CIVIL WAR UP CLOSE, THE, Thousands of Curious, Obscure, and Fascinating Facts

by Donald Cartmell

The Civil War Up Close is a thoroughly researched book that features numerous essays on fascinating aspects of the war that have been, for the most part, overlooked by modern historians. It reexamines accepted theories with a fresh, new outlook, and brings hard-hitting analysis to several age-old questions, such * Who were the best generals to emerge during the war? * Who were the worst? * Which battles and campaigns were the most influential? * Who were the women that rose to prominence during the war, and why? * What were the most important military and political decisions made by President Abraham Lincoln? * What were the most important military and political decisions of Jefferson Davis? * What were the long-term consequences of the Confederacy's stunning victory at Manassas? The essays and features in The Civil War Up Close are organized in chronological order, and serve to motivate the reader to reevaluate long-held opinions through an exploration of lesser-known but fascinating facts about the war and the people who won and lost it.

Genres: Civil War, History, Nonfiction

207 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2005

Reviews

[Art · Rating 3 out of 5]

I found the premise of a book that collected lessor known stories about the Civil War intriguing. This one did not disappoint. However, I found two glaring errors that called the validity of the rest of the book into question. I'm not a Civil War expert, so the fact I caught these is cause for concern.

In the author's introduction to part one he speaks of Oliver P. Morton as the Governor of Illinois. The caption to Morton's photograph later in the narrative also indicates he was from Illinois. The narrative states he was the Governor of Indiana. I had to look it up to be sure. Turns out Morton was indeed from Indiana. The other noticeable error occurs in a section about England and the desire of the Confederacy to gain formal recognition. In a passage clearly meant to reference Queen Victoria the author calls her Queen Elizabeth.

These errors didn't ruin the book, but I'm definitely left wondering what else might be wrong. At best, this is sloppy editing. At worst it might indicate sloppy research.

[William P. · Rating 5 out of 5]

its ok.