My Brother's Keeper by Nancy Johnson is a well written historical fiction of the US Civil War as seen through the eyes of a 13 y.o. drummer boy.During the first 4 chapters,strong bonds are formed between 2 brothers and their younger sister as they manage a farm in upstate New York under the drunken tyranny of their mother's second husband. Their mother dies at the opening of the book. Joshua promises to take care of Jere who is the oldest.It is this promise that forces Joshua(13 y.o.)to enlist in the Union Army at the same time that Jeremiah(17 y.o)does. Jere joins for glory and adventure. Boot camp, long marches, train rides, army camp life are described. Jere gets killed in an ambush before he even fights in any battle. Joshua is devastated by his death and his inability to protect his brother. He lashes out at the enemy. Josh is repulsed by the killing, bloodshed, and noise of battle. He runs off into the woods and gets lost. Josh travels by night and sleeps by day like runaways slaves did because he feels like a deserter. Josh is found by soliders from the 20th Maine and meets Colonel Joshua Chamberlain. The outstanding character of Chamberlain is well portrayed. Josh serves bravely as a messenger boy and a "medic" during several battles including Little Round Top and Gettysburg.He's captured by the Confederates but escapes bringing pivotal information to General Grant. He's there during the surrender of Lee to Grant. This book will serve well in Literature Circles for those studying the Civil War. The issues of slavery and the insanity of war are well presented.

Read this to your children in the car as you drive into Gettysburg. It is a great intro to the battle. I read it to 7, 9 and 10 year olds and the adults enjoyed it, too. It's about the experience of an adolescent girl who leaves her home for the day to help babysit some neighbor children and gets inadvertently caught behind battle lines in the famous battle at Gettysburg.

Incidents, places and people in this short book (read it in 20 minutes) are easily found in the actual Gettysburg area - making the story come alive and giving the kids concrete concepts to "hang" the sights on: For example, the main character flees to the Weikert farm for safety - there is a Weikert tombstone in the cemetary just opposite the Visitor's Center; she meets a General Weed, and his photo is prominent on the Park Service's explanation at the auto pull-off for Big Round Top; she lives in a red house with two linden trees in the yard, and many Civil War era houses can be found in town, several with linden trees, and so on.

The prose is very well constructed, exceptionally so for a children's book - and it reads almost like poetry. It looks like a simple little children's chapter book, but it really is a treasure.

Perez' novel is a young adult novel in a similar genre to _Johnny Tremain_: historical fiction with a considerable amount of gore. The scenes of violence in this story, which centers on the Battle of Gettysburg, are well-written and appropriate for the subject but I would think they would be too graphic for some young readers. Perez presents a Shaara-esque Gettysburg with a befuddled Lee and a Longstreet in the right. Her research fails her at one point as she places the Stonewall Brigade in the night assault on Culp's Hill (they were not engaged there until the next day) and the Second Virginia with the rest of the brigade (they were detailed as skirmishers on the far left throughout the battle, which is why they had only one man, Wesley Culp, killed in action). Most readers, of course, won't even notice this error. They may, on the other hand, find her presentation of young people involved on opposite sides of the war a little shallow, and her conclusion with the Gettysburg Address a little routine. Moments of interesting, original language do, however, lift this book somewhat above the general swamp.

If you love battles, battle strategies, and battle grit, this is the Gettysburg book for you. There are some "human interest" portions, but mostly, detailed battle. I teach this book in Jr. High. The kids loathe it, except for the battle-lovers. We joke at the end that we all want t-shirts sporting the phrase "I survived the Slopes of War". But if you like battle scenes, hey, go for it.

I thought that this book started out boring and almost as soon as the war started, it picked up into a fast paced "horror" novel of what it would be like to live in this time period. I had to read this book for a college course and i thouht it was a great read for us and I expect that even kids will enjoy history in the form of a story!

Glenn Tucker takes the time to cover just about all aspects of the Battle of Gettysburg in this book. However by doing so the writer seems to be bored at times, feeling he has to convey what happened though it has no consequences or historical value only that it, in fact, happened (Stuart and the calvaries on the third day). At the same time, the profiles of the individuals involved in this great battle (their personal histories and even physical appearances) are supurb and add a touch of familiarity. Also, there are moments when the author's prose is truly eloquent, haunting, vivid, and beautiful at the same time.

Glenn Tucker's "High Tide at Gettysburg" is an extraordinary piece of work. Tucker, unlike many historians describes the officers, where they came from, and who they were. He also points out little tidbits that make the whole story of Gettysburg more interesting. For anyone who is interested in the Battle of Gettysburg, I encourage him/her to read this.

When the movie on Gettysburg was first released in Australia I tried desperately to find a book to read about the battle. I found this one and I enjoyed it a great deal. It may not be the most detailed account available but I found it to be one of the best that gave a complete overview of the 3 days fighting without getting lost or bored. The authors style of writing was refreshing and enjoyable and I found it hard to put the book down. Still one of my favourite books on this battle although I have read many since.

"Firestorm at Gettysburg" provided an often fascinating account of the Battle of Gettysburg from the point of view of some of the town's residents. Usually, most accounts focus on the famous events such as the battle on Little Round Top or Pickett's Charge, but this book focuses on the chaos created in the town itself, especially as the Union troops stampeded through town and up Cemetery Hill at the end of the first day of fighting. We read how people cowered in their cellars, watched the battle from the fields or rooftops, took in wounded friend or foe, and sometimes foolishly ventured outside.

"Firestorm" also describes the battle's aftermath in horrific detail, not allowing the reader to forget the carnage that the townspeople had to deal with long after both armies had marched away. The town was overwhelmed by all of the dead and wounded left behind, and the suffering that many of the soldiers endured not only because of their wounds but also because of the conditions they were hospitalized under was truly appalling, even sickening.

The book grabbed me for many reasons. Several accounts described soldiers, from both sides, behaving despicably, or nobly, or foolishly, or patiently, or stoically, or oddly, or in a variety of other ways. Accounts of conversations between townspeople and the Confederate soldiers occupying the town intrigued me. It was good to be reminded that individuals fought this battle, not just armies.

Obviously, the residents were in the dark as to the overall progress of the battle since they were primarily concerned with keeping safely out of harm's way. The authors wisely inserted summaries of the battle periodically so the reader could compare the impressions of the residents to the actual progression of the battle.

Other accounts of events that occurred in the town captivated me. A resident's narrow escape from the bullets of a sharpshooter, the capture of Union soldiers who refused to endanger the residents of a house, the selflessness many displayed as they took wounded soldiers into their homes...there were numerous little incidents which, taken together, painted a vivid picture of the confusion, fear, tragedy, and the complexity of the Battle of Gettysburg. Overall, I enjoyed the book a great deal.

Unfortunately, this book is full of technical errors. Who proofread this? One of the other reviewers already listed several factual contradictions present in the book, contradictions that I too noticed and grumbled about. There were also numerous typographical and even formatting errors that would draw the wrath of any English teacher. These errors really annoyed me and dampened my enthusiasm for the book noticeably. How much? I'll put it this way. I read this book after borrowing it from a friend, trying to decide whether or not to buy it. I'll buy it in a heartbeat...AFTER the next edition, complete with factual and typographical corrections...comes out.

If I had read first reader's review (above) I'm sure I would have been less likely to begin reading, much less finish, this book. But for all of the inconsistencies, mistakes, and other problems, this is an entertaining, usually interesting, and often moving book presented in a contemporary, TV-like style. I suppose the multitude of (mainly) amateur historians and Civil War buffs will find the scholarship sloppy but, frankly, there are very few Bruce Catton's and James McPherson's out there who have the rare capability of making sense out of the chaos of war while mainiging high literary and academic standards. Oh, well. The Civil War is a passion that many have staked out as their speciality, resulting in people who guard their area of "expertise" like a junkyard dog. I'm reminded of the cliche that they can't see the forest for the trees. And I believe that is the case here. Authors Slade and Alexander have (like most amateur history students) brought their love and fasination for Gettysburg and tried to see it from the vantage point of those who lived there, the average man, woman, and child. We read of the impending battle in the diaries and letters and follow events -- some humorous, some tragic, some mundane -- but all compelling -- through to the anticlimactic ending and beyond. I especially enjoyed the juxtapositioning of the photos with the text exerpts, putting faces with the voices, so to speak. So much history, especially that associated with the Civil War, is badly written, narrowly focused, trivial, grossly sentimental, and, well, the criticism could go for as long some of those endless tomes that crowd the shelves of your neighborhood bookstore. This book deserves to be on those shelves, but, perhaps not next to Bruce Catton!

This tremendous book provides a compelling account of the events that transpired during the battle and beyond in the most human of terms. Never mind the military maneuvers, the body counts, and other minutia so entrancing to some. Here are real accounts of real people acting heroically to protect those they love and the wounded thrust upon them. Never before has such a story been told about Gettysburg. The day by day recounting, allowing each person to relate what they saw and felt is amazing. I only wish more "professional" historians wrote this well. This is a must read for everyone who really wants to know what happened at Gettysburg.

David G.Martin gives us a detailed look at the first day at Gettysburg. A day usually neglected by most. He has done a good job. He paints the picture without fine brushstrokes. The engagement of July 1 is able to be held in your hand and..(most importantly) it can be followed easily. It is detailed, informative and full of incidents that make up a battle. A battle as important as this needs a good opening. Martin gives me that. Worth the read for the appendix alone. Against all the other books that concentrate on other events at Gettysburg it is good to have one that makes you cross the fields of the first day. He has taken his time analysing and gathering facts and gives good service allowing the reader to see several viewpoints at a time. There is a possibility that a few minor details may be 'here say' but in the smoke of battle who sees the entire picture? David G Martin gives the best picture of the first day at Gettysburg I've read. Glad I have it amongst my collection.

In his book, Martin has done for the First Day of Gettysburg what Harry Pfanz did with his two books on the Second Day's actions. The author has obviously done a great deal of research on the minute details of the movements and actions of many of the regiments involved on Day One. Of special mention is the lead up to July 1 and also the afteraffects, including answering some "What If's" that are intriguing. My only fault with the book is some incorrect information regarding some facts on the 26th North Carolina, which by itself is not crucial, but if the same is true of information regarding other units of which I am not familiar, it could be a problem. But do not let that criticism keep you from purchasing this book.

Gettysburg is a three (3) day battle, but most coach High School teachers focus on the last 24 hours. (Coach history teacher's kill a childs desire to read more about history.) Until I visited the National Battlefield I didn't even realize what I'd been missing. This visit changed me and I started doing two things. Studying Civil War history, something I'd never done before thanks to poor history teachers in High School. (He was also poor at coaching, we never won a game.) I also, started looking for a book detailing the 1st days action and found that one did not exist. Now one does! This is a must for anyone interested in Gettysburg! The author has gone to all the trouble of researching all the various books on the subject bring a spotlight on the conflicting stories and bring the reader as close to the action as can possibably be achieved without actually taking part in the battle itself. (The author also has saved you the time of rearching all those books yourself, now you can sit down by the fire and just enjoy reading about the actual battle.) After reading this book you will probably know more about what actually happened, than the actual participates did themselves. BUY this book and read it. It is a must for anyone seriousally interested in the Civil War! You'll thank me

Peter G. Tsouras' Gettysburg: An Alternate History is an interesting investigation of intriguing "what if" issues surrounding the greatest battle of the American Civil War. Military readers and historians will wade through the somewhat dry "blow-by-blow" and arrive at a better understanding of key issues of the battle which are not always obvious in accounts of the actual battle. On the other hand, the general public will not find this book appealing at all but rather, tedious and confusing.

Unlike other works of alternate history, which tend to effect only one change in a historical situation, Tsouras' narrative on Gettysburg poses five major changes. These changes are: (1) what if Stuart had turned up sooner, on the evening of 1 July 1863? (2) what if Ewell had conducted a more vigorous pursuit onto Cemetery Hill and Culp's Hill on the night of 1 July? (3) what if Longstreet had persuaded Lee in allowing a wider Confederate envelopment of the Union left flank on 2 July? (4) what if the Confederates had mounted a larger, better coordinated assault against the Union center on 3 July? and (4) what if the Union had mounted a major counterattack after the failure of Longstreet's assault? Tsouras has encompassed the most intriguing possibilities about the battle in this account, but it probably would have been better to "de-link" the alternate events by means of an anthology. By putting all five alternatives into play in the same sequential account, plus other alternate events like Meade and Lee becoming casualties, the alternative nature of this account threatens to snowball out of control.

Tsouras' alternate history does help to highlight certain aspects of the two armies that will be interesting to military readers. First, the early return of Stuart demonstrates the reliance that Lee placed on that trusted commander, rather than just his five brigades of cavalry. Actually, Lee retained several other brigades of cavalry under his control but failed to make use of them in Stuart's (historical) absence. For Lee, Stuart was his Reconnaissance and Security (R&S) asset, not the actual cavalry units. Instead of just moaning, "where is Stuart, where is Stuart?" the historical Lee should have been re-constituting his R&S capability from other cavalry available. This failure to adapt was a major command failure on Lee's part - which has been obscured in actual histories of the campaign - which tend to affix great blame on Stuart. A second military issue that is revealed in this alternative history is the superior Union artillery organization (as opposed to technical and numerical superiority, which is frequently mentioned). The Union artillery at Gettysburg was under the firm central control of Major General Hunt, who coordinated both the artillery reserve and corps artillery. On the other hand, the Army of Northern Virginia maintained much weaker control over its artillery, lacking a central artillery reserve or a senior officer willing to coordinate the artillery of its three corps. Military readers will see in this issue the antecedents of the argument between "decentralization" and "centralization" in fire support with the latter winning in this case. Indeed, Tsouras' alternative clearly places the Union artillery center stage because three times it is the artillery that saves the Army of the Potomac when the Confederates achieve breakthroughs. The need to mass and redeploy artillery quickly was less urgent in the actual battle, but a major asset of the Union army nevertheless.

The weakest aspects of this alternative history are the chosen methodology and insufficient maps to follow the narrative. Tsouras follows in the footsteps of legendary Gettysburg park historian Harry Pfanz and elects to describe the movements, attacks and retreats of virtually every regiment in the battle. This is tedious and unenlightening. At times, the narrative becomes clogged and confusing, with too much low-level detail which does not aid the reader's understanding of how this battle differs from the actual battle. Furthermore, there is a gross insufficiency of sketch maps to follow the battle (nor can the readers use other books on Gettysburg, since the action deviates sharply from the historical dispositions), particularly in the crucial fighting on 2 July. Sedgwick's Union VI Corps movements, which cause Longstreet's flanking attack to unravel, are not even depicted.

As for the "alternate" outcome of this version of Gettysburg, southern readers will not be pleased. Instead of merely suffering a major defeat as they actually did in July 1863, in this alternative history the Confederates suffer a military catastrophe that results in the war ending shortly thereafter. Such a catastrophe was most improbable and readers should consider that a single battle that decisively ends a war - a la Hastings in 1066 - are exceedingly rare in military history. Even after great defeats, armies are often capable of slipping away to recuperate and rebuild. Not here. Furthermore, very few battles in the Civil War achieved anything like decisive results due to the limits of the technology, doctrine and training of the citizen armies involved. That the Confederates would mount a massive 35,000-man charge into massed Union artillery after suffering greater-than-historical losses on 2 July seems really improbable. It seems even less likely that a Union army that was so badly hurt could mount such a decisive end-the-war pursuit after Longstreet's attack fails. In particular, this account tends to elevate Union General Hancock to Napoleonic stature - which is in vogue now thanks to his coronation as "a great general" in Shaara's classic, The Killer Angels. Maybe if Hancock had succeeded Meade on 3 July he would have mounted an aggressive counterattack to crush the Confederates once and for all, but readers should consider that Hooker and Burnside had been aggressive corps commanders who choked when given the senior command. Given the scenario presented here, Hancock would have been just as inclined to "play it safe" since both armies were essentially "fought out."

Gettysburg: An Alternate History is an epic saga by Peter G. Tsouras that explores what might have happened if a few twists of fate had significantly altered the course of the battle at Gettysburg, and therefore the American Civil War. Written with close heed to the actual events, Gettysburg: An Alternate History is a fascinating "what-if" journey of speculative fancy, often told through the eyes of soldiers struggling to survive the bloody battlefield. Gettysburg: An Alternate History is especially recommended reading for Civil War buffs, and will have great appeal for "Alternate Universe" science fiction fans as well.

For those interested in the Civil War, in the military past overall, or in thought-provoking propositions, author Tsouras's lively pursuit of the what-ifs of Gettysburg makes stimulating and worthwhile reading. I have read a number of the author's wide-ranging books on military affairs, and believe this is the best one with which to begin. It is knowledgeable--and fun. The book never feels forced--there is always a sense that Tsouras is in absolute command of the material. The result is a dead-accurate recreation, followed by a fascinating variation on the different course history might have taken, and all smoothly presented. Well done! I recommend this work strongly.

Like many other Civil War books focusing of specific battles, They Met at Gettysburg is excellent in some respects, and strongly lacking in others. The book does excel in the aspects of history leading up to the battle of Gettysburg, and as a study of the generals that were a critical part of that battle. What it lacks is an adequate description of the battle itself. The immortal Pickett's Charge does not get nearly the description it warrants, and the heroic defense of Little Round Top by Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain and his 20th Maine (which has filled entire books on its own) does not even get a single mention. Thus, this book does have some strong points, and should be read by anyone strongly interested in the leaders at Gettysburg. For a true work about the battle itself, however, look elsewhere.

As Civil War histories go, this book is unusual. One could expect from the title a blow by blow account of the battle of Gettysburg. Instead, what is offered is a study in leadership contrasts between Robert E. Lee and George Meade. Lee is presented as perhaps America's greatest general fighting his worst battle. Meade is portrayed as an uninspired mediocrity that benefited greatly from his corps commanders and fortuitous circumstances.

Much of the familiar litany of Gettysburg lore is mentioned, but not re-hashed in great detail. J.E.B. Stuart's failure to provide timely reconnaissance, James Longstreet's lack of enthusiasm for Lee's offensive strategy and tactics, Richard Ewell's failure to secure the high ground on Cemetery Hill and Culps Hill are briefly examined. In addition, the inability of either Ewell or A. P. Hill to replace Stonewall Jackson as an effective corps commander is discussed. These facts provide the framework that gave Lee the impetus to strike "those people" (as he called the Union Army) in his own way. The ghost of Stonewall Jackson, who crossed over the river at Chancellorsville, haunts the scene. The pairing of Lee and Jackson caused some of the most spectacular victories of the Confederate Army, and Stonewall's loss was still keenly felt. One can only imagine what Jackson would have done with Lee's order to attack Little Round Top, or the Union center along Cemetery Ridge.

While Lee aggressively yearned to strike the enemy, Meade hesitated. At one point, Meade gave serious consideration to a retreat. Finally, he let his corps commanders vote the idea down. After the failure of Pickett's charge, Meade failed to take the initiative to counterattack Lee and deliver the fatal blow that could have ended the war.

The material is presented objectively, without particular bias. The book openly admires Robert E. Lee, but so do many. The brutal fact that Gettysburg may very well be Lee's worst fought battle is not glossed over. The failure of some of Lee's lieutenants to show their best effort is not used as an excuse to cover "Marse Robert's" errors. The reader doesn't hang on every word, but reading of the various commanders' abilities and limitations is informative. In addition, there is an abundance of illustrations and detailed maps that assist the reader in following some of the technical details. This Civil War book has value for the serious Civil War buff.

Do not buy this book if you wanted a detailed blow by blow description of the battle, see Coddington's work for a great study of the battle. While sections of the book do have detailed analysis and descriptions it's the look at the command structure that sets this book apart.

Stackpole goes to great lengths to show the differences between Meade and Lee and how these differences affected the ebb and flow over the course of the 3 days in question. I've read many books on Gettysburg and there was something about this book that really appealed to me, whether it was the way the author presented the material or his writing style I can't say but I thoroughly enjoyed this book.

As an Australian Army Officer, Gettysburg doesn't represent a pivotal moment in my nation's history, nor in our collective consciousness. However I find the depth to which Gettysburg has been commented on over the years to be an absorbing and captivating area of study.

Almost from the moment that Pickett's, Pettigrew's and Trimble's tired and bloodied soldiers made it back to their line of departure up on Seminary Ridge, blame for the failures of Day 3 of the Gettysburg battle seems to have been laid at the feet of the majority of the key players. Wert describes them all and provides perhaps a deeper insight into the mind-set of each of them.

Wert's book is not one for those who do not possess a reasonable understanding of the 3 day battle in it's entirity. The fighting on days 1 and 2 were equally ferocious and, as Wert describes, pivotal to the Lee's decision to continue the attack on Day 3. Wert deliberately doesn't go into detail - after all, this book is about Day 3 - but it's helpful to have a overall view before buying this book.

The book itself is full of first hand accounts, many of them touching and quaintly mis-spelled, plus a detailed breakdown of what each regiment and unit was up to during Day 3. All in all, an enjoyable read but not without some criticisms:

Firstly, I'm sure the devotee's would disagree, but more maps would have been useful, especially when Wert is describing the actions of several units all with similar numbers. I got sidetracked a few times and had to grab a map from another book to see who was where! Secondly, and a word to the wise consumer, this book has to be the worst quality book that I've ever purchased! The pages look as though they've been guillotined with a serrated bread knife and the binding is already starting to go after one read..

Jeffry Wert is no stranger to Civil War history, having already published a number of books in the field. With "Gettysburg, Day Three" he takes as his subject one of the most famous days of battle during the entire war, the final day of fighting at Gettysburg. Wert has constructed a solid, well-reasoned history, providing a balanced look at both Union and Confederate forces. Inevitably, the great Confederate charge launched against the Union center provides a focus for much of the narrative, but Wert does not neglect the less famous events of that day, including the cavalry actions on either flank of the contending armies. Likewise, his narrative includes the stories of enlisted soldiers as well as generals. This is not a book which attempts to present some new, controversial theories, but it succeeds very well as a comprehensive look at this most famous of American battles.

After 30 years of reading books about the Civil War and about Gettysburg in particular, I recently have found very little to keep my interest. It was almost as if I had "read it all". I picked up Jeffert Wert's book "Gettysburg :Day Three" primarily because of his past books. I had read one on Longstreet and one on Custer. In the past I have found Wert to be highly readable yet consistly knowledgable on his chosen subject. I was not disappointed. Suddenly I was on the battlefield I had visited over 25 year ago. Seeing Culp's Hill,Spangler's Spring and the surrounding woods.I was reminded of standing at Hay's position at the stone wall and viewing Seminary Ridge and the Blue Ridge Mountain range behind it.When you read the section on the cannonade against the oncoming Confederates the distance takes on a completely new meaning.( If you've ever visited Gettysburg on a hot July day you have a greater appreciation of how suffocating it must have felt.)

Wert transports the reader to the field of battle. To read this book makes the reader feel the temor of the earth during the cannonade prior to the Confederate charge. You also sense the desperation in the fighting on both sides. The reader comes to, somewhat, understand the hesitation yet the fortitude of the men in gray as they rose to march against the postion so prominent and so formidable yet so far away. I found the book even handed and fair to both sides of the battle. I agree with the previous writer that more maps would have been better but I always complain about a lack of maps.

I highly recommend to those that have become jaded,as I had, to pick this book up and once again experince this battle in the only way left to us. You won't be disappointed.

This book was originally written and published in 1913 by Civil War veteran and author Oliver Norton. Norton takes a look at both sides of the battle for Little Round Top and tries to give a fair and accurate account of what really happened. Instead of offering his complete insight, he paraphrases from popular figures of those involved in the confict such as Colonel Joshua Chamberlain, Colonel Strong Vincent, Colonel Oates, General Law, General Sykes, General Barnes and a host of others. This book is basically a collage of personal accounts summarized and paraphrased into almost a confusing format. Norton doesn't follow a easy format to his book and often left me confused on whether or not he was talking about the battle himself or another person was. Besides the confusing style, I would have to say that the book did offer some interesting insight as to what happened from a variety of key people. It was interesting to read about what one Confederate colonel wrote about a particular movement while comparing that to what a Union colonel wrote. Norton had a great idea with this book but it really left me confused because nothing flowed or connected in the writing at times. I couldn't recommend this book to many unless they wanted a quick source of paraphrased personal accounts. I was disappointed in not getting more information on Colonel Chamberlain or his opinions of what really happened.

Author was present at the battle as an aide to a Union officer. He has assembled in great detail battle reports by participants, and does not hesitate to offer corrections where he sees fit. He wrote the book toward the end of the century. It is reasonably well organized, but fairly poorly illustrated (good period photos, but minimal maps). Slow reading, but ok for those fascinated by the detail of Day 2 battle at the southern end of the field.

Many times, a book by a participant involved on the winning side in a battle is very much obscured by bias towards being the winner. However, in this case, Norton has taken the many reports written by the regimental commanders and presented them as is, some with his own added comments. This presents a less biased view. Again, however, reports written days or even weeks after a battle may tend to overlook serious mistakes by leaders, dead or living at the time. But the reading is interesting to the serious student of the Civil War and should be in your library.