Rating: 
Summary: What are we fighting for?
Review: a. Until now, only three book-length studies have been done on the bloody Tennessee battle near Stones River. Peter Cozzens has used No Better Place to Die: The Battle of Stones River to recount the late 1862 campaign and battle in detail. Cozzens describes the battle in great detail, emphasizing the tactical fine points and their effect on the overall campaign. His viewpoints on the eccentric personalities of Bragg and Rosecrans at their higher level of commands and his accounts of the individual soldier on the ground allow Cozzens describe the battle to the reader in a personal and first hand account. It allows the reader to see the battlefield though the soldier's eyes, bringing to life the responsibilities of commanders and the effects of their decisions on the lives of their soldiers and the ultimate purpose of their mission.c. The thesis of Cozzens' book deals mainly with the personalities of Rosecrans and Bragg and how their impulsive and sometimes brash decisions affected the outcome at Stones River. He writes, "No one had more stinging criticism for Bragg than two who would soon become his lieutenants, Lieutenant Generals Hardee and Polk, who had urged President Davis to recognize that only a change of commanders could save the army and salvage Confederate fortunes in the West. But Davis gave his friend Bragg a chance and took no action. His inaction, however, rendered Bragg's lieutenants insubordinate; the President fostered failure at Murfreesboro." As for Rosecrans, Cozzens writes, "All the Federals needed was to fight a war of attrition. Applying constant, direct pressure to the Confederates, they would guarantee that though they might lose a few battles, they would still, in time, win the War. Although he had provided the Bluecoats with the first evidence of how they could conduct the War and win, Rosecrans was no the man to lead them to that victory. His courage was a gift in battle, but his impulsiveness was a curse. Rosecrans would become too impulsive and fashion a foolhardy plan which would allow the Rebels to beat the Federals before they had won their war of attrition."
Rating: 
Summary: Well Worth the Effort
Review: Cozzens wrote three superb, and related, books on the decisive Battles in the West. Of these three, the most important is "No Better Place to Die".. not because it is the best of the three, for it is not, but rather because it is a very detailed analysis of an otherwise ignored battle. Cozzens does not write in the most accessible style, but considering the complexity of the battle and the serious nature of the work, it is appropriate, and after a few pages, clear and understandable. One wishes that better and more detailed maps had been provided, along with some photographs of key players, but those "deficiences" are more than made up by the quality of the research.
Rating: 
Summary: He's just getting started
Review: Cozzens' first book about the Civil War's western theatre admittedly is easily the least compelling, but still a good read. Calling this book "bad" as another reviewer did, is just bizarre. If you're not interested in the Civil War, don't read books about it. This is, for the most part, a well-written, fine account of the Battle of Murfreesboro, or Stones River. The main problem is a sometimes-confusing rundown of troop movements, not helped by even more perplexing maps. I had a great deal of trouble figuring out just where everybody was on the battlefield. Cozzens' next two books in this "trilogy" remedy most of the problems and are big steps forward.
Rating:
Summary: He's just getting started
Review: Cozzens' first book about the Civil War's western theatre admittedly is easily the least compelling, but still a good read. Calling this book "bad" as another reviewer did, is just bizarre. If you're not interested in the Civil War, don't read books about it. This is, for the most part, a well-written, fine account of the Battle of Murfreesboro, or Stones River. The main problem is a sometimes-confusing rundown of troop movements, not helped by even more perplexing maps. I had a great deal of trouble figuring out just where everybody was on the battlefield. Cozzens' next two books in this "trilogy" remedy most of the problems and are big steps forward.
Rating:
Summary: Good Account of One of the Civil War's Bloodiest Battles.
Review: In my humble opinion, Cozzens has produced a fine account of one of the war's bloodiest and most vicious battles. While close to 30,000 soldiers were casualties, the battle has often been overlooked in favor of Gettysburg, Antietam, Vicksburg, and other battles. The account of troop movements and battle descriptions is detailed without being overly tedious. The author also includes several brief biographical notes of generals and other officers while also including anecdotes about several of the common soldiers in the battle. Cozzens is also able to maintain a good balance of the Union and Confederate side. The major complaint I have is the maps - while the ones in the book are excellent and finely detailed, there's just not enough of them. Having at least 5 more battle maps would have immensely clarified troop movements and the flow of battle. For example, the narrative of Confederate Generals Cleburne and McCown's attacks on the morning of December 31, 1862 are reinforced by excellent maps while maps do not exist or are too few for other parts of the battle. Unfortunately, I find this to be a common theme in many Civil War battle text - a good or excellent battle narrative diminshed by too few maps. Complaint aside, I recommend this book as the defintive text on one of the war's bloodiest battles. Read and enjoy!
Rating:
Summary: Good Account of One of the Civil War's Bloodiest Battles.
Review: In my humble opinion, Cozzens has produced a fine account of one of the war's bloodiest and most vicious battles. While close to 30,000 soldiers were casualties, the battle has often been overlooked in favor of Gettysburg, Antietam, Vicksburg, and other battles. The account of troop movements and battle descriptions is detailed without being overly tedious. The author also includes several brief biographical notes of generals and other officers while also including anecdotes about several of the common soldiers in the battle. Cozzens is also able to maintain a good balance of the Union and Confederate side. The major complaint I have is the maps - while the ones in the book are excellent and finely detailed, there's just not enough of them. Having at least 5 more battle maps would have immensely clarified troop movements and the flow of battle. For example, the narrative of Confederate Generals Cleburne and McCown's attacks on the morning of December 31, 1862 are reinforced by excellent maps while maps do not exist or are too few for other parts of the battle. Unfortunately, I find this to be a common theme in many Civil War battle text - a good or excellent battle narrative diminshed by too few maps. Complaint aside, I recommend this book as the defintive text on one of the war's bloodiest battles. Read and enjoy!
Rating:
Summary: A Solid Study
Review: Mr. Cozzens was educated in the law and it shows in his writing. The explanation of the battle is very solid, detailed, and to the point. There isn't a lot of color or background in any of his work, but it is first rate solid history! His research is rock solid and for all it's detail it does make for an enjoyable read.
Rating:
Summary: A Solid Study
Review: Mr. Cozzens was educated in the law and it shows in his writing. The explanation of the battle is very solid, detailed, and to the point. There isn't a lot of color or background in any of his work, but it is first rate solid history! His research is rock solid and for all it's detail it does make for an enjoyable read.
Rating:
Summary: OK, but not first choice of Civil War books
Review: No Better Place to Die : The Battle of Stones River by Peter Cozzens is a decent history of an important, but little discussed, Civil War battle. The strength of the book is Cozzens' discussion of the historical context of the battle as well as the personalties involved. Of particular interest was the description of Generals Rosecrans and Bragg and the roles that they played in the outcome. However, the books weakness almost overcomes the positives. As far as the actual battle was concerned, it was difficult to follow what was actually happening. The maps were not particularly helpful. This was disappointing since the tone and momentum of the battle radically changed from the first to the second day. Cozzens does little to describe how this change in fortune occurred. I was happy to have read this book, although it would not be my first choice of Civil War books.
Rating:
Summary: A well written account.
Review: The first battle to resemble Verdun. Peter's grasp of his material consistently amazes me.
| 
