<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Waste of money
Review: I had originally placed this order almost a year ago with much anticipation. After the publishing was delayed for months I had forgotten I even had it on back order. Well, I finally got my copy and I must say that it is a big disappointment.To begin with, there are exactly two illustrations: one map and one seriously degraded photo of Col Oates. Unless you have the memory of an elephant it is very hard to get detail on timelines and troop movements/placements on text alone. This, to me, was perhaps the biggest disappointment. Another area of concern is the, at times, seemingly lack of real research. One example of this is the claim made by the author that the hill, thus the entire battle, could have been won if the 15th ALA had had support, etc. He failed to explain where these units were supposed to come from, neglected to mention that by the time the 15th ALA had run out of steam there wasn't enough daylight left to mount another assault, any supports would have to come from over a mile away under fire, and he doesn't offer any gameplan as to how the Confederates were supposed to hold the hill once it was taken (given the fact that there were 1000s of Union troops within double quick distance). I don't mean to nitpick on one aspect but the entire book is written this way. I was looking for a book that was going to finally explain the Confederate point of view in detail, with battle maps to accompany the text. But this reads more like a guy who is trying to defend his family's honor after someone hurled a staining insult at them. I agree that the Conf side of this legendary struggle has not been represented in enough detail and scope. I still feel that way. Bottom line-the premise is a great idea; don't waste your money.
Rating:
Summary: Waste of money
Review: I totally agree with [a negative reviewer]. I was very disappionted after waiting so long for the release. The authur constantly repeated things, trying to make the book longer. Plus Tucker seems to have a grudge against Joshua Chamberlain. In the last chapter he makes it sound like Chamberlain had nothing to do with the battle and lied about his contribution afterwards. He provdes no maps to prove his "research". He also states the 15th Alabama retired up Big Round Top after the battle. But wasn't Big Round Top in Union hands after the 2nd day? There's many things I didn't like about this book.
Rating:
Summary: About as bad as a Civil War book can get
Review: That a book purporting to be a detailed, comprehensive tactical study offers only one map pretty well reflects the carelessness, and lack of respect for the reader, with which this book apparently was produced. I've written thirteen books on the Civil War and Indian Wars myself, and I understand the importance of good maps. The prose also is sloppy, and the author repeats the same absurd premise - that a few more men in the ranks of one regiment might have changed the course of Gettysburg, and thus of the Civil War - so many times that one feels tempted to toss the book across the room. An absolute disgrace to the field of military history.
Rating:
Summary: About as bad as a Civil War book can get
Review: The author, who did a good job with Burnside's Bridge, repeats himself over and over ad naseoum and fails to include maps or drawings to illustrate what he is describing. His main premise is, that had the 15 th Alabama been fully complemented with men and had it been supported by another regiment, Gettysburg would have been a Confederate victory. That is prepostorous, considering the number of reinforcements the Union had. Oates and his men deserve a lot of credit for their valor but so do the Union troops who put up one hell of a battle from prepared defensive positions. The author is capable of writing a much better product and must have been in a hurry to churn another book out.
Rating: 
Summary: wasted words and no maps
Review: The author, who did a good job with Burnside's Bridge, repeats himself over and over ad naseoum and fails to include maps or drawings to illustrate what he is describing. His main premise is, that had the 15 th Alabama been fully complemented with men and had it been supported by another regiment, Gettysburg would have been a Confederate victory. That is prepostorous, considering the number of reinforcements the Union had. Oates and his men deserve a lot of credit for their valor but so do the Union troops who put up one hell of a battle from prepared defensive positions. The author is capable of writing a much better product and must have been in a hurry to churn another book out.
<< 1 >>
| 
