What do you think?
Rate this book
A Short History of the Civil War: Ordeal by Fire
Novelist, historian, and critic Bernard De Voto calls this book the "best one-volume history of the Civil War I've ever read." David Madden, Director of the United States Civil War Center in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, considers it "the most powerful of all short histories of the Civil War published since the Depression." These and many other authorities have been won over by the author's profound grasp of the great conflict, and also by his conceptual power, narrative drive, and muscular prose.
Now Civil War buffs and general readers alike can enjoy the noted historian's audacious, staccato-like style as he brings the events, figures, and campaigns of the War Between the States vividly to life. Beginning in Washington, D.C., on the day of Lincoln's inauguration, the narrative moves swiftly on to the battles of Bull Run, Shiloh, Vicksburg, Antietam, Chancellorsville, Gettysburg, Chickamauga, the Wilderness, and, ultimately, to Lee's surrender to Grant at Appomattox Court House.
Avoiding footnotes and other academic trappings, the author describes in absorbing, highly readable detail the drama of military campaigns and battlefield strategies, studding his narrative with fascinating anecdotes and asides on Lincoln, Grant, Lee, Sherman, Jackson, and other leaders. Enhanced with 50 maps of battle sites, this fascinating popular history will thrill any Civil War buff and will also appeal to a wide audience of general readers.
Now Civil War buffs and general readers alike can enjoy the noted historian's audacious, staccato-like style as he brings the events, figures, and campaigns of the War Between the States vividly to life. Beginning in Washington, D.C., on the day of Lincoln's inauguration, the narrative moves swiftly on to the battles of Bull Run, Shiloh, Vicksburg, Antietam, Chancellorsville, Gettysburg, Chickamauga, the Wilderness, and, ultimately, to Lee's surrender to Grant at Appomattox Court House.
Avoiding footnotes and other academic trappings, the author describes in absorbing, highly readable detail the drama of military campaigns and battlefield strategies, studding his narrative with fascinating anecdotes and asides on Lincoln, Grant, Lee, Sherman, Jackson, and other leaders. Enhanced with 50 maps of battle sites, this fascinating popular history will thrill any Civil War buff and will also appeal to a wide audience of general readers.
448 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1948
11 people are currently reading
121 people want to read
About the author
Fletcher Pratt
262 books34 followersMurray Fletcher Pratt (1897–1956) was a science fiction and fantasy writer; he was also well-known as a writer on naval history and on the American Civil War.
Pratt attended Hobart College for one year. During the 1920s he worked for the Buffalo Courier-Express and on a Staten Island newspaper. In the late 1920s he began selling stories to pulp magazines. When a fire gutted his apartment in the 1930s he used the insurance money to study at the Sorbonne for a year. After that he began writing histories.
Wargamers know Pratt as the inventor of a set of rules for civilian naval wargaming before the Second World War. This was known as the "Naval War Game" and was based on a wargame developed by Fred T. Jane involving dozens of tiny wooden ships, built on a scale of one inch to 50 feet. These were spread over the floor of Pratt's apartment and their maneuvers were calculated via a complex mathematical formula. Noted author and artist Jack Coggins was a frequent participant in Pratt's Navy Game, and L. Sprague de Camp met him through his wargaming group.
Pratt established the literary dining club known as the Trap Door Spiders in 1944. The name is a reference to the exclusive habits of the trapdoor spider, which when it enters its burrow pulls the hatch shut behind it. The club was later fictionalized as the Black Widowers in a series of mystery stories by Isaac Asimov. Pratt himself was fictionalized in one story, "To the Barest", as the Widowers’ founder, Ralph Ottur.
Pratt is best known for his fantasy collaborations with de Camp, the most famous of which is the humorous Harold Shea series, was eventually published in full as The Complete Compleat Enchanter. His solo fantasy novels Well of the Unicorn and The Blue Star are also highly regarded.
Pratt wrote in a markedly identifiable prose style, reminiscent of the style of Bernard DeVoto. One of his books is dedicated "To Benny DeVoto, who taught me to write."
Pratt attended Hobart College for one year. During the 1920s he worked for the Buffalo Courier-Express and on a Staten Island newspaper. In the late 1920s he began selling stories to pulp magazines. When a fire gutted his apartment in the 1930s he used the insurance money to study at the Sorbonne for a year. After that he began writing histories.
Wargamers know Pratt as the inventor of a set of rules for civilian naval wargaming before the Second World War. This was known as the "Naval War Game" and was based on a wargame developed by Fred T. Jane involving dozens of tiny wooden ships, built on a scale of one inch to 50 feet. These were spread over the floor of Pratt's apartment and their maneuvers were calculated via a complex mathematical formula. Noted author and artist Jack Coggins was a frequent participant in Pratt's Navy Game, and L. Sprague de Camp met him through his wargaming group.
Pratt established the literary dining club known as the Trap Door Spiders in 1944. The name is a reference to the exclusive habits of the trapdoor spider, which when it enters its burrow pulls the hatch shut behind it. The club was later fictionalized as the Black Widowers in a series of mystery stories by Isaac Asimov. Pratt himself was fictionalized in one story, "To the Barest", as the Widowers’ founder, Ralph Ottur.
Pratt is best known for his fantasy collaborations with de Camp, the most famous of which is the humorous Harold Shea series, was eventually published in full as The Complete Compleat Enchanter. His solo fantasy novels Well of the Unicorn and The Blue Star are also highly regarded.
Pratt wrote in a markedly identifiable prose style, reminiscent of the style of Bernard DeVoto. One of his books is dedicated "To Benny DeVoto, who taught me to write."
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
June 15, 2022
It’s estimated that over 100,000 books have been written about the American Civil War. No one knows for certain, as there is no complete bibliography. One can literally spend a lifetime reading and studying the subject. But if you were only going to read one book — just one book about the Civil War to gain an appreciation and understanding of the subject — then this little book by Fletcher Pratt is the one to read. In this short, brilliant book Pratt managed to capture the very essence of the conflict.
Pratt was a first rate military historian, but was better known as a writer of clever and exciting fantasy stories. This versatility honed his storytelling skill to a mesmerizing edge. He distilled all important details of politics, causes, battles, and personalities into a short, engrossing book that will hold your attention rapt from start to finish. This book is both solidly researched and an exciting page-turner. It has appeal even to those with no particular interest in subject solely on the merit of Pratt's tight storytelling.
This book was written in 1935, and much new material on the Civil War has surfaced since then. Others, such as Shelby Foote, Bruce Catton and James McPherson have written much longer and more comprehensive works on the war that are excellent in their own right. Yet this little book still shines out as a gem among them. With its solid scholarship, sharp storytelling, and precise choice of details, it is the first rate Cliff Notes to the Civil War.
Pratt was a first rate military historian, but was better known as a writer of clever and exciting fantasy stories. This versatility honed his storytelling skill to a mesmerizing edge. He distilled all important details of politics, causes, battles, and personalities into a short, engrossing book that will hold your attention rapt from start to finish. This book is both solidly researched and an exciting page-turner. It has appeal even to those with no particular interest in subject solely on the merit of Pratt's tight storytelling.
This book was written in 1935, and much new material on the Civil War has surfaced since then. Others, such as Shelby Foote, Bruce Catton and James McPherson have written much longer and more comprehensive works on the war that are excellent in their own right. Yet this little book still shines out as a gem among them. With its solid scholarship, sharp storytelling, and precise choice of details, it is the first rate Cliff Notes to the Civil War.
September 23, 2024
It might not be “history,” but it sure is something. Frenetically paced and dyspeptically opinionated, Pratt’s belated reportage barely works as historical gloss for the initiated, let alone as the “most appealing introduction” to the conflict, as our prefatory materials assure us. Consider this introduction to Benjamin Butler: “a classic example of the bartender politician, with one eye, and that usually bleary, two left feet and a genius for getting them into every plate, but a wonderful genius at stuffing ballot boxes, voting dead men, controlling ward-healers and handling every other device of machine politics. Like most machine politicians His Frogship longed for wider puddles …” And on it goes. If that’s your thing, and how can it not be, there’s oodles therein.
February 20, 2016
This is probably the most unique history of the Civil War that I've ever read. Fletcher Pratt's ""Short History of the Civil War"" doesn't read as a dry historical tome; rather, it's almost written as if it were a cinematic epic. Pratt focuses less on dates and facts and instead focuses on the personalities behind the war, giving the reader a broad picture of the many colorful individuals who fought the conflict, both political and military. In some ways, the book is dated (a lot of facts are not up to current historical research) and is not an appropriate book for someone new to Civil War history. However, it is an engaging book that portrays both the glory and the horror of the War Between the States.
May 22, 2012
The first book I ever read about the Civil War and still the one most vividly implanted in my memory. Pratt's battle narratives are unexcelled, and his witty, lively prose turns even secondary Civil War personages (Rosecrans, Bragg, etc.) into historical icons.
February 4, 2023
A very solid history, even today, within its bounds. Its strengths are great, and its weaknesses forgivable.
Strengths: Pratt's style and personality, foremost. His experience writing pulp science fiction and fantasy is evident in his taut, punchy style. He doesn't give over much space to character analysis, instead sketching out the characters in this story in sharp relief, in passing- noting Bragg's intellectualism, or Custer's dumb bravery, or Humphreys's good humor, in a sentence or two, which is all you really need. Pratt's recounting of battles is always clear and concise. He has a strong eye for detail, and favors brief, revealing anecdotal incidents; but he shies away from pathos- he's of a piece with his "hardboiled" contemporaries in that he hints at fields of emotion, without explicitly describing them. He isn't an academic- while he's clearly widely-read, there are no footnotes, and little quantification. He likes pithy sentences and archaic words.
The text is divided into four books, each covering about a year of the war, and each of the first three end with a chapter summarizing and analyzing the war thus far (and it's a shame there isn't such a chapter at the end). Pratt's analysis is perceptive, and his relation of it is entertaining; pretty much all of it holds up today, though it might not pass muster as a set of academic theses. For example- from a passage explaining how the South was less psychologically/socially fit to win such a war- "Lee could not apprehend the growth of a Northern military machine because such a thing was outside his mental horizon; like the countryman before the giraffe, he though "there ain't no such animal." His life was dedicated to proving the theory that a man is born to the purple of ability, that it cannot be educed by specialization or culture, that the bankrupt tanner U. S. Grant will be a bankrupt tanner forever. If this be untrue a Negro is as good as a white man and slavery is wrong."
Following on from the topic of Pratt's analysis- this is an almost unbelievably "pro-Union" book for the time it was written (1935, 2nd edition 1948). Really, it's not pro-North so much as it is just honest- it's impossible to honestly recount the American Civil War without it being clear that the Confederacy was morally repugnant and wrong. At a time when the Lost Cause mythology permeated popular culture (Gone with the Wind was published a year later), and when academic historians were largely content to waffle about economic causes of the Civil War, Pratt frankly states that it was over the issues of slavery and secession, just as everyone at the time said. He doesn't go into great detail about this, as this is mainly a military history, but he doesn't lie about it. He does make clear his analysis that the intellectual and political culture of the North was ultimately better-fit to win the war, and to lead America into the future, in a way that would likely make Lost Causers throw a fit. He's not unreservedly pro-Union, though, and intermittently displays some scorn for the Radical Republicans, who he regards as having been counterproductively zealous in their partisanship.
Weaknesses: Pratt's non-academic background and focus on military affairs mean that social-economic-diplomatic-political factors are given short shrift. This is a history of the war as a series of campaigns, and other matters are only lightly and intermittently treated. This is not unforgivable- it's an inevitable limitation of the format, and there are other books that cover those things excellently. The book's scope also means that it doesn't really cover the background or consequences of the war, either- it starts with Lincoln's inauguration, and ends with Lee's surrender (Johnston's having been covered in an earlier chapter), not even recounting Lincoln's assassination. This is, again, an issue of the book's scope, rather than of its content.
Pratt is also prone to minor errors of fact- nothing major or disqualifying, and errors he might've derived from his sources, but things which better editors might've caught. He seems to think Benjamin Butler was literally one-eyed, for example, rather than "Cyclops" being a nickname applied by Southerners upset at his rule of New Orleans; he implies that Sherman got the go-ahead for his risky March to the Sea after Lincoln was safely re-elected (the order actually came before the election, though the March began after it). As I said, though, he doesn't make any errors that undercut his narrative or analyses.
As propulsive and engaging as his writing is, Pratt is not very good at keeping the reader apprised of dates- he's interested in telling a story, rather than relating bare facts per se.
Four stars out of five, as much as I enjoyed it, because this is in fact limited in its scope, and dated in some ways. Strongly recommended, though.
Strengths: Pratt's style and personality, foremost. His experience writing pulp science fiction and fantasy is evident in his taut, punchy style. He doesn't give over much space to character analysis, instead sketching out the characters in this story in sharp relief, in passing- noting Bragg's intellectualism, or Custer's dumb bravery, or Humphreys's good humor, in a sentence or two, which is all you really need. Pratt's recounting of battles is always clear and concise. He has a strong eye for detail, and favors brief, revealing anecdotal incidents; but he shies away from pathos- he's of a piece with his "hardboiled" contemporaries in that he hints at fields of emotion, without explicitly describing them. He isn't an academic- while he's clearly widely-read, there are no footnotes, and little quantification. He likes pithy sentences and archaic words.
The text is divided into four books, each covering about a year of the war, and each of the first three end with a chapter summarizing and analyzing the war thus far (and it's a shame there isn't such a chapter at the end). Pratt's analysis is perceptive, and his relation of it is entertaining; pretty much all of it holds up today, though it might not pass muster as a set of academic theses. For example- from a passage explaining how the South was less psychologically/socially fit to win such a war- "Lee could not apprehend the growth of a Northern military machine because such a thing was outside his mental horizon; like the countryman before the giraffe, he though "there ain't no such animal." His life was dedicated to proving the theory that a man is born to the purple of ability, that it cannot be educed by specialization or culture, that the bankrupt tanner U. S. Grant will be a bankrupt tanner forever. If this be untrue a Negro is as good as a white man and slavery is wrong."
Following on from the topic of Pratt's analysis- this is an almost unbelievably "pro-Union" book for the time it was written (1935, 2nd edition 1948). Really, it's not pro-North so much as it is just honest- it's impossible to honestly recount the American Civil War without it being clear that the Confederacy was morally repugnant and wrong. At a time when the Lost Cause mythology permeated popular culture (Gone with the Wind was published a year later), and when academic historians were largely content to waffle about economic causes of the Civil War, Pratt frankly states that it was over the issues of slavery and secession, just as everyone at the time said. He doesn't go into great detail about this, as this is mainly a military history, but he doesn't lie about it. He does make clear his analysis that the intellectual and political culture of the North was ultimately better-fit to win the war, and to lead America into the future, in a way that would likely make Lost Causers throw a fit. He's not unreservedly pro-Union, though, and intermittently displays some scorn for the Radical Republicans, who he regards as having been counterproductively zealous in their partisanship.
Weaknesses: Pratt's non-academic background and focus on military affairs mean that social-economic-diplomatic-political factors are given short shrift. This is a history of the war as a series of campaigns, and other matters are only lightly and intermittently treated. This is not unforgivable- it's an inevitable limitation of the format, and there are other books that cover those things excellently. The book's scope also means that it doesn't really cover the background or consequences of the war, either- it starts with Lincoln's inauguration, and ends with Lee's surrender (Johnston's having been covered in an earlier chapter), not even recounting Lincoln's assassination. This is, again, an issue of the book's scope, rather than of its content.
Pratt is also prone to minor errors of fact- nothing major or disqualifying, and errors he might've derived from his sources, but things which better editors might've caught. He seems to think Benjamin Butler was literally one-eyed, for example, rather than "Cyclops" being a nickname applied by Southerners upset at his rule of New Orleans; he implies that Sherman got the go-ahead for his risky March to the Sea after Lincoln was safely re-elected (the order actually came before the election, though the March began after it). As I said, though, he doesn't make any errors that undercut his narrative or analyses.
As propulsive and engaging as his writing is, Pratt is not very good at keeping the reader apprised of dates- he's interested in telling a story, rather than relating bare facts per se.
Four stars out of five, as much as I enjoyed it, because this is in fact limited in its scope, and dated in some ways. Strongly recommended, though.
May 18, 2020
Although this is an excellent book, I do have some criticisms as well as love-notes to impart in my review. I think some context is in order, first.
This book originally came out in 1935, a mere 70 years after the end of the Civil War. Fletcher Pratt may have been able to actually interview a few old veterans, or have access to more letters and journals than are currently extant, although he does not name any resources or include an appendix. Despite this, it was one of the first to tell the story from a Northern perspective, opposing the South's version of a noble "Lost Cause," wherein the main cause of the war was States' Rights. Pratt asserts that it was absolutely about Slavery. Moreover, the editor asserts, in the Introduction, that some of the population numbers put forth by Southern apologists are often misleading.
But this book does have its weaknesses. A glossary, for many of the various old-fashioned terms, would have been very useful. So would footnotes briefly explaining the various classical references as well as references to personages who must have once been well-known, but now are obscure.
The strengths of this book lie in the thumbnail descriptions of many of the generals, the political infighting on both sides, the intense descriptions of the battles, including the river and sea battles, which was something that Pratt was excellent at. It is also good that he included a number of maps and brief explanations of the weather that impacted the battles. Being that this is a one-book history, many things are necessarily left out, but it is a great place to start.
This book originally came out in 1935, a mere 70 years after the end of the Civil War. Fletcher Pratt may have been able to actually interview a few old veterans, or have access to more letters and journals than are currently extant, although he does not name any resources or include an appendix. Despite this, it was one of the first to tell the story from a Northern perspective, opposing the South's version of a noble "Lost Cause," wherein the main cause of the war was States' Rights. Pratt asserts that it was absolutely about Slavery. Moreover, the editor asserts, in the Introduction, that some of the population numbers put forth by Southern apologists are often misleading.
But this book does have its weaknesses. A glossary, for many of the various old-fashioned terms, would have been very useful. So would footnotes briefly explaining the various classical references as well as references to personages who must have once been well-known, but now are obscure.
The strengths of this book lie in the thumbnail descriptions of many of the generals, the political infighting on both sides, the intense descriptions of the battles, including the river and sea battles, which was something that Pratt was excellent at. It is also good that he included a number of maps and brief explanations of the weather that impacted the battles. Being that this is a one-book history, many things are necessarily left out, but it is a great place to start.
April 28, 2018
Pratt's prose is like a racehorse, and just sweeps you away. In that respect, it reminded me of my all-time-favorite one-volume history of the Civil War, Bruce Catton's "This Hallowed Ground." Unfortunately, Pratt is less thorough than Catton, and there are even some factual errors. Nevertheless, every one of the four one-volume Civil War histories I've read (Pratt, Catton, McPherson and Guelzo) includes different material, so no matter how many you've read, you can always learn valuable things by reading yet another one!
For me, this whole book was worth it for the chapter describing Stonewall Jackson's disastrous (for the Confederacy) failures to be where he was supposed to be, when he was supposed to be, during McClellan's Peninsular Campaign. Turns out that in two of those cases, he was off somewhere by himself, praying.
That gave me goosebumps when I read it. I actually had to just put the book down and ponder for a while. This is because I know from other reading that Stonewall Jackson was a phenomenally devout Christian who earnestly sought to do God's will at all times. Apparently, at that particular moment in history, God's will was for Stonewall's forces to be sidelined and twiddling their thumbs instead of fighting -- thus damaging the Confederate war effort. My conclusion: Jackson, simply by praying instead of leading his men in battle, actually WAS doing God's will! Unbeknownst to himself at the time, of course. Lesson: If you sincerely ask God to use you, He will -- but not always in the way you think!
For me, this whole book was worth it for the chapter describing Stonewall Jackson's disastrous (for the Confederacy) failures to be where he was supposed to be, when he was supposed to be, during McClellan's Peninsular Campaign. Turns out that in two of those cases, he was off somewhere by himself, praying.
That gave me goosebumps when I read it. I actually had to just put the book down and ponder for a while. This is because I know from other reading that Stonewall Jackson was a phenomenally devout Christian who earnestly sought to do God's will at all times. Apparently, at that particular moment in history, God's will was for Stonewall's forces to be sidelined and twiddling their thumbs instead of fighting -- thus damaging the Confederate war effort. My conclusion: Jackson, simply by praying instead of leading his men in battle, actually WAS doing God's will! Unbeknownst to himself at the time, of course. Lesson: If you sincerely ask God to use you, He will -- but not always in the way you think!
February 7, 2017
Pratt is better known for writing fantasies, but, with this book, he has written an excellent one-volume history of the American Civil War. I like how his narration moves at a quick pace--like Stonewall Jackson marching in the Shenandoah Valley. He also gives us some very vivid portrayals of the leaders, such as this one of U.S. Grant-"...his veins ran glaciers, his mental thermostat habitually stood at -273 degrees Centigrade...The heat of emergency, which made others boil over, rave, sing and swear...only brought this tortoise to the comfortable temperature of activity. The evidence--his dispatches...written in the midst of battle ring clear and sharp as a chime of bells." However, I give it *** ( really ***1/2) as it's from 1935 and there have been a lot of new information and insights into the ACW since then. For example, there is almost nothing about the role of African Americans in the war, no mention made that about 200,000 of them served in the US Army and Navy. Mention is made of "colored" soldiers' participation in the Battle of the Crater, but not that the blacks were slaughtered-wounded blacks and blacks who tried to surrender killed by the Confederates. And nothing about the infamous Fort Pillow massacre and other atrocities. So, a good history but with a great need to be supplemented by more "up-to-date" material.
August 22, 2011
I thought this was a very good one volume civil war book. However, it is very pro-union and it leaves out quite a bit, but overall it is very good.
February 12, 2013
An excellent and readable history from Fletcher Pratt.
June 20, 2013
The very first book I ever read on the Civil War. I was maybe ten years old at the time and it created a life long interest. Highly recommended for young readers.
December 6, 2025
Fletcher Pratt is known to the SF&F community as the coauthor of the "Harold Shea" series (he did others, both with L. Sprague deCamp and alone, but those left a lasting impression). He is also known to wargamers as running a wargaming club in the 1930s, and publishing his naval miniatures rules in 1940.
He also did some historical writing, including a 320-page history of the ACW. It was originally titled Ordeal By Fire in 1935, and then the present title was given to the second edition in 1948. My dad was given a copy by his older brother around '51, and it set him on the path of being a Civil War nut, and later a wargamer, and an author of books on the ACW. That particular copy has not survived, but he still has a 1963 9th printing of the Cardinal Edition he originally read. I have a 1968 Bantam edition.
In 320 pages Pratt isn't going to, and doesn't, say anything I don't already know, but he does cover the subject well and energetically in that length.
He cycles through subjects, giving the broad movements, the battles, the leaders. Occasionally, there's a chapter labeled as "Interludes" away from the war itself. Britain's non-intervention, the draft riots, Gettysburg Address, the Second Inaugural. Everything is handled quickly, but never breathlessly, and passion in the writing carries things forward.
Overall, it's a good book to develop a basic understanding of the ACW, and likely an interest in seeing more. Very good for all this is the maps. Unlike a lot of books that have a bare handful of maps, if that, and desperately need more, the list of maps here runs two pages.
He also did some historical writing, including a 320-page history of the ACW. It was originally titled Ordeal By Fire in 1935, and then the present title was given to the second edition in 1948. My dad was given a copy by his older brother around '51, and it set him on the path of being a Civil War nut, and later a wargamer, and an author of books on the ACW. That particular copy has not survived, but he still has a 1963 9th printing of the Cardinal Edition he originally read. I have a 1968 Bantam edition.
In 320 pages Pratt isn't going to, and doesn't, say anything I don't already know, but he does cover the subject well and energetically in that length.
He cycles through subjects, giving the broad movements, the battles, the leaders. Occasionally, there's a chapter labeled as "Interludes" away from the war itself. Britain's non-intervention, the draft riots, Gettysburg Address, the Second Inaugural. Everything is handled quickly, but never breathlessly, and passion in the writing carries things forward.
Overall, it's a good book to develop a basic understanding of the ACW, and likely an interest in seeing more. Very good for all this is the maps. Unlike a lot of books that have a bare handful of maps, if that, and desperately need more, the list of maps here runs two pages.
June 21, 2025
Fantastic writing. Just fantastic.
July 11, 2011
I would give this 2.5 stars, if I could. Decent summary of the conflict, but it is very dry and not told with too much passion. There are many better short histories out there a reader can go for.
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews