I was very satisfied with the level of customer service that I recieved from Amazon.com. I love the low prices and the customer service.

This book is mainly for academics and true historians. It's a short book, which makes it a quick read, but it's not as good as some of McPherson's other Civil War books. (like "Ordeal by Fire"). His thesis is that Civil War soldiers, both Union and Confederate, fought for three different reasons (or "motivations"). These are related to reasons why soldiers chose to enlist (enlistment motivation), to fight (combat motivation), and to stay in the service (sustaining motivation). The book seems pieced together to me and the chapters are not put in chronological order like most history books are. He uses so many excerpts from soldier's letters and diaries that it was hard for me to follow. Even though I understood his thesis, I did not like the book's style. I would give this one a pass unless you have nothing else to do!!

This month marks the 147th Anniversary of the beginning of the American Civil War and the fight to preserve the union and end slavery.

Any war, as a violent, organized explosion of human emotions, produces some very unnatural responses on the part of soldiers and civilians alike. James McPherson, undoubtedly now the preeminent American Civil War scholar has, in the words of his own introduction, tried to make sense of what was similar to other wars but also what was different about that experience for the soldiers on both sides of the divide in that war. Working from a plethora of soldiers' letters and other observations he has tried to explain why the citizen soldiers on both sides of that bloody conflict kept at it despite the grueling circumstances, including extremely high casualty rates.

I make no bones about my partisanship for the Northern, Union and anti-slavery side in that conflict. However in war, and civil war in particular, one can note the attributes of bravery, honor and heroism of the opposing side without giving an inch on the political questions. If one thinks about it if one does not recognize those characteristics in the soldiers of the other side one places oneself in a very hard place. The Geneva Conventions, weak as they are, codify that understanding.

McPherson goes into great detail about the phases of the war-the general bloodthirsty and energetic desire of both sides to get at it; the sobering effects of actual combat; the psychological traumas produced in men before, during and after battle. In short, the passion and anger that drive men to fight-and soldiers to reflect a bit afterward. He details the sense of patriotism, honor, manhood, shame and other virtues of mid-Victorian America that further drove these men. Probably his weakest part is an examination of the personal politics of the soldiers, although that may be, in part, a function of the fuzziness of their goals as they became overwhelmed by the other considerations previously listed.

However, overall, McPherson more than adequately makes his point that many considerations entered into the calculations of those who freely volunteered for the citizen armies on both sides, fought tremendous and bloody battles and slogged on through thick and thin. I will stop here with one comment that struck me from a Northern soldier about his reasons for fighting. Admittedly this soldier was a high abolitionist but here is what he said-" I want to be able to sing `John Brown' [John Brown's Body, the anti-slavery hymn and precursor for the Battle Hymn of The Republic] in the streets of Charleston [South Carolina]." Yes, I can, indeed, get behind that sentiment as a reason for fighting.

This month marks the 147th Anniversary of the beginning of the American Civil War and the fight to preserve the union and end slavery.

Any war, as a violent organized explosion of human emotions, produces some very unnatural responses on the part of soldiers and civilians alike. James McPherson, undoubtedly now the preeminent American Civil War scholar has, in the words of his own introduction, tried to make sense of what was similar but also what was different about that experience for the soldiers on both sides of the divide in that war. Working from a plethora of soldiers' letters and other observations he has tried to explain why the citizen soldiers on both sides of that bloody conflict kept at it despite the grueling circumstances, including extremely high casualty rates.

I make no bones about my partisanship for the Northern, Union and anti-slavery side in that conflict. However in war, and civil war in particular, one can note the attributes of bravery, honor and heroism of the opposing side without giving an inch on the political questions. If one thinks about it if one does not recognize those characteristics in the soldiers of the other side one places oneself in a very hard place. The Geneva Conventions, weak as they are, codify that understanding.

McPherson goes into great detail about the phases of the war-the general bloodthirsty and energetic desire of both sides to get at it; the sobering effects of actual combat; the psychological traumas produced in men before, during and after battle. In short, the passion and anger that drives men to fight-and soldiers to reflect a bit afterward. He details the sense of patriotism, honor, manhood, shame and other virtues of mid-Victorian America that further drove these men. Probably his weakest part is an examination of the personal politics of the soldiers, although that may be, in part, a function of the fuzziness of their goals as they became overwhelmed by the other considerations previously listed.

However, overall, McPherson more than adequately makes his point that many considerations entered into the calculations of those who freely volunteered for the citizen armies on both sides, fought tremendous and bloody battles and slogged on through thick and thin. I will stop here with one comment that struck me from a Northern soldier about his reasons for fighting. Admittedly this soldier was a high abolitionist but here is what he said-" I want to be able to sing `John Brown' [John Brown's Body, the anti-slavery hymn and precursor for the Battle Hymn of The Republic] in the streets of Charleston [South Carolina]." Yes, I can, indeed, get behind that sentiment as a reason for fighting.

...well almost. In 'For Cause & Comrades' James McPherson has set out to explain exactly why the average soldier sacrificed so much for his respective cause in the American Civil War. He has succeeded in convincing me. As the backbone of his thesis, McPherson has used hundreds of letters and diary entries from both Confederate and Union soldiers that offer some glaring insight into their motivations and beliefs. He first touches on the more universal motivations of warriors such as honor, duty, comradery, religion, vengeance and so on. And while these all played a significant part in the Civil War, McPherson argues that what ultimately separated Civil war soldiers from those of most other wars was a fervent belief in the righteousness of their cause. In other words, this was a truly ideological war and these convictions of righteousness, on both sides, was what carried these men through such horrific fighting to the bitter end.

While I can't say there were any shocking revelations here, I was slightly surprised, for instance, at how many Union soldiers were fervently dedicated to their cause. It usually goes without saying that the Confederate side was truly motivated to defend their cause, but I had always assumed that most Union men served out of a grudging sense of duty. It turns out that many truly felt that they were defending the American experiment as a whole from the despised "traitors and rebels." In fact, this seems to have been a bigger factor than slavery for most, as a large portion of Union men were just as racist as their Southern adversaries. Which makes it somewhat ironic that they felt they represented the cause of the entire free world against tyranny and oppression. It should be noted though that many Union soldiers did passionately oppose slavery and this was an equally compelling cause for them. The Union side seems to be very complex. On the other hand, the Confederate cause seemed to be much less complicated. They were fighting not only for the right to continue slavery, but also for their independence from the hated Yankee. As much as white supremacy was a chief motivator (even poor, non-slaveholders resented the notion of black equality), most Southerners truly believed they were fighting for their own liberty and way of life.

Of course McPherson concedes that not every soldier fit this description. There are skulkers, dodgers, draftees, and otherwise reluctant soldiers in every army, but as McPherson shows, there was a significant core of truly ideological fighters on both sides who refused to accept anything less than total victory. While those well versed in Civil War history might not find anything new here, I found it to be a concise and convincing survey on Civil War motivations and I would highly recommend it.

James M. McPherson's For Cause and Comrades: Why Men Fought in the Civil War aims to answer the simple question of what motivated the men who became solders in the Civil War to fight and die in this conflict. The simple answer according to McPherson was duty, honor, patriotism, ideological beliefs such as liberty and freedom, and religious beliefs. These ideals or ideas are pretty much the same motivating factors soldiers from other wars in the 20th Century or those historians of ancient wars give to explain why they fought and died. McPherson certainly did his homework by reading twenty-five thousand letters and two hundred fifty diaries from soldiers to come to his conclusion that it was truly duty, honor, patriotism, ideological beliefs in liberty and freedom, and religious beliefs that motivated these men to fight and die in the Civil War cause. As a reader I was hoping for something more or different than the tired and tedious five reasons that every soldier indicates as motivating factors for them. There is not a dispute that these five factors are for the most part true. The excerpts from the letters indicate these five motivating factors over and over. Even though these were excerpts and pulling text out of the original context of a document can significantly change its meaning, for the most part the excerpts painted the picture that supported McPherson's argument that, "Yet for Civil War soldiers the group cohesion and peer pressure that were powerful factors in combat motivation were not unrelated to the complex mixture of patriotism, ideology, concepts of duty, honor, manhood, and community or peer pressure that prompted them to enlist in the first place." (p. 13)

The reading of For Cause and Comrades felt as though it was another book that put soldiers and war up on a pedestal of what a great sacrifice soldiers gave to their country by participating in the horrors of war and akin to a child's hero worship. For Cause and Comrades also seemed as though it was reiterating the tired and worn out American patriotic themes of liberty, freedom, duty, honor, and religion. The book generated visions from daily life on par with "The Few, the Proud, the Marines" commercials on television to recruit soldiers, or popular mass media inundating the masses with typical American ideology such as Superman standing for truth, justice, and the American way, or another person who feels a particular generation was the "Greatest Generation" above all others. Watch out Tom Brokaw, McPherson feels Civil War soldiers out does any other group of soldiers including your beloved World War Two soldiers in the area of duty, honor, patriotism, freedom and liberty loving, and devotion to a higher power. McPherson did mention through the words of the soldiers that war was a horrible affair, but then uses it to idolize these men in their accomplishment of overcoming adversity and "staying the course" instead of ever mentioning that war is lowest form and action of human existence and should be something to be avoided at all costs. A true hero is one that can solve problems without resorting to violence. A truly wise hero knows not only how to solve problems without violence but also knows that war that involves murder, gruesome mutilation, and destruction which result in unspeakable pain, misery, and suffering whether physical or the destructive psychological impact on soldiers and civilians of the society and is a course that should never be traveled.

McPherson's expertise in writing about this subject is not disputed nor is his findings. McPherson has been a professor at Princeton University since 1962 and his entire academic career has been focused on many aspects of the Civil War era. He has been nationally recognized numerous times for his work in this field including receiving the Lincoln Prize for For Cause and Comrades. For Cause and Comrades has made an important contribution in historical research by giving a voice to people who can no longer speak for themselves and illustrates their experience to give a more in depth well rounded picture of history. Futhermore, everyone is entitled to their own perspective and interpretation on any subject. Unfortunately, for this reader, it was filled with too much hero worship, idolization, and the standard tired historical interpretations of soldiers and war as being something someone does if they have a sense of duty, are honorable, patriotic, revere freedom and liberty, and are spiritual. These themes should stay in fiction such as stories of King Arthur and the Knights of the Roundtable. People in the real world should find other avenues besides war to achieve the admirable qualities of duty, honor, patriotism, believing in ideals, and spirituality and it should be the responsibility of learned people to point that out instead of seemingly making war and people who fight in wars the pillar and standard for achieving all those admirable qualities.

I don't know if anyone will ever read this review for a 10-year old book, but I'm reading it right now and I really wanted to share about it.



I truly appreciate the scholarship of McPherson on the Civil War and all the research he has done on the subject. For this book alone, he read hundreds of soldiers letters and diaries to understand what motivated them to put their lives on the line. A great many of them understood the issues of the day, volunteered for the war, and did not need a whole lot of incentive to enlist. A 1982 movie, "The Blue & the Gray," contains a scene where Union soldiers in 1861 are inspired to enlist with the help of a beautiful young lady singing a patriotic song. In actuality, most of these soldiers would not have needed such encouragement.



Anyway, a book like this is highly important. It has become very popular to say things like "the war was not fought over slavery" or "the Civil war had nothing to do with slavery." This book goes straight to the sources and finds out why the men who were there did what they did.



Clearly, for some of them, North and South, slavery was THE issue. In fact, I have long believed slavery was just an institution, but the real issue for many Confederates was the preservation of white supremacy. Many soldier's letters cited declare that they saw it as an abomination- even laughable to some- that anyone would want to free "inferior savages" they thought could not be educated or assimilated into American society. In fact, on page 109, a private of the 25th Wisconsin Infantry wrote home that some captured Confederates told them they were fighting because "You Yanks want us to marry our daughters to the n----rs." But this book does show that while slavery was a huge issue, certainly the source of political and territorial strife for so many years leading up to the war, it was not the only issue. The book shares the letters of immigrant Union soldiers who fought to secure democracy, something denied to them in their oppressive native countries. And many Confederate soldiers clearly say they are fighting in defense of their homes and families and because their states have been "invaded."



I tend to think some people who want to minimize or dismiss altogether the impact of slavery- or really, the place that black people would have in America, North AND South- unfortunately miss the understanding of the Civil War and American History. Personally, the older I get, the less I'm concerned about why the war started and why it was fought than I am with what happened when it ended. All I know is, the Union was saved and slavery was dead. Unless all people in "the land of the free" have access to liberty, that "land" is a hypocrisy.

I don't know if anyone will ever read this review for a 10-year old book, but I'm reading it right now and I really wanted to share about it.

I truly appreciate the scholarship of McPherson on the Civil War and all the research he has done on the subject. For this book alone, he read hundreds of soldiers letters and diaries to understand what motivated them to put their lives on the line. A great many of them understood the issues of the day, volunteered for the war, and did not need a whole lot of incentive to enlist. A 1982 movie, "The Blue & the Gray," contains a scene where Union soldiers in 1861 are inspired to enlist with the help of a beautiful young lady singing a patriotic song. In actuality, most of these soldiers would not have needed such encouragement.

Anyway, a book like this is highly important. It has become very popular to say things like "the war was not fought over slavery" or "the Civil war had nothing to do with slavery." This book goes straight to the sources and finds out why the men who were there did what they did.

Clearly, for some of them, North and South, slavery was THE issue. In fact, I have long believed slavery was just an institution, but the real issue for many Confederates was the preservation of white supremacy. Many soldier's letters cited declare that they saw it as an abomination- even laughable to some- that anyone would want to free "inferior savages" they thought could not be educated or assimilated into American society. In fact, on page 109, a private of the 25th Wisconsin Infantry wrote home that some captured Confederates told them they were fighting because "You Yanks want us to marry our daughters to the n----rs." But this book does show that while slavery was a huge issue, certainly the source of political and territorial strife for so many years leading up to the war, it was not the only issue. The book shares the letters of immigrant Union soldiers who fought to secure democracy, something denied to them in their oppressive native countries. And many Confederate soldiers clearly say they are fighting in defense of their homes and families and because their states have been "invaded."

I tend to think some people who want to minimize or dismiss altogether the impact of slavery- or really, the place that black people would have in America, North AND South- unfortunately miss the understanding of the Civil War and American History. Personally, the older I get, the less I'm concerned about why the war started and why it was fought than I am with what happened when it ended. All I know is, the Union was saved and slavery was dead. Unless all people in "the land of the free" have access to liberty, that "land" is a hypocrisy.

I listened to the unabridged Books on Tape version which consists of 8 cassette tapes in a case. I found it very interesting. The tapes seemed to go by quickly.

My only suggestion would be to shorten some of the lengthy introductory material (dedication and credits) so as to get into the actual book more quickly. Also, a portion of the last cassette is devoted to a preview of another book, so the set could fit onto 7 tapes if edited just a bit.

McPherson quotes extensively from letters and diaries written during the war, so most of the accounts are first-hand. He groups them into categories and draws conclusions from their similar opinions, although he sprinkles in disclaimers because the sample is not totally balanced as it is only from literate English-speaking soldiers whose letters were saved by their descendants. Men who could not write (including most of the large number of ex-slaves who served in the Union army) did not leave a record of their experiences. Also, families of men who died in battle were often more likely to save their letters than those who survived the war.

As a female who has never served in the military, I have often wondered why so many men left their homes and families to fight in the Civil War, especially puzzling since their enemies had recently been their countrymen and were often even their relatives. McPherson has done a good job of using the soldiers' own words to explain why they risked their lives again and again. He also points out how the war changed men's viewpoints on slavery. Union soldiers who did not care much about it were exposed to it's hardships as they marched through the South and became anti-slavery, while some Confederates expressed doubts about it as the futility of their struggle became apparent. By 1865 some Southern soldiers said they would rather see the slaves freed then to lose the war. But of course it was too late.

The narrator does an excellent job of reading the book. Recommended.

I listened to the unabridged Books on Tape version which consists of 8 cassette tapes in a case. I found it very interesting. The tapes seemed to go by quickly.

My only suggestion would be to shorten some of the lengthy introductory material (dedication and credits) so as to get into the actual book more quickly. Also, a portion of the last cassette is devoted to a preview of another book, so the set could fit onto 7 tapes if edited just a bit.

McPherson quotes extensively from letters and diaries written during the war, so most of the accounts are first-hand. He groups them into categories and draws conclusions from their similar opinions, although he sprinkles in disclaimers because the sample is not totally balanced as it is only from literate English-speaking soldiers whose letters were saved by their descendants. Men who could not write (including most of the large number of ex-slaves who served in the Union army) did not leave a record of their experiences. Also, families of men who died in battle were often more likely to save their letters than those who survived the war.

As a female who has never served in the military, I have often wondered why so many men left their homes and families to fight in the Civil War, especially puzzling since their enemies had recently been their countrymen and were often even their relatives. McPherson has done a good job of using the soldiers' own words to explain why they risked their lives again and again. He also points out how the war changed men's viewpoints on slavery. Union soldiers who did not care much about it were exposed to it's hardships as they marched through the South and became anti-slavery, while some Confederates expressed doubts about it as the futility of their struggle became apparent. By 1865 some Southern soldiers said they would rather see the slaves freed then to lose the war. But of course it was too late.

The narrator does an excellent job of reading the book. Recommended.

James McPherson does it again with a great analysis of why men fought in the civil war and what made them continue fighting after that first battle. Whether it was brotherhood, pride, or religion each side brought with it various and compelling reasons for going to war. The war was a travesty that brought devastation to both sides but if you want to see inside the soldiers minds this is the only book that does it. There are few out there like it and I McPhereson is among the best. This is an essential book for any civil war library.

James McPherson does it again with a great analysis of why men fought in the civil war and what made them continue fighting after that first battle. Whether it was brotherhood, pride, or religion each side brought with it various and compelling reasons for going to war. The war was a travesty that brought devastation to both sides but if you want to see inside the soldiers minds this is the only book that does it. There are few out there like it and I McPhereson is among the best. This is an essential book for any civil war library.

Very well researched and easy to read. McPherson tries to be fair to both sides of the war, giving the good and the bad, but it is rather obvious that he favors the North.

Very well researched and easy to read. McPherson tries to be fair to both sides of the war, giving the good and the bad, but it is rather obvious that he favors the North.

McPherson has weaved together a very well written study of what motivated soldiers, both North and South, to fight in the Civil War. McPherson does an excellent job of breaking up the chapters to keep the text flowing. He also describes what would motivate men to continue to fight after seeing the horrors of battle, why men joined up, why married men continued to serve despite pleas from family members to go AWOL or take a medical leave, etc. All the while, McPherson uses dozens of quotes from diaries and letters to back up his claims. McPherson should be applauded for letting the soldiers tell most of this story rather than the author conjecture why he thought they fought. He also seems to have let the story come to him rather than set out with an agenda. A must have for any Civil War or military history student.

Ripped sleeve, but hardcover, and all pages of the book were in very good shape.

Ripped sleeve, but hardcover, and all pages of the book were in very good shape.

Excellent work, well written. This is not light reading and certainly gives one much food for thought. This is not a shoot-em-up-bang-bang, rather it is a serious work on a very serous subject. I would highly recommend it's reading and recommend you add this one to your collection. I do wish we had more researchers out their of this quality. Thank you Prof. McPherson.

This book is a very refreshing twist on Civil War history. In this work, as well as in his book What They Fought For, noted Civil War historian James McPherson explores what exactly motivated men to fight in the war. Having done exhaustive research to the tune of diaries and letters from nearly 1,000 soldiers, most of them obscure and average men, McPherson is aptly qualified to perform this work. He looks at several factors, from group unity to sense of honor to desire for vengeance, in an attempt to understand the average Civil War soldier, and ultimately makes a strong case for the idea that Civil War soldiers were idealistic men who were not ignorant of the issues at stake and who were motivated by an extraordinary desire to fight for their beliefs. This, McPherson argues, sets them apart from soldiers in other wars.

As is always the case with McPherson, this book is very well written and enjoyable to read. Most of this book is composed of quotes from various soldiers with McPherson's interpretation and narrative interjected only often enough to keep the discussion flowing. He does a wonderful job of integrating the quotes and making them fit perfectly into what he's trying to say. McPherson's use of quotations from the men who were actually there is infinitely more effective in proving his point than anything he could say himself, and this is what makes this book so great. There are hundreds of books out there that will tell you WHAT happened, but this book is one of only a few that will try and explain WHY and HOW things happened.

Although Professor James McPherson wrote this study of the motivation of the Civil War soldier, it is not a great exaggeration to say that in this book the soldiers speak for themselves. Professor McPherson has read and analyzed a prodigious amount of source material written by Civil War combatants, Union and Confederacy, officer and enlisted soldier. For this book, he has taken a sample of the letters home and the diaries of 1076 soldiers, 647 Union and 429 Confederate to analyze their candid, uncensored reflections of why they fought. Professor McPherson also draws on many modern studies of combat psychology and utilzes their findings in discussing the Civil War soldiers.

Professor McPherson's sample is not statistically random and it may be skewed in some ways. For example, the sample does not include (obviously) illiterate soldiers or black soldiers. It tends to be tilted in the direction of those individuals who did most of the fighting and who were committed to their respective causes. Professor McPherson recognizes that many of the combatants were unwilling participants, particularly as the draft was instituted in both armies and that both armies included many shirkers. These individuals are not represented in his sample of letters. But still, these letters, written in the activity of soldiering and not intended for publication, are revealing of their authors' thoughts and feelings in a way impossible to replicate in other writings.

The letters reveal much about the motivation of the combatants and about life in Civil War America. Professor McPherson finds that many of the soldiers in the Civil War had a firm idea of why they were fighting. On both sides soldiers fought for the preservation of liberty and the duty they perceived they owed to their country. Patriotism, in a word. Southern soldiers fought to achieve their independence and to avoid what they viewed as "subjugation" and "slavery". Northern soldiers fought to preserve the Union and, increasingly as the War progressed, to end slavery. Soldiers in both the Union and the Confederacy drew sustenance from religious convictions. They were motivated deeply by the camaraderie that developed with their fellows, particularly in their own units. In the Civil War in particular, soldiers fought side-by-side with others from their own state and community. They developed a strong bond with each other, based on the terrors of war and the privations of the camps, and fought in solidarity with each other.

The letters in the book speak well for themselves with Professor McPherson's organization and commentary. It is moving to read about how many Americans were driven by high ideals in enlisting and fighting in this, the most deadly and formative of the wars of the United States.

There is a sense of poignancy throughout the book. For the Civil War generation, concepts of duty, honor, family, manhood, and patriotism were not viewed with the skepticism that became common following WW I and that remains prevalent with many people today. It was a romantic generation, in part, but one with commitments and ideals. I think there is much contemporary Americans may learn by the devotion shown by the American Civil War soldiers and by the ideals of liberty, duty, and courage for which they fought.

This is a wonderful book. Prof. McPherson read over 30,000 letters and diaries for this, and thus I think he has provided one of the most thorough and thought provoking treatments of the psychology of Civil War soldiers and studies on why exactly they fought.

For this work, Prof. McPherson also incorporates theories, reports, and research of the combat motivation, effects of combat, and psychology of men and soldiers in others war such as WWI, WWII, and the Vietnam War, not to mention general medical studies from British, American, and German armies. In some instances, he uses modern knowledge to analyze the thoughts and feelings of the soldiers of the Civil War. As interesting as this is to show how soldiers in the Civil War had the same problems and feelings as most men of war, his academic findings illustrate how Civil War soldiers were also very different from soldiers in other wars.

The difference lay in their devout belief in their causes, and their sustained belief in those causes, and the close relationship with the men they fought with (which is a common thread for men of all wars), throughout the war. McPherson rarely goes on for more than a paragraph or two of his own narrating. He lets the voices of the men who fought take up 90% of the book, giving you a real sense of who these people were, and allowing the reader to derive an opinion for themselves, but always with McPherson's voice in the background guiding the reader, teaching you.

The causes brought up by the letters and McPherson are wide and varied, and McPherson makes sure to research each and explain as elaborately as possible, but quite noticable are the few main causes that men on both sides procliamed in verbose rhetoric. These consisted of Duty, Honor, Liberty, Independence, and the sustainment (US) or creation of (CS) a "free and independent country". For the CS the issue of slavery is brought up, but even though McPherson mentions it quite often and does what he can to explain, I did find some holes, most especially what yeoman farmers in general felt about the slavery and the strife, or what their exact definition of "states rights" (in relation to slavery) was. But that subject in of itself deserves it's own book, and I do not find that as derogative to the book at all, in fact it provoked my thoughts.

This may be strange to say, but while reading it, you feel safe. In other words, the research is so sound, so well documented, so well explained, that you feel like there is no way you are falling into a trap of propagandist, shallowly researched, or off the cuff revisionist history simply masked by some good prose. McPherson is a talented writer, making the read an easy and anticipated one for the reader (I read in 3 days, and I am NOT a fast reader), but he's also an astute historian who settles for nothing less than good hard research and logical and sound analyzation of his findings (thus a lengthy bibliography), without any sway of personal opinion; the book is entirely objective, and the bibliography in of itself is a great read (I've already read some of the books listed and recommended).

Read this book if you want a solid, incredibly well researched, and inspired understanding of the men who fought the Civil War. Hopefully you'll come away with new ideas for yourself and a new knowledge of the men who fought. McPherson muses that these men deserve a respect for fighting for goals and causes that were sustained only by their own willpower, conviction, and mainly their courage, amidst the blood and chaos of the War; and judging by what Prof. McPherson has found, that is something I can concur with.

With this work McPherson has proved himself to be an outstanding research historian. Many such historians cannot find the right balance between evidence and interpretation. McPherson has done just that. He provides for us a powerful forum for the soldiers to tell us themselves why they fought; but he also weaves their comments into a compelling story, providing keen insight, analysis and juxtaposition for Union and Confederate soldiers. This is truly a great example of the Civil War as social history.

Why did they do it? Why did several million American men put their lives on the line (a bet 600,000 would lose)? It could be argued the Grey men appeared to fight for the right to own slaves most of them had no hope of ever owning themselves while the men in blue fought to stop the spread of an institution which enslaved a race most of them thought not deserving of legal, social or economic equality with themselves.

In McPhereson's brilliantly researched book, he paints the Civil War soldier on both sides as a complex individual whose motives for engaging in Civil War were at times noble, idealistic or principled. The author reviewed more than a thousand letters soldiers wrote during the war to recreate the state of mind and motivations of the combatants.

The results will paint a much more nuanced picture for the reader than they probably had on the subject before. This is important work that does as good a job as I can imagine of recreating the mindsets of individuals long dead but who largely defined the course of American history through our present time. This book is a relatively quick read and written in McPhereson's excellent style -- authoritative while emminently engaging.