What They Didn't Teach You About the Civil War

by Mike Wright

Instant coffee was invented during the Civil War for use by Union troops, who hated it; holding races between lice was a popular pastime for both Johnny Reb and Billy Yank; 13% of the Confederate Army deserted during the conflict. These are three of the hundreds of bits of knowledge that Mike Wright makes available in his informative and entertaining What They Didn't Teach You About the Civil War, which focuses on the lives and ways of ordinary soldiers and of those they left behind.

Genres: History, Civil War, Nonfiction, American Civil War, War, Historical, Military Fiction

352 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1996

Reviews

[Frank · Rating 4 out of 5]

After the 3 day Battle of Gettysburg , the Union army Brass checked the weapons on the field. They found at least 37 thousand discarded rifles. Sometimes the troops ran off without firing their rifles; sometimes their muskets misfired. 24 thousand weapons were still loaded . Many of the weapons left behind 18 thousand were loaded with not one , but at least two minie balls . 6 thousand rifles had a lot more , as many as ten unfired cartridges rammed down their barrels . The others were improperly loaded , sometimes backward , the lead bullet facing the rear of the weapon. If loaded backward or with more than one cartridge , the rifle would not fire ...

[A.L. Waddington · Rating 4 out of 5]

Instresting read, great research tool. I really enjoyed it.

[Amanda · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have to say I enjoyed reading What They Didn't Teach You About the American Revolution better than this next volume. Perhaps it is because I took an entire class devoted to the study of the Civil War, but I felt that I had already known much of what was covered in this book, maybe not the specific details, but the general events and happenings. I know that I actually did learn some of it in my Civil War class, enough to wonder if the professor himself actually read the book and used some of the information in his lectures, which is entirely possible because I completed the class in 2014, and the book was written some twenty years before. It could still be an interesting read for others, but they will have to watch out for some repeated passages, as there is one paragraph repeated nearly verbatim twice within the book. I thought I was experiencing deja vu. I guess that is because the author intentionally did not mean to write these What They Didn't Teach You books in chronological order, and sometimes the topics covered in the chapters overlap in content. One does not have to be a Civil War expert to read this book, but having background knowledge will aid in the understanding of the events and how they fit in time. It makes me wonder if I had taken a semester-long class on the American Revolution if I would feel the same after reading that book as well.

[Gerry · Rating 2 out of 5]

I really have mixed feelings about this book - is it good? No, it is not. Is it informative to some degree, yes it is. By far the best chapter out of 26 is chapter 11 - "All In The Family: More Than Just A Brothers War." But one chapter does not make a book - multitudes of information placed within at most times felt like the author was attempting to impress us with his intelligence than the matter to which he was attempting to write to us in a Historical sense.

There are tidbits of information peppered throughout that could (in fact) inspire young people to possibly read further and study on their own; however, knowing what I know about teenagers I believe most would stop reading this book at chapter 3 if they were attempting to read this in a linear form.

This is one of those books I didn't really enjoy but one in which I will keep due to the sparse information that encapsulates so many topics could be worthy of conversation over a fire pit and grog - other than this I would not recommend this book for the seasoned reader of the American War Between the States. The more mature and informed Historian would likely find this book to be more of an asterisk to Historical occurrences than actual "new" and relevant information.

[East Bay J · Rating 3 out of 5]

Well, this was an interesting read. Mike Wright has collected various stories, trivia and statistics on the Civil War not commonly reported in your typical books and textbooks. What makes this book even more interesting is that he looks at the common soldier, citizen, etc., taking us into the realm of motivation of many of the players who aren't in the history books. Topics like desertion, ladies of the night, poorly armed and dressed soldiers, medical practices and more are covered. I've been interested in reading about the Civil War for some time and wanted a light read as an introduction and this was a good place to start. It did feel at times as if a greater understanding of the people and events of the Civil War would have made this book more rewarding but it is full of interesting and even startling information and left me wanting to know more. If only Howard Zinn had written about the Civil War, his would be the next book I read.

[Dale · Rating 3 out of 5]

Entertaining but too many errors.

Mike Wright is a television writer. In fact, he writes a pretty entertaining book as well. But, his lack of training as a historian shows in What They Didn't Teach You About the Civil War .

Some of the facts things he writes about were not taught to you because they just are not facts. In other cases, they are factual, but not truthful For example, the fact about Robert E. Lee not owning any slaves at the time of the Civil War (p. 23) is technically true - but ignores the fact that his wife owned the slaves and they freed them in 1862 (not "long before the Civil War" as the book asserts) because of a requirement of her father's will.

Wright makes the comment that the Confederacy only had one good general (Lee) on page 40. Perhaps Wright meant to clarify his point and say...

Read more at: http://dwdsreviews.blogspot.com/2011/...

[Deena Scintilla · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very interesting facts about the Civil War that were not taught in school. Perhaps if they did put a more human face on the wars, those of us who didn't care much for history would become "hooked" earlier. Recently, I've gotten into genealogy and discovered several ancestors who fought on both sides of the Civil War so this was a more personal read for me. Often, too, we glorify the leaders in the battles but know little about their weaknesses, their human sides. Some parts were repetitious and at the end, I skipped over those sections that had been covered earlier. Also, a proof reader would have caught some of the errors such as using the word "game" instead of "gave". Still a good read.

[Geoff Sebesta · Rating 3 out of 5]

A smarmy miscellany that manages to hit some interesting corners. The chapters on prostitution and Quantrill's Raiders were interesting.

Completely runs out of steam by the end. Which makes sense; it's a collection of random facts in chronological order. The author is never actively wrong, but their interpretations are often odd.

[Cat. · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not always the most organized writing, but really packed with details about lots of different topics surrounding the American Civil War: music, letters home, battles (of course), sex ...

Can't wait to see what else this guy has done

[William Martinez · Rating 5 out of 5]

Pretty good book with learning facts in both Armies. It educates the reader in battle names from the CS Army and the U.S. Army and is interesting that the author doesn't pick a side during the reading of the book.

[Stephanie · Rating 5 out of 5]

I LOVED this book!!