William C. Davis (1)Rezensionen

Washington, DC

basement shelf to the top left of the office computer
Middle shelf

This book, I understand, is the first of a set of 10 compilations of CWTI reprints from 1962-1973. I was lucky enough to purchase them when they were first available sometime in the early '90s. They are a wonderful set of books. CWTI was probably the best of the magazines devoted to the ACW at the time. Each volume is hardbound, and with the exception of not using color (except for black and a few shades of blue) they're printed exactly as they originally appeared. Half of the fun is reading the ads: Visit the Gettysburg centennial reenactment staying at a bed and breakfast located in the city for 3 days including 2 meals a day for less than $100/person. Purchase a complete CW officers uniform (north or south) for around $20. First edition books, some of them classics now (Bruce Catton, anyone?) for $5-8 each new.

Best, though, are the articles written by some of the leading CW historians of the time. Being printed at the time of the centennial (at least the first 3 volumes, 1962-3, 1963-4, 1964-5) there's usually a special edition devoted to the major battles of a century before. Antietam, Chancellorsville, Gettysburg, Chickamauga... an entire magazine covering various facets of the war: the battles, the maneuvering, the leaders, sometimes the political issues. Unfortunately what were beautiful colored maps originally are published here in black and blue, but they're very legible, readable and go along with the flow of the text.

Finances (school, new baby) stopped me buying after vol. 7; I was on here looking for 8-10 but vol. 1 seems to be the only issue available. Over the past 20-25 I've read, reread, referenced articles, made online comments about articles written 50 years ago... I really love these books and highly recommend them to any CW afficienado.

"Crucible of Command" isn't intended to be a complete history of the Civil War, and doesn't provide a detailed review of various battles, but instead is a comparative biography of Generals Lee and Grant. The book made me rethink what I knew, or thought I knew, about the two generals. Previously, I would have described General Grant as being somewhat of a minor military man, lucky to even be named a General much less overall commander of military forces; a heavy drinker if not a drunk; and someone whose military style was to send wave after wave of soldiers headlong into battle regardless of the numbers sacrificed. In contrast, I would have described General Lee as a brilliant leader and military strategist. I also had the belief that the Confederacy was fully committed to their cause, and that the men of the South were fully dedicated with nary a straggler or deserter among them.
William Davis' book changed a lot of my preconceptions about my earlier preconceptions, and about the conduct of the war itself. Because the book isn't really about the battles and chronology of the war, it made me realize that there was a lot I'd forgotten or just didn't know about the Civil War, and motivated me to read more. As a result, I just picked up one of Bruce Catton's books on the History of the Civil War, and am looking forward to refreshing my memory and learning more about this important part of our U.S. history.

An interesting presentation of the last days of the confederacy. After Lee's surrender, what did happen? Davis's cabinet was not the agreeable group to work together, and this book shows how personality can influence public opinion.

I am completely fascinated with anything that has to do with the Civil War. Great photos and articles.

As a longtime historian of the Civil War, William C. Davis has written extensively about the conflict. This is one of his earliest works, a study of the campaign fought in northeastern Virginia in the summer of 1861. Davis's skills as a writer are on full display, as he provides an entertaining narrative that details the events of the battle as best he can. The book suffers, though, from a paucity of maps; those provided are only for the battle itself, and these are of inferior quality. This is the only serious criticism of the book, however, which remains the best single-volume study of the first major clash between the Union and the Confederacy.

William C. Davis is an excellent historian. He tracks down material like a good, old-fashioned historian, he analyzes it like a good, old-fashioned historian, and he writes like a good, old-fashioned historian. Here is the story of the first successful revolution against Spain in the Americas, a dry run of the Texas Revolution writ small, and a story of Manifest Destiny. West Florida, which stretched from Baton Rogue to Mobile (East Florida from Pensacola to St. Augustine), was settled mostly by Americans and their slaves, but also a grab bag of Frenchmen, Englishmen, and Spaniards. The Spanish government, like most Spanish colonial governments, was weak ineffective, riven with corruption, and broke. Especially during the chaos of the Napoleonic Wars, when Spain was in the midst of Civil War and other Spanish colonies, one-by-one, began rebellions of differing sorts. Here are American frontiersmen who are violent, gritty, impetuous, jealous of their liberties (schooled on the American Revolution), and willing to take a chance. Davis tells the story as engagingly and as thoroughly as possible. It drags in spots, and the cast of characters is daunting at times, but it is pretty good. Historians of American expansion, Texas, Louisiana, the South, should like it, and find something to connect to their interests. It probably will bore the average American history reader.½

Interesting look at the 1830s and the paths three Americans -- Jim Bowie, Davy Crockett and Wm. Travis -- took to their ultimate destination: the Alamo. Mexican politics of the time, too, and their effect on the Mexican and North American population of Texas.

Nice pix

A wanna-be coffee-table book. Half of the book (all of the right-hand pages) is pretty pictures of food and/or ingredients.

The other half has pictures, recipes, and captions. I thought the book would contain actual Civil War recipes, and maybe it does, but I have my suspicions: some of the recipes are described as "updated" (in what ways is left unsaid), and the author seems to use words like "original," "traditional," and "authentic" with enough care for me to view them as weasel-words in respect to the recipes' actual-Civil-War-ness. Apparently the book was published with the idea that one can prepare the included recipes for oneself; however, some recipes lack quantities for certain ingredients, or omit certain instructions. And whereas the photograph sources are credited, the recipe sources are not.

In each page's general comments on Civil War military food, the author states some very suspect things as fact (e.g., that dysentery among soldiers had to do with the greasiness of their food, or that saltpeter is rock-salt). The proportion of things I found suspicious on their face is high, and I'm just a dilettante.

The comments on Civil War military cookery are repetitive. One could wish for more careful copyediting. Using "a piece of butter the size of an egg" to indicate 4 Tbsp of butter in the ingredient list was cute the first time and tiresome the other six. There are other, less consistently employed historical cutseyisms.

It gets two stars because I learned two things from it: what paste has to do with pastry, and why beaten biscuits are called that.

great book explaining more about the challenges of obtaining food and the cooking it and eating it. well done

This book does a good job of detailing the lives of two of America's most famous pirates. The Laffite brothers were masters of operating near the line, and avoiding getting caught. When they did get caught they always found a way to avoid damages. This book shows how two men were resourceful, and innovative. It is an interesting book. There is more information here than I had suspected.

William C Davis sometimes doesn't get his due from academic historians because he sells books. Most academics write dry, boring tomes that nobody reads because they are full of inane and pretentious theories that only interest other academic pedants. William C Davis, however, is a historian and the old mode. This book is thoroughly, thoroughly, thoroughly researched. The endnotes are several hundred pages long, and some of the individual notes spanned several pages. He explains in these notes where his sources come from how they're better than previous books, etc. Nobody, even the most academic of Texas historians, can quibble that this book is well researched, well written, and just flat out good. This is the best triple biography of Davy Crockett, Jim Bowie, and William Barrett Travis ever done. Had Davis decided to split this in the three books, there would be the best three books on these three Texas heroes ever. Davis corrects many historical inaccuracies about these characters, putting their lives into focus, defining them as men of their times. Jim Bowie was a land swindler and slave smuggler; Davy Crockett was a failure as both farmer and Congressman, probably a failure into being a second husband, and, in the end, unable to live up to a legend of his own making; William B. Travis was a debtor, an adulterer, and a horrible father; yet they are all representative of the frontier type, to various degrees, the men who turned the untamed wilderness of the American West into pure opportunity. It also serves as a decent introduction to the Texas Revolution, though the last chapter on actual battle of the Alamo was way too short. It was almost a letdown. Davis should have expended his talent, research, and industry into describing the muck mess that is the historiography and historical depiction of the battle (although he probably did that in his later book, specifically on the Texas Revolution, which I own but have not yet read). All in all, a brilliant book.

Davis has written a very detailed account of this famous battle which changed how military minds around the world looked at battles at sea. It heralded the end of the wooden ship as a naval vessel. Using published and unpublished material from private collections, he presents in great detail how the two vessels were conceived, how they were built and how the battle was fought. Plus he does so in a very readable manner that makes the book available to the general reader. This is a very enjoyable read for anyone interested in naval battles even though this was an unusual one.

A very high level book about the Laffite brothers and their business dealings. Very few details. If you are looking for a book about pirates business dealings this is excellent...the actual battle reports though rarely have any detail.

The legends and myths of the Alamo are well known. After you read this book you will know the truth about this ill-fated battle and three of the American heroes who were there. The lives of Crockett, Bowie and Travis will be brought into a whole new light. You wont want to put this book down.

The author delves into a part of U.S. History often ignored, the contested portion of the Louisiana Purchase. West Florida which France and the U.S. Accepted as part of the purchase was considered by Spain their colony and was administered by Spain for years after the Louisiana Purchase. This occurred mainly for the fledgling U.S. Could not afford a war or an economic embargo from the European powers at the time.

But when Reuben Kemper ends up in the territory of Spanish West Florida and and goes into Business with John Smith, Smith starts a series of events that causes his partner, Kemper, to not only look like he owes more than he does in their joint business venture but has the committee doing the original accounting, appointed all by Smith, rule that Kempers' land should be confiscated and awarded to Smith as well. The authors research goes far enough into details that even though it is believed that the Kempers never heard of a later accounting that showed in actuality it was Smith that owed Kemper a substantial amount.

But the Kemper did know that the judgment and the seizure of their land went against Spanish law for the amounts involved required this to be adjudicated in Havana and not locally. Kemper having a temper, fortitude and a long memory becomes an outlaw to the Spanish settlers and eventually and icon to Americans as his fight for his personal justice, vengeance, is turn on a whim into a fight for the independence of West Florida.

Though this initial foray in 1804 for independence came to naught it places the seed that the territory is militarily weak. Yet at that time the Spanish leadership was honest and the existing Americans supported the law that protected their existing rights. Though the object of their expedition crumbled the Kemper's came to be known as men who did not speak idle threats and followed through on their words.

The revolution that made West Florida a short lived independent republic would come a few years later and have nothing to do with the Kempers though Nathan Kemper would later become involved. The U.S.A. did not become officially involved but had rumors out that if West Florida was an independent country they would annex what was already their purchased territory. But reading this complex and in depth history what seemed to be the final stray was when the honest Spanish administrator was replaced with an incompetent one who allowed a corrupt official to usurp his powers over land and legal processes. Causing land prices to plummet, land disputes and no way to get anything done without a bribe flames the true revolt of 1810.

The people were successful in gaining independence for the western part of West Florida and looked like they would take all of The Florida territories just shy of Saint Augustine with the forces they had if the U.S. Government did not stop them. And though the Republic of West Florida won its independence and wanted to be annexed by the U.S.A. they did not like the manner in which President Madison instituted its incorporation into the Orleans territory by totally ignoring the new republics elected officials and their constitution.

This forgotten revolution that was an auger of things to come such as the loss of Spanish colonies throughout the Americas to uprisings, including the Texas fight for Independence that is well recorded, and the U.S. Civil War. The author does summarize quickly the results of the war of 1812.

There is no question that the author did a great amount of research and writes an interesting narrative. With the colorful Kemper's and names like Andrew Jackson and Bowie bringing in names familiar to many. I would like to see another book with more focus on the involvement of the U.S. Government and of the actual leadership of the successful 1810 revolt. For this was not a revolt to throw off any yoke of monarchy but to protect land rights and an honest administrative process. Some of the details the author was able to find is a testament to his research skill. This is an important part of American history and what would lead to America's expansionist policy on the continent.

In "Lincoln's Men" (1999), William C. Davis provides an in depth study of the relationship between President Abraham Lincoln and the men of the Union Army during the War Between the States. Lincoln had an unusually close relationship with his fighting men - one that would sustain the president and his soldiers through even the bleakest periods of the war. Davis makes the case that, had this personal relationship not existed, it would have been much more difficult for the country, civilians and soldiers alike, to find the will to continue to fight a terrible war that seemed to be lasting forever.

That Abraham Lincoln became a father figure to a huge majority of the men fighting on the side of the Union, especially those in the Army of the Potomac, is beyond dispute. As his book's subtitle announces ("How President Lincoln Became a Father to an Army and a Nation"), Davis explains here the "how" part of what happened. In order to do that, Davis searched through some 600 manuscript collections to see what the men themselves had to say about Lincoln during various milestones of the war. He quotes extensively (sometimes to excess, in fact) from the letters and diaries of the men who were there.

"Lincoln's Men" is divided into nine chapters, beginning with one on Lincoln's election to the presidency in 1860 and ending with one on his assassination in 1865. Between these bookend chapters are others on creation of the Union army, Lincoln's struggles with the reluctant-to-fight General McClellan, Lincoln's evolving policy on emancipation of the slaves in Southern states, Lincoln's efforts to keep his army armed, fed and paid, and one on Lincoln's liberal pardon policy (perhaps the most revealing chapter in the entire book).

Each of the chapters is peppered with direct quotes from soldier correspondence that show Lincoln's influence and effect on the men he so much respected and admired. Davis does not make the claim that love for Mr. Lincoln was unanimously shared by the army and, in fact, spends a good number of pages quoting from McClellan loyalists who remained in opposition to Lincoln right up to his death. Shockingly enough, some Union soldiers, those who insisted to the end that they had not enlisted to fight to end slavery, were cheered by the news of Lincoln's assassination - and many learned to regret the mistake of expressing those feelings to Lincoln loyalists.

Abraham Lincoln was perhaps the perfect man for his time and his job. It is, of course, impossible to predict what might have happened if America had had no Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln's Men does make clear, however, how much a key element the personality of Lincoln was in holding the Union together long enough for the United States to conclude the war successfully. Without the strong emotional bonding between Lincoln and his men, the War Between the States may have ended very differently.

Rated at: 4.0

Good read, the author uses diaries, journals as source material along with Johnnie Green's book to provide a different view of this distinguished Confederate Kentucky corps commanded by John Breckenridge. The author also has written a book on Breckenridge which is a good companion to this book.½

This book is a history of Virginia in the Civil War during 1862. Each chapter is written by a different individual. The chapters most interesting to me were those by Thomas Lowry on court-martial and the diary of Judith B. McGuire.

This is a relatively short book with some interesting information written for the general public. As Thomas Lowry tells it men from New York were the most apt to break the law. At any rate this is a quick read but get it from your local library.

When I read the reviews for Davis's book one word always seemed to pop up: exhaustive. Exhaustive research, exhaustive detail, exhaustive portraits, exhaustive this, exhaustive that. It's true. There is so much detail given to not only the personalities and lives of Crockett, Bowie, and Travis, but to the culture and landscape of both politics and era as well. It's as if the reader is witness to the pioneering growth of Louisiana, Texas and Virginia by default. History, politics and geography all rolled into one book.
Because not much is known about Crockett, Bowie and Travis each has become a legend beyond compare. Using as much information as he was able to research (exhaustively) Davis does a great job trying to dispel rumor and myth surrounding each man, admitting that these are men of folklorish proportions, but not much of it can be substantiated.
Confession: knowing there was no way I was going to finish this in time I skipped to the last chapter of the book. It is, of course, the end of Crockett, Bowie and Travis. Davis paints a tragic picture of what their last days must have been like in Alamo, Texas. The one image that kept playing in my mind was the uncertainty of their fates. When their families did not hear from them they could only speculate and worry. Word travelled slowly in those days. A telegram dispatched two weeks earlier can give loved ones the impression you are still alive despite the fact you died the next day.½

This book is about three months in the life of a small Alabama town when the Confederacy was born. I kept thinking it would make a moderately less violent television series ala Deadwood. Lots of compelling personalities with itchy trigger fingers.

I liked this author's book Three Roads to the Alamo, about William Travis, Jim Bowie, and Davy Crockett. This is a far denser read. Even with my interest in the subject I found myself lagging at times.

The Confederates liked to think they were statesmen on par with the Founding Fathers, but in fact they were more akin to the bootblacks that shined Ben Franklin's shoes. It's almost funny when it begins to dawn on a few of them that they can never fix what's wrong with government when the real problem is what's wrong with themselves.

I have two complaints with the book. The first is about Davis's use of "Little Aleck" to describe the confederate vice-president and moderate Alexander Stephens. The similarity to the name of the Clockwork Orange protagonist is disconcerting enough, but it also diminishes a man who overcame cruel physical deformity. Stephens was one of the few people (besides Jefferson Davis) who saw clearly the danger they'd placed themselves in.

My second complaint is that Davis often uses Mary Chesnut's judgment about a character without seeming to consider that occasionally she may have been wrong. I'm not saying she was, just that I would have liked corroborating evidence.

That said, the book sets the scene very well and is a good introduction to a society at its peak, right before it drove its Cadillac off the cliff.

Often interesting, but repeditive and stretched. Border notes when reading.

This is a superb book. The mythology surrounding this war never made a great deal of sense to me, and this examines many issues, both broad and specific and creates a much clearer understanding. I recommend it to anyone seeking a greater understanding of the war.

There is one argument that jarred me. Davis suggests in one of his pieces that the slaves can't have been too unhappy--they could have created a lot of problems for the Confederacy by resistance. According to Bitterly Divided, by David Williams, that is exactly what they did. He quotes Southern whites complaining that their slaves became harder to control and less industrious as the war went on. In his book Maryland, Carl Bode says, speaking of slaves: "By March 1862, Dr, John Bayne [of Maryland], could write Lincoln in outrage [...] 'Hundreds and I may say thousands have absconded and they meet with such ready ingress and protection within the lines of the Army that we shall soon be depopulated of slavery." We may not have opinion polls of slaves within the Confederacy, but we do know that so many thousands sought Federal lines that the army didn't know what to do with them.½