Rating: 
Summary: The Endnotes Alone Consume 25 Percent of the Book
Review: If you are a student of the June - July 1863 Gettysburg Campaign, this book ought be in your collection. Edwin B. Coddington's work is so jam-packed with details about the soldiers, weapons, terrain and the Civil War itself that this book serves much more as a reflection of the era than reference for the famous three-day clash of arms. Coddington does more than just report the battle. He examines the thought processes of the commanders, both blue and gray, and the events that shaped their decisions. Indeed, with so many commands issued by generals in the flowery and noble-sounding language of the 1860's it's a wonder Confederate or Union commanders knew what was expected of them at all. Critics of the book have fairly commented that Coddington ignores some of the small unit actions and other armed engagements around Gettysburg in preference to the "main event" of each day. This is true, but you have to keep in mind that this hefty volume will keep the reader busy for days. There's only so much information you can cram into one volume. As far as coverage of Confederate and Union commander's dialogue and command correspondence, Coddington does weigh a bit heavier on the Union side. This is not likely a purposeful intent to downplay the Southern struggle. More likely this was due to the generally greater volume of Federal documentation, including hearings regarding the conduct of the war, that survived the decade and found their way into historic archives. As with many military campaign books, a reader of this book will need to bookmark the infrequent map pages as these must be readily at hand for constant reference. Available in paperback for many years now, this book is very affordable.
Rating: 
Summary: Simply the Best
Review: It is with sadness that we must recognize that we can never thank Professor Coddington properly for giving us the standard treatment of our country's greatest battle. The Pennsylvania Historian did not live to see his masterwork published and so did not offer us the opportunity to offer our congratulations and appreciation. Histories of Gettysburg are in long supply - but have no doubt, Coddington's effort stands alone, ahead of the others. Every detail of the Campaign, from its beginning to its end on the south shores of the Potomac in Virginia, is thoroughly researched, analyzed and presented in a clear, concise, convincing fashion. Over two hundred pages of reference notes are included to lead the student wherever he may be interested to go. Coddington, being a Pennsylvanian, may be accused of some northern bias (especially in defending the reputation of Meade, a fellow Pennsylvanian) but any subjectivity is slight and detracts in no way from the value of the treatise as a whole. Any significant discussion concerning tactics and strategy of the Battle of Gettysburg should start with a firm foundation in Coddington. Other than the Official Records, this is the reference point for that great, terrible battle. If you really want to understand this battle in detail, study Coddington and then take the U. S. Army War College Guide to the battlefield to walk the grounds yourself.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent
Review: Read the book prior to visiting the battlefield, and I found it a very useful preface to the battlefield itself. Coddington does an extremely good job of examining the battle. Certainly the best book (of the few I have read) on the Civil War.
Rating:
Summary: Truth In Advertising
Review: The book's title emphasizes that it's a study in command of both the ANV and Army of the Potomoc, and that's exactly what it is. Some books get more specific in the details of every action on the field (Pfanz's books). Some are more specific with primary accounts (Sears). Most books give more coverage to Ewell's attack on the night of July 2. This book was also the only one that didn't include some of the more well known anecdotes of the battle (Jennie Wade etc). Where this book does shine is in critically analyzing the relationships, communications and misunderstandings between the North's corps commanders and the South's division commanders. This book is also the most meticulously researched of any Gettysburg book to date (as many other reviews note, there are 300 pages worth of notes alone). Coddington doesn't hesitate to pull punches. Most of the criticism concerning the North falls on Sickles for advancing the III corps out of the battleline, and almost nobody in the high Southern command escapes criticism (ironically, one of the post-battle and post-war designated goats, Ewell, gets the least amount of it). Coddington keeps the narrative from getting too dry by often offering his own opinion and analysis on the movements, the communications and the insubordinations. In all, this is a critical book to read about the campaign. If you're looking for an easier read or a more human element in a book about the entire campaign, Sears's book is for you. If you want more specifics, Pfanz's books are for you. If you're looking to understand the chain of commands in both armies and some of the breakdowns that ultimately hampered the Confederacy's effectiveness at Gettysburg, this is the book.
Rating:
Summary: An excellent in-depth accounting the Gettysburg campaign
Review: The events leading up to the battle of Gettysburg, and the battle itself, stand as one of the most significant points in American history. This narrative covers events several months prior to the battle, with a comparatively brief description of the battle itself. The strength of the book is clearly in the campaign itself, with ample reflection on the motives and causes leading to the conflict. The author skillfully overlays the campaign against the political backdrop of the period, and seems to relate many of the command decisions to Presidental authority. While the author presents little novel information, he has done a masterful job of progessively focusing the reader on the causes of the campaign, the difficulties faced by each of the commanders, the onset of the battle, and the aftermath. The book is impeccably referenced and researched, and stands as a indispensible resource for all interested in the Civil War. This book will appeal to anyone who is serious in their study of Gettysburg.
Rating:
Summary: The Gettysburg Campaign
Review: The Gettysburg Campaign was published in 1960, before the era of social history, and is a product of the great man, great moment theory. This is both its weakness and strength. The book spends very little time with the actions of small units (small being anything under brigade size) and with their commanders. There is no mention of common soldiers and what they experienced. This leads to a very incomplete picture of the battle. We see the battle as faceless, the common soldiers are merely numbers. While there is nothing wrong with this approach, and in fact it was the approach of almost all history books before the late 1960s, it might strike today's reader as an abnormality. In today's era of social history the privates are given as much attention as the generals, with some books dedicated wholly to their experiences. Coddinton, however, chooses to look at the "great men." It is in his analysis of the various levels of command, from army to corps to divisional to brigade to, in a few cases, regimental, that Coddington shines. The book shows not only the decisions that were made, but what factors played into those decisions, whether they were good decisions or not, and what options where available. The book is structured differently than most on the campaign in that it spends nearly as much time on the prelude and aftermath as it does the three days of battle. This too adds greatly to the book, and makes it truly deserving of the title The Gettysburg Campaign. The emphasis on the whole campaign allows us to put the battle and the various decisions made by the commanders into their correct perspective. Also different than most historians, Coddington views the battle as being won by the Union, not as being lost by the Confederacy. He argues that Meade did a commendable job, and that the Army of the Potomac simply outfought the Army of Northern Virginia. The evidence he provides is solid, and should sway the reasonable reader to his point of view. The Gettysburg Campaign, while showing signs of the era in which it was written, is the best book on the battle, a must read for the serious student of the battle.
Rating:
Summary: Authoritative, objective
Review: The thesis in this masterful work is that counter to popular myth, the Army of the Potomac did not field soldiers any less competent, brave, or willing than the Army of Northern Virginia. Rather, Coddington contends, inadequacies in command on both sides led to the various successes and failures durning the Gettysburg Campaign. It is his opinion that the North, because of advantages in placement and terrain made less mistakes than their counterparts. He also contends that competency in command in the Union from Generals such as Reynolds, Gibbon, Hancock, and Warren were on the level of brilliance that one usually associates with the South. This can be perceived as a biased book, as his commentary can be scathing when discussing the flaws of action of a commander. He gives equal time to the mistakes on both sides, from Sickel's meddlings during the second day, Barnes's failures at Rose's Wheatfield, and Howards insitance of holding Reynold's lines for the Union to Lonstreet's petulance on the third day, Anderson's inability to move half of his division on the second day, and Harry Heth's overt aggression which cost him half of his on the first for the Confederates. The common romantic mythologies of the two armies makes the criticism of the North easier to accept, as lapses in command were the rule; correspondingly it is difficult to accept Coddington's assertion that the Confederacy acted with only an equal level of competence to their Union conterparts whereas previously they had exceeded it. Coddington's reinforcements with primary source material, however, is outstanding, giving strong weight to his premises and making his conclusions difficult to debase. Very highly recommended.
Rating:
Summary: "The" Definitive Work on Gettysburg
Review: There is no other book on Gettysburg that provides a blow by blow account of the action and decisions that were made by both sides at Gettysburg. For those interested in doing computer simulations, or those doing re-enactments of the battle of Gettysburg, this book IS A MUST READ book. It is well-written with the most extensive documenta-tion from a military historian and tactician's standpoint. This work provides some of the most intriguing details that probes the minds of the commanders who made fateful decisions. One example is the meticulous detail that the author provides of the accounts of the death of General John F. Reynolds at the hands of a sniper's bullet. No other book on Gettysburg (or any other battle) provides such a comprehensive analysis of chronology, the strategy and tactics that this book offers. It is well worth the money.
Rating:
Summary: The Bible on Gettysburg: All others compared
Review: This book by Coddington has been known as the best-detailed book on Gettysburg since it was written many years ago. Combined with excellent maps, the author provides straightforward detail on all the movements attacks and the aftermath. Coddington's book has traditionally been held as the single best volume on Gettysburg. Combined with Stephen Sears new book, the two provide the best look at Gettysburg. Coddington describes the strategy of the campaign to the tactics of the battle which starts with confusion for the Confederates and ends that way as Hancock, then Meade organize their defense on a position worthy of Malvern Hill with open fields of fire (except the base of the round tops) and elevation. Descriptions of the battle are well described particularly Longstreet's desperate and crushing attack on the Union left and Ewell's failed attack on the 2nd day that demonstrated that occupying the town and the far left were not beneficial to the Confederates at all. Pickett's attack with Hill's corps under Longstreet is an inexplicable disaster that was a forlorn hope from the start that is still a mystery that it was ever attempted across a field suitable for massing Union artillery and enfilading fire from both artillery and infantry. Coddington provides Lee's thoughts on the success of the attack that was to be supported by Stuart's attack in the rear. Sears does a more detailed job on the decisions of the main characters and key information such as surveillance by the Union. Both books are objective which is particularly refreshing since the apologist historians looking for a villain in the southern cause get lost within their perspective and damage the history of the event.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Study
Review: This book is an excellent study of the oppossing sides of the Gettysburg Campaign. What is most remarkable is the fact that the author goes a marvelous job of treating each side fairly. Most books about the Civil War definatley take a pro Lee or pro Union stance. Coddington does a good job of treating everyone evenly, giving praise where it is due. Coddington's book is also a good narrative history of the events. Even though I knew the outcome of the battle the book at times read like fiction. This is espically true when dealing with the third day. The only objection that I have is Coddington's failure to objectively review the purported reasons for the battle and the campaign in the first instance. He takes Lee's rationalizations at face value and portrays the campaign as a giant foraging enterprise. Furthermore, given the strong defensive positions occupied by Meade, there is little discussion of whether Lee should have accepted battle on July 2. While these oversights are not insignificant, the book is very worthwhile.
|
