Book Description
The Atlanta Campaign of 1864 was one of the most interesting and important campaigns of the Civil War.Though the Confederate army was strong and capable, Major General William Tecumseh Sherman, the Union commander, successfully took Atlanta with few casualties, using his superior numbers to maneuver the Confederate soldiers from successive strong positions.

Sherman Invades Georgia takes advantage of modern planning techniques to fully examine what went into the Georgia campaign.Unlike other studies, though, this one puts the reader squarely into the mind of General Sherman on the eve of his most famous military undertaking—limiting the information to that possessed by Sherman at the time, as documented in his correspondence during the campaign and not in his after-the-fact reports and autobiography.

Laid out in chapters that follow the format of an "estimate of the situation," this book doesn't simply recount the facts or attempt to provide a definitive history—other books do that—rather it offers a narrative of the campaign that illustrates a logical decision-making process as formulated in modern times. Published in cooperation with the Associations of the United States Army, the book serves two audiences: military professionals can use it for training purposes and Civil War buffs and interested laymen can gain a sense of the uncertainty that real commanders face by not having all the records of both sides at hand. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (4)

I finsihed the book last night
And a nice read it was!The author writes in a conversational style I found very easy to follow.

The book is an analysis of Sherman's thinking in preparing for his Atlanta campaign using modern military planning techniques.The author pauses to allow the reader to make his or her own plans, then presents his (the author's) plans, and finally states what Sherman adtually decided.The Confederate situation is discussed, but mostly from the viepoint of how it affected Sherman's thinking.There are plentiful maps, all very useful as they do not try to show too much, nor to leave out essential locations.

So while the book is not a history of the Atlanta campaign (though the full campaign is outlined), I found it a very interesting and useful, but not lengthy, read.

practitioners think about logistics
I will be buying this book based on seeing the author on CSPAN on November 18. I am writing this review to give a little balance to the other reviews. I read a lot of civil war books (at least one or two a month)and am currently a member of two Civil War round tables and have attended meetings at seven round tables throughout the country over the last 12 years. For someone like myself, a book that approaches concerns that would be of interest to professional soldiers adds another dimension to my knowledge. Scales said that he calculated the various amounts that could have be delivered by means available to Sherman. This information is not available everywhere. He admits that some of his book will be difficult for people who are not familiar with logistics. He also said that civil war generals were geniuses for the vast amount of information they needed to understand and synthesize. I look forward to reading this book. Even if in the end it does not deserve 5 stars, it will certainly increase my knowledge of the civil war.

Rebuttal
I find this review hard to believe. "Civil War Buffs Beware?" Are you kidding me? You gave this book, which you admitted you haven't read, the lowest possible score because it didn't cover what YOU wanted it to cover. This particular quote says it all:

"Unfortunatey this is not that book. But in fairness to the author, it is not the book he set out to write. This is essentially a training manual for military professionals. As such it may be a fine book. Of that I am not qualified to judge. (Therefore, I found it impossible to give it a meaningful numerical rating.)"

If you are not qualified to judge, have not read the book and find it impossible to give it a numerical rating, then DON'T. Your commentary is essentially worthless, which i'm glad you finally get to toward the end of the review. Oh, also, learn how to spell skirmish. Thanks.

Civil War Buffs Beware
In a field which has produced multiple in depth studies of virtually every campaign, battle and skirmish during the entire course of the Civil War there remains one campaign that has been almost totally neglected: Sherman's 1864 invasion of north west Georgia from Chattanooga, Tennessee to the Chattahoochee River on the outskirts of Atlanta. Most historians pick up the story with the seige of Atlanta followed by Sherman's "March to the Sea." Largley ignored - or given only cursory treatment - are the hard fought battles that preceeded that seige and brought Sherman's army from southeast Tennessee to the gates of Atlanta: Dalton, Resaca, Alatoona Pass, and Kennesaw Mountain to mention only the most significant encounters. These battles cry out for updated historical treatment in a full length book by a modern Civil War historian.

Unfortunatey this is not that book. But in fairness to the author, it is not the book he set out to write. This is essentially a training manual for military professionals. As such it may be a fine book. Of that I am not qualified to judge. (Therefore, I found it impossible to give it a meaningful numerical rating.)

But as a student of history and of the Civil War I can only say that I was disappointed in this treatment of the war in north west Georgia. I am still waiting for the definitive historical study of that campaign. ... Read more

Book Description

In this engrossing work of history, Lee Kennett brilliantly brings General Sherman's 1864 invasion of Georgia to life by capturing the ground-level experiences of the soldiers and civilians who witnesses the bloody campaign.  From the skirmish at Buzzard Roost Gap all the way to Savannah ten months later, Kennet follows the notorious, complex Sherman, who attacked the devastated the heart of the Confederacy's arsenal. Marching Through Georgia describes, in gripping detail, the event that marked the end of the Old South.

Customer Reviews (7)

Unique, thoroughly researched, and a good read
If you're looking for a tactical study of Sherman's Atlanta campaign, this isn't it.If you're looking to delve into the human aspects of a massive Civil War campaign, this definitely is it.If you're looking for a well written book of interest to a broad range of readers, this is also it.No need to be a "buff" to enjoy Kennett's fast paced work that is full of interesting stories and insights into a broad range of topics.His writing keeps the pages turning.It is a unique combination of "beach" book and reference.I have two quibbles with Kennett's writing and they are technical:1) Stop separating full sentences with semi-colons.Use periods.It aids in reading.2) Stop using French terms where they aren't necessary or translate them.The book is too good for that to matter much.

Well written, well researched
Lee Kennett has made a major contribution to the literature of "The March."He has drawn from a huge number of little known sources; private correspondence, diaries,and eyewitness accounts.The book has a good "feel" of the history of the period.His writing style is informal and allows the reader to see the events as if through the eyes of the participants.
I have researched & written extensively on the history of Milledgeville, Georgia and can say that Kennett covered the Milledgeville period as well as it has been covered by anyone.

Hugh T. Harrington
author of: "Civil War Milledgeville, Tales From the Confederate Capital of Georgia," "Remembering Milledgeville, Historic Tales From Georgia's Antebellum Capital" and "More Milledgeville Memories."

Deserves to be rated as a Civil War classic!
Lee Kennett's Marching Through Georgia could easily be mistaken for a "popular history", the kind of work that scholars will occasionally endorse, but usually dismiss. Marching Through Georgia is certainly as readable as any so-called popular history but this work is a gem of historical scholarship, to be compared with the studies of such authors as Bell Irvin Wiley, James Robertson, Reid Mitchell, and Earl Hess.The number of primary sources consulted is positively staggering.Kennett understands, and communicates the character of Civil War soldiers and soldiering inthe Western Armies (North and South) better than any author I've ever encountered with the possible exception of Larry Daniel.An outstanding book!

Total Dominance!
This is as complete an analysis of General Sherman's Georgia Campaign, his famous March to the Sea, as you will ever read. Starting in Dalton and ending in Savannah, the total event is here: The participants, the politics, the strategy, the horror and, most importantly, the impact.

Stating that he would make Georgia howl, Sherman proceeded to do just that. In the process he demonstrated not only to the North but also to the South that this war was over. Southern armies were no longer contending against Northern aggression. They were swamped by it. They could no longer contain this conflict.

Sherman's March is the signal event of the War. It is unique. It was not fought against an enemy army. It was not fought to achieve a strategic position. It was not fought to out flank or surprise. It was fought to destroy an enemy's heart and soul, against an enemy's will to resist. And it succeeded admirably.

The March demonstrated beyond a doubt the fundamental weakness of the South, the uncontestable dominance of the North and the complete futility of further resistance. It spelled defeat more accurately than any other event in the War's four year history. It demonstrated that the South could no longer defend itself, that they couldn't do a thing about it. It demonstrated that the South was whipped.

This is an excellent account of what transpired.

Excellent Recounting of a Painful Time
I was raised in Georgia and attended public school in Athens in the 60s and 70s. Even in a university town some 100 years after the Civil War there were people with embittered attitudes toward the North who saw themselves as citizens of a conquered country. This was surely due in part to Civil Rights legislation enforcing integration; and in part to that fable of Southern life, GONE WITH THE WIND. Most white Southerners know and many revile the name of William Tecumseh Sherman; not because they are ardent historians but because Margaret Mitchell and director Victor Fleming immortalized Sherman's burning of Atlanta on celluloid. In fact, although I hardly studied anything about the Civil War in public school, our class did take a 60-mile bus ride to watch GONE WITH THE WIND at the Fox Theatre in Atlanta. Although many years have passed, I have no reason to believe that today's young Georgians are any more informed about the actual history of their state; whether this is through official ignorance, shame, fear, or willful deceit I cannot say.

Lee Kennett's book, MARCHING THROUGH GEORGIA goes a long way toward addressing this ignorance, and should be required reading for every Georgian. The book focuses on Sherman's North Georgia Campaign, the Battle of Atlanta and the March to the Sea as it affected the soldiers and civilians of both sides. His discussion of strategy is general and primarily about Sherman's decision to have his army forage off the land. Even this is included because of the consequence such forage had for the people involved--Kennett lays the blame of the Union atrocities at the feet of this decision, but takes care to point out the nature of such "atrocities", and that truly severe crimes other than the destruction of property was rather rare. Indeed, what makes Kennett's book so valuable is its evenness of tone regarding the issues and personalities. A Sherman biographer, he neither idolizes nor demonizes the General. Sherman, though not the main subject of this book, emerges as a recognizable and very human figure. Sherman's devotion to duty was horrifyingly single-minded--Kennett relates an incident in which 28 Union soldiers are too ill to travel, and Sherman left them in the care of a Confederate hospital in Milledgeville while he moved on with his troops: "'If they die, give them a decent burial,' Sherman said, 'if they live, send them to Andersonville [the prison in south Georgia where Union soldiers were held in appalling conditions to die in the thousands], if course,' Dr. Massey may have looked a bit nonplussed at this, for Sherman added: 'They are prisoners of war, what else can you do? If I had your men I would send them to prison.'" In another incident, Sherman refused to accept Union prisoners from Andersonville in a prisoner exchange because they were too ill or wounded to fight.

Kennett's descriptions of Sherman's progress were very meaningful to me as a native of the state. Non-Georgians might get bogged down a bit in the geography, and this is one of the book's weaknesses, but a minor one. There are two maps included, but as neither shows a complete map of the state some readers might well be bewildered. The Andersonville prison played an important role as at least a potential target but appears on neither map. It was not liberated during Sherman's Georgia campaign, and had it been shown on the map its distance from Sherman's path would have been immediately clear. The only other flaw is the paucity of information on black Georgians and how the campaign affected them. Kennett addresses this, relating that most information on their situation is related by whites and is mostly stereotypical. He provides one touching conversation passed along from Joel Chandler Harris (author of the Uncle Remus/Brer Rabbit tales): "...an old black couple he found in a corner of fence, not far from the road Sherman's army had just passed: 'Who is that lying there?' asked Joe. 'It my old man, suh.' 'What is the matter with him?' 'He dead, suh, But bless God he died free.'"

Also extraordinary is the comradeship that grew between members of the opposing sides whenever contact was allowed. Animosity between combatants is expected, but over and over Kennett relates encounters between the two armies, or between Union soldiers and Southern civilians that are remarkable in that so many concerned seemed able to view their opposite number as a fellow human rather than an evil enemy. Southerners now know only the destruction Sherman's forces brought, emptying and burning Atlanta and many other towns; but at the time Sherman's actions were seen at least by some as a reasonable response to the Confederates' burning of Chambersburg, Pennsylvania.

MARCHING THROUGH GEORGIA is full of fascinating information: North Georgia, mostly populated by poor white farmers who didn't own slaves, was largely loyalist and opposed succession; Governor Joe Brown (after the war a US Senator!) supported States' Rights to the extent that he clashed repeatedly with Confederate President Jefferson Davis; Sherman's forces faced the most opposition and most difficult fighting in primarily loyalist North Georgia; after the burning of Atlanta Sherman was able to move through Georgia with very little fighting at all; and rather than "bushwacking" Sherman's forces and provoking a fight with vastly superior forces, most Georgians preferred to let him move quickly through their land.

The Civil War buff, fans of War Histories and Southern History and Georgians in general will all find much of interest in Marching Through Georgia. My knowledge of my home state has been immeasurably improved, and I am looking forward to reading Kennett's biography, SHERMAN. ... Read more

Book Description
Sherman's March is the vivid narrative of General William T. Sherman's devastating sweep through Georgia and the Carolinas in the closing days of the Civil War. Weaving together hundreds of eyewitness stories, Burke Davis graphically brings to life the dramatic experiences of the 65,000 Federal troops who plundered their way through the South and those of the anguished -- and often defiant -- Confederate women and men who sought to protect themselves and their family treasures, usually in vain. Dominating these events is the general himself -- "Uncle Billy" to his troops, the devil incarnate to the Southerners he encountered.

"What gives this narrative its unusual richness is the author's collation of hundreds of eyewitness accounts...The actions are described in the words, often picturesque and often eloquent, of those who were there, either as participants -- Union soldiers, Confederate soldiers -- in the fighting and destruction or as victims of Sherman's frank vow to 'make Georgia howl.' Mr. Davis intercuts these scenes with closeups of the chief actors in this nightmarish drama, and he also manages to give us a coherent historical account of the whole episode. A powerful illustration of the proposition put forth in Sherman's most famous remark." -- The New Yorker ... Read more

Customer Reviews (24)

SHERMEN'S MARCH
tHIS BOOK SHOULD BE READ BY SOMEONE WHO ALREADY HAS READ MUCH ABOUT THE CIVIL WAR, iT IS CHOCK FULL OF PERSONAL INFO,BUT WILL BE CONFUSING TO THE A READER WHO IS NOT FAMILAR WITH THE CHARACTERS AND PLACES

One Of The Best Books I've Read
This book is easy to read!The author does not write above or below the reader.It's a great straight forward book filled with a large amount of information. The information presented will be appreciated by Civil War buffs of any level.He covers both the military and civilian angles.

And Now for the Details...
I have been a Civil War buff all my life and thought I knew a fair amount of detail on all of the major engagements of the war.However, until I read "Sherman's March", I really didn't know anything about his post-Atlanta campaign except that he marched to Savannah.Presumably his soldiers fought battles along the way and presumably they did something after capturing Savannah but I guess my curiosity never led me to find out more.It was in the Atlanta campaign that my great great grandfather was captured so I thought I should find out what happened after that.

What the author, Burke Davis, chronicles is what exactly DID happen after the fall of Atlanta.He has put together a fascinating account of the March to the Sea (and beyond) by compiling first-hand accounts of the events of the campaign.Sherman's men found little oppostition after Atlanta but their march had a devestating effect on the South.The brutal, unforgiving thievery that his foragers and "bummers" committed led to a great loss of resources and morale for the Southern folks.What few battles there were did not register on the richter scale of war but the destruction wrought by his troops was of tsunami proportion.There is much about the various communities put to the torch (beginning with Atlanta) and focussing on Columbia, SC.There is also much to suggest that Sherman was guilty of oversight by not maintaining tight control over his troops.His attitude was that the South needed to learn the consequences of their wrongly conceived rebellion.The sooner their morale was broken, the sooner the war would end and the fewer number of soldiers would become casualties (on both sides).While the reader may find truth in Sherman's attitude, it is hard not to become enraged at the extent of the mayhem.

Davis also presents a fair amount of information of the slaves that were freed along the way and the attitude of the different Union Generals towards their emacipation.In the 21st Century it is pretty commonly felt that the Civil War was about slavery.However, a significant percentage of the Union's fighting men felt the issue of the South's secession from the Union was the cause they were fighting for, Sherman included.Nonetheless, they used the freed slaves whenever it was to their advantage and abandoned them when it wasn't.

Sherman's concept of a large army invading deep into enemy territory with no lifeline of support was a challenging concept at the time and its' success influenced military strategy thereafter.Although Davis documents that the soldiers were able to take far more than they needed, it was still an impressive campaign.There were plenty of things the men did without for roughly six months; clothing, pay, letters from home, and many other things that the Army of the Potomac took for granted.

After Savannah, their march through the Carolinas spelled the defeat of the South and Davis does a good job of detailing Sherman's significant involvement in the war's end.There was controversy surrounding that and Sherman found himself at odds with the Secretary of War, Edwin Stanton.Davis concludes by giving us a brief synopsis of the rest of Sherman's life after the war.

During the first chapter I was apprehensive about Davis's style of writing but the rest of the book made me appreciate his approach to the subject.His frequent use of primary sources was helpful yet not overdone.His writing gave way to some editorial comments but, overall, I thought the book was pretty well balanced.I gave it 5 stars because, after the first chapter, I couldn't put it down and because I learned so much about an aspect of the Civil War that no one else seems to make much mention of.

Unrelenting aggressive slash and burn good read
Based upon civilian, military, and reporters eyewitness accounts.Davis' wonderfully written account of this mercurial Union general's march through the South moves along at a fast pace.There are those who would have us believe Sherman was just a troubled man and his military actions were inhuman; he may, in part, had these attributes, but we shouldn't disregard his compassion.His brilliance as a military leader is unquestionable; ruthless against the enemy but sensitive to the woman and children.I found myself shaking my head with sorrow through one paragraph only to switch to a chuckle on the very next.The bibliography is extensive.

Beginning with the fall of Atlanta, we follow the unrelenting aggressive slash and burn total warfare of General Sherman's Union troops, and then the final march into Raleigh.The strategy was to beat the Rebels into submission----a quicker end to the war.Although not stated in the book, I think the "march" introduced the creation of mobile warfare.Sherman to wife Ellen: "there are some very elegant people here who I knew in better days and who do not seem ashamed to call on the 'Vandal Chief'.They regard us just as the Romans did the Goths and the parallel is not unjust.Many of my men with red beards and stalwart frames look like giants".In battle was not the only way a soldier lost his life: many union troops died after a forced march back home; despicable and troubling.The finale march was a victory parade through Pennsylvania Avenue.

There are stories of rescue and caring among the carnage, such as the feeding of confederate families.Davis does a good job of showing the human side of the lives of the confederate people.Atrocities occurred on both sides; alcohol and the lax in discipline were no doubt the culprit in the burning of property.Sherman made the mistake of overextending negotiations for surrender; he was relieved, but Grant kept him on; only small changes were made in negotiations.Sherman to a friend: "General Grant is a great general.I know him well.He stood by me when I was crazy, and I stood by him when he ws drunk; and not, sir, we stand by each other always".Just a note: the free press aided the enemy then as it does so today.

"It was to be almost a century before military scholars proclaimed the general as the most original and influential of Civil Warfield commanders, whose concepts forecast developments in the twentieth century."

Wish you well
Scott

A Genuine Thriller
Some of us who neither grew up in, nor have familial roots in the deep south sometimes find it difficult to fathom why many of our born and bred Redneck brethern are still upset about the Civil War. This book gave me understanding. It also ignited in me an abiding passion for American history that my high school and college courses completely failed to stimulate.

Comparing "Sherman's March" to Michael Schaara's "Killer Angels" [which I also enjoyed hugely]... I'd say Schaara's book is a very fine historical novel... but in "Sherman's March" Burke Davis has accomplished the IMO much more difficult task of rendering rigorously-documented history so that it reads as if it were a novel. ... Read more

Book Description
Perhaps the most feared and fearless Union general in the war, Sherman's determination, courage, and skill were a key factor in ultimate Northern victory. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

PLENTY OF BLAME FOR ALL INVOLVED
Professor Lucas has written a well researched analysis of the burning of Columbia, South
Carolina by the Federal army. There were strategic military reasons forSherman'smarch
through central South Carolina. Columbia "was an important war manufacturing
center--one of the few still in Confederate hands--providing munitions, equipment, and
uniforms....central South Carolina contained the last Confederate sources of food
untouched by war." Governor Magrath pointed out to Jefferson Davis that the borders of
South Carolina were Richmond's second line of defense which was confirmed when
Richmond fell less than two months after Columbia surrendered.

The author outlines the wartime conditions in Columbia noting that both the civilian and
military authorities were tardy in realizing the obvious danger to the city and even slower
to act. Finally the author writes "The missing ingredient with the Confederate camp....was
a belief in the possibility of success. The defeatism of Beauregard's leadership was
abundantly clear...."

Chapter 2 gives a succinct account ofthe evacuation of Columbia noting that inspite of
the desperate condition of the Confederate armies, the large arsenals and war supplies in
Columbia were not evacuated.The cotton in storage was moved into the streets with
orders for it to be burned which contributed to the later fires. Columbia Mayor Goodwyn
surrendered the city while scores of bewildered Columbians, in an ill-conceived attempt to
placate a dreaded conqueror, began distributing alcoholic beverages to the soldiers. This
precipitated an insurmountable problem.

A balanced account of the burning of Columbia is given. The most damaging fire began
about eight p.m.on February 17th, was of inexplicable origin and was not extinguished for
six or seven hours when the wind abated. With drunken men roaming the streets, rioting
and acts of personal violence were bound to occur. Confusion reigned and most control
over the city was lost . The extent of the damage following the fire is reviewed. About
one-third of Columbia was destroyed with the business community virtually wiped out and
265 residences burned.

Regarding who burned Columbia, the conclusions were (and still are) along partisan lines.
South Carolinians charged Sherman as "morally responsible for the burning of Columbia".
Union officers and troops felt that while the events in Columbia were regrettable they
were the results of acts of war. Sherman entered South Carolina to disrupt the state's
transportation system and bring an end to the war by destroying Southern morale.
However, Professor Lucas notes "The failure of Sherman's psychological warfare, a new
kind of war which Southern civilians did not understand, was that the hatred generated
during the invasion did not terminate with the war's end."

The post war criticisms of and charges against Sherman and the Union army are reviewed.
The author notes that the Confederates as they evacuated the city began the looting and
plundering then the entering Federal troops seized what was left. The unanswered
question of incendiarism, the most disputed issue, is complicated by a lack of reliable
eyewitness accounts.
In summary, Sherman failed to take timely and sufficient action to control both the fires
and the riots. However, the author notes that the failure of Confederate leadership in the
defense of South Carolina and the evacuation of the city played a major role in creating a
situation which resulted in the destruction of the city. In addition no preparations were
made by Beauregard, Hampton or the city fathers for the official surrender of the city
when a formal declaration of Columbia as an open city may have produced positive
results.

In conclusion, Professor Lucas writes that the burning of Columbia was a great tragedy
for South Carolina and the Union stating "....when the Union Army left Columbia on
February 20, 1865, it left behind bitter hatred. Many citizens had lost everything they
possessed, while others had gone through the catastrophe relatively unscathed. All,
however, suffered psychologically. They had promised to give their "all" in defense of
South Carolina and the Confederacy; it was painfully apparent that few had done so. Long
before Columbia was captured, Columbians had given up." ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

Sherman...a different man
I enjoyed this work.Even though it was not an exhaustive report on General Sherman, (as it probably never was intended to be), it was interesting and thought provoking.I especially liked the somewhat fresh ideas on Sherman's treatment of the Carolinas after his well known march to the sea.Not all authors have the poetry and flow of a Carl Sandburg but Mark Coburn has a style that makes this work an enjoyable read as opposed to some that can lose you in details that are not important to the issue.If you can obtain a copy, I would recommend you do so. ... Read more

Book Description

In the crowded battlefield of Civil War commanders, William Tecumseh Sherman stands apart. Others are often summed up in a few words: the stubborn, taciturn Grant; the gentlemanly, gifted Lee; the stomping, cursing Sheridan; and the flamboyant, boyish Stuart. But the enigmatic Sherman still manages to elude us. Probably no other figure of his day divides historians so deeply-leading some to praise him as a genius, others to condemn him as a savage.

Now, in Sherman, Lee Kennett offers a brilliant new interpretation of the general's life and career, one that embraces his erratic, contradictory nature. Here we see the making of a true soldier, beginning with a colorful view of Sherman's rich family tradition, his formativeyears at West Point, and the critical period leading up to the Civil War, during which Sherman served in the small frustrated peacetime army and saw service in the South and California, and in the Mexican War Trying to advance himself, Sherman resigned from the army and he soon began to distinguish hiniself as a general known for his tenacity, vision, and mercurial temper. Throughout the spirited Battles of Bull Run and Shiloh, the siege of Vicksburg, and ultimately the famous march to the sea through Georgia, no one displayed the same intensity as did Sherman.

From the heights of success to the depths of his own depression, Sherman managed to forge on after the war with barely a moment of slowing down. Born to fight, he was also born to lead and to provoke, traits he showed by serving as commanding general of the army, cutting a wide swath through the western frontier, and finally writing his classic -- and highly controversial -- memoirs. Eventually Sherman would die famous, well-to-do, and revered -- but also deeply misunderstood.

By drawing on previously unexploited materials and maintaining a sharp, lively narrative, Lee Kennett presents a rich, authoritative portrait of Sherman, the man and the soldier, who emerges from this work more human and more fascinating than ever before. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (10)

A Monumental Disappointment. . .
Lee Kennett has accomplished the impossible: he's taken one of America's most celebrated and brilliant generals and made him seem like nothing more than an average commander and a less-than-average human being.After reading Kennett's biography, I'm left wondering why President Lincoln and General Grant, to name but a few, were so impressed with Sherman's capabilities as a soldier, and why the Confederate generals feared him as much as they did.Rather than portraying Sherman and his accomplishments in a fair light, Kennett seeks at every turn to diminish those accomplishments and the man who achieved him.Sherman, we are told, was at best a competent general, not the great strategist that his contemporaries and subsequent students of military history recognized him to be.Trouble is, Kennett doesn't back up his dismissive assessment of Sherman with any kind of analysis, impartial or otherwise.Instead, he gives short shrift to Sherman's accomplishments in the field, including the famed "March to the Sea" -- all topics that Kennett glides over with astonishing little detail.Instead, Kennett is content to engage in psychobabble of the worst kind: Sherman's behavior in America's greatest conflict, and indeed throughout his life, was nothing more, in Kennett's eyes, than repeated manifestations of a "narcissistic" personality disorder.I bought the book expecting a serious treatment of one of America's greatest generals and instead got a hatchet job (and an unconvincing one at that).Unless you are a Sherman hater, save your money for one of the other good biographies of Sherman or, better yet, his own memoirs.This book, I regret to say, is worthless.

A solid biography covering all aspects of Sherman's life.
If you want a good solid exciting biography of Sherman - this is your book. I'm tired of reading bloated biographies of
say 1000 pages. This book has a nice quick pace. Sherman would have liked that. It gives adequate coverage to Sherman'smilitary and personal life as well as a nice perspective on his historical legacy.

Shorter Bio of Sherman unremarkable
William T. Sherman seems to have a biography written of him every three years or so. There are currently four bios available, not to mention his own memoirs and more venerable books such as the volumes by Liddell Hart and Lloyd Lewis. He's an endlessly fascinating character, multi-faceted, complex, and as amazingly verbose. He had an opinion on most everything, and to use my wife's phrase, "never had an unuttered thought." Because of this he's great biography material, and historians have been interested in him a great deal as a result.

Those recent bios vary greatly in their treatment of their subject. John Marszalek's Sherman: A Soldier's Passion For Order is the culmination of that man's life, seemingly. Marszalek lived with Sherman for a great while, to the extent of naming a dog Cumpy (Sherman's childhood nickname), and it showed in that the book is still the longest and most exhaustive biography. He sees Sherman as a twisted soul, tormented by his inability to control the world around him, but able to deal with things once he gets in command of an army and is able to influence events to an extent. Michael Fellman's Citizen Sherman is more harsh and unforgiving. Fellman is a Canadian historian who looks at the American Civil War through relentlessly modern lenses, and sees racism, misogyny, elitism, and various other ills pretty much everywhere in 19th century America. He doesn't think much of Sherman. Stanley Hirshson's The White Tecumseh, on the other hand, is apparently a very forgiving portrait of what the author considers a great soldier (this is the one Sherman bio I haven't read). The author of the present book, Lee Kennett, falls somewhere between Marszalek and Hirshson. He handles Sherman pretty mildly, though he does make note of his foibles and prejudices (as expressed in things he wrote) in passing.

Most biographers of Sherman note that he wanted to be judged as a soldier, and then dutifully tell you that they will abide by his wishes. Kennett follows suit, but only sort of succeeds. Instead his book is largely a study of Sherman's personality, with a whole chapter devoted to this subject on the eve of the Civil War. The book is remarkably spare in terms of narratives of the actual battles themselves: instead there's a great deal of space devoted to the politics of the army 1861-1865. So the Meridian raid gets about a paragraph, and the battles around Atlanta are disposed of in a page or so.

The author also leaves things out, things that make it into some Sherman biographies. Perhaps the best-known anecdote is Joe Johnston killing himself by standing bareheaded at Sherman's funeral, and catching pneumonia. It's not here, and there are a number of other things that didn't make the book either. I know this is a short biography, but somehow I expected some of these things to make the book.

Several previous reviewers put this forward as an introductory biography of Sherman. One thing the book definitely is is neutral on the subject. Until now, the one neutral book was Marszalek, the longest, so I suppose this one, at half the length, is better. I don't consider a 352 page book an introduction to anything, however, and I can't say I agree here. Introductory books are 200 pages or so.

That being said, this isn't a bad book, and I can't come up with any reason to review it negatively. It's just not a particularly good one either.

A good introduction to General Sherman
Over the last few years several outstanding biographies have been written.Biographies that delve deep into their subject and bring that person and their entire family to life.This is not one of those books.This is not to say that Lee Kennett has produced a bad biography, just a biography that pales in comparison to some other works.Simply put, it is impossible to do a complete biography on a man as complex as William T. Sherman in a scant 353 pages.To write a reasonably detailed account of the, "Great March" alone would have taken more space than this whole book.

What Kennett has produced is a good quick scan of the General's life.The details of his campaigns and many other facets of his life have been left for others.As an example, he covers the battles around Atlanta in about two pages.Not much in the way of detail will be found on any of the battles that Sherman was involved in for the author has instead tried to deal with the personality traits that made Sherman into Sherman.Unfortunately, the search for Sherman the inner man is not all that successful.The author does make some interesting points but he never seems to really get into the soul of his subject.It would indeed be interesting if someone could really get into the soul of the man who devastated so much of the south and then turned around and attempted to give back to the south all it was about to lose.

On the whole, I found this an interesting book.It is the first time I have read about General Sherman in any detail, and I'm sure that those who have studied the General before will find this book lacking.However, for someone not very aquatinted with Sherman this is a fairly good book.I never quite felt that I knew, "Cump" but I did begin to feel as if I would like to know much more about him.That in itself is an accomplishment for Mr. Kennett for I, like many other sons of the south, was raised to detest that foul Yankee firebug.

Better served elsewhere
Probably closer to two and a half stars.

While someone new to Sherman will get something from this book, the best biography still is Marszalek's. The Sherman in this book comes across (at least to me) as a cardboard man at times, which, having read Marszalek's book (and others), I knew not to be the case.

Although the book covers his whole life and is over 400 pages, most of the important military aspects of his career (look at the subtitle) are given little coverage. A couple of pages each for Shiloh, Chattanooga, not much better for the Atlanta Campaign and the March to the Sea!

Analysis of Sherman's relationship with Grant is cursory, which is a pity, because this axis was the major factor in the Union's triumph in 1864-65.

I don't intend to keep my copy now that I have read it. ... Read more

Product Description
Sherman's March To The Sea 1864 ... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

A top pick for any military collection strong in Civil War history.
SHERMAN'S MARCH TO THE SEA 1864: ATLANTIC TO SAVANNAH by David Smith tells of a grueling march - nearly three hundred miles - in which the army lived off the land and destroyed all war-making capabilities of the enemy. Photos, maps, and art examines the major participants, strategies, and campaigns of the last months of the Civil War, making for a top pick for any military collection strong in Civil War history.

Sherman and the March To The Sea in a Nut Shell
David Smith in less than a hundred pages provides the best short volume available regarding "Sherman's Renowned March To The Sea". Providing a short biography of each key player, thereason behind the campaign, including Grant's fear that it would fail, Smith writes in a very readable fashion. I recommend it for the beginner or the seasoned reader who wishes to understand the impact that Sherman had on ending theAmerican Civil War. Further, while Sherman did not invent "total war", he brought it to the United States.The lesson of the "march" is timely for today, especially the fact that war involves civilians, no matter how one attempts to paint the issue otherwise.
The book reads like a well-crafted novel and should be purchased without resveration.

Two Campaigns for the Price of One
In Osprey's Campaign No. 179, Sherman's March to the Sea 1864, author David Smith describes Sherman's campaign across Georgia and Hood's campaign across Tennessee in late 1864. This is a phase of the American Civil War that often gets short shrift, due to the lack of `popular' large-scale battles, but it was nonetheless decisive in determining the outcome of the war in the West. Smith manages to deftly weave together the two campaigns into a coherent narrative that nicely adds to our understanding of this crucial phase of the war.

The opening sections on the origins of the campaign, opposing commanders, opposing armies and opposing plans are good. Smith's section on commanders provides capsule bios of 6 Union and 3 Confederate leaders, while the opposing armies section details the forces in both Tennessee and Georgia.The campaign narrative proper is sub-divided into two chapters on Sherman's march across Georgia and one on Hood's invasion of Tennessee. Graphically, the volume is complemented by five 2-D maps (After the fall of Atlanta, September-October 1864; March to the Sea, Part 1, 15-26 November 1864; Hood's Tennessee Campaign, November-December 1864; the Battle of Franklin, 30 November 1864; and the March to the Sea, Part 2, 28 November - 21 December 1864), two 3-D BEV maps (the Battle of Nashville, first and second day, 15-16 December 1864) and three battle scenes by Richard Hook (the Battle of Allatoona Pass, 5 October 1864; a Union foraging party; and Fort Mcallister, 13 December 1864). The volume also has rather lengthy orders of battle for both campaigns, totaling 7 pages. Notes on the battlefields today and bibliography are short, but adequate.

Southern readers may find Smith's description of Sherman's march to be a bit anti-septic, in that it seems to downplay the harm and injury inflicted upon Georgia's civilian population. Sherman's march was an emotional, gut-wrenching experience for the Confederacy to witness a Union army moving unmolested through the heart of its territory and the psychological damage was complemented by a vicious scorched earth policy.Smith's account is lucid but lacks some of the emotive weight that provides the historical context for this campaign.Even Sherman realized that his operation was far more than a mere march or a plundering raid, but a deep stab into the South's vitals. Indeed, Sherman's march was an early example of a new philosophy of warfare, that held that attacks upon regular military forces was merely a precursor to the execution of decisive attacks against an enemy's civilian economy (e.g. Julian Corbett a few decades later). It was also interesting to see the author's discussion of the Confederate use of buried land mines outside Savannah, which posed a threat not unlike the IEDs in Iraq today.

The author also covers Hood's campaign effectively and avoids any pre-determination that the campaign was foredoomed. Indeed, the author suggests that under better conditions, Hood's invasion of Tennessee might have succeeded in diverting at least part of Sherman's forces (but for how long?). Readers thirsting for action while find their appetite sated by the sanguinary battles of Franklin and Nashville, which ended any chance for the Confederacy to retrieve something from this campaign. Overall, a good volume.
... Read more

Book Description
"Sherman's life was a rich and varied tapestry, and Mr. Lewis has put the richness into his book. Not only does he make us understand Sherman, he makes us see again the tremendous, terrible pageant of the Civil War."--New York Times."This is no ordinary military biography. . . . Lewis's excellent description of the relationship of Grant and Sherman and the meaning of the Union in Sherman's life are highlights which are not easily forgotten."--Civil War History."The book is beautifully proportioned; the epic tale rumbles on with the inexorability of Sherman's cannon rolling down on Atlanta. An indispensable addition to the literature of this troubled period, and a worthy monument to the military genius who crushed the South which he loved."--Christian Science Monitor."The greatness and vividness of Sherman in his best years emerge from the facility and resource of this talented book."--New Republic."War is hell," said William Tecumseh Sherman. The Union general who is remembered for his devastating march through Georgia during the Civil War is presented in all his passionate humanity by Lloyd Lewis.Introducing Sherman, Fighting Prophet is Brooks D. Simpson, a professor of history at Arizona State University and the author of Let Us Have Peace: Ulysses S. Grant and the Politics of War and Reconstruction. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (5)

Sherman Fighting Prophet
This is one of the finest books that I have ever read on the Civil War and I have read dozens. It is insightful, interesting and full of details.
Harl Pike

The General Who Marched To Hell
In this works,the author depicted Sherman's temperament and the fighting style.Analyzed thecompaigns through Georgia and the Carolinas.

Not your usual Civil War biography
Although Lewis seems to be a Sherman fan, he is very fair and is not patronizing.I am impressed with the number of sources Lewis drew upon in his writing.This is a long book and starts slowly, but picks up speedduring the Civil War years. This is the first biography I've read aboutSherman, and I feel like I "know him" very well. I thinkultimately, this is a very good book that serious Civil War buffs shouldread.

AN EXCELENT STORY ON W.T. SHERMANS LIFE.
THIS BOOK OF LLOYD LEWIS' ON WILLIAM T SHERMAN IS AN EXCELLENTREAD. LEWIS MUST HAVE SPENT A LONG TIME RESEARCHING SHERMAN AND HIS FAMILY, HISLIFE AND TIMES. ANYONE WHO HAS READ THE BOOK WOULD AGREE I AM SURE. SHERMAN WAS AN INDEPENDANT THINKER AND A MAN OF HIGH RESOLVE.HISCONTRIBUTIONS AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS TO RESTORING THE UNION ARE CERTAINLYEVIDENT IN THIS BOOK.ALTHOUGH I AM NOT AN HISTORICAL EXPERT ON THEAMERICAN CIVIL WAR, I AM SURE THAT ANYONE WHO READS THIS BOOK WILL BE MOREINFORMED AN EDUCATED ON ITS HISTORICAL ASPECTS AS WELL.LLOYD LEWIS , INONE OF THE CHAPTERS REFERS TO "SHERMAN AND HIS INEXHAUSTABLEPEN".AFTER READING THIS NOVEL, YOU WILL FIND ALSO THAT"THEPEN IS MIGHTIER THAN THE SWORD". AFTER READING "SHERMAN - THEFIGHTING PROPHET", I FELT LIKE HAD KNOW THE MAN.W.MUNRO

Excellent!
The author brings you right into the fight with Sherman.He usesexcellent language and descriptive terms.I reccomend this to everyone! ... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

Solid work
I'd probably give this book 3.5 stars, the plagiarism comment and all.Part of the reason this book is worth reading is simply because there are not many books on the Atlanta Campaign, despite how important it was.While Albert Castel's Decision in the West probably ranks as the best, this book is a good companion.This work gives the reader a good view from mostly the generals headquarters, but also from in the field as well.The authors are not afraid to criticize or second guess generals, but they are also not afraid to heap praise either.

The book does have some negatives, though.The text does not read especially well nor is it all that interesting.I would describe it as very workmanlike.The book features no endnotes or footnotes so what the authors cited can be a mystery.Finally, the book is mostly a military history of the campaign and doesn't delve too deep into the social aspects or what it was like for the common soldier in great detail.

Overall, while this is not the greatest book on the campaign, it is worth reading just because there are not many books written on the campaign.Also, the epilogue about Margaret Mitchell and her writing of Gone With the Wind as compared to David O. Selznick's screen version is very interesting.

Be Aware
While this book may appear to be well-written at first glance, one would do well to read the May 1989 (vol.55, #2) review of it in The Journal of Southern History.The reviewer points out evidence of plagiarism, and the journal notes that the publisher withdrew the book from publication.Though it doesn't say the book was pulled for plagiarism, it is reasonable to assume so.The lesson here is to always check scholarly journals for reviews of scholarly books before trusting their content.Trust the pros.

War So Terrible
This is an excellent book reviewing the battles that took place from Chattanooga to Atlanta in the summer of 1864 in the Western armies.The authors, working independently, have chronicled much of the strategy and and battlefield drama that characterized such engagements as Dallas, New Hope Church, Pickett's Mill, Kennesaw Mountain, Ezra Church, Resaca etc.
As a layman, I was not bogged down with too much military lingo, and was able to get a good grasp of the strategy used on both sides.Maps and pictures add to the clarity. The authors seemed to start out being favorably disposed to Joseph E. Johnston's command, then, as they analyze all the historical and geographical factors from hindsight, they bring the reader to wonder at his failure to maneuver into a decisive victory over Sherman's advancing army. With the ensuing command of Gen. Hood one senses the nearly frantic contrast to throw men into battle as Atlanta becomes ever-more threatened, at great sacrifice of Confederate lives.
If you had ancestors that fought in the Atlanta Campaign, this is a very good book, with details drawn from numerous sources. The writers have added soldiers' and officers' comments from diaries and letters that detail the morale, the terrain, the weather, and attitude towards the events of the day. These add more interest to the sometimes dry, official commentaries so often quoted in other works.
Good history for layman or scholar; Union or Confederate. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

The Bible of Civil War books.
This was arguably the greatest book that I have ever read on any topic.Not only was it a great account of General Willie T.'s life, but it also gave great insight into the real meaning of life.If anyone is looking foran answer to anything, then this is the book for you. ... Read more

Book Description
General John Bell Hood tried everything he could: Surprise attack. Flanking march. Cavalry raid into the enemy's rear lines. Simply enduring his opponent's semi-siege of the city. But nothing he tried worked. Because by the time he assumed command of Conf ... Read more

Customer Reviews (4)

How Joe Johnson was responsible for the fall of Atlanta.
Most people who follow the Civil War would say that Joe Johnson was a very capable general for the Confederacy.In Davis's book, Johnson is shown as a general who was cautious and to a certain extent defeatist in his dealings with Sherman.I think the author makes a good case that Johnson's conservative generalship led to the forordained loss of Atlanta, and that the three weeks of Hood's command was an attempt to change the fate of Atlanta.Davis makes a good case by examining the records and correspondence of the loss of Atlanta.Hood's later reckless assault against Unionist forces in Tennessee clouded his capable handling of the forces around Atlanta.

This is revisionist history, but I think the author makes a solid case that Johnson's defense was not good for a nation wanting an active defense of one of their largest cities.Hood's
offensive was much more appreciated by the military and civil authorities in Richmond and Atlanta.Johnson's own conduct after the war plus the esteem his soldiers held him caused his redemption.

A nice little book about the defense of Atlanta.Sherman would have won ultimately because of his numbers.However the theory of Johnson's conservative strategy resulted in the fall of Atlanta.

Atlanta Will Fall
Stephen Davis has written a lucid account of the dark days of the Army of Tennessee as it was outmaneuvered and outgeneraled by W.T. Sherman during the campaign for Atlanta in 1864.Davis has introduced new primary research to support his assertions that Atlanta was lost in December 1863 when Johnston was appointed commander of the Army of Tennessee.History has castigated John Bell Hood for the loss and Davis does everything he can to dispel this claim and more.Very well written and full of the authors conclusions, it makes the reader think about what he is reading.Highly recommended for anyone who knows anything at all about the Georgia campaign.The passages on Johnston, Hardee, and Hood are especially interesting.

Davis' work is superb
Stephen Davis systematically tackles the old myths surrounding the Atlanta campaign and its subsequent capture by the North.His analysis of Johnston's tactical decisions clearly elucidates where responsibility for Atlanta's loss truly lay.It is obvious that Davis has spent a great deal of time researching this work and his efforts show.A must read for anyone who enjoys a gripping, thoroughly researched account of a major historical event.

Was it Johnston who lost Atlanta due to overcaution?
Atlanta Will Fall: Sherman, Joe Johnston, and the Yankee Heavy Bandits is a sharp overview of the entire Atlanta campaign during the American Civil War, from Dalton to Jonesboro. The battles are described and the strategies analyzed, with detailed evaluations of the three major generals involved. In particular, author Davis argues that between the Confederate leaders Joe Johnston and John Bell Hood, it was Johnston who lost Atlanta due to overcaution, while Hood got the bad rap. Atlanta Will Fall is strongly recommended reading for Civil War buffs. ... Read more

Book Description
Civil war buffs know that General William T. Sher-man, hero of the North, had a passionate relationship with a beautiful girl from Georgia, Cecelia Stovallo. Legend has it that their romance was the reason Sherman spared her hometown of Augusta during his infamous march to the sea, in which his troops cut a swath through nearly every other town in Georgia and burned Atlanta to the ground. A multilayered historical saga spanning a quarter-century, Haeger's novel begins with the youthful chance meeting between Sherman and Stovall that led to a secret rendezvous, a desperate love, years of separation and longing, and a love rekindled, set against the backdrop of the Civil War. An epic tale of star-crossed lovers separated by their fierce loyalties for opposing sides. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (9)

Good love story
Cecilia Stovall goes to West Point along with her brothers to visit Marcellus, her oldest brother, freshman at West Point.At the Commencement Ball, she meets one of Marcellus's classmates, William Tecumseh Sherman, and she feels an instant connection to him.She spends the next few weeks with him as much as possible.

When Marcellus finds out, he immediately leaves West Point and takes Cecilia with him on a trip through Europe.The only reason that the two aren't allowed to be with each other is because she is Southern and William is Northern.While that doesn't matter to them, the Stovall family is against it for the very beginning.

During their time apart, Cecilia and William attempt to communicate through letters, yet find themselves more and more distanced.Finally, Cecilia ends up marrying a rich Southerner who helps finance her father's plantation.William ends up marrying a childhood friend.

As the war approaches, the tension is high.Cecilia questions the beliefs of the South and ends up risking her life for what she believes is right.But the love between William and Cecilia is what saves her home and her life.

I was surprised at how much I really liked the book.Usually, fictional books that I have read about the Civil War are more educational that enjoyable.This was the first true book that focused as much on the story as the facts themselves.The love story was really beautiful.I'm really glad I picked this one up.I'd recommend this book to loves of historical fiction and I look forward to reading more books by Diane Haeger.

Good premise, poor delivery
I am a devoted fan of good historical fiction, but this book is deeply flawed.I enjoyed the characters, setting, and plot development.The writing style seems more appropriate for a high school-level reader.Some authors paint complex pictures of their characters and this author limits herself to pretty descriptions of Southern scenery.

My Dearest Cecelia: another facet to the Civil War
My Dearest Cecelia begins in 1891, years after the American Civil War, but the novel transports the readers back to 1837 at the dazzling West Point ball bristling with many handsome soldiers and beautiful women.One of the ladies there is Southern belle Cecelia Stovall of Augusta, Georgia, with her brothers, and she is saved from an unwanted man by none other than William Tecumseh Sherman.In the years to come, he will become the South's greatest enemy, but for now, he is a quiet young soldier who becomes drawn to Cecelia's beauty and character.After their first dance, Cecelia and William quickly fall in love with each other, but in the years to come, people like her Southern gentleman of a brother pry the couple apart.Cecelia is sent to London before going back to Augusta, but she and William never stop thinking about each other.

I am really surprised, but warmed, at the chemistry between the two.They barely know each other, yet they both spend years upon years pining for each other.Sometimes, their love appears a bit shallow (hence four stars), but the offense can be pardonable.Cecelia risks her life and country to try to communicate with William, but for years, there is very, very little contact.Even after they are destined to marry other people, and even after William's Union is pitted against Ceceila's Georgia, their love never dies.This is a classic tale of undying romance, and there is some history in the background.Diane Haeger makes the Southerners sound believable with their truncating of the r's in words like "for" and "your" - all the better for the imagination.My Dearest Cecelia can, I hope, satisfy the romantic, the historian, and the Southerner.

Syrup and Cliches
I was intrigued by the summary on the book jacket. Once engaged, I found the writing to be closer to a romance novel than the historical fiction feel I was looking for. The style was full of cliches and I found it unbelievable that a character could hold a candle for as long as these two did, when there was so little contact between them for such long periods of time. I prefered the style and writing of The Other Boleyn Girl by Philippa Gregory.

Diane Haeger is a superb author
This is the 2nd book of hers I have read, and I loved it just as much as the first.She is an amazing writer and is now my favorite!I would recommend (and do) this book and any others by Diane Haeger to anyone. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

Civil War enthusiasts should learn about this campaign!
Sherman's March to the Sea is well-known, however his subsequent campaign up through the Carolinas is not.Sherman is widely considered to be the inventor of manuever warfare, and as such this is required reading.It islittle known that this campaign continued for 9 days afterAppomattox!

READ THIS BOOK YOU WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

Corrective to misconceptions (4.25 *s)
This is a brief but highly informative look at Sherman's march through Georgia from Atlanta to Savannah in Nov-Dec of 1864. Both Sherman's reasoning in undertaking such a campaign and the main details of the march are discussed. Beyond that the author corrects many misconceptions about that decisive march of 150 years ago.

Sherman was hardly the brutal, non-caring individual often portrayed by apologists for the South. It is certainly true that Sherman desired to destroy infrastructure in Georgia (railroads, etc) and ravage the countryside to supply his huge army of 70,000 men, consisting of four corps, with up to four divisions per corps. However, it was a campaign of demoralization instead of massive killing intended to persuade Southerners of the futility of continuing to fight the war - at least for those who did not already know that.

Sherman basically cut off all communications with the outside world - telegraphs not allowed. The Southerners had no idea of his destination, believing that either Macon or Augusta were most likely. He completely surprised state government officials at Milledgeville forcing them to flee on a moment's notice. His use of an overwhelming force avoided a bloody siege at Savannah. He left an escape route for the small Confederate army which was wisely taken just a few days after Sherman had easily assaulted Fort McAllister. An interesting side to the book is the manner of warfare in pre-airplane days. It was simply assumed that soldiers would have to be sacrificed in taking positions. Hopefully, enough troops would get through the fusillade of bullets to take the objective. That was the strategy for capturing Fort McAllister.

Sherman was hailed as a military hero for his devastating and quick march through Georgia and capture of Savannah. Some have focused on Sherman's racist views and he was a racist by modern standards. Yet he did oppose slavery, if not equality. There were many eyewitness accounts of his shaking hands and talking with blacks on his march but especially so in Savannah.

The author also intersperses about 15 brief biographies of key individuals directly or indirectly involved in Sherman's campaign, most of them being generals for either the North or the South. There is no doubt that 1864 was a bad year for Atlanta and Georgia. It is easy to speculate that Sherman's campaign was not necessary as the South was already on its last legs. But he may well have spared lives as was his intention.

An absorbing portrait of a complex man and his unforgettable contribution to both American and world warfare history unfolds
John F. Marszalek, Giles Distinguished Professor Emeritus of History at Mississippi State University, presents Sherman's March to the Sea, a no-nonsense examination of General Sherman and his role in enabling the Union's victory during the American Civil War. Sherman's March to the Sea looks critically at sources that would vilify or sanctify Sherman's actions or personality beyond what the events of history say, and focuses upon what Sherman himself intended his wartime strategy to be: not a "total war" in which civilians are brutally slaughtered en masse, but rather extreme property, city, and supplies destruction designed to force the South to end the war as quickly as possible, therefore saving lives in the long run. Sherman's March to the Sea also analyzes Sherman's tactics, recounts the destructive details of Sherman's march, portrays Sherman through both white and black eyes as well as scrutinizing what positive and negative propaganda had to say about him. Of particular interest are the conclusions drawn about Sherman's racial views - while he was definitely racist enough to believe that black Americans were inferior to whites, neither was he the monstrous, hate-filled demon toward blacks that past and contemporary propaganda would portray him as. An absorbing portrait of a complex man and his unforgettable contribution to both American and world warfare history unfolds.
... Read more

Book Description

Customer Reviews (15)

Sherman's March
The difficulty for those of us interested in studying the American Civil War is that the available bibliography is overwhelmingly large. One could begin reading as a child and reach adulthood and continue reading until death or senility interrupted the exercise without completing all of the published titles! Life is too short to read poorly written books!

With that observation in mind, it is a welcome experience to occasionally come across a worthwhile one volume biography of a major historical figure and "Sherman: A Soldier's Passion for Order" fills the bill perfectly. The author, John F. Marszalek, is a history professor at Mississippi State University.

While it may strike some as odd that a historian employed on a campus located in the Deep South chose to write about General William T. Sherman, it is worth remembering that "Uncle Billy," himself, was a man of contradictions. Sherman tried and failed at many occupations during the antebellum period. One of the few successful and easily the most satisfying positions that he held was as the superintendent of a military academy located in Louisiana. But for the crisis of secession and war, Sherman would have been pleased to remain at the academy as a Southern gentleman and an accepted member of local society. The war came, however, and Sherman resigned his position and donned the blue Federal uniform. As a Union general, Sherman became the scrouge of the same South that he had so admired and enjoyed.

Sherman was adopted into the family of a prominent Ohio politician following the death of his father. This was the first of many disruptions in his life. His adoptive parents compelled him to change his actual first name from "Tecumseh" (after the celebrated Indian leader and warrior) to William. Marszalek sees many of Sherman's subsequent choices and decisions as part of a determined effort to create and maintain continuity, stability and order. As much as he loved the South, Sherman viewed secession and disunity as a form of anarchy that needed to be crushed. Similarly, the Indian tribes threatening the settlement of the frontier needed to be suppressed. Late in his life, Sherman resisted his wife's repeated entreaties to have him convert to Catholicism.

Marszalek also treats Sherman's friendship and eventual estrangement from Ulysses S. Grant. Sherman was devoted to the military and grew disillusioned when Grant chose to pursue a political career during the Reconstruction Era. Although both Grant and Sherman lived long enough to write memoirs, Grant's memoirs are better known on account of his superb ability as a writer. Unlike Grant, Sherman's own book generated more controversy than praise upon its publication (Grant defended Sherman's book, however, as providing accurate accounts and descriptions of events) and is not read as often today.

I have had the good fortune to have visited Grant's residence in Galena, Illinois and the former Galt House (the hotel still exists, but it has relocated to a much larger building several blocks away) in Louisville, Kentucky, where Grant and Sherman studied their maps and plotted the strategy that resulted in the eventual Union victory. Marszalek's book helped bring some of these same details to life for me as a reader. Recommended.

The South's Best Friend?(Could be)
In this book, the author takes us on an in-depth tour of the life and times of William Tecumseh Sherman.In doing so, he lets us see Sherman as a boy living in poverty; as a nine-year-old foster child; and as a student, young soldier, husband, father, failed businessman, Civil War General, and aging military hero.In the end, we find that Sherman was very much like the rest of us: a man with hopes, dreams and fears of his own, and certainly not the crazed and often despised General who, according to legend, burned Atlanta to the ground and wantonly ravaged, pillaged, and plundered the South.

True, Sherman did order that all inhabitants of Atlanta be evacuated [705 adults (few men), 860 children, and 79 slaves], but that was to prevent snipers from killing his soldiers.And he did order that all facilities which could be used to support the war effort be destroyed (e.g., the railroad station; factories producing uniforms, munitions, railroad tracks;etc.).But that only amounted to about one third of the structures in Atlanta.And he did march the bulk of his 60,000 man army to Savannah living off the land.But he did so to help bring the Civil War to a speedy conclusion with minimum loss of life by severing the logistic supply lines across the South.And his orders were not to burn or destroy any private property, no matter what the inhabitants "said", as long as they were not fired upon.

And finally, and most revealing: When Confederate General Joseph E. Johnston was given the authority to surrender all remaining Confederate armies to General Sherman, Sherman met with him and developed what he thought were acceptable surrender terms.He forwarded them to Washington to obtain the necessary authorization only to find that his terms were considered much too soft on the South by then Secretary of War Edwin Stanton.Stanton went so far as to send a letter to the New York Times accusing Sherman of TREASON and then attempted to have General Grant relieve him of his command.Grant met with Sherman but avoided doing so.

According to the evidence, then, William Tecumseh Sherman wasn't the crazed villain many in the South consider him to be.And maybe, just maybe, he was the best friend the South ever had, or at least he tried to be.In any event, after reading this biography, one can only wonder how many people now living in the South, who vilify Sherman's memory, owe their very existence to the fact that he decided to make war on property rather than on their forefathers.

Sherman a glorified war criminal
Sherman made war on women and children. He had his troops burned houses to the ground, turned a blind eye to the looting his men did, burned crops to the ground, destroyed any livestock he couldn't use and left the civilian population to starve to death everywhere he went in the South.
Sherman had town halls burned so there were no accruate recordsas to how large the population of the town he burned was. Sherman also removed large numbers of civilians (women and children)who worked at the New Manchester and Roswell, Georgia Mills, North; where many of them died of exposure or starvation. On the trip North many of these New Manchester, Roswell, Georgia Mill women workers were raped.
I am not a sympathizer for the Southern Cause during the American Civil War. However, I do believe that Sherman is a war criminal and shouldn't be idolized which this book does.

First in War, First in Peace!
William Tecumseh Sherman was an unusually good soldier. With the exception of Grant, he prosecuted the war as the South never imagined a Yankee could. He realized early on that this war would be long and brutal. He also realized that it would profoundly change the very nature of the United States.

John Marszalek gives the reader a man who never stops trying. From soldier to banker, from school teacher back to soldier, Sherman was a man who did his best all the time. He suffered quite a few set backs, some of them material, yet he always rebounded and it was this resiliency, this durability, that enabled him to persevere in his desire to end the Civil War in the only way he knew it could be ended, with the total destruction of the Confederacy.

Between Grant's war of attrition and Sherman's war of annihilation the rules of warfare were simply rewritten. Sherman was one of the greatest generals the Civil War produced. The story of his life is the story of a warrior. Seen by most historians as simply a destroyer, Marszalek justifiably points out that he just may have been one of the very best friends the South had.

You will enjoy this exceedingly well written book about an amazingly adaptive and creative man, one who fought hard for what he believed in and in so doing, laid the foundations for America as we know it today.

An interesting look at General Sherman
Marszalek's narrative of the life of Union General William Tecumseh Sherman focuses on order.It is Marszalek's contention that Sherman's early life left him with a lifelong fear of the disorganized, and that, for this reason, he strove to find and maintain order throughout his life.It is a compelling argument, and certainly worthy of consideration.Sherman WAS a stickler for order and discipline--his Civil War record testifies of that.Marszalek succeeds admirably in linking Sherman's earlier life to his later obsession with having things the 'right way.'

As a biography of Sherman, however, this volume falls short in many respects.Sherman's Civil War career is given only about 200 of 500 pages.The account is sparse, and seldom is enough detail given that anyone without a previous knowledge of Sherman's campaigns would be able to understand what is being narrated.The last 100 pages or so of the book are disappointing--instead of a detailed description of Sherman's later life, there is a rambling string of thoughts with little or no reference to very important events.Sherman's promotion to the rank of lieutenant general (and later full general), his appointment as chief of the army, and his post-war relationships with men such as Sheridan and Schofield are only vaguely alluded to, and are not actually treated as separate events.When describing Grant as the President of the United States, Marszalek expects the reader to be familiar with events surrounding his coming into the presidency.Grant's, Sheridan's, and even Sherman's wife Ellen's deaths are not described until the very last chapter, and then (with the exception of Ellen) with no more detail than the simple statement that they were dead.

Despite this failure of the latter part of the biography, Marszalek's work nevertheless is valuable.His analysis of Sherman's psyche is, for the most part, good (at least apart from the fact that nearly every early event in Sherman's early life is described as an 'omen' of things to come), and the argument he advances for why Sherman turned out the way he did is sound.Marszalek speaks at great lengths of Sherman's total war policy, but in this it seems, to me at least, that he is misunderstanding.His analysis of Sherman's military genius and the development of his strategy is admirable, but I do not agree with his labeling the advance on Atlanta total war.To me, at least, total war was the march to the sea, was the 50-mile swath of devastation left by Sherman's 'bummers' as they consumed everything of value in their path.Still, even if the label of total war is erroneously applied to all of Sherman's independent campaigns in 1864-65, Marszalek's examination of these campaigns, and examination what made Sherman proceed the way he did, is very thought-provoking.

I cannot call this the perfect work on Sherman, but I do believe it is good.Despite any other flaws, Marszalek is fair in his treatment of Sherman, and in that respect triumphs.In short, this is a good biography of a great man, and, even considering the disappointing last several chapters, worthy to be labeled good Civil War history. ... Read more