Shades of Blue and Gray: An Introductory Military History of the Civil War

Rating:
Summary: An excellent brief military history of the Civil War.
Review: Hattaway's Shades of Blue and Gray is an excellent introduction to the military history of the Civil War. While brief enough for the amateur historian to enjoy, this book is also suitable for scholars and features many valuable insights into the period. Hattaway adequately explains many of the complicated and technical aspects of the war in a way other works have failed to do. Shades of Blue and Gray gets to the heart of the military science involved in the war, and relates the Civil War to the world-wide development of modern warfare. This book is also excellent for anyone interested in Confederate General Stephen D. Lee, one of Hattaway's specialties. For anyone interested in the way the war was fought, this book is a must.

Rating:
Summary: An excellent brief military history of the Civil War.
Review: Hattaway's Shades of Blue and Gray is an excellent introduction to the military history of the Civil War. While brief enough for the amateur historian to enjoy, this book is also suitable for scholars and features many valuable insights into the period. Hattaway adequately explains many of the complicated and technical aspects of the war in a way other works have failed to do. Shades of Blue and Gray gets to the heart of the military science involved in the war, and relates the Civil War to the world-wide development of modern warfare. This book is also excellent for anyone interested in Confederate General Stephen D. Lee, one of Hattaway's specialties. For anyone interested in the way the war was fought, this book is a must.

Rating:
Summary: An excellent overview of the American Civil War.
Review: Prof. Hattaway, a student of T. Harry Williams of LSU, has the most eloquent and clear style of writing that the concepts that he communicates are very easily understood. Having had Prof. Hattaway for Am. Hist. in college, I must say that his writing technique is truly genuine--he acts and reacts precisely in the way that he presents himself in the work. The work itself gives a very broad overview of the Civil War with enough detail to surpass elementary study but in moderation enough to keep easily distracted readers from finding it laborious. I highly recommend Prof. Hattaway and his works.

Rating:
Summary: Sweeping observations with false connotations
Review: Really it deserves a 2.5, but that's not possible so I rounded up. I have read a number of books on the military history of the Civil War, and I bought this book as a brush up to keep my finger in it, one could say. The authors greatest error, in my eyes, was his tendency to make sweeping observations which were not always true. He claims that the South just had to hold out and keep holding out to win, whereas it has been the general opinion of many historians, as well as Robert E Lee, that the South had to win quickly, or be doomed to a gradual loss.

Alright, so maybe Hattaway did say that - it's only one thing, right? Well, it is always "The North," "The South," like everyone in those two areas thought about the war the same. Ok, so he was trying to keep his history short. And yes, he did keep it short, at the expense of misrepresentation. Many people generally regard the Civil War as a battle of generals, and I don't see a reason to disagree with that, and neither does Hattaway. So he mentions the generals, and this general, and that other general, and soon even I, someone who has studied the Civil War before, don't even know whether he's talking about a Confederate or Union general, never a good thing to be confused about.

I could recommend this book only as the most elementary introduction to the military history of the Civil War, someone interested in learning a little more about it and not having any prior knowledge. Otherwise, I would go for one that was a little less pro-North (as Hattaway has a very Northern point of view. I know, it's the timeless problem about writing about the Civil War - it's hard to keep objective. He just tends to tell the point of view of the Northern generals a lot more than the Southern generals. Except mentionning their names, of course, see above comment).