Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.

Start by marking “Battle Cry of Freedom: The American Civil War” as Want to Read:

Other editions

Enlarge cover

Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

Open Preview

Battle Cry of Freedom: The American Civil War

(The Oxford History of the United States #6)

James M. McPherson

4.36 · Rating details · 26,680 ratings · 1,251 reviews

Winner of the Pulitzer Prize for History

'Read it. It will open your eyes about race history in America. It will shock you for what it tells you about politics in America today.' Richard Ford

'A remarkably wide-ranging synthesis of the history of the 1850s and the Civil War ... that effectively integrates in one volume social, political and military events from the immediate ...more

Get A Copy

Paperback, 904 pages

Published March 29th 1990 by Penguin (first published February 25th 1988)

More Details... Edit Details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about Battle Cry of Freedom, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

This book is not yet featured on Listopia. Add this book to your favorite list »

Community Reviews

Showing 1-30

Average rating 4.36 ·

Rating details

· 26,680 ratings · 1,251 reviews

More filters

Sort order

Start your review of Battle Cry of Freedom: The American Civil War

Jun 15, 2011 Jan-Maat added it

Shelves: 20th-century, usa, modern-history, american-civil-war

Embarking on reading or in this case rerereading McPherson's civil war at 800 plus pages feels like committing to refighting that four year conflict. One feels the need of a logistics corps to support the reading effort at the front as the page counts mounts and mounts. The book itself, particularly in a hardback incarnation, is virtually a civil war, it could be lobbed with hostile intent at a passerby, or laid on the ground to make a defensive position or strapped to the chest to protect the h ...more

flag 73 likes · Like · see review

Apr 08, 2012 Mustafa Ahmad rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: politics, history, nonfiction

Being a young history buff, it took me 3 weeks and 3 days to read this. That is, 3 weeks of contemplating reading it and proceeding to finish it in 3 days. This book is undoubtedly the best 1-volume book on the war that divided and reunited America but ended some of our back-then traditions such as slavery. In other words, the Civil War. It has a good balance of the battles such as Gettysburg and Antietam while it does discuss the social, political, and economic factors that also fueled the war. ...more

flag 55 likes · Like · see review

May 29, 2007 Bryan Jones rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

It is reported that there are 15,000 books on the Civil War in the Library of Congress, so the natural question is where do you start? Furthermore, Most of the "seminal" Civil War works are volumes and thousands of pages. Well in 850 pages, McPherson provides succint, yet thorough historical writing of the highest caliber. It unmuddies the waters as to the reasons for the country's schism and the start of the war and provides the necessary level of detail as to the prosecution of the war without ...more

flag 50 likes · Like · see review

Nov 09, 2009 Steven Peterson rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

If you want detailed discussion of battles, this is not the book for you. If you want detailed descriptions of key actors during the Civil War, this will not be the book for you. But if you want an all encompassing volume, linking the battles, economic issues, social life, culture, and politics, then this book will be a wonderful resource.

Where does the title of the book come from? A Civil War song, "The Battle Cry of Freedom," written in 1862. Illustrative lines:

"The Union forever, Hurrah boys If you want detailed discussion of battles, this is not the book for you. If you want detailed descriptions of key actors during the Civil War, this will not be the book for you. But if you want an all encompassing volume, linking the battles, economic issues, social life, culture, and politics, then this book will be a wonderful resource.

Where does the title of the book come from? A Civil War song, "The Battle Cry of Freedom," written in 1862. Illustrative lines:

"The Union forever, Hurrah boys Hurrah!
Down with the traitor and up with the star; While we rally round the flag boys,
rally once again, Shouting the battle cry of freedom."

McPherson addresses the purpose of this volume (Page ix): ". . .I have tried to integrate the political and military events of this era with important social and economic developments to form a seamless web synthesizing up-to-date scholarship with my own research and interpretations."

The book begins with background, the Mexican War, slavery, bleeding Kansas, and the election of 1860. We learn about the comparative economies in north and south as well as social and cultural and political issues. Then, as one chapter title says so well, "Amateurs go to war." Starting with untrained forces and many inept officers, the war began.

The difference between this and other histories can be noted in space devoted to battles. Pea Ridge (Elkhorn Tavern) is covered in two pages; Shiloh is addressed in 11 pages; 11 pages on Vicksburg; 13 pages are devoted to Gettysburg. But the context in which these battles (and others) were fought provides a deeper view of the Civil War. For instance, a table on page 608 suggests that it was a "poor man's fight," with laborers, farmers, making up the bulk of the Union forces. But McPherson notes that this ignores demographic realities and that, in fact, there was greater representativeness among the Union military than has often been noted.

All in all, an impressive work, integrating the many aspects of the Civil War in just one volume, with 862 pages of text.
...more

flag 24 likes · Like · see review

Jan 14, 2010 Eric rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: history, us-civil-war

The times, they change so fast, and the Young People Today know nothing of drive-ins… of paper routes…of bizarrely racist street parades:

Indiana Democrats organized a parade which included young girls in white dresses carrying banners inscribed “Fathers, save us from nigger husbands!”

(p. 159)

A Democratic float in a New York parade carried life-size effigies of Horace Greeley and a “good looking nigger wench, whom he caressed with all the affection of a true Republican.” A banner proclaimed tha

...more

flag 22 likes · Like · see review

Mar 08, 2017 Nick Borrelli rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

As I have gotten older I have definitely become more interested in reading about history, especially books about the Civil War. My reading tastes have evolved from someone who only used to read Fantasy to someone who now reads a lot of non-fiction. Battle Cry of Freedom has been touted as the best SINGLE volume account of the Civil War. I have read Shelby Foote's magnum three-book, 3,500 page opus, found that to be an amazing experience and one that kept me engrossed for over a year. So I picked ...more

flag 18 likes · Like · see review

Oct 31, 2015 B. P. Rinehart rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Recommends it for: Anyone who watches the news and wants to know...why?

Recommended to B. P. by: Ta-Nehisi Coates

Shelves: history-stuff, non-fiction-stuff, un-decade-african-descent

"The terms of...peace and the dimensions of black freedom would occupy the country for a decade or more. Meanwhile the process of chronicling the war and reckoning [with] its consequences began immediately [after it ended] and has never ceased. More than 620,000 soldiers lost their lives in four years of conflict-360,000 Yankees and at least 260,000 rebels. The number of southern civilians who died as a direct or indirect result of the war cannot be known; what can be said is that the Civil War' "The terms of...peace and the dimensions of black freedom would occupy the country for a decade or more. Meanwhile the process of chronicling the war and reckoning [with] its consequences began immediately [after it ended] and has never ceased. More than 620,000 soldiers lost their lives in four years of conflict-360,000 Yankees and at least 260,000 rebels. The number of southern civilians who died as a direct or indirect result of the war cannot be known; what can be said is that the Civil War's cost in American lives was as great as in all of the nation's other wars combined through Vietnam. Was the liberation of four million slaves and the preservation of the Union worth the cost? That question too will probably never cease to be debated--but in 1865 few Black people and not many northerners doubted the answer."

This is year 3 of United Nations International Decade for People of African Descent

Oh hey, look what I found: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/w...

If ever there was a one volume history as comprehensive on anything--this is it! I feel this to be a truly monumental achievement for me to complete this book. As good as Ken Burns' documentary on the war was, this is easily more comprehensive a history. It is amazing to believe that this volume was made to serve as an introduction to the American Civil War, but that's what this is. If you are trying to understand why United States of America is the way it is right now you must know the history of the Civil War and Reconstruction. Much of the turbulence in the current American government can be traced back to a plurality of people in the United States still trying to grapple with the events of the 19th century. It took this book 200 pages to thoroughly explain what the Civil War was fought over, then the action begins.

James M. McPherson is THE preeminent historian on the American Civil War. He came of age, professionally, during the American Civil Rights Movement (which ironically coincided with the centenary of the Civil War). He and his colleagues were inspired by then-current events to re-evaluate all of the histories concerning the Civil War written since it ended and their scholarship has overturned much of the poison of the Dunning School/Lost Cause mythology (at least in the academies. I can say with disappointment that in the heart of many white southerners--even of my generation--the lie remains strong). I cannot wait to read his other books in the future.

This is the second book in a trilogy that I have given myself to read on America in the 19th century. The first book I read last year was The Half Has Never Been Told: Slavery and the Making of American Capitalism and the book that will conclude this particular project of mine is Black Reconstruction in America 1860-1880. For now though, I will make like Grant after Appomattox and meditate quietly on events. ...more

flag 18 likes · Like · see review

Aug 27, 2012 Donna Davis rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Recommends it for: those seeking one definitive American Civil War source.

Shelves: favorites, reviewed, american-civil-war, history, blogged, military-history

If you only choose to read one (challenging and sizable) resource on the American Civil War, this is the one. It won the Pulitzer, and although it is a large piece of work, it is immensely readable. It begins with the Mexican-American War because that is where much of the Civil War's military leadership is forged. It also makes it much more interesting to see whose fortunes rise, and whose fall (although these are, naturally, secondary to the issue of the war itself).

This is unquestionably the m ...more

flag 12 likes · Like · see review

Jan 16, 2013 Esdaile rated it it was ok · review of another edition

Shelves: history, american

This work is certainly very extensively researched and annotated and abounds in comments from contemporaries-quotations, extracts from diaries etc. This is so much the case that it is arguable that McPherson did not so much write a historical account as piece together as produce a series of quotations from eye-witnesses and those who lived through events and has interspersed them with a linking narrative and his own biased comments. The book is rather like a printed version of popular tv histori This work is certainly very extensively researched and annotated and abounds in comments from contemporaries-quotations, extracts from diaries etc. This is so much the case that it is arguable that McPherson did not so much write a historical account as piece together as produce a series of quotations from eye-witnesses and those who lived through events and has interspersed them with a linking narrative and his own biased comments. The book is rather like a printed version of popular tv histories where dramatic footage is interspersed with aging eye witnesses making their truncated and edited comments on past events. In other words this is a documentary rather than a history and it has the surreptitious bias of a modern newspaper. Interestingly, the back cover of the penguin edition gives visible support to this by producing in the popular type of the US at that time (Galliard?) for the name of the publications 6 promotional puffs. The worst thing about the kind of bias in a book like this is that it is very difficult for a layperson to argue, since it is not a question of untruths or errors but of truths not mentioned or facts ignored, and McPherson is too good at his job to leave anything out which is well known. Many are also likely to think that this is a fair account since the writer takes pains to give it the superficial appearance of being so. There is no officious sabre rattling or trumpet blowing about this book. It appears to be sweetly reasonable while relentlessly pursuing a pro-Northern line from beginning to end.
Nearly every famous quotations and many obscure ones from the war can be found in the pages of this book. As a mine of quotations it is certainly second to none. The only exception that comes to mind is the remark made by one Southerner on hearing of Lincoln’s condemnation of rebellion and disloyalty-“if rebellion is always wrong, then God save the King!”. Stonewall Jackson referred to the South’s attempt at independence “the Second War of Independence”, an aspect of the struggle which McPherson does not address with any seriousness. The issue is by no means dead. In recent years the state of Vermont has begun to mutter about secession from the Union. At the Vermont Independence Convention held on October 28th 2005 in the state capital, Thomas Naylor declared that “South Carolina and the Confederate states had a perfect right to secede”.

I was not surprised after 550 pages of pro-yankee journalism to find McPherson belittling a notorious statement of Northern malice. This is the infamous invitation to the rape of women in the occupied South made by the commander of Union forces in occupied New Orleans. It is termed euphemistically by Mc Pherson as “an incident” and “Butler’s women’s order”. : The writer notes that it “intensified British upper-class alienation from the North” (Is McPherson suggesting that the British middle classes of the time more sympathetic to a bit of rough treatment of snooty belles?) Butler’s statement ran as follows: : “any woman who persisted in the practice of insulting Northern soldiers shall be regarded and held liable to be treated as a woman of the town plying her trade” Even today, with two world wars and countless horrors between then and now, this order sounds appalling and is appalling. It is also historically significant since it breaks the very codex which Gibbon in Decline and Fall had so proudly noted a hundred years before as the hallmark of civilized behaviour-soldiers in the eighteenth century refraining from attacking or molesting civilians. But McPherson who is always more understanding of Northern outrages than Southern ones-finds what he calls “considerable provocation” for Butler’s declaration. What can this “considerable provocation” be? Something pretty drastic to justify an invitation to rape one would think. Nothing less than murder and terrorism surely? Not exactly. Southern provocation was “climaxed by a woman who dumped the contents of a chamber-pot from a French-Quarter balcony on Fleet Captain Farragut’s head.” This would be hilarious if the writer were not so serious in believing this largely excuses Butler’s order. McPherson does not tell us how many women were raped as a result of the green light given by their commander. I am sure that if the history had been in reverse the reader would have received a very different account.. Apart form the relentless bias of the book, it is poorly served by the publishers: the photographs are cramped and mostly anyone’s second choice, more seriously, the maps of the battlefields are so poorly printed as to be almost unuseable. Maybe that suits McPherson’s belief that battles are not half so important as they are made out to be by most historians. Like Tolstoy in War in Peace he sees them and portrays them as a lot of sound and fury and confusion-decisive battles do not take place in this account. Gettysburg is presented as just one more bloody conflict rather than the decisive battle is its traditionally presented as being. Far more important for McPherson is the calibre of generals-this seems to him to be all important, not that he is over-enthusiastic about Southern generalship. It is not brilliance on the part of Lee but timidity, incompetence and rivalry among Northern generals which is here offered as the major clue to the slow progress of the Northern war effort. As for Lincoln, needless to say he, he is the hero of the story, as infallible as the Pope. If McPherson ever criticises Lincoln, I missed it.
This may be, as some claim, the best book on the subject. If that is true I am sorry to hear it. ...more

flag 11 likes · Like · see review

Mar 27, 2012 Aaron Arnold rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: history, read-in-2011, politics, favorites

Widely acclaimed as the best single-volume history of the Civil War around, this is another entry in the Oxford History of the United States, which I am enjoying immensely. The preface had an interesting observation: though this book covers the shortest span of all the books in the series (albeit with some significant overlap), it's one of the longest books in the series. The Civil War is the most-written about period in American history simply because there's so much history in it, as it did mo Widely acclaimed as the best single-volume history of the Civil War around, this is another entry in the Oxford History of the United States, which I am enjoying immensely. The preface had an interesting observation: though this book covers the shortest span of all the books in the series (albeit with some significant overlap), it's one of the longest books in the series. The Civil War is the most-written about period in American history simply because there's so much history in it, as it did more to turn a bunch of squabbling states into the United States than anything since 1789. McPherson doesn't even get to recounting the actual war until over a third of the way into the book as the country splits and splinters and tries and fails to resolve a vast number of contradictory pressures and choices about its future, and the Federalists' nightmares about factions turned into reality: Northerners vs. Southerns, those who wanted to settle the West vs. those who wanted to preserve the existing balance of the states, wets vs. dries, immigrants vs. nativists, Catholics vs. Protestants, tariff supporters vs. free traders, developers favoring Hamiltonian projects vs. laissez faire adherents, plantation owners vs. industrialists, rural folk vs. urban dwellers, Democrats vs. Whigs, Democrats vs. Know-Nothings, Democrats vs. Republicans, war hawks vs. doves, but most of all, slavery supporters vs. abolitionists.

It's a truism that in elementary school you learn that the Civil War was about slavery, in high school you learn that it was about states' rights, and that in college you learn that actually it was still really about slavery. McPherson completely demolishes the idea that it could have possibly been about anything other than the South's "peculiar institution" - slavery was the bedrock of the South's economy, the keystone of its social structure, and the altar on which they convinced themselves that they were the highest, most advanced civilization on Earth. McPherson somehow works that discussion smoothly into the book among a million other things, from advanced demographic analysis (like his eye-opening mythbusting of the "rich man's war, poor man's fight" canard), to the background political scheming that Lincoln had to overcome, to the shockingly large tolls that disease and poor sanitation took on each army, to the massive economic chasm opening between the modernizing North and the magnolia-tinged South, and most especially, to the battles. You can't really be interested in this greatest of all American wars if you're not fascinated by the senseless, bloody, magnificent meetings between two of the mightiest armies of the 19th century, and McPherson seemingly covers every cavalry raid and clash of picket lines. It's an impressive feat, well-worthy of its 1988 Pulitzer Prize, and though it's rare to describe a book as being the last word on a subject, surely even rarer is the reader who finishes this masterwork unsatisfied. ...more

flag 11 likes · Like · see review

Jun 09, 2010 Marley rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: amazingnotyetreread

THE Civil War book. Many thanks to the blogging of Ta-Nehisi Coates to teach me this fact. Reads like Greek myth or Shakespearian tragedy, but with incredible footnotes. And with an unbelievably good first 300 pages about the politics that made war inevitable, and which includes evidence that demolishes the idea that some unsullied struggle for "states' rights" was what spawned the secession.

All I can think about now is who would play Grant in the movie, and how much of a dick McClellan was, and ...more

flag 10 likes · Like · see review

Aug 21, 2012 Mary rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

McPherson's book is a wonderful history of the Civil War. He begins by setting the scene describing what was happening politically, culturally, and socially in the United States before the war began. Using this same wide scope he takes readers through the war years, through the end of the war, and Lincoln's death.

I had not read anything about the Civil War since my college American History survey and so I learned a great deal. Although it took me a longtime to read this book, it wasn't because ...more

flag 9 likes · Like · see review

May 28, 2014 Max rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: american-history

Comprehensive, concise and well written, “Battle Cry of Freedom” digs deeply into the politics, economics and social attitudes leading up to the Civil War as well as giving a blow by blow accounting of the battles and their greater impact on the home front. Disparate economies pave the road to war as the North takes off with the transportation and industrial revolutions and the South remains a stagnant agrarian society dependent on slavery. McPherson highlights many points in the conflict where Comprehensive, concise and well written, “Battle Cry of Freedom” digs deeply into the politics, economics and social attitudes leading up to the Civil War as well as giving a blow by blow accounting of the battles and their greater impact on the home front. Disparate economies pave the road to war as the North takes off with the transportation and industrial revolutions and the South remains a stagnant agrarian society dependent on slavery. McPherson highlights many points in the conflict where opportunities were missed or seized with dramatic consequences. He cuts through the mythical stereotypes of the generals. Lee and Jackson had their good days and their bad ones just as did Grant and Sherman.

The war’s legacies included progressive measures that could only be taken in the absence of the South: a national bank, a transcontinental railroad, land grant colleges, homesteading and of course emancipation. The economic ascendance of the country during and immediately after the war would have faced continuous challenge if compromise between North and South continued rather than a decisive war. The progressive unionist attitude of the North vs. the conservative states-rights attitude of the South still persists as the Tea Party and liberals continue the fight, hopefully without a war.

McPherson characterizes this disparity of views in his afterword in terms of Isaiah Berlin’s “Negative Liberty” and “Positive Liberty”. Negative Liberty encompasses the hands off position towards government to leave the individual free to do what he wants. Positive Liberty means the intervention of government to ensure that the rights of everyone are protected. Oddly, this characterization makes me think of Lewis Thomas’ book “The Lives of a Cell” which describes the role of cooperation between different organisms in nature to ensure their mutual success. The opposing view being that success in nature is primarily competitive often described as “survival of the fittest”. Certainly there is truth to both sides, but it seems to be an American trait to be strongly on one side or the other with little middle ground.
...more

flag 8 likes · Like · see review

Jan 28, 2019 Teri rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: history, pulitzer-2019, read-in-2019

This is a very well-written, readable, comprehensive single-volume compendium on the Civil War. McPherson begins in the mid-19th century detailing the events leading up to the war including Lincoln's rise in politics, the Dred Scott decision, and Harper's Ferry. He covers the causes, the political and social climate, and the economic outlook of the times. Interspersed between the various battles of the war, McPherson covers specific side information such as conscription, medical needs, POW priso ...more

flag 7 likes · Like · see review

Jan 25, 2017 robin friedman rated it really liked it · review of another edition

McPherson's Illustrated Battle Cry Of Freedom

Professor James McPherson's "Battle Cry of Freedom" initially appeared in 1988 and received the Pulitzer Prize, together with great popular and critical acclaim, for its detailed single-volume study of the Civil War. In "The Illustrated Battle Cry of Freedom" (2003), Professor McPherson reformatted and edited his outstanding 1988 study. The major change to the book is the addition of many illustrations, which include photographs, portraits, paintings, McPherson's Illustrated Battle Cry Of Freedom

Professor James McPherson's "Battle Cry of Freedom" initially appeared in 1988 and received the Pulitzer Prize, together with great popular and critical acclaim, for its detailed single-volume study of the Civil War. In "The Illustrated Battle Cry of Freedom" (2003), Professor McPherson reformatted and edited his outstanding 1988 study. The major change to the book is the addition of many illustrations, which include photographs, portraits, paintings, cartoons, drawings, and maps from the Civil War era. To make room for the illustrations, about 20 percent of the original text was cut, and there are no footnotes or bibliography.

I read McPherson's original study well before I began reviewing. I also read this illustrated version shortly after its publication and found it too an excellent single-volume introduction to the Civil War. The illustrations enable the reader to see and to get the feel of the Civil War, its era, and its major protagonists in a way the printed word cannot capture. The photographs and the contemporary artwork, including drawings and paintings by the soldiers, are difficult to find in one place. I found they added a great deal to my understanding.

Apart from the illustrations, this book remains, as was the original version, a magisterial overview of the Civil War. The book weaves together descriptions of the military campaigns of the War with discussions of the sources of the conflict. It discusses in depth the differences between the North and the South in their conceptions of freedom and in their understanding of our country. McPherson covers the domestic fronts of the War, including both economic and social issues, in both North and South and also explains the efforts of both sides in the sphere of international relations. The book focuses on the change of the Civil War from a conflict to restore the Union to a total war to create a unified Nation. The climactic point of the story is President Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation which made the abolition of slavery an irreducible element of the Union war effort.

McPherson describes eloquently how the Civil War effected a radical change in our country from a loose union of states to a united Nation. He discusses the changing concept of human freedom and liberty which emerged from the War and which remains evolving in our country to this day. The valor of the soldiers and civilians on both sides of the conflict is presented from the inside and with respect and reverence. McPherson shows the reader how and why the Civil War was the turning point in our Nation's history and encourages the reader to reflect and to explore further.

The loss of portions of the text is a pity, but it is compensated by the illustrations. Readers who wish to track down sources or explore further will need to consult the original edition for references. This book and the unabridged original are still the best sources to introduce the reader to the facts and significance of the American Civil War.

Robin Friedman ...more

flag 7 likes · Like · see review

May 08, 2019 John Nellis rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: black-powder-era

Still the best one volume history of the Civil War era.

flag 7 likes · Like · see review

Sep 22, 2010 Richard rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

James McPherson has created a monumental work on the Civil War and its origins. I read it several years ago and recently re-read the first half, which concerns the United States at mid-nineteenth century and the many political and social issues working toward a collision course between the northern and southern states over the cause of slavery. McPherson is very possibly America's highest regarded Civil War author. This book won him the Pulitzer Prize.

The first time I read this book, I was amaz ...more

flag 6 likes · Like · see review

Jun 19, 2020 Ozymandias rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: american, history, modern-history

This is the best overview I’ve ever read on the American Civil War. It’s been widely hailed as a classic, and rightly so. I’ve read multi-volume books (see the Foote trilogy) that couldn’t manage to get all the nuance this book managed in one. What makes it so good? It covers everything! From the war’s origins through espionage through naval war through tactics and strategy to political structure to racial prejudice to imperialism to economics to... etc.

One part of what makes the book readable This is the best overview I’ve ever read on the American Civil War. It’s been widely hailed as a classic, and rightly so. I’ve read multi-volume books (see the Foote trilogy) that couldn’t manage to get all the nuance this book managed in one. What makes it so good? It covers everything! From the war’s origins through espionage through naval war through tactics and strategy to political structure to racial prejudice to imperialism to economics to... etc.

One part of what makes the book readable instead of just insightful is the way that it’s organize. The book has good use of chapters on several thematic topics arranged where it’s chronologically appropriate. For example, the chapter on fiscal policies appears amid discussion of military events in early 1862 when both sides were coming to consensuses on the issues. And the discussion of naval warfare fits into the discussion of late 1861 when the blockade runners and the Confederacy’s campaign to get British intervention was most active. The fact that the chapter then continues on into the Monitor/Merrimack fight of 1862 and indeed summarizes the situation of the navy for the rest of the war doesn’t really get ahead of the main narrative because it’s an isolated subject. Vital, but isolated.

I really appreciated the division and focus on how much attention to give each area. It shows the balance of the war pretty well. It’s not just a string of Southern triumphs until Grant takes charge and brings the whole force of the industrialized North into play. The war hung on a tightrope the whole time. Even the generalization that the South was mainly dominant until Gettysburg reflects an unjustly eastern perspective. The West was really the decisive theater of the war. That’s where the Confederacy was split and Sherman led his army through Georgia to the sea and enveloped the eastern theater from behind. But what shines out the strongest was how important Grant’s (and Lincoln’s) strategy was to success: attack on all fronts simultaneously so the outnumbered South couldn’t move around reinforcements. Grand strategy was what won the war.

Probably the best thing about this book though is how effectively it demolishes the whole “Lost Cause” narrative that dominates so many of the popular and therefore accessible accounts: that the war was initiated by a few radicals (mainly abolitionists who wrongly opposed white supremacy) and was fought over the question of State’s Rights. What State’s Rights? They never say. And McPherson is blunt in calling them out on it. The right they were defending was slavery, and they wanted to defend it (ironically) by intruding on Northern state’s rights by gaining federal protections for slaveowners in all territories. In short, the cause of the war was that the North wanted to prevent the expansion of slavery and the South would accept nothing less than its enforcement across all states in the union. Including the free states of the north. Inasmuch as there was a second most important issue it was white supremacy. A poor Southerner would never be able to afford his own slaves, but at least he was superior to a nigger. And yes, that’s exactly how they put it. Alexander Stephens (VP of the Confederacy) gave a whole speech about the superior moral and economic virtue of slavery: it kept the childish, unmanageable blacks under control and working for the benefit of white men who thereby gained the leisure to pursue a worthy culture.

This book isn’t revisionist history, it’s a reversion from the accounts put forth by decades of revisionist historians (Stephens himself changed his argument after the war) who sought to give the Lost Cause some luster while justifying the continued oppression of their African-American population. And Northern historians were equally complicit in promoting the cause of white supremacy, even if it meant ignoring quite literally everything said by any Southern politician before and during the war.

The obvious implications of the “Lost Cause” narrative are plain, but there are a lot of subsidiary ones that are equally distorted. I had never, for example, questioned that the South was the real underdog in the war. The North had all the industry, railroads, and manpower so naturally they could overpower the South through force of numbers. But that’s a product of the South’s comforting effort to explain away defeat as a noble cause beyond their control. The North’s advantages were obvious, yet they took time to mobilize and weren’t necessarily decisive. And the South had advantages too. A substantial number of talented generals, interior lines, and a monopoly on cotton that made them potentially attractive to European traders.

The North’s objective was also a lot harder. The South merely had to keep an army in the field and threaten Union forces. The North had to invade hostile territory and fill it with garrisons to keep the population in line and protect vital infrastructure. Something that would go a long way to reducing their superiority in numbers. If you look to Europe, Southern victory was considered inevitable well into 1863. Why? Because they knew how exceedingly difficult it was to hold such a large territory against the will of its inhabitants. Looking at the closest comparison, the American Revolution, it’s clear that subduing a dispersed population who didn’t want to be subdued was no easy feat. And had things gone only slightly differently that’s the “inevitable” outcome we would have been taught.

McPherson’s emphasis at all points is on contingency. The North’s industrial and manpower advantages ultimately prevailed because they were successful in battle. Their unified strategy across all fronts managed to capitalize on their advantages while exploiting real weaknesses in the South. This didn’t derive from any universal principle of superiority of resources. In fact, even when adopting this strategy they could have failed. Even in 1864, a delay in Northern success could easily have left McClellan not Lincoln as president. And that could easily have meant a Southern victory (certainly it would have meant the continuation of slavery and likely a further war down the road).

There’s a lot here I don’t have room to unpack. The book is, after all, very long and filled with facts. That it’s eminently readable as well is a true achievement. This should be the starting point for anyone interested in the Civil War. ...more

flag 6 likes · Like · see review

Aug 28, 2010 Jim rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: history-military, history-political, favorites

As other reviewers have noted, this magnificent book is almost certainly the best single-volume history of the American Civil War. It is hard to imagine that there will ever be another to match it.

Here is the way that I have heard the question: "I think I might be interested in learning something about the Civil War. If I wanted to read one book and find out for sure, what should I get?" The simple, unequivocal answer to that question is "Battle Cry of Freedom".

James McPherson is, for me, one of ...more

flag 6 likes · Like · see review

Jul 14, 2010 Anastasia Fitzgerald-Beaumont rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

I read this when I was still at school, an excellent one-volume overview of a great American tragedy.

flag 6 likes · Like · see review

May 22, 2012 Jerome rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: favorites, civil-war

I was at Gettysburg yesterday and decided to purchase a copy since I have only a grade-school knowledge of the war.

In "Battle Cry of Freedom", the author does an excellent job portraying the views of all sides and tracing the American Civil War back to General Scott's victory over Mexico 25 years earlier. While slavery was always an issue in America, after the Revolution many felt it would eventually wither on the vine. The constitution prohibited the slave trade after a few years, many northern ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Aug 03, 2012 Jeremy Perron rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

James McPherson's Pulitzer winning work Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era is often referred to as being the best single volume account of the American Civil War*. This book is all it was cracked up to be. It exams the major causes leading up to the conflict and the war itself by exploring them from multiple angles. The book shifts smoothly from the bottom Union ranks to the presidential chair, from radical abolitionists to powerful slave holders. One of the main themes of the book is 'lib James McPherson's Pulitzer winning work Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era is often referred to as being the best single volume account of the American Civil War*. This book is all it was cracked up to be. It exams the major causes leading up to the conflict and the war itself by exploring them from multiple angles. The book shifts smoothly from the bottom Union ranks to the presidential chair, from radical abolitionists to powerful slave holders. One of the main themes of the book is 'liberty', how it is defined by the major actors and how the definition changes toward the end of the war. McPherson points out that both sides were fighting for their version of liberty, what they felt were the right American traditions, and how they understood the Constitution of the Framers. However, the obvious truth is that part of the South's definition of liberty is the right to own slaves, and that was the right for which they were going to break apart the Union and go to war to defend.

McPherson's narrative begins at the end of the Mexican-American War, where the nation is debating on what to do with the newly acquired territory and the slave issue moves to front and center. In this debate we see the close of a second generation of American leaders and the rise of third. The actors Henry Clay, Daniel Webster, and John C. Calhoun leave the stage after their last act and are replaced by the likes of William Seward, Salmon Chase, Stephan Douglas, and Jefferson Davis. Although his star would continue to rise, at the start of the 1850s Abraham Lincoln was but a minor and unimportant character.

The debate heats up and in 1860 Lincoln is elected President but before he can even enter the office, states begin leaving the Union. McPherson points out that some historians have faulted President Lincoln for not taking the South's threat to secede seriously and failing to address it. McPherson continues to describe that view as seriously flawed. To McPherson, the only thing that Lincoln and the Republicans could do to satisfy the Southerners would be to disband and declare that slavery was a positive good.

As the war begins the South has the good fortune to have great generals in their cause such as Robert E. Lee and Thomas 'Stonewall' Jackson. While the Union's best general, Winfield Scott, was a relic from another age. U.S. Grant, William T. Sherman, and Philip Sheridan would have to rise up through the ranks by the measure of skill and merit while the conflict was going on. The generals that Lincoln would start with, George McClellan and Joe Hooker, were not very good. Although McClellan thought of himself as the second coming of Napoleon and his fans agreed.

"But perhaps career had been too successful. He had never known, as Grant had, the despair of defeat or the humiliation of failure. He had never learned the lessons of adversity and humility. The adulation he experienced during the early weeks in Washington went to his head. McClellan's letters to his wife revealed the beginnings of a messiah complex."(p.359)

The Civil War changed society more than anything since the American Revolution and maybe even more so. Although American Revolution changed things by making a bunch of British subjects American citizens and the Civil War saw everyone remain Americans, the long range changes seemed faster and greater.

"By the beginning of 1862 the impetus of war had evolved three shifting and overlapping Republican factions on the slavery question. The most dynamic and clear cut faction were the radicals, who accepted the abolitionist argument that emancipation could be achieved by exercise of the belligerent power to confiscate enemy property. On the other wing of the party a smaller number of conservatives hoped for the ultimate demise of bondage but preferred to see this happen by the voluntary action of slave states coupled with colonization abroad of the freed slaves. In the middle were the moderates, led by Lincoln, who shared the radicals' moral aversion to slavery but feared the racial consequences of wholesale emancipation. Events during the first half of 1862 pushed the moderates toward the radical position."(p.494)

Lincoln would issue the Emancipation Proclamation that would free the slaves in the Confederacy and be the first major step to freeing the all the men and women who were slaves in United States of America. But it was only a step and a war measure, in order to permanently eradicate the 'particular institution' the U.S. Constitution needed to be amended. Lincoln would work to insure the passage of 13th Amendment in the Congress and send it to the states.

"Among the spectators who cheered and wept for joy when the House passed the 13th Amendment were many black people. Their presence was a visible symbol of revolutionary changes signified by the Amendment, for until 1864 Negros had not been allowed in congressional galleries. Blacks were also admitted to White House social functions for the first time in 1865, and Lincoln went out of his way to welcome Fredrick Douglass to the inaugural reception on March 4."(p.840)

The Civil War would end for all practical purposes when Lee surrendered to Grant at Appomattox. There were other formalities, other armies that needed to surrender, but the long bloody conflict was over. There was a lot of work to be done and, unfortunately, Abraham Lincoln would not be there to lead it. John Wilkes Booth stole him from the nation. James McPherson does an incredible job bringing these events to life. If you want to know something about the Civil War this is a great place to start, for in the years since it was published it has made Civil War history buffs of many people.

*Several book reviews, including Washington Post, New York Times, and L.A. Times, all use that term. ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Feb 17, 2014 Jim rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

“Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era” by James McPherson is widely considered to be the best one volume history of the American Civil War era ever published. When I first read it twenty years ago I came to that same conclusion. Re-reading it again now has not led me to alter my opinion. If you are looking for a comprehensive survey of the cultural, political, economic, and social landscape of the period, the nature of which all fed into the ultimate decision by the South to try and leave th “Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era” by James McPherson is widely considered to be the best one volume history of the American Civil War era ever published. When I first read it twenty years ago I came to that same conclusion. Re-reading it again now has not led me to alter my opinion. If you are looking for a comprehensive survey of the cultural, political, economic, and social landscape of the period, the nature of which all fed into the ultimate decision by the South to try and leave the union, this is the book you should read.

The Civil War revolved around the issue of slavery. Despite “controversy” over that notion among a segment of our population and in the popular media, very few credible historians would still argue that the peculiar institution wasn’t the issue that drove the South to secession. But why slavery became the catalyst it was is much more complex. The decision made by our founders to “kick the can down the road” and not deal with slavery in the Constitution, along with changing gender roles, increasing religious fervor, a bifurcation in the economic systems of the North and South, and ultimately the struggle over expansion of the slave power into the west culminated in this greatest tragedy of our history.

All of this is expertly dealt with by McPherson in a smooth, very readable way. And while it is clear what he blames the ultimate cause of the war on, he is scrupulously fair in the way he deals with every side of the question, criticizing where it is warranted and praising when it is deserved. Ultimately, he concludes that secession was not the second revolution that is often portrayed, but rather it was the North that was in the middle of a revolution – a cultural and
economic one. By insisting that the South follow it away from the conservative, agrarian, hierarchically dominated culture that had previously dominated western society – particularly some of the discredited traditions that were a part of that culture (mainly slavery) – it induced the South to resort to war to protect it.

There were a couple of minor criticisms I had with the book. First, McPherson accepts without question the brilliance of Robert E. Lee’s military genius. There has been a bit of a re-assessment of that assumption in recent years that calls it into question, much of it persuasive in my opinion. McPherson certainly had the resources to make that analysis himself. Secondly he seems to accept the results of the Appomattox surrender as an example of American exceptionalism, in that both sides immediately laid down their arms and reconciled with little effort. More recent work has cast substantial doubt on that assertion.

These are minor criticisms however; in my opinion this book should be required reading for anyone studying the Civil War era.

Highly Recommended!!!!! ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Oct 15, 2011 Mark rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

I first read James McPherson's classic history of the Civil War era when I was in high school. At the time I had a pretty callow understanding of history; because of this, while I took a lot from McPherson's book, many of his arguments and details went largely unappreciated. In the years that followed his book remained on my shelf as a valued resource that I drew from, even as I moved on to more focused studies about the period. Recently, however, a friend's request brought me back to the book f I first read James McPherson's classic history of the Civil War era when I was in high school. At the time I had a pretty callow understanding of history; because of this, while I took a lot from McPherson's book, many of his arguments and details went largely unappreciated. In the years that followed his book remained on my shelf as a valued resource that I drew from, even as I moved on to more focused studies about the period. Recently, however, a friend's request brought me back to the book for my first cover-to-cover reading of it in decades. This proved an extremely interesting experience, for several reasons.

Foremost among them was the opportunity to learn the things I had missed the first time around. I credit this to my maturity, as I have a far greater range of interests than my 17-year-old self ever did. This helped give me a deeper appreciation for McPherson's book, as I saw the balance and nuance he displayed on the numerous topics he addressed. I also found myself admiring even more so the fluidity of McPherson's presentation of the era and his ability to range from topic to topic in a way that never weakened my engagement with the text.

Yet for all of the book's strengths and my increased admiration for them, I also saw flaws that I missed the first time through. Foremost among them is McPherson's scope, for as brilliantly as he covers the lead up to the Civil War and the war itself, this remains his predominant focus. Other subjects relevant to the era, such as cultural developments, are ignored so long as they are irrelevant to his focus on the war and the events leading up to it, making his book less comprehensive than some of the others in the series. Another is the increasingly dated nature of the text. Unlike Robert Middlekauf with his volume on the Revolutionary era, McPherson has stated that he has little interest in updating his work. Though his decision is understandable in some respects, the absence of the considerable amount of Civil War historiography that has been published over the past three decades erodes its value and will continue to do so as time went along.

Because of this, I finished McPherson's book with an appreciation both renewed and more tempered than before. While it remains the single best book on its subject, it is one that is showing its age. I expect that I will turn to it again in the years to come, but when I do it will be an awareness that it no longer can serve as the solitary go-to source for understanding this pivotal era of American history. ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Jan 02, 2010 Pete Sikora rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Any review that starts with "this is the definitive X of Y" has to be suspect. But this really is the definitive history of the civil war.

The political pressure on Lincoln... the battles... the economic conditions... the battles... the run up to the war... the battles... the increasingly impossible slave/free state compromises... the battles... the generalship... and did I mention the battles? It's readable, exciting and insightful.

The most interesting segment of the book is the run up to the Any review that starts with "this is the definitive X of Y" has to be suspect. But this really is the definitive history of the civil war.

The political pressure on Lincoln... the battles... the economic conditions... the battles... the run up to the war... the battles... the increasingly impossible slave/free state compromises... the battles... the generalship... and did I mention the battles? It's readable, exciting and insightful.

The most interesting segment of the book is the run up to the war itself. McPherson blows away the (marxist-y) argument that economic conditions led to the war. Ideological and political conflict over slavery started the war, not economic rivalry.

After all, the South *wasn't* a rival to the North - it had only one big specialty crop. The South was just a big debtor, with an economy and social structure that would have collapsed even if the North hadn't collapsed it for them. Ok, so that last part is just my opinion, but I bet McPherson thinks it even if he doesn't come right out and say it ;)

McPherson does show how the free/slace state compromises became increasingly impossible for the South. The increasing weight of a growing North was impossible for the Southern planter class to defeat, either in Congress or - it turned out - on the battlefield.

Or more precisely, the South could win battles, but it was strategically virtually doomed to lose. Or so it seems. Again, McPherson shows how the South could perhaps have "won" the war had the Lincoln been defeated for re-election. But the odds were long - and timely battlefield victory saved Lincoln.

The South didn't know that - they thought they would whip those wimpy, effeminate yanks. That didn't work out so much. But they did know they couldn't win in congress, because the north's growth outnumbered the South's. They knew they couldn't protect their property in a democratic system. The North's abolition movement was winning the political battle.

My only question: maybe we shouldn't have fought it. The South's politics suck - still re-fighting that war. No South, no Newt Gingrich. No South, and we're Sweden or France. Maybew we should have let them go.

Anyway, a great telling. Even if it plows well-worn ground, McPherson puts the entire package of the war together. Not an easy task, and done brilliantly. Bravo! ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Nov 30, 2018 RM(Alwaysdaddygirl) Griffin (alwaysdaddyprincess) rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

5 star. Will reread down the road. 🇺🇸🤙

flag 6 likes · Like · see review

Jun 11, 2011 Carol rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

This is a book I have long intended to read. The hard bound edition is 860 pages so it was a challenge. I have long had an affinity for books about the Civil War and biographies of Abraham Lincoln. This book starts at the Mexican War in 1847. The politics of this war shows clearly the persistent greed for more land and the lengths we would go to obtain it. More to the point, many of the best who fought in the Mexican War became the officers who would fight against each other in the Civil War. Th ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Feb 11, 2013 Mickey rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

I had the very good luck to attend a lecture by James McPherson at NCSU right as I was finishing up reading this book. He was an extremely gracious and engaging speaker. He even made a joke about the technical difficulties involving his microphone (causing him to have to talk from the corner of the room (right near where I was sitting!) instead of in the center). He also did a good job of dealing with the crowd, which had some very outspoken Lincoln-buffs who shouted out answers. Of course, I'm ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Oct 24, 2020 CoachJim rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: history

Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era
by James M. McPherson

The late C. Vann Woodward in the Editor’s Introduction to this volume notes how unique this book is in that it is a one volume history of the Civil War. This becomes remarkable in that this is the longest of the ten Oxford History of the United States series, and also covers the shortest period of any of the volumes.

In this volume the author covers all the aspects of life and war. He deals with the politics, the culture, the economics, ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Nov 14, 2019 Graham rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

As described, this is THE book on the war of the rebellion over slavery in America. Don’t expect extensive tactical discussions, i think Gettysburg was a whole 4 pages out of 800, but do expect the all important lead up to war taking up a third of the text. This precursor period of ideological settler colonial war (Kansas) for the West requires as much setup as McPherson delivers. Also, pay attention to his narrative style, as first published in 1988 during the pinnacle of social historiographic ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

topics	posts	views	last activity
The History Book ...: Military Series: BATTLE CRY OF FREEDOM: THE CIVIL WAR ERA - Final Thoughts and Book as a Whole ~ Spoiler Thread	16	220	Mar 09, 2017 07:48PM
The History Book ...: 23. Military Series: BATTLE CRY... July 16th ~ July 22nd ~~ Chapters TWENTY SEVEN & TWENTY EIGHT & EPILOGUE (807 - 862); No Spoilers Please	17	48	Jan 07, 2013 10:05AM
The History Book ...: 22. Military Series: BATTLE CRY... July 9th ~ July 15th ~~ Chapter TWENTY SIX (774 - 806); No Spoilers Please	10	47	Dec 26, 2012 08:29AM
The History Book ...: 21. Military Series: BATTLE CRY... July 2nd ~ July 8th ~~ Chapter TWENTY FIVE (751 - 773); No Spoilers Please	9	94	Nov 09, 2012 06:13AM
The History Book ...: 20. Military Series: BATTLE CRY... June 25th ~ July 1st ~~ Chapter TWENTY FOUR (718 - 750); No Spoilers Please	22	103	Nov 05, 2012 07:24AM
The History Book ...: 19. Military Series: BATTLE CRY... June 18th ~ June 24th ~~ Chapter TWENTY TWO and TWENTY THREE (666 - 717); No Spoilers Please	15	47	Nov 02, 2012 09:15AM

Readers also enjoyed

See similar books…

Genres

History

2,001 users

Nonfiction

550 users

Military History > Civil War

535 users

North American Hi... > American History

297 users

War

153 users

American History > American Civil War

125 users

Military > Military History

113 users

War > Military Fiction

80 users

Politics

60 users

Historical

51 users

See top shelves…

About James M. McPherson

James M. McPherson

502 followers

James M. McPherson, Ph.D. (Johns Hopkins University, 1963; B.A., Gustavus Adolphus College (St. Peter, Minnesota), 1958) is an American Civil War historian, and the George Henry Davis '86 Professor Emeritus of United States History at Princeton University. He received the Pulitzer Prize for Battle Cry of Freedom, his most famous book. He was the president of the American Historical Association in ...more

Other books in the series

The Oxford History of the United States (10 books)

Books by James M. McPherson

Tried by War: Abraham Lincoln as Commander in Chief

Crossroads of Freedom: Antietam: The Battle that Changed the Course of the Civil War

For Cause and Comrades: Why Men Fought in the Civil War

More…

Articles featuring this book

Doris Kearns Goodwin Examines Presidential Leadership

In Pulitzer Prize-winning historian and author Doris Kearns Goodwin's latest book, Leadership: In Turbulent Times, she draws upon...

Trivia About Battle Cry of Fre...

No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »

Quotes from Battle Cry of Fre...

“Not surprisingly, South Carolina acted first. “There is nothing in all the dark caves of human passion so cruel and deadly as the hatred the South Carolinians profess for the Yankees.” wrote the correspondent of the London Times from Charleston. The enmity of Greek for Turk was child’s play “compared to the animosity evinced by the ‘gentry’ of South Carolina for the ‘rabble of the North.’ … The State of South Carolina was,’ I am” — 4 likes

“His captors asked why he, a nonslaveholder, was fighting to uphold slavery. He replied: “I’m fighting because you’re down here.”7” — 4 likes

More quotes…

See a Problem?

Preview — Battle Cry of Freedom by James M. McPherson

Battle Cry of Freedom: The American Civil War

(The Oxford History of the United States #6)

Get A Copy

Friend Reviews

Reader Q&A

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

Readers also enjoyed

Genres

About James M. McPherson

Other books in the series

Books by James M. McPherson

Articles featuring this book

Trivia About Battle Cry of Fre...

Quotes from Battle Cry of Fre...