Amazon.com: Customer reviews: Appomattox: Victory, Defeat, and Freedom at the End of the Civil War

Top positive review

Where the Myth of the South began

Reviewed in the United States on December 18, 2017

This is a very interesting book that really talks about how the myths of the "great South" originated and how the misguided myth of Lee being the magnanimous person and leader to truly surrender. This paints a very different picture, especially with Pres. Johnson's tenure in office, on how he pushed for subjugating blacks and even making it seem that the South won the war. A truly amazing story and one i'd recommend every one to read, especially with the white supremacist movement being still so prominent now. Overall. a fascinating book, well researched and very well written. I really enjoyed the book and hope you do as well.

2 people found this helpful

Top critical review

All critical reviews›

Karen C.

The cheapened version ...

Reviewed in the United States on December 29, 2018

I have read many books and articles about the "War Between the States" and I have read often about General Grant's magnanimous acceptance and the terms that he granted to the Southern soldiers, but I have never read such tripe as expressed in this book. I expect that people will differ on the facts, making up stories is another point. Read it and you can judge! Nick Christhilf

3 people found this helpful

Sort by

Filter by

Filtered by

1 star, Verified purchasesClear filter

1 global rating | 1 global review

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

From the United States

historicus

North Good, South Bad. Move along to another book.

Reviewed in the United States on January 10, 2014

Verified Purchase

In a nut shell, “The North is good, the South is bad.” There is little here in this very biased attempt at scholarship for the “must be published”, on which to waste your time.
The author slips and slides past good construction of her thoughts, as if leaping to her predetermined conclusions. Fast and loose is the style of this book. She refers to “code” …a code in which she knows what the author of a statement “really meant”.pp70,pp242
The author cherry picks testimonies to steer to her conclusions. Historians know that anybody can be found saying anything.
Her first transgression is attempting to fool the reader that the Constitution was struck and ratified to provide a “perpetual” union. Nowhere is that word found in the documentation involved. Additionally she seems to not have read the ratification of the Constitution submitted by the State to which her University is so dear. Virginia, as other states held, maintained the right to withdraw from the Union if they felt harmed. Their late secession invoked that retained right.
Also, the author seems devoted to the importance of USCT at the final battle against the UNV and the final numbers of Lee’s Army. There was a small brigade of USCT at the final battle. Whether they were instrumental to Lee’s defeat or fired the final shot should be determined by other than testimony from those USCTs. Having read much on the battle, they are a mere footnote to the military student, a main event to a PC rendition.
Pp70 It is record from multiple sources that Lee and his generals could only put in line just under 8000 infantry and roughly 2000 cavalry. The author seems bent on connecting the request for 25K rations as indicative of more able bodied and armed men. It is clear that for several days after April 9 and before the surrender and pardoning, many stragglers and support personnel from Lee’s self described “dissolved” army, presented themselves for surrender. She suggests it is somehow undue glorification to suggest a 5:1 troop advantage against the ANV. The facts suggest just that.
The author additionally insists the USCTs shared their rations with CSA soldiers who would, days before shoot or enslave them. From Armistead Long’s book, partially noted by the author, those rations were the very same CSA rations captured by Union troops a few days earlier. Fast and loose.
Pp101 “Black magnanimity at Appomattox was the exercise of moral authority”
Pp228 Refers to the words of a poet as “Lee’s testimony”
Grant’s wife owned slaves and brought them to camp as late as 1863.
Author suggests militant Confederates wanted to reopen slave trade…unmentioned is the fact the CSA constitution prohibited international slave trade.
Pp103 Author declares she knows what Lee meant in his Farewell Address, though he didn’t say it. “…. made explicit what Lee only implied (in his address)…..” Fast and loose.
Pp123”… Lee embodied the immorality of the South”
Pp187 Remarkably, the author confronts history with this quip. In reference to an interview conducted with Lee, she says..” Could he (Lee) really have said the things that Cook (interviewer) attributes to him?” If he did, there goes your book, huh?
She can’t fathom the Lee and the “best men of the South” had wished to a gradual end of slavery. She refers to Lee’s words as “ludicrous”. I suggest that she revisit her belief system.

I could go on. But the author fails to mention that Lincoln’s April 11th speech is basically the outline for Johnson’s Reconstruction. That Davis and others were not tried because the case against them wasn’t quite as solid as the Radical Republicans thought and didn’t want the embarrassment of Constitutional arguments. Don’t bother with this book.

The author is from the "Must Be Published" halls of academia....the reach to 'reinterpret' captured by a favorable review which unintentionally reveals the issue.....I quote...
"We are always looking for books that enable us to see the Lees in a new way. Elizabeth Varon's new book, Appomattox: Victory, Defeat, and Freedom at the End of the Civil War does just that... A compelling tale."
A "tale" for sure, a "new way", and a fictitious one as well, disguised as history but closer to a fairy tale. Her military inaccuracies punctuate her suppositions and poor historical work. There is a crowd in academia that "wishes" things were one way though the truth of history points to another.
The first duty of a historian is to NOT INVENT. Varon's book is an INVENTION. She knows what Lee meant even though he didn't say it.
Books like this feed the eradication of historical monuments. I wonder if she connects the events on her campus (UVA) with historical rewrites such as this....

33 people found this helpful

Helpful

Need customer service? Click here

‹ See all details for Appomattox: Victory, Defeat, and Freedom at the End of the Civil War

5 star		70%
4 star		17%
3 star		6%
2 star		3%
1 star		4%

Appomattox: Victory, Defeat, and Freedom at the End of the Civil War

›

Customer reviews

Customer reviews

Appomattox: Victory, Defeat, and Freedom at the End of the Civil War

Top positive review

Top critical review

Filtered by

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

From the United States

There was a problem loading comments right now. Please try again later.

Appomattox: Victory, Defeat, and Freedom at the End of the Civil War › Customer reviews

Customer reviews

Appomattox: Victory, Defeat, and Freedom at the End of the Civil War

Top positive review

Top critical review

Filtered by

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

From the United States

There was a problem loading comments right now. Please try again later.

Appomattox: Victory, Defeat, and Freedom at the End of the Civil War

›

Customer reviews