. There follow chapters on Lincoln's relationship with Sherman and Grant.

This is an interesting look at Lincoln's relationship with some of his commanding generals. People who have read deeply on the Civil War may not find much that is new here. People who want to get a sense of the players and their interactions would probably find this book helpful. Like all edited volumes, there is some unevenness. In the end, though, a useful volume.

McClellan, Hooker, Meade, Sherman and Grant are some of the best-known Civil War generals. All had to work with Lincoln, most of them had a hard time doing so. Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief is one of the most durable stories of the Civil War. This book is a look at Lincoln's relationship with five of the most important generals.
Lincoln and McClellan by Stephen W. Sears, is an excellent statement of his position. Sears judged Mac and found him wanting. This 50-page essay details his reasons. While there is nothing new in this essay, it is an excellent concise argument for his position. For those following the ideas of Harsh, Rafuse or Beatie this is a valuable refresher.
Wilderness and the Cult of Manliness: Hooker, Lincoln and Defeat by Mark E. Neely, Jr. is a unique look at Fighting Joe. This is as much a look at the expectations of the era as a look at their relationship. I found this to be the best essay and the most thought provoking.
`Unfinished Work': Lincoln, Meade, and Gettysburg by Gabor S. Boritt is badly dated. When written in 1994, this was the standard historical view of Meade at Gettysburg. In the last five to ten years, historians are reevaluating this view and Lincoln's expectations. The author is unduly harsh in his appraisal of Meade's conduct from Gettysburg to the end of the war. It is a valuable look at how history can grow and change.
Lincoln and Sherman by Michael Fellman is a unique essay centering on the question of race. Sherman held a very standard view of the capabilities of Afro-Americans and refused to change. Lincoln went through a learning process as he moved toward emancipation and accepting Black soldiers. This is a look at that clash of ideas and of wills between two men that needed the other, when neither could gain the upper hand.
Grant, Lincoln, and Unconditional Surrender by John Y. Simon is a very different look at the relationship. The author's idea is that Lincoln both feared Grant politically and closely watched him militarily. This is less a relaxed working relationship built on trust as wary Lincoln keeping close tabs on Grant. While not entirely satisfactory in presentation, this raises some interesting questions.
This is well worth reading. While in its' teens, good history never grows old. There are new ideas, discredited ideas and some very good ideas. All of them are worth thinking about and fun reading.

Gabor S. Boritt is the Director of the Civil War Institute at Gettysburg College and this collection of five essays is a great addition to any well-read student of the Civil War.

The essays are:

-"Lincoln and McClellan" by Stephen W. Sears

-"Wilderness and the Cult of Manliness: Hooker, Lincoln and Defeat" by Mark E. Neely, Jr.

-"'Unfinished Work': Lincoln, Meade, and Gettysburg'" by Gabor S. Boritt

-"Lincoln and Sherman" by Michael Fellman

-"Grant, Lincoln, and Unconditional Surrender" by John Y. Simon

It also includes extensive endnotes and a suggestion for further reading written by each of the authors with commentary on the sources they used.

This is not a book for the beginning Civil War learner. The authors assume the reader is well-versed in the personalities involved. The essays are well-written and I learned some new things (I have nearly 100 books on the Civil War on my shelf), such as that Grant considered bringing McClellan back to lead an army in 1864.

Ironically, the worst of the bunch is written by Pulitzer Prize winner Mark E. Neely, Jr. It felt like it was edited from a much larger work. That being said, the overall quality is very high.

Highly recommended.

I found this book to be full of new information, that gives a better understanding of the Civil War. The true relationship between President Lincoln and his Generals needed to be told.

Not a great deal of new insight here. I did learn a bit more than I knew, however, about Meade's failure to pursue at Gettysburg. Mr. Boritt is the editor and author of one essay; other essays are by four historians: Stephen W. Sears, Mark E. Neely, Jr., Michael Fellman, and John Y. Simon. (Alan J. Jacobs