I would have added brief (relatively) reviews I wrote on Goodreads, but am unsure if such is acceptable, and I certainly don't want to swamp your feed...
Scrupulously fair, objective, exhaustively researched and wonderfully written - Guelzo is a brilliant historian and gifted writer. Lee the man was neither saint nor sinner - fluctuating on the scale between the two conventional extremes. He was a technician, not a thinker. The longest document he ever wrote was 79 pages. A keen and perceptive strategist, but a mediocre tactician, manager and logician. His hands-off management style worked when he had subordinates that were superbly competent in their own rights (Jackson and Longstreet) but when they were gone his erratic personnel selection and battle management became unavoidable.
He was a man of considerable contradiction, accepting blame in the moment such as in the immediate aftermath of Gettysburg, but then spending months and years afterwards deflecting blame onto his subordinates, his troops and his southern brethren. He was mildly opposed to slavery, and saw it as something that should and would eventually end - but he never thought beyond that, nor acted to promote that, nor seemed bothered by the institution of slavery manifested about him. He declined to join the Union and followed Virginia into secession (an act he considered unconstitutional at the time, although that position too shifted in time) largely because he thought it the best way to preserve his family's financial and social future... if he stayed with the Union then independent Virginia would confiscate his properties and holdings. Plus he, and other Confederate leaders (notably Davis) simply did not believe that actual war would ensue. That motivation also shifted over time, until post-war he favored the "noble cause" myth that subsumed Southern culture and lore until it became conventional wisdom only recently dispelled (within the past 20-25 years).
Guelzo has a gift for making historical figures come alive in your mind, and immersing you in the cultures, the events and the times surrounding them. His is an open, fair and reasoned presentation of Lee, of his extended family and their influences upon him, of the people who interacted and influenced him. His evaluations of Civil War personalities and performances along the way is reason enough to read this book - besides the primary subject Lee, you of course have Davis, Jackson, Longfellow, Hill, Ewell, Stuart, Early, McClellan, Hooker, Meade, Burnside and to a somewhat lesser than expected degree, Grant and Lincoln - plus many many more. The book is a pleasure and a revelation.
I remember meeting the author in the Quantico PX when it came out. He was signing/selling this book. It is pretty good and worth the read!
I would strongly recommend two additional selections:
Grant – Ron Chernow
Robert E. Lee: A Life - Allen C. Guelzo
I knew about the Chernow book (and how good it is, but haven't read it), but wasn't familiar with Guelzo's book on Lee. -- thanks for both Urey!
Anything by Guelzo!
I would have added brief (relatively) reviews I wrote on Goodreads, but am unsure if such is acceptable, and I certainly don't want to swamp your feed...
We'd welcome hearing your take on a book!
Well - since you opened the door...
Robert E. Lee: A Life
by
Allen C. Guelzo
Scrupulously fair, objective, exhaustively researched and wonderfully written - Guelzo is a brilliant historian and gifted writer. Lee the man was neither saint nor sinner - fluctuating on the scale between the two conventional extremes. He was a technician, not a thinker. The longest document he ever wrote was 79 pages. A keen and perceptive strategist, but a mediocre tactician, manager and logician. His hands-off management style worked when he had subordinates that were superbly competent in their own rights (Jackson and Longstreet) but when they were gone his erratic personnel selection and battle management became unavoidable.
He was a man of considerable contradiction, accepting blame in the moment such as in the immediate aftermath of Gettysburg, but then spending months and years afterwards deflecting blame onto his subordinates, his troops and his southern brethren. He was mildly opposed to slavery, and saw it as something that should and would eventually end - but he never thought beyond that, nor acted to promote that, nor seemed bothered by the institution of slavery manifested about him. He declined to join the Union and followed Virginia into secession (an act he considered unconstitutional at the time, although that position too shifted in time) largely because he thought it the best way to preserve his family's financial and social future... if he stayed with the Union then independent Virginia would confiscate his properties and holdings. Plus he, and other Confederate leaders (notably Davis) simply did not believe that actual war would ensue. That motivation also shifted over time, until post-war he favored the "noble cause" myth that subsumed Southern culture and lore until it became conventional wisdom only recently dispelled (within the past 20-25 years).
Guelzo has a gift for making historical figures come alive in your mind, and immersing you in the cultures, the events and the times surrounding them. His is an open, fair and reasoned presentation of Lee, of his extended family and their influences upon him, of the people who interacted and influenced him. His evaluations of Civil War personalities and performances along the way is reason enough to read this book - besides the primary subject Lee, you of course have Davis, Jackson, Longfellow, Hill, Ewell, Stuart, Early, McClellan, Hooker, Meade, Burnside and to a somewhat lesser than expected degree, Grant and Lincoln - plus many many more. The book is a pleasure and a revelation.
Thanks, Urey! I need to read more about post war positions and actions.