The Civil War: A Narrative, Volume 2 | Shelby Foote | From Cover to Cover | The Players' Aid

[@lawrencef6562]

Bruce Catton was my first Civil War favorite writer, also a good author. But Shelby Foote's work I fell in love with. It is lyrical writing. His description of individuals is compelling; the people he describes makes them come alive. His ability to put you in the moment helps you understand the point of view of the participants in a way that the god's eye view of wargames so often fails to capture.

[@gravecac9522]

After I saw Shelby Foote in Ken Burns Civil War Series, I read his narrative (back in the late 90s). If you get a chance, I highly recommend touring a few of the battlefields. It really gets you a feel for the ground they fought on, and adds to the wargaming.

[@dizpatcher01]

Shelby Foote. My go to author when it comes to the Civil War. This is a fascinating exhaustive piece of work. I believe he dedicated over 20 years of research and writing to complete this series.

[@williamcampbell5971]

Happy New Year , I'm starting Vol 1 and will read all three vols this year.

[@ThePlayersAid]

Good luck! It's worth the investment!

[@terryp3034]

What's wonderful anout Foote is he brings a novelist's sensibilities to the doubts, motivations and conflicts that shaped the way the commanders and chief politicians impacted the decisions they made. Suddenly, they're human beings and not statues in a park. And, yes, US Grant was definitely the man who saved the Union.

[@ThePlayersAid]

That's part of the reason I chose to start here instead of a single volume more historical/academic option. I'm a literature fan more than anything and so having something so epic, that's as well written as it is was really important. I wanted to make sure I could finished it and stay engaged. and a 4000 page novel is more readable than a 500 page academic text, for me at least.

[@terryp3034]

@ThePlayersAid This may be fun to watch for as you read the 1864 volume. I was lucky to meet Foote at a speaking appearance and asked if there were any figures he came to not like, and he said, yes, there were two he came to despise, one on each side: Joe Johnston and Phil Sheridan. He said it became a battle of sorts to not let that come through in his writing.

[@strelnikoff1632]

Second volume was so much better than Volume 1. You could tell Foote was hitting his stride. The trilogy is sometimes termed the "American Iliad" which is a good analogy.

[@martynbrawn76]

I read all three volumes of Foote's magnus opus back in 1995. It inspired me to acquire and paint up two 15mm ACW armies and a 1996 trip to the USA (from UK). Flew into Atlanta, hired a car and flew out of Baltimore a fortnight later. Visited Lookout Mtn, Chattanooga, Chickamauga, Fort Sumter, Chancellosville (where we drove the route of Jackson's flank march), The Wilderness & Spotsylvania (saw Gen. Sedgewick's memorial and were disappointed that it wasn't in the shape of an elephant), Harper's Ferry and Antietam. Will never understand how the Union troops successfully assaulted Lookout Mtn! Also visited Yorktown and Fort McHenry.

[@dalerobinson8051]

You've visited more American battlefields than I--a native--have.

[@dalerobinson8051]

Craig Symonds's thin Battlefield Atlas of the Civil War has a map on the left side and text on the right of most battles. I also use Time-Life's Fields of Glory, which has all the maps of their Civil War volumes. Use every time I read an ACW book. Foote helped me understand Davis and why he did what he did. If he and Lincoln had been in each other's place, we'd be a fragmented country now.

[@tomw324]

Really enjoyed the Foote books, even though he has a bit of a southern bias and the southern nicknames get to be a bit much but that is the charm of his writing. You should watch Ken Burns Civil War series when you are done with the books. Excellent series with a number of interview segments with Shelby Foote himself, quite a character.

[@Jubilo1]

Superb prose by an author not that far removed from the conflict and immersed in the region. Very long is good for Foote.

[@jimfusco6026]

Could i also recommend The Civil War documentary by Ken Burns, its very informative and puts faces to all the names that your reading about.

[@secretmission204]

Just finished Michael Shaara’s Killer Angels. Simply outstanding.

[@ArnoVdVelde]

Oh, and Alexander, it isn't a battle by battle book. The Napoleonic wars by Alexander Mikaberidze gives a global overview of the whole period. It doesn't really focus on battles or campaigns too much, just a relationship between the powers and the tensions. It isn't all the info but it is a great place to start/general overview. And probably puts it in a wider context than just battle-battle-battle.

[@DaveEatonWNY]

Shelby Foote is a fantastic writer - and these books are extraordinary records and provide a lot of enlightening information. However, to round out your understanding of the American Civil War (not to be confused with knowledge), I highly recommend watching Ken Burns’ classic PBS series, The Civil War. Actually, I can’t recommend that strongly enough as a source of context for what you learn about each individual battle. (Also, Burns includes many actual interviews with Shelby Foote, which are wonderfully conversational - he relays little-known details as if he is recalling a conversation he had with the actual historic figures.)

[@MrDsmalls]

While Foote is very affable and appealing in the Burns', he also perpetuates multiple lines of reasoning that are highly suspect and prejudicial. Saying the North's win was inevitable, that it 'fought the war with one hand behind its back', downplaying the role of slavery, etc. Many of these thoughts have been accepted by the public, and they are wrong.

[@Caratacus1]

The Napoleonic companion book par-excellence is Nick Lipscombe's Peninsular War Atlas. The downside is (obvs) it covers the epic 6 years in the Peninsular but not the rest. Almost as good is Esposito and Elting's Military History and Atlas of the Napoleonic Wars. The downside there is that it only covers campaigns that Napoleon was present in (and boy are they Napoleon worshippers!). However put both atlases together and you've got most things covered.

[@kaiax33]

Wrapping up Volume 1 right now. Didn't want to watch this for fear of "spoiler alerts" :)

[@Socialdogma]

Read anything by Dave Powell if you are interested in Chickamauga.

[@markherman50]

We should talk sometime and discuss games through the literature.

[@ArnoVdVelde]

The things GCACW does to a person!

[@ThePlayersAid]

Guilty as charged your honour!

[@drizzle952]

That looks like a long read...

[@williamcampbell5971]

@drizzle952 i think all three vol is like million and half words lol

[@ThePlayersAid]

I think it's just shy of 4000 pages lol.

[@MrDsmalls]

Shelby Foote is a very skillful writer, but should be taken with quite a few grains of salt. When you read his work against more scholarly rigorous work, you see some odd discrepancies. A few from Vol. 3 that are fresh in my mind after reading Gordon Rhea's fantastic Overland series: - His Confederate casualty numbers for the Wilderness are way under modern estimates. Based, in part, on these estimates he remarks that the battle was the 'Army of the Potomac's worst tactical defeat in the war to that point.' which is borderline absurd. - He continually puts forth the Lost Cause representation of Lee as a figure who constantly knows what Grant is going to do. While Lee no doubt performed well during Overland, he was often mistaken as to Grant's intentions of what he would do next. This is spelled out in clear detail through rigorous research by Rhea and others. - Foote puts forward the debunked notion that the June 3 assault at Cold Harbor lasted 'eight minutes'. His description of Union soldiers pinning notes to their backs with their names so they can be recognized after death has so seeped into the story of the war that it is held up by McPherson in Battle Cry of Freedom. In reality, there are no contemporaneous accounts in letters, descriptions, etc that verify this story. It is entirely based on one person's recollections written 30 years after the battle. Foote was a great storyteller, but he was not a great historian.