Lincoln and His Generals

Rating:
Summary: Won't Someone Bring This Classic Back Into Print?
Review: "Lincoln and His Generals" is an absolute must for anyone who aspires to a true understanding of the American Civil War and how it was fought, especially from the high command perspective on the Union side. Poring over the orders that passed back and forth between Lincoln and his top commanders, Williams paints a highly opinionated portrait of Lincoln's efforts to find the commander who will at last win the war. Williams' portrait of McClellan is extensive - and unforgiving. How this classic study could have been allowed to pass exclusively into the realm of the used book seller is a mystery to this reviewer.

Rating:
Summary: The war from the top
Review: An absolutely engrossing explanation of how Lincoln and his top generals fought the Civil War and how the war forced the adoption of a modern command structure.

If you've seen pictures of Lincoln when elected in 1861 and compared them to pictures from 1865 and wondered why he looked so worn, here's the answer: he had generals (and oh what generals they were!).

The fault I find is that it gives too much emphasis to Mclellan and most of the remaining attention to Grant. While these were the major Generals in Chief, I would have liked to have seen more on the other generals who served under them.

Rating:
Summary: The Definitive work on Lincoln as Commander In Chief
Review: In Lincoln and His Generals, T. Harry Williams concentrated on telling the story of Lincoln as commander in chief during America's greatest and most devastating war. In the preface he states his goals clearly; "my theme is Lincoln as a director of war and his place in the high command and his influence in developing a modern command system for his nation." Williams expertly develops this theme throughout this fascinating book. Though many may disagree with some of his conclusions about how effective Lincoln was in this role, few, after reading this book, would dispute the fact that it is a well written and reasoned account of the topic, and that it is an important contribution both to Civil War and Lincoln studies.
William's views Lincoln as a genius - a man, who came into office with no military knowledge, yet had the flexibility of mind to adapt and learn from his mistakes to guide his country to victory through its greatest wartime crisis. He states that, "Lincoln, by the power of his mind, became a fine strategist...a better natural strategist than were most of the trained soldiers." He claims that Lincoln grasped the war's big picture from the very beginning, and even claims that Grant's final end-game strategy from 1864 on was fundamentally Lincoln's plan, though the details and execution were Grant's. I believe that he overreaches with some of these claims, yet he still makes a great case for Lincoln's genius, and his role as the indispensable man behind Union victory.
Williams also writes of the generals who were Lincoln's tools for winning the war. McClellan and Grant get the most ink, the former because, despite his great talent, he was ultimately a failure and Lincoln's greatest disappointment and the latter because, in William's estimation, he was the greatest general on either side of the war. Of Lincoln's other generals, Williams writes more about the ineffective, incompetent ones such as Fremont and Banks than he does of effective and even great generals like Sherman and Thomas. He explains in his preface that the reason for this is that the incompetent generals were headaches to Lincoln, forcing him to have intimate command relationships with them, while he had to interfere very little with the moves of the effective Sherman and Thomas.
Whether or not you agree with all or even any of the author's conclusions, he has written what still stands as the definitive work on this topic - the launching point for discussion and debate on Lincoln's role as commander in chief. Not only that, he has done it in fine style, creating a clear, interesting, and well-written book that stands as a masterpiece in its field. I give it my highest recommendation.


Rating:
Summary: Great book that nearly misses five stars
Review: This book is a wonderful look at Lincoln and his relationship with his generals and why he went through so many prior to finally appointing Grant, he just couldn't find one that would not when under pressure find all the reason they could not to attack.
The book also does an excellent job of detailing Lincoln's involvement in strategic policy for the Union armies. Surprisingly for a man who'd never held a high military rank, Lincoln displayed an incredible grasp of strategy and frequently understood things generals such as Meade did not. Williams also expands into how upon the appointment of Grant to general in chief, the Union high command evolved into a modern military command, the first of its kind in the world, even more advanced than anything seen in Europe until Moltke the Elder, with the Union army high command consisiting of Commander in Cheif, General in Chief, and a new office designed for Halleck and to keep Grant from having to be in Washington, Chief of Staff. Williams also makes clear the different military culture of the 19th century, in stark contrast to most instances today, a general who disagreed with Lincoln or thought his plan to have dissatisfied the president or simply disliked somone they were told to collaborate with in a battle, instead of trying to work out differences, asked to be relieved of command.
The one major drawback to this book is its lack of maps. There are no maps to follow the action along, so its advisable to have a Civil War atlas at hand in order to be able to place some of the places the battles take place. Also, if you're looking for a detailed "what happend" in the many battles, in most cases you won't get it with this book. This book is purely about the command and control structure of the Union army and how the players interacted with each other. My one final and biggest grip with Williams is that he at many points assumes too much in my opinion. There are many instances where the documentary record when he wrote the book did not state what happend, so Williams assumes that things "must have" or "certainly happend" a certain way without in some cases anything approaching a clear reason why he draws this conclusion.
Other than these few gripes, this is a wonderful book and should be read by anyone wishing to understand why Lincoln went through so many generals.

Rating:
Summary: a good authors opinion
Review: While I enjoyed this book, I felt the title was deceptive. The author, T. Harry Williams, trys to convince us, that Lincoln was a master strategist, and it basically was his strategy that helped win the war. ( I HAD thought this book would be about Union Generals, as Douglass Freemans- Lee's Lt's was about his. That may have been my fault, for misunderstanding)

I read this book with an open mind, yet with a good knowledge of the Civil War, and of McClellen, Meade, Grant, Hooker, Burnside, Pope and McDowell. McClellen stated many times, that Lincoln could not hold on to a secret, and that was his reason for not keeping him informed. Also, many of the plans McClellen devised, were later used by Grant. Hooker built the Union Military up, and did a fantastic job of organization, from the bottom ranks up. Meade, did much of the work, that we give Grant credit for, ( though Meade did make the newspapers mad at him, and refused to name him)

Lincoln is a very interesting man, but I feel it is a stretch to call him a master military strategist.

If you enjoy reading someone elses view, or opinion of the Civil War, this is a really nice book. But, that is why I can only give it three stars, it is good, but too much of the authors opinion.

Rating:
Summary: Well Researched and Comprehensive
Review: Williams notes in the preface of my 1952 edition that it is not about the Generals of the Union, but rather about Lincoln and his problems with the Union military commanders. While much of the text is dry details about this letter or that between Lincoln and his generals, the Williams does interject some bits of interesting facts and educated theories on why Lincoln often acted as he did. This is a well researched book, with most pages having between about 3 footnotes, and it is very helpful in understanding the political climate of the American Civil War.

Rating:
Summary: Well Researched and Comprehensive
Review: Williams notes in the preface of my 1952 edition that it is not about the Generals of the Union, but rather about Lincoln and his problems with the Union military commanders. While much of the text is dry details about this letter or that between Lincoln and his generals, the Williams does interject some bits of interesting facts and educated theories on why Lincoln often acted as he did. This is a well researched book, with most pages having between about 3 footnotes, and it is very helpful in understanding the political climate of the American Civil War.