Customer Reviews

Military Memoirs of a Confederate; A Critical Narrative

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

This book is the work of one of Lee's Lieutenants, General Edward Porter Alexander. Alexander was Longstreet's artillery commander for most of the Civil War. As such, he saw action in the Eastern Theater from 1st Manassas, through to the surrender at Appomattox Courthouse. After the war, he was encouraged by General Longstreet to write a history of his Corps. Unfortunately after completing most of the primary research, very few of the officers he contacted were willing to give him the first person authoritative accounts he wanted. What he instead was to write a memoir that almost 100 years later is still the model of historical writing.
For historians the danger of memoirs is twofold. First, many authors have an axe to grind and will suffer from "selective memory" in retelling their experiences. Also, but less deliberately, we are all the leading stars of our lives (if you aren't you oughta be). Taking center stage, authors can appear to have a larger role in the subject than they should otherwise have. With General Alexander's book though, there is no romanticism of the "Lost Cause", nor hero worship of the Lee/Jackson pantheon. Alexander dispassionately relates the campaigns he saw, with insightful critiques of the leaders of both sides. He doesn't spare himself from criticism either; you don't often see that in a memoir.
Anyone with a serious interest in Civil War campaigns should have this book in their library. However, if you are looking for a Confederate mea culpa, or a social history you should look elsewhere. Highly recommended.

Alexander's memoirs is perhaps the best of any officer from the North and South. His narrative is brutally honest when it comes to the strategies of the Army of Northern Virginia. He is also not shy when it comes to pointing out mistakes made, even when made by Lee, Jackson, and others of the high command. Alexander writes in a very clear, and understandable way. He starts out with his being on the West Coast when the Southern states begin to secede from the Union. When his home state leaves, he reports to Lt. McPherson, later to become an admired officer in the Union army, that he must go with his state.

From here, Alexander gives his first-hand experience in nearly every battle fought in the Virginia vicinity, as well as Chickamauga in the west. You may also be surprised to find out that he writes in detail about the Army of the Potomac as well, giving its officers and strategies both praise and criticism. He always uses their reports, as well as the South's, when it comes to their accounts of the battle, and their casualty lists, giving credence and respect to both sides.

Alexander was one of Lee's most valuable officers, and perhaps his best artillerist. He was a man Lee could not spare. Longstreet and Jackson both appreciated his great knowledge and value. This book will not disappoint you. Many historians have given great praise and due credit to Alexander's scholarly narrative. I highly recommend this book to any Civil War buff.

This book, unlike Alexander's more recently discovered personal memoir, is only for the serious scholar. His account of strategy, tactics and troop movements is almost completely unleavened with anecdotes or personal reactions. I found it to be very dry, very hard to maintain interest in. That isn't to say it's not an important book -- it is, very much so. There are areas where Alexander's knowledge falters and he should not be taken as a sole source of information, but in general, this is a very detailed and worthwhile account by an intelligent participant. But recreational reading? Not on your life. I'd recommend the author's Fighting for the Confederacy instead.

Any serious student of the War for Southern Independence has learned that memoirs are a veritable minefield of self-serving half-truths and outright misrepresentations. Alexander's is the notable exception. Long allied with, and perhaps a bit beholden to, James Longstreet, Alexander tries to if not defend, at least explain his old chief, particularly at Gettysburg. Alexander's fundamental honesty triumphs, though he is at pains to put the best face on Longstreet's actions. The memoir is frank, enormously fact-filled, and about as honest as someone with a personal stake in the matter could be. An absolute must-have for any student of The War.

General Alexander gives almost a blow-by-blow account of each major battle of the War Between the States, complete with Orders of Battle, casualty reports, and numbers of troops engaged. His excellent memory for detail makes for somewhat dry reading at times (if you're not looking for numbers), but remains a classic in War literature. A must-have for any library on the period

I believe this to be the most accurate, and honest, first-hand account of the Army of Northern Virginia. After reading this book, your perception of certain battlefields will never be the same. Not only was Alexander a true soldier, but also a fine scholar.

The most fascinating book I've read so far on the Civil War, with so much detail that I believe it re-writes history -- I doubt many future books will be written without referencing his work. Written in a very balanced style when anayzing the actions of the north and the south and its various commanders, it provides tremendous insight into their personalities, and their brilliance and blunders. The pages devoted to Picketts Charge at Gettysburg will be a revelation to most I believe. And, blended in are pages devoted to his personal life, adding another dimension to the book.

A very good critical narrative. He breaks it down each battle The ANV participated in. He gives a good account what each commander starting with
Brig Gen Johnston and Brig McDowell at Manassas(Bull Run) ending with
Appomattix Courthouse did and how they as commanders could have fought their battle and win. Good insight especially since he was in the command
tent with General Lee and Longstreet. This is what is lacking with most
historians now days. He gives very good details but some readers say the
reading is dry. This is not a daily journal on a privates war. Read the
Title. It should explain itself. The narrative briefly tells what each
brigade did if needed to help develop the battle line. He does not get
into each regimental history unless there is a particular point to make. He does break it down What each army brings to battle and casualties. Very important to my thought. Also there are a few snippets here and there to make things funny. One thing In a way before reading this book I bought the other one his personal journal "Fighting For the Confederacy
The Personal recollections of General Edward Porter Alexander" This is a
more personal side of him. It has more personal thoughts and observations on the war and the people he met during the war. I think I
would have enjoyed The Military Memoirs even more by reading the Personal
recollections first but that is my take. In any event General Alexander
is accurate enought with his information that he can still hold his own
with modern historians today. Even better he didn't let the "lost cause"
mentality interfere with writing the Critical Memoirs.

This is a very good book for those of you who are civil war buffs. Alexander has his own views about many of the generals and makes them well known. Some I do not agree with...for instance his views on Stonewall Jackson. Much of what he writes about is very interesting....for instance day-to-day happenings that others leave out. I would personally not give this book 5 stars but would recommend it for reading cw history.