In the mid-1880s, the Century Publishing Co. began a huge retrospective look at the Civil War. It eventually was turned into several volumes, the famous ``Battles and Leaders.'' This is credited with helping reunite the nation.

``Battles and Leaders'' was illustrated by hundreds of woodcuts -- woodcuts because it was difficult to reproduce photographs at that time. The woodcuts were made from illustrations made on the spot by what were later called ``combat artists'' (``specials'' to the Civil War public), or from photographs by artists who had experienced the war first-hand.

Nearly 400 of these illustrations (a few water colors, the rest woodcuts) are reproduced here from the files of Century.

In few of them is there much derring-do. The Civil War battlefield was much more crowded than a modern one, but still it was a lonely place. Explosions, even the big one at the Battle of the Crater, are the merest wisps against the skyline of huge panoramas where armies joust but are barely visible.

The soldiers themselves highly approved of these illustrations. The Century artists, they judged, ``got it right.''

Editor Stephen Sears notes this is not a history of the Civil War, though it does carry through all the major campaigns in a structured fashion.

Rather it is, for us, a look at what our ancestors took to be the look of the biggest event in American history.

Most of the pictures in this folio are rather homely, almost humdrum. It is the ensemble of all of them that punches home the message.

All in all, one of the better volumes for coming close to the common soldier's experience of that war.

This book is a "must have" for anyone who visits the Antietam National Battlefield. It has it all (for a tour of the field). Maps and analysis of the day's events. It also has the auto tour so you can understand what happened at each auto stop you make on the tour. It tells you where you are and what took place there. In each of these sections it even gives you quotes from those who survived the horrific fighting that took place on that fateful day on September 17, 1862. If your going to Antietam for the first time, or have been there a few times this is "THE" tour book to have with you. You can't go wrong, and at this price it's a steal.

Ably edited by Stephen Sears, On Campaign With The Army Of The Potomac: The Civil War Journal Of Theodore Ayrault Dodge is the compelling and informative memoir of Theodore Doge (1842-1909) who joined the Union Army at the age of 19 and kept a running "journal-type account" of wis battlefield experiences. He was a lieutenant colonel in the Army of the Potomac's 101st, and later transferred to the 199th New York infantry regiment. He saw action at the Seven Days' Battle, Second Bull Run, and Chancellorsville, ending his journal and fighting career on the bloody field of Gettysburg. He was wounded three times -- once slightly, once seriously, and then losing a leg. On Campaign With The Army Of The Potomac is a remarkably vivid memoir of military life that is a welcome and much appreciated contribution to the growing library of Civil War studies.

If you've ever thought history was even slightly boring, try thinking of the myriad alternative human universes that could have been born -- indeed, that had to be avoided -- along the way to where we are. If the Armada had not been defeated ... if Lee had won the civil war ... the possibilites are endless, and if you don't experience little shudders of horror or nostalgic loss when listening to this collection, you haven't been listening hard enough.

This is a collection of 16 stories drawn from American Heritage magazine. The writing is crisp and descriptive. The authors are all top-rate and include the likes of Stephen Ambrose, Martin Blumenson, John Lukacs, and Stephen Sears himself, to mention a few. The stories describe some of the key moments in the war, spanning all theaters and all mediums. Informative and penetrating, each story is easily read in one sitting, even if you're a slow reader like me, which makes it an excellent book for casual reading.

Page 173 says the treated chemical paper is placed under the original and exposed to sunlight. This will not work. Treated paper is placed on top of original.
...

Earl B. McElfresh has performed a valuable service to students of the War between the States and lovers of vintage maps. He has gathered these maps from many sources and reproduced them in a single volume to be studied and admired. One can not only learn the topography of many sites and battlefields in the 1860s, but also gain insight into the methods used to produce such maps.

Information on the topography was of vital importance to any army, whether planning a large campaign or a single battle. Both the Union army and the Confederate army employed many men capable of creating detailed images of the lay of the land. One of the most famous is Jed Hotchkiss, mapmaker to Stonewall Jackson. Several of his maps are reproduced in this volume. Using every medium at their disposal, from pencil to water color, he and others created detailed or rough drawings. Most are worthy of framing and hanging on the wall.

This is a valuable reference work for students of the war and students of mapmaking. It is a large volume and the details stand out.

The heart and soul of this book are the numerous reproductions of original Civil War maps, most of them hand-drawn by topographical engieers. Some are familiar from their later, engraved versions which appeared in the atlas for the Official Records (although the originals shown here are always more vivid and immediate), while others have not been seen their original wartime use. Many are quite simply works of art, transforming the three-dimensional world into an exquisite two-dimensional rendition.

But superbly reproduced maps are not the only treasures in McElfresh's book. The introductory chapters about the work and importance of topographical engineers to the Civil War is perhaps the best account of them yet published. And one-page biographies are provided for many of them, some famous for other, post-war careers (Ambrose Bierce and George Armstrong Custer, for example).

This is a book which belongs in any collection of Civil War material.

I am not a Civil War buff, not an expert but I was hooked by Stephen Sears excellent book. When I first moved to Shepherdstown which is across the Potomac from Sharpsburg I felt I should know more about the Battle of Antietam but I have never been interested in Civil War history. Despite the fact that re-enactors frequent our area and many Confederate soldiers are buried in my town (they weren't allowed to be buried in Maryland) I had little understanding of what transpired there. I read a glowing review of Landscape Turned Red in Newsweek and decided to give it a try. From the first page, I was drawn in.
I have stood in 'bloody row' and read and in the tower and read. Since then I made it a book club selection. When people visit and want to go to the battlefield, I send them home with a copy of this book. Even history haters can love it. It is well worth your time.

It is amazing to me after 135 years and all that we know about the Battle of Antietam and the Civil War that ANYONE can defend George McClellan. S. Sears has written a book which tells the story of a tragic battle and its campaign. Despite the rose-colored glasses that some readers might choose to wear; Sears makes it clear that G.B. McClellan had a magnificent chance to end the war in September of 1862 and because of McClellan's failure, his beloved Army of the Potomac had to fight for 3 more years. How many died because he was too cautious? Sears' book is most enjoyable as well as informative. It is a must-read for anyone interested in the Civil War.

Stephen W. Sears, as always, has done a great job in presenting the battle of Antietam creek and the generals who participated in it. There is just the right balance between details and big-picture views, between little stories and big stories. Sears helps the reader to relive the battle from both sides. He gives a fair-sided approach to both armies and generals.

This book showed me the importance of the battle. The battle was very important in the history of the war. For the South it was a failure. Only a couple hundred recruits were mustered in Maryland for the Army of Northern Virginia. The South would have to try another invasion sometime later. At the Battle of Antietam, George McClellan, a slow but brilliant general, almost captured Lee's whole army. Had it not been for A. P. Hill's timely arrival, Lee might have been forced to surrender.

On the Northern side, there was great providence at work for them. A copy of Lee's general order showing the detailed orders for each division of the army fell into the hands of McClellan. McClellan acted quickly (at least for him) and soon had Lee in a desperate situation. Lee had the Potomac river behind him. Well, if you want to know the rest of the story and all the interesting details, get the book.

In my opinion, Sears is the best writer on Civil War battles. If he write a book on the Civil War, get it, by all means (well, not *all*). Sears shows the brilliance of both McClellan and Lee (of course, Longstreet, Jackson, the Hills, etc. also). You NEED this book, if you are a Civil War buff.

The Civil War Virginia Peninsula Campaign of 1862 set the tone for the Union implementation of the war for the subsequent 2 years and Stephen Sears chronicles this series of battles magnificently in "To the Gates of Richmond". The overwhelming thrust of this book descrbes in great detail how inept a battle general George McClellan was and how his poliicies led to the ultimate withdrawal of the "Army of the Potomac" from the Richmond front. The reader gets a true feeling of frustration at McClellan right from the beginning as the campaign starts with the siege at Yorktown. The Federals far outnumber the Confederates in this initial phase, but McClellan opts to entrench his army in the face of a much weaker and somewhat exhausted "Army of Northern Virginia" just completing it's march down to the Peninsula from Manassas. Sears does a good job of documenting McClellan's lack of ability to obtain military intelligence but does a better job showing McClellan's lack of "the will to fight". And this isn't more evident than in the following battles at Williamsburg and Seven Pines/Fair Oaks...the Federals really had victory in their grasp, but because of the "defensive minded" leadership, the campaign continued on. An interesting debate on how long this faceoff at Richmond would have lasted can be had if Joe Johnston hadn't gotten wounded at Seven Pines and R.E. Lee hadn't taken over. Johnston was fairly "defensive-minded" himself and I'm sure that the campaign would not have followed the course that it ultimately did. Lee then, of course, initiated an offensive that started with Jeb Stuart's cavalry ride around the Federal entrenchments, proceeded on to the battles at Mechanicsville, Gaines Mill, Savage's Station and Glendale before ending with the blood-bath at Malvern Hill and subsequent Union withdrawal to Harrison's Landing on the James River. Sears descibes each battle with just the right amount of military tactics and "real-person" accounts from the many journal/diary entries enclosed to give the reader a real feel for the action. His discussions of Longstreet's subversion of the plan at Seven Pines, the mysterious actions of Stonewall Jackson throughout the campaign, the bloody fighting and ultimate breakthrough by the Confederates at Gaines Mill and the standoffs at Savage's Station and Glendale adroitly precede the brilliant climax of the book at the "Guns of Malvern Hill" chapter and the amazing decision (by McClellan) to retreat to Harrison's Landing following the Malvern Hill victory. Sears continues his brilliant writing as he closes the book with the entrenchment at Harrison's Landing and subsequent withdrawal (ordered by Halleck and protested by McClellan) back up the Potomac. Sears proves himself to be one of the pre-eminent Civil War historians around today with this book and he should be considered an "essential" author in any reading of the conflict...I definitely look forward to reading his other books and would recommend this book very highly.

In To The Gates of Richmond : The Peninsula Campaign, Stephen W. Sears once again proves that he is the preeminent author of Civil War histories. Like his histories of the The Battle of Antietam in Landscape Turned Red or of the Battle of Chancellorsville, Sears has an enviable way of setting forth both the feel of the battles and the raw history that one needs to fully understand the battles and campaigns of the Civil War. In To The Gates of Richmond, Sears does a masterful job of describing the thought process of McClellan and Lee as well as the line soldiers on both sides. If one wants to get a true feel of what it was like to be on the Peninsula in 1862, then this is the book for you.

The theme of the book is lost opportunities for both the Union and the Confederacy. The Peninsula Campaign is probably the only time in the history of the Civil War where each side had an ability to end the conflict on terms that were advantageous. For the Union, a victory and the capture of Richmond, probably would also have resulted in the destruction of the main Southern Army. For the Confederacy, if Lee had been able to cut off and destroy the Union Army, as Lee wanted to do, the Union would have been left with no effective force to stop an advance on Washington. However, errors on both sides led to three more years of death and destruction.

For Lee it was the problem of a new command, with subordinates not of his own choosing and with many of those subordinates failing to live up to expectations. For Stonewall Jackson, the Peninsula Campaign was far from his finest hour. From failing to communicate with Lee, to not having his troops arrive on time, to not pushing forward where there was a clear advantage, Jackson's failures assisted the Union Army in escaping the 'traps' that were being set by Lee. However, the blame is not placed solely on Jackson and his fellow Generals. Sears properly criticizes Lee for his overly complicated battle plans, especially given his unfamiliarity with the command.

Sears greatest criticisms are rightfully saved for McClellan. Like in the Battle of Antietam, McClellan great caution turned a real numerical superiority into an imaginary disadvantage. Where McClellan should have been driving forward and bringing Lee to battle, his incorrect belief that he was outnumbered two to one forced him to take the defensive and almost led to the destruction of the Army that he truly loved. The plain fact is that McClellan may have been the right General to have formed the Army of the Potomac, but as a battlefield leader he was a disaster. From his ordering retreats when they were not necessary, to his failure to establish a clear chain of command during battles, to his penchant for not being in the field when battles were taking place, and for his failures to take advantage of opportunities presented him, Sears systematically outlines the deficiencies of the General that was once known as the Young Napoleon.

This is a very good book, especially for those who are interested in the personalities of those that led the armies into battle. It is very readable and draws a fine balance between presenting the facts that one needs to be aware of as well as the personalties of the leasers and common soldiers that fought the battles.

"To the Gates of Richmond" provides an excellent description of the complicated and too-often-overlooked series of battles on the Peninsula before Richmond in early 1862. Sears brings the same matter-of-fact narrative style he used so effectively in the classic "Landscape Turned Red" and his more recent "Chancellorsville," while seasoning the story with ample quotations from diaries and letters of soldiers and officers who served in the campaign. The result is a clear description of a series of battles that were often both ill-conceived and poorly executed, without bogging down in a dry, minute-by-minute "microhistory" approach.

Sears's expertise on George McClellan is especially welcome here, and he provides damning evidence and hard but fair criticism of the competence of the "Young Napoleon", who was so afraid of losing a battle that he deliberately and repeatedly removed himself far away from the battlefield. He also provides considerable insight into the lapses of Stonewall Jackson, who was "not himself" during the Seven Days, and chronicles the rise of Robert E. Lee and the birth of the Army of Northern Virginia.

Finally, the book is also supplemented by clear (if somewhat amateurish) maps and a generous supply of contemporaneous sketches and watercolors by observers of the campaign. I highly recommend this as a very welcome addition to any Civil War bookshelf.

"Chancellorsville" is the finest work to date by the author, Stephen Sears. The book is incredibly well researched, covering events before, during and after the battle. Unlike some of Sears' earlier works (e.g., "Landscape Turned Red: The Battle Of Antietam"), I found "Chancellorsville" to be an even-handed, unbiased account of events. The book is an easy read and will be understood even by the novice Civil War buff. If I had to point out one weakness, it would be Sears' lack of details concerning certain parts of the battle. The author certainly did extensive research and possessed the information - it was simply not included in the text. But then I am thinking of the type of detail presented in the masterpieces by John M. Priest on South Mountain and Antietam. Perhaps such detail was not the goal of Sears. In any event, Sears has written an informative and insightful book - an honor and a delight to read.

Chancellorsville is one of the American Civil War's most complex campaigns and battles. At the campaign level, the challenge of understanding Joe Hooker presents a significant challenge to students of history. Too easily he is dismissed as either a drunkard or a hollow man, full of bravado but not to be seen once the guns open fire. At the battle level, Chancellorsville has the kinds of tactical movements that are rarely seen in eastern theater battles. The "left hook" at Chancellorsville and subsequent attack/counterattack in the center of the Federal line produced a series of complex interactions rarely seen in a civil war battle.

Sears makes sense of Chancellorsville, or at least presents the facts, and helps the reader and student better piece together puzzle of what happened in that campaign. Sears does not accept the pat arguments against Hooker, and makes his case to recessitate some of Hooker's image. Whether Sears is correct or not in his interpretation, the point is to reconsider all the standard epitahs that historical figures have; once you do so, you get a better understanding of the forces that shaped the development of history, especially military history.

Sears' book on Chancellorsville is indispensible for students of the Civil War and the battle itself. It is a vital resource and good, engaging historiography.

Sear's has written the best Civil War battle history I have read in several years. This continues the series of excellent, readable books he started with his books on Antietam and The Peninsula Campaign but this is a superior book. This book has clear and insightful interpretation that made me rethink the understanding I had formed of Gen'l Hooker and of the entire Chancellorsville campaign from reading other coverage of this battle from numerous authors. Hooker comes across as a flawed but much sinned against leader victimized by subordinates, chance, and the "bad karma" from the legacy of George McClellan much more than as the inept egotist outwitted by Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson presented by other authors. I found myself rethinking much I felt I "knew" about this battle and rereading other books to reexamine their assumptions and presentation of Hooker and the battle. Simply a first rate book that any Civil War buff or general military or American history fan should read. Very highly recommended.

Stephen W. Sears, in Controveries and Commanders (Dispatches from the Army of the Potomac), has written a very readable account of the Army of the Potomac through ten specific examinations of controveries surrounding different leaders that cover the entire time span of the Civil War. He gives enough detail to bring the novice properly into the debate without bogging the narrative down. The author keeps the stories, combining to form a single tapestry, humming along. The theme that seems to connect all the various narratives is the idea of jeolousy, betryal, back-biting, and gossip that infected the top ranks of the Army and brought many commanders, whether rightly or wrongly. The human dimension of the leaders at war could not have been brought into clearer focus. It was often a little frightening but also made for very interesting reading. A wonderful book for a Civil War beginner.

Sears offers a fascinating assortment of brief essays on the Union's Army of the Potomac and some of the storms that swirled around a number of its commanding generals from the beginning of the Civil War to its end. Each of the essays is brief enough to be enjoyed in one sitting, and offers some fascinating new insights into aspects of the Civil War in the East. Even where he is covering ground that has been well covered before--e.g., Lee's "Lost Order" before the Battle of Antietam--Sears manages to introduce some new information and fresh insights.

Anyone who has done much reading about the Civil War knows that one of the major challenges confronting Lincoln as commander-in-chief was finding a dependable general to put in charge of the Army of the Potomac. This volume reviews some of the problem generals with whom he had to deal--including McClellan (a Sears specialty) and Joe Hooker (whom Sears defends in an unconventional review of Hooker at Chancellorsville). But the book also goes below the command level to look at colorful characters like Dan Sickles and Phil Sheridan. Especially engaging are the essays dealing with the court martials and less than honorable discharges of generals who were unfairly treatged for a variety of reasons.

While to some degree, these essays are "insider baseball" and would be best appreciated by readers with background on the Civil War, they stand alone and can be appreciated by almost anyone with an interest in the era.

This book is not your typical Civil War book. Sometimes my fervent interest in the Civil War is somewhat diminished as I attempt to plow through a tome filled with copious amounts of meaningless and irrelevant information (recountings of troop movements, long lists of command structure changes, etc.) Mr. Sears' book adroitly avoids these pitfalls of the typical Civil War narrative. I found the book to be pure enjoyment. I gained much insight on the inner workings of the various changes in command in the Army of the Potomac, and the internal machinations which caused them. Mr. Sears certainly comes to some conclusions with which other historians might disagree, but he makes a strong case for his arguments. This book is one of my top five Civl War recommendations.