I was anxious to learn more about Ms Pryor's "reading" of Lee the general through whatever letters she had uncovered. Oooppps. No such thing.

Pryor's "reading" of the Lee the general is so second-handish that it reminded me of another infamous treatment of Lee's generalship. So similar were the concepts and critiques of Lee the general that looking at her footnotes, I discovered that her "reading" of Lee during the war comes from her reading of select, secondary sources that support her agenda and have been thoroughly discredited as inaccurately portraiting Lee's generalship.

For me, this spoiled the book. I have gifted my copy to charity.

By trying to examine R. E. Lee by the world of the 21st century, Ms. Pryor has put together some personal letters from or to Lee and made serious mistakes of judgement. While there is perhaps a chance to sell a few books by attempting to show unexpected flaws in the life of someone judged by almost all serious historians or biographers to have been very worthy, Ms. Pryor has chosen a belittle one of the great men of our American experience. I am very sorry I bought this book and feel that it is an egregious slur on the memory of a much better person than Ms. Pryor.

Fun to read a pissant writing about a man with such integrity. Taking some letters, scrutinize them carefully, add preconceived ideas and a few tea leaves, and viola, pissant can give a portrait of Robert E. Lee.

I think Lee would have liked this book. Remember, Robert E. Lee was a devout Christian. According to Lee's Bible, Jesus Christ said that nobody is "good" but God. Lee was a humble man, and all his life he tried to learn from his own mistakes, his father's, those of others'. That's to say, yes, Robert E. Lee did make mistakes on occasion. And so, I'd bet the one most opposed to the "Marble Man" myth would be Lee himself. I liked this book.

Robert Edward Lee (1807-1870) has won immortal fame among the great military captains of all time. Thousands of articles and books have been written about him. His most notable biographer is Douglas Southall Freeman's adulatory multivolumed work by a Lee worshipper. In recent years several revisionary works have appeared by the likes of Alan Nolan
who have castigated Lee for his white supremacist views Now it is the turn of Elizabeth Brown Pryor.
Pryor has sifted through over 10,000 pages of letters from Lee, his wife Mary and the Lee family. She has almost 200 densely written pages in her book listing first and secondary sources. She has done her homework!
Pryor has produced what is, in my opinion, a great book on the great Virginian. We see Lee as a great and good man but one who was not perfect. Pryor begins each chapter with a letter from Lee or family memory and then illuminates how that letter became an important mirror into the life of the Confederate hero.
We see Lee as a brave man who defended his beloved South against the North. Among salient points we learn:
a. Lee was a white supremecist who had trouble controlling the slaves on the Arlington estate he inherited from Washington Park Custis (Custis was the father of Lee's wife Mary and the grandson of George Washington_).
b. Lee could harsh in his treatment of slaves. Several slaves ran away from Arlington. He was not adverse to having them whipped for infractions
of his strict rules. There are reports that Lee was also kind to slaves.
He was a racist and believed the white race was superior to the African-Americans with whom he interacted. In this belief he was consistent with the widely held belief of the vast majority of nineteenth century Americans.
c. Lee was a great general as manifest in the brilliant Chancellorsville campaign but had trouble in supervision of his subordinates. Lee also kept inadequate leaders in positions of leadership in the Army of Northern Virginia who should have been replaced.
d. Lee was Virginia-centric. Lee believed in states rights.
e. Lee was an elitist who thought upper class white males should be the leaders of society.
f. Lee was frustrated by his antebellum army career as a member of the engineering corp. He suffered from depression and had a violent temper.
g. Lee was a good and faithful husband to his invalid wife Mary. The Lees had several children. He was an absentee father due to his military career.
h. Lee hated the years he spent as supt. of West Point. Following the Civil War he became President of Washington College in Lexington Va. bust disliked the work
i. Lee was often perceived as aloof and cold. Lee was able to unwind with famiily and close friends.
j. Lee's ideas on religion varied throughout his life from a mild Deism to evangelical belief in his later years. He was an Episcopalian.
Not everyone will like this biography of a Southern icon without peer who has been elevated to the ranks of Dixie sainthood along with Elvis!
As one who has read all the important biographies of Lee I consider this book an essential in understanding the great but enigmatic man. Pryor's book will engender controversy but is a vital read for anyone wanting a good understanding of Lee that does not portray him as a Lost Cause saint.
Essential and excellent!

"There is indeed a certain childish willfulness in the American mind that insists on chastising the people of the past for not being like them, or else pretending that they were. Which is a certain way NOT to learn anything from history." ---Dr. Clyde Wilson

Put it this way - if you are the type of person Dr. Wilson is describing, you're going to love this book! If not, you'll be wishing you had paid for it in Confederate bills instead of U.S. dollars.

The book itself contains roughly 175 pages of footnotes, bibliography and index. There are 50 pages of actual letters, some of which have already been published and others of which are not even by Lee, but by other people. If you're planning on seeing 500 pages of newly discovered letters, forget it. The fewer than 50 pages of new letters by Lee himself will leave you grossly disappointed. Finally, we have 425 pages of Ms. Pryor's perseverative and monotonous interpretations of those letters, which I suppose is the "meat" of the book.

According to Ms. Pryor, Lee did not release the Custis slaves immediately. The terms of the will specified "within 5 years" of the elder Custis' death (in 1857). Lee fulfilled that mandate by manumitting them in 1862. This apparently wasn't satisfactory enough for Ms. Pryor as she repeatedly drones on about Lee's failure to understand how the slaves felt.

Ms. Pryor is also critical of Lee for expecting the slaves to actually work!? Oh horror! Oh horror!

Of course, there is the matter of several slaves being whipped by Lee, something which has never been conclusively proven. Like a second rate shyster, Ms. Brown does her best to drum up the case against him.

According to Ms. Pryor, Lee had no appreciation of other cultures and saw nothing worthwhile in the Mexican culture when he was there during the Mexican war. I'm wondering what Pryor expected Lee, an educated, well-to-do man from one of Virginia's first families, to say when he was in Mexico? "Gee! What lovely mud huts!?" I'm pretty sure that Mexico didn't have Grand Melia and Paradisus or any other resorts at that time, so I can't figure out what Ms. Pryor expected him to see in the place? I suppose to understand her reasoning, or her expectations, one would have to refer back to Dr. Wilson's quote above.

Also, according to Ms. Pryor, Lee had "poor cross cultural communications skills", a term apparently taken from today's lexicon of multicultural drivel. In this case she was referring to his "communication", or lack of it, with the Comanches. I ran this past a native American friend of mine and he almost fell over laughing. I'm not sure there were too many folks at the time who had good cross cultural communication skills with the Comanches of that era, as this particular group wasn't usually given to such things themselves. Would that it were possible to transport Ms. Pryor back in time to the 1850s and observe how her "skills" with the Comanches would fare? I would be taking bets on how long she kept her pretty blond hair.

In sum, this book, touted though it is by most "contemporary" historians, is one more example of the sham that has become what we used to call, "the field of history".

If you feel compelled somehow to read it, buy it used and pay as little as possible. When you're through with it, it will make for an excellent target at the firing range.

Robert E. Lee is one of those larger than life figures that seems remote and inaccessible. By looking at his personal correspondence, Elizabeth Brown pryor paints a fuller portrait of Lee as a person than any book we have seen yet. (I was amazed that a complete set of Lee's letters has never been published.) If you want a full account of Lee's military career, you have to go D.S. Freeman, admittedly a bit over-laudatory. His style can be a little off-putting for modern readers, so Emory Thomas is a good updated biography. Don't look to this book for a detailed study of his military genius. That's been covered enough in many other books. The beauty of this book is that we get a real feel for the person; we can read the man. And reading him was just a delight!

Historian Elizabeth Brown Pryor has based her biography of Robert E. Lee on a huge collection of Lee family letters so that the reader sees Lee through his own words in repsonse to life situations. He comes through as a very complex person with a largely conflicted life. Lee of course was primariy a soldier (at one point he had been superintendent of West Point) and while Lincoln offered him the leadership of the Union army he followed his Southern background and in a few short weeks sided with the Confederacy. In this book we also see Lee as a husband and father. One example of Pryor's insight shows the reaction of Lee and his wife to the Union army taking over their Arlington estate which had been in his wife's family and their recognition that the house had been looted, and as the war progressed their land turned into a military cemetary for both Union and Confederate dead. Pryor says that that incident made the break complete and left the Lees embittered for the rest of their lives.
This is a fine study of the man based on his own words and is a valuable addition to Civil War history. I would agree that Reading the Man will beocme a standard reference on Robert E. Lee.

When I first heard of this book, I couldn't wait to get my hands on it. Now that I am finished reading it, I wish I would have spent my money elsewhere. Although this revisionist history does provide some compelling and dramatic insights into Lee as a person, the author is clearly no fan of Lee or his legacy. I found myself wondering if Elizabeth Brown Pryor had any sympathy for Lee "the man" whatsoever. The concept of the book is very good, but the writer's analysis is shallow in many areas. She breezes over several significant events in Lee's life and Civil War career, yet makes it a point to showcase Lee's "racism" throughout many chapters. She uses a surprisingly narrow scope of primary documents. The writing style in some passages is mediocre at best. If you want a book about Robert E. Lee that a Left wing Liberal could love, then this may be the book for you. If you want a true portrait of the man, I would recommend you look elsewhere.

Remember the character in Albert Camus' The Plague who's fixated on writing a book so perfect that the publisher, upon reading the manuscript, will jump from his chair and shout to his staff: "Hats off, gentlemen! We're in the presence of greatness!"?

That's exactly my reaction on finishing Elizabeth Brown Pryor's 2008 Lincoln Prize-winning Reading the Man. The book is great: consummately researched (nearly one-third of the total, some 200 pages, are footnotes and bibliography), judiciously and courageously argued, and written in a lively, engaging style. But Lee, the book's subject, is great too, not despite but in part because of the complexity of his character and occasional failings. In Pryor's hands, Lee the man comes centerstage, eclipsing the "marble man" of romanticized myth. As Pryor says at the beginning of her study, her purpose isn't to debunk the myth so much as to "amplify our understanding of what constitutes heroism, and how as an ordinary person Lee faced the vagaries of the human condition" (p. xiii). Her book should be read in that spirit.

And how much more fascinating the flesh-and-blood Lee is than the marble Lee! Disgraced by a scandal-creating father and brother, Lee early on developed a strong atoning sense of duty and rectitude (Chapters 1, 2, and 4) that made him a conscientious citizen, soldier, and father, but also, occasionally, a pedant (as during his leadership of West Point, recounted in Chapter 13) and a blue-nose (as in his tedious sermonizing to his children, recounted especially in Chapter 14). He was apparently ambivalent for years about his army career, unable to make a decision to leave but increasingly unwilling to tolerate long absences from his family and even longer spans between promotions (Chapter 11). He was a meticulous but not especially creative engineer (Chapter 7), and an equally meticulous college administrator in his post-war life (Chapter 24), although it's a job he didn't particularly like. And he was a devoted and playful father. His love and concern for his children unmistakably come through in his letters, and are even more remarkable given his own unhappy and care-ridden childhood (especially Chapter 6).

Lee went to geat pains to cultivate a public persona as a man in control of himself and situations. And many times, both were true. But it is to Pryor's credit, although it's earned her a savaging from Lee-worshippers, that she points out three arenas in which the public persona and the private man differ.

The first is Lee's attitude to blacks, which reflected the prejudices of his time and class. His lack of sympathy and understanding for them led to a mishandling of his father-in-law's slaves that fomented a minor revolt, and it also led Lee to turning a blind eye to attacks on blacks after the war (Chapters 8, 9, and 24).

Moreover, also after the war, Lee appears to have fallen into the despairing fury that so many other defeated southerners experienced. His public pronouncements (except for one interview given only three days after Appomattox) stressed reconciliation. But his private papers seethed with rage and frustration (Chapter 25).

Finally, Pryor points out what any student of the Civil War already knows (even though one hardly dares speak it): although Lee fought a few brilliant battles, he was also at times stubborn, unwilling to listen to advice from his generals, impetuous, and careless of life. His defeat at Gettysburg is, of course, the obvious example. But his conduct at the Seven Days Battle and Antietam also throw less than favorable light on the quality of his generalship (Chapters 19, 20, and 21). Lee remains a great general; but he's not a faultless one.

And Pryor's frank discussion of Lee as he actually was is the book's greatest strength. In allowing us to look past the myth at the man, Pryor invites us to recognize that greatness doesn't require unassailable perfection. Great men and women are still, for all their gifts and accomplishments, human.

And so I say, to both Pryor and Lee: "Hat's off!"

This book is excellent, although one would prob get more from it if he or she knew a little of the Lee story in advance. Pryor's analysis and interp is EXCELLENT, esp. regarding Lee and slavery.

To put to rest the suggestion of "faulty" research, with which Ms. Pryor wrote her book, I found it to be of an impeccable nature as well as being fully noted.

Of all of the Civil War books I have read, "Reading the Man" has certainly had the most impact on this 7th generation Georgian, whose forebears fought and died in this terrible war. I remain a loyal daughter of the South and deplore what our battle flag has come to represent. The house I grew up in was on the site of one of the fiercest battles fought for the City of Atlanta, and only after becoming an adult, I learned that the "alley" behind my Grandmother's house was really a rifle pit used in that battle. Thus, my familiarity has been with the battles fought in this part of the Confederacy and on Sherman's devastation during his march to the sea. Therefore, I began this book with little knowledge of General Lee, the man.


Ms. Pryor's fine book has brought to life a man who "did the best he could", at all things for which he took responsibility. His striving for excellence became both a blessing and a curse as he and his soldiers fought against terrible odds. His loyalty to his beloved home state of Virginia, which caused him to regretfully resign from the US Army and a much enjoyed position in the Army Corp of Engineers and to turn his back on his mentor, General Winfield Scott, was a true measure of the man's unbreakable bond with the places and things he loved more than the offer, coveted by many others,to be the commander of the Union Army.

This loyalty to his state, to his home, to his wife and extended family, and the men he commanded, never wavered throughout all the times of this terrible war.

I was moved to tears when, after Lee's honorable surrender, I read about a group of "Richmond Grandees" watching these tattered men file past them; they "stood at a turnpike intersection and watched ten thousand soldiers file by." In place of the bright eyes and gold braid flashing from every passing parade, "now they saw rags and tags - nothing alike - most garments and arms taken from the enemy - such shoes, such tin pans and pots tied to their waists, bread or bacon stuck on the ends of their bayonets. For many, these tough veterans still represent the greatest army that has ever fought on this continent. Who they were and how they mocked deprivation and danger is a fascinating story."

Ms. Pryor has brought to life the human story of the gallant General Robert E Lee, his family and the thousands of brave Southern boys turned men, who fought to defend their beloved homes and against the invasion of the mighty Army of the North.

With his human shortcomings, at the heart of the man, he was gallant and honorable. I would recommend this book to anyone as a shining example of a man who overcame the terrible reputation of his father, "Lighthorse Harry Lee", and lived his life in the most honorable way possible - in love and loyalty to those he loved and what he believed in. He would be a wonderful example to the men of our times.

Reading The Man is a refreshing analysis of Robert E. Lee the human being. Indeed, this is the central goal of her book in that there is much that needs to be revealed to show the humanness of the man who has often been placed on a pedestal. Her book is well researched as her endnotes and sources cited clearly reveals. There are still many admirable traits to the man, e.g. his innate dignity, his sense of duty, his love of his family as well as his abilities as a general, but he is also revealed to have less admirable traits, such as his domineering tendencies, his inability to admit error on his own part, his views on slavery, and so forth. This is the kind of treatment we need of all figures in history to show that even though they may have possessed unusual abilities and played significant roles in major events, they are still fallible human beings.

Pryor traces Lee's entire life's journey, from the influence of his father (Light Horse Harry of Revolutionary War fame) and mother as well as the reputation the family name bestowed on young Robert (both good and bad), his years as a cadet at West Point, his role as husband and father, and through his years in the military, culminating in his leading role as commander of the Army of Northern Virginia during the Civil War. I personally enjoyed reading of his friendships, his affectionate letters to his children and family, and his periods of difficulty (which show once again more of the human side of Lee). There is no question that the subject of this book was and led an unusual life with a driven sense of purpose and duty and who consistently displayed the strengths and weaknesses of every human being.

His personality traits came through in many of these letters as well. He was extremely friendly with the ladies, had a conscious sense of his own reputation, was warm in his letters to family (though he certainly could evince the attributes of a stern disciplinarian), enjoyed the camaraderie of the army and so forth. But he could also be self-justifying, fall into bouts of depression, and reveal a bitterness and disappointment, especially in the postwar years. His religious views and experiences are also well discussed in this book and the role various family members played in his life is also valuable.

Without reciting all the events of Lee's life, which most who read this book will be familiar with, it is doubtless the most heartbreaking period to read about during those years during and after the Civil War. Perhaps Lee felt this was his surest form of duty, but his actions can not go without criticisms. His role contributed to the carnage that resulted. His battlefield successes, which could be remarkable, still don't negate the fact that huge casualties were incurred on his own side. In my opinion, slavery played the major factor in that war, and the cry of the defense of states rights implicitly meant that a state could perpetuate the institution that considered other human beings as property. This denied the South the moral high ground in my opinion, and I'm a Southerner. It was partly this same defense of states rights that often showed itself in some of Lee's postwar writings.

Lee is credited with making statements against secession before the war and against the institution of slavery, but his actions certainly seemed to prove the contrary. Yes, Lee was a product of his time, but as Pryor mentioned in this book, he certainly wasn't ahead of his time either; he was no progressive or liberal on the slave issue. In fairness, neither were many Northerners. I have certainly come more around to the view of Lee as a tragic figure, though as Pryor stated, he made his own choices. Lee did much with little in the course of that terrible four year conflict. He possessed many remarkable traits and abilities, yet, as Pryor's book reveals, he was still human.

Having read a couple of reviews in the "main stream" print media that appeared to celebrate this book's exposure of Robert E. Lee's true sentiments about slavery (e.g., the Philadelphia Inquirer's review focused ad nauseum on the most negative report of Lee's ordered whipping of a captured runaway slave), I relunctantly bought this book (from Amazon, of course), fearful that this would prove to be yet another exercise in political correction by a less-than-objective historian.

Reading it, however, revealed something altogether different -- Lee was a man of his times (high society in the antbellum south, 19th Century) and also a real and very moral man, who focused more on the practical than the theoretical.

That is not to say that the author, Elizabeth Pryor Brown, sought to try prove that Robert E. Lee wasn't the icon that he is held to be, even to this day, in many parts and in many hearts of the South. She dramatized the presence of a whipping post for errant slaves, with little proof that it was ever used. But as is often the case with historians who delve deeply into their subjects, her heart was touched the humanity, grace and character of Lee, through a thorough and scintillating read of private letters that had been locked away in a bank vault for more than a century.

Things I learned in the book: He was a mega-flirt, but never unfaithful to or threatened by his strong-willed, secure and relatively independent wife. He loved the company of others, particularly his fellow soldiers and officers. None of three daughters ever married. He was confident yet humble,loved his family, and had a tireless devotion to duty, both an an engineer and a soldier.

He, not unlike almost anyone who has ever served in the military, expressed his share of frustrations with the military life, and even showed a little jealousy when peers were promoted ahead of him (but also showing that he was not particularly adept at, or fond of, politics). Except, possibly, for his flirtations, apparently done with the full knowledge of Mary Lee, none of this would be a surprise to any devotee or student of the General.

This book is very well written; it is fair and balanced, and gives more time and attention to Lee, the man, than Lee the general or even the soldier. The book was a joy to read and very hard to put down, even for a historical tome, with difficult to understand reprints of entire letters by Lee and members of his family and a bit too much ink on Harry "Light Horse" Lee, Robert's heroic but badly flawed and largely absent father. Her final chapter, and its final words, are wonderfully insightful at answering an important question -- why, after all these years, are we stil fascinated by this lengdary man? This book is a wonderful achievement and a worthy read.

No minds will likely be changed about Lee, whether you're a son of the South or South-hating liberal yankee who will be disappointed that Lee isn't thorough demystified. The careful and thoughtful reader will come away with greater appreciation and respect for the man.

I have just finished this excellent work and am dumbfounded by the two star reviews left by some readers. Clearly they didn't read the same book I did. Did Fruit Loop actually say it was "shoddily researched?" Did he see the 140 pages of footnotes? The 21 page bibliography? That he should question Ms. Pryor's credibility is laughable considering he makes major flaws in his own information. The slave whipping story did not only appear as an anonymous accusation in the New York Tribune. It appeared many times including one first hand account by one of the slaves who was whipped! Ms. Pryor's so-called "shoddy" research clearly shows this. And Fruit Loop's description of other aspects of Lee's relationship with his father-in-law's slaves is full of errors. GWP Custis's near bankruptcy had nothing to do with slaves emigrating to Liberia. Those that did go, the Burke family, went when Mr. Custis was still alive. Also, Lee had almost nothing to do with educating the slaves. That was done almost entirely by his mother-in-law, wife and even his daughters. He was pretty detached from it.

I think what is at the heart of the criticism of this book is an inability by some to consider that Lee had flaws; that there were unpleasant aspects of his character. Those unpleasant aspects were very common for his time and Ms. Pryor clearly states that Lee was no worse than others but he was no better either. He was very much a man of his time. These defenders of Lee and the Old South need to come to grips with the fact that slavery was bad and slaveowners, while not evil, did something bad by owning other human beings.

That said, Ms. Pryor's book is remarkably evenhanded and forgiving of Lee. She has said that she has a fondness for Lee and she certainly highlights his virtues as much as his vices.

This is a new kind of study of Lee. Finally we can see the whole man. And, for this reader and student of the Civil War, I can say that for the first time we have an explanation of Lee that actually makes sense. Bravo.

I have been a park ranger at Arlington House, The Robert E. Memorial for 17 years now and I can honestly say that I have read at least five biographies, assessments, evaluations or interpretations of Robert E. Lee for each of those years. I am certain that when all the books and articles are added together they number close to a hundred. It's important that I do that. It's my job and my responsibility to have as comprehensive an understanding of Robert E. Lee's life as is possible so that I can honestly and accurately convey it to the people who visit and the students who partake in our education programs. But with all of these books and articles there is a certain consistency, not with interpretation but with information. It is safe to say that since Douglas Southall Freeman wrote his landmark, Pulitzer Prize winning four volume biography in the 1930's the assumption has been that there is nothing new that can be found out about Lee. Freeman's work was so exhaustive, seemingly leaving no stone or document unturned, that, it seems, every biographer of Lee since then has taken the approach that no new research was needed or possible. Instead, it became the fashion for biographers and other historians to simply take what Freeman researched and interpret it in whatever way they wanted. Thomas Connelly chose to psychoanalyze Lee in a groundbreaking and exceptionally flawed work, The Marble Man while Alan Nolan chose a lawyerly approach, constructing the case against Robert E. Lee in his book, Lee Considered, as if Lee had never been considered before. And there have been others, many quite reverential but the problem with all of them is that they've all used the same information. Writing about Lee ceased being about scholarship and instead became bickering op ed pieces. And the greatest crime of it has been that it has made Robert E. Lee uninteresting. How many times can you read the same things, no matter what way they've been spun, and still remain excited? I stopped being interested in reading things about Lee over five years ago. I have forced myself to keep reading but there has been no joy in it.

Until now. Elizabeth Brown Pryor and her extraordinary new book, Reading The Man, has single-handedly revived what was hitherto unrevivable. She has made Robert E. Lee come to life in a way that no other writer has ever been able to do and she has done it in a way that should make every other biographer of Lee blush: she has let the man speak for himself and she has done it through new research. Yes, new research. Certainly much of the new material she has uncovered has been locked away in trunks for almost a century so other researchers including Freeman had no access to it. But some of what she's used has been available to researchers for decades they just chose not to look. Intellectual laziness? Or have researchers just been content with what they've had? Fortunately, Elizabeth Pryor was neither lazy nor content and what she has constructed is a masterpiece of biographical examination. The Lee that springs from her pages is dynamic and emotional, conflicted and complex, playful and loving and nothing like he has ever been portrayed before. But the magic of this work, what truly elevates it beyond mere interpretation into what can only be described as revolutionary, is how Ms. Pryor manages to be both critical and sympathetic with her subject. With Lee it has always been you either revere or revile him. There has been no middle ground. Those that simplified him to the point of mere symbolism insured that. He was either the Christ like martyr of the Lost Cause or the white supremacist Benedict Arnold of the Civil War. But Elizabeth Pryor has shown us, has proven beyond reproach, that you can be critical of someone and still like him. You can point out his flaws but empathize with his humanity. You can be honest without defilement. What Ms. Pryor has done for all of us interested in history, the Civil War and Robert E. Lee is incalculable. She has, quite literally, shown us a new way to examine our common history and truly learn from it. We would be fools not to follow her.

Ms. Pryor's "biography" would have more credibility had she simply published Lee correspondence; instead she includes second- and third-hand sources, many of which have been debunked, an attempt to psychoanalyze General Lee and define his character. In one infamous incident, she quotes a rumor of slave-whipping whose sole "source" was anonymous letter to the New York Tribune in the middle of the war, which claimed that then-Colonel Lee had personally whipped a female slave. Yet Pryor claims there were five witnesses to this event, however fails to name them.

The slaves in question didn't even belong to Lee; they were the property of his father-in-law, who directed in his will that they be freed within 5 years, yet gave no means for doing so. In fact, George W.P. Custis was nearly bankrupt, forcing Lee to send those who wished to go to Liberia at his own expense. He apprenticed several to tradesmen and had them all taught to read and write so that they could employ themselves in their new lives. The many existing letters exchanged by the Lee family with former Custis slaves show a continual bond that gives the lie to any claims of abuse.

As for Lee being a "ladies man": Pryor fails to understand the custom of the time - more suited to the medieval game of "courtly love." Flirtations occurred but there was no impropriety or marital infidelity. In fact, the devotion of Robert and Mary Lee to each other during their lifetimes was extraordinary.

Ms. Pryor goes on to credit several sources whose antagonism to the Lee family and southern history is well known. Although the collection of Lee correspondence is well worth the read, any suppositions as to their character and content by this particular author can't help but lack for credibility. Quite disappointing. Only two stars

Ms. Pryor's "biography" would have more credibility had she simply published Lee correspondence; instead she includes second- and third-hand sources, many of which have been debunked. In one infamous incident, she quotes a rumor of slave-whipping whose sole "source" was anonymous letter to the New York Tribune in the middle of the war, which claimed that then-Colonel Lee had personally whipped a female slave. Yet Pryor claims there were five witnesses to this event, however fails to name them.

The slaves in question didn't even belong to Lee; they were the property of his father-in-law, who directed in his will that they be freed within 5 years, yet gave no means for doing so. In fact, George W.P. Custis was nearly bankrupt, forcing Lee to send those who wished to go to Liberia at his own expense. He apprenticed several to tradesmen and had them all taught to read and write so that they could employ themselves in their new lives. The many existing letters exchanged by the Lee family with former Custis slaves show a continual bond that gives the lie to any claims of abuse.

As for Lee being a "ladies man": Pryor fails to understand the custom of the time - more suited to the medieval game of "courtly love." Flirtations occurred but there was no impropriety or marital infidelity. In fact, the devotion of Robert and Mary Lee to each other during their lifetimes was extraordinary.

Ms. Pryor goes on to credit several sources whose antagonism to the Lee family and southern history is well known. Although the collection of Lee correspondence is well worth the read, any suppositions as to their character and content by this particular author can't help but lack for credibility. Quite disappointing. Only two stars

This is a revisionist view of the Southern model for wisdom, loyality, courage, and compassion. I am very skeptical of the research, and I believe this is very bad timing for such a book to throw doubt on the quality of a real leader. The book is well written and thought provoking, but I disagree with some of the conclusions.

I have not yet finished the book, but I can say without reservation that thus far this has been the most revealing book on Robert E. Lee I have read. Even the huge four volume biography that Douglas S. Freeman wrote on Lee (that won a Pulitzer Prize) doesn't compare. One reason is that the author had access to previously unreleased letters by and to Lee, along with other family members and close associates. Given that letters were the main form of communication in an era before the telephone, faxes and email, much is revealed about Lee and his life. Of course, Pryor's research, organization and writing style is helpful, explaining the letters in the context of the times and also placing them in chronological/themeatic chapters.
I do have to agree with one of the reviewers- a family tree, showing the relationships between REL and his huge extended family would have been extremely helpful. Pryor points out that like many upper class Southern families of the time, the Lees tended to intermarry with a few select other families, making it very difficult to figure out who was who.
I have always felt it was tragic that RE Lee died before he could write his own story. Since then, others have written his story for him, often with axes to grind both positive and negative. This has been a disservice to Lee and his place in history. I think finally that READING THE MAN comes closest to revealing Lee as he was.

Is their person more of an icon than Robert E. Lee? Toward the end of the war, he was the living symbol of the Confederacy's hope. After his death, he became the Christ-like central figure in Myth the Lost Cause, the "marble man" of history. The Politically Correct Myth of the Civil War insistently attacks him as a traitor and slave owner while trying to show his feet of clay. Biographies tend to be sugarcoated stories of his life, denouncements or pseudo-psychological studies of his "mental problems".

This book contains none of the above and allows the Lees among others to speak for themselves. The format of each chapter is a letter or excerpts from letters that introduce the subject followed by an intelligent and balanced discussion. Those looking to worship "General Lee" or those looking to damn him, will not be happy. However, if you wish to gain an understanding of the man, this is an excellent book. The author is neither judgmental nor loving. She presents Lee within the confines of his class, training and the times. This helps the reader understand the decisions made and his actions. What emerges is an intelligent, ambitious family man doing what he feels is best.

On of the nicest items in the book is the author's recognition of the pseudo-psychological studies and why they fail to explain the man. While this in not a major item in the book, it shows a sense of fairness lacking in some books. It is hard not to admire Robert E. Lee and the author clearly admires him. However, I never felt that this admiration interferes with her honest evaluation of him. After reading the book, I agreed with the observation "Cousin Robert is only human" and had all the contradictions of the species.

"READING THE MAN" BRINGS MANY NEW INSIGHTS INTO THE LIFE OF ROBERT E. LEE AND GIVES A MORE ROUNDED VIEW OF THIS CONFEDERATE ICON. BEAUTIFULLY WRITTEN. AND AT LAST WE REALIZE THAT LEE WAS A HUMAN BEING, AFTER ALL.

For those who wish to have a good look at the life of Robert E. Lee in one volume, this is the book to use as a basic biography and guide. Author Elizabeth Brown Pryor has taken letters written by Lee as the springboard for each of the chapters of the book, corresponding with the chapters in his life. This gives the reader a chance to read and sense the tone of the celebrated General, in his own words. Surely, this was not an easy task since there are about 10,000 known letters of Robert E. Lee scattered hither and yon. To find, read and cull the best of these must have been both Herculean and painstaking. One suspects it has also been a labor of love.

Those with the sketchiest knowledge of Lee will remember that his father was a Revolutionary War era hero, that he had an almost unparalleled record as a West Point cadet, that he married into the Custis and therefore Washington family, making him not only one of the First Families of Virginia but also of the First Family of America. Of course best known is Lee's choice to side with state and kindred during the Civil War and the resultant verve and disappointment on the field of battle.

In this 200th birthday anniversary year, Pryor fleshes out these facts with a nuanced portrait of a complex man whose personal and professional life are not as easily summarized as one might suppose. Dealing with those who came before her who served as Lee's uncritical biographers, Pryor demythologizes Lee in a respectful way, allowing him to be not only three dimensional but also multifaceted. She also gives an outstanding précis of aspects of the Lee hagiography and misconceptions that have persisted through repetition. It would be correct to call Pryor's approach even-handed. She clearly appreciates that Lee was a towering figure in his time; she also allows the reader to see his eccentricities.

The book is excellent on some challenging subjects such as Lee's attitude toward slavery and how it compares to the attitudes of his contemporaries. Pryor also gives us an account of Lee's unabashed affection for women. The chapter on Lee's tenure as head of West Point speaks volumes about how Lee was perceived by those who observed him as a professional soldier preparing others to be professional soldiers.

The author's description of what went right and what went wrong at some of the key battles of the war, notably Gettysburg, are well done, and will provide both the general reader and the Civil War expert good starting points for conversation. Even so, I must confess that the second part of the book was for me slower-going than the first half. Whether that is due to Lee, Pryor or me, I am not sure. Nor am I sure what to conclude about Robert E. Lee--a man of honor (rightly placed or mis-placed), of brilliance (and obstinacy) in peace and in war, and a man who took a road less traveled by which made all the difference.

The book has many fine illustrations scattered throughout the text, including many portraits and photographs of Lee from youth to old age.

Elizabeth Brown Pryor has previously given us a similar life of Clara Barton. Pryor is both an award-winning historian and senior diplomat in the American Foreign Service, having served as a senior adviser to the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe of the U.S. Congress.

For those who wish to have a good look at the life of Robert E. Lee in one volume, this is the book to use as a basic biography and guide. Author Elizabeth Brown Prior has taken letters written by Lee as the springboard for each of the chapters of the book, corresponding with the chapters in his life. This gives the reader a chance to read and sense the tone of the celebrated General, in his own words. Surely, this was not an easy task since there are about 10,000 known letters of Robert E. Lee scattered hither and yon. To find, read and cull the best of these must have been both Herculean and painstaking. One suspects it has also been a labor of love.

Those with the sketchiest knowledge of Lee will remember that his father was a Revolutionary War era hero, that he had an almost unparalleled record as a West Point cadet, that he married into the Custis and therefore Washington family, making him not only one of the First Families of Virginia but also of the First Family of America. Of course best known is Lee's choice to side with state and kindred during the Civil War and the resultant verve and disappointment on the field of battle.

In this 200th birthday anniversary year, Pryor fleshes out these facts with a nuanced portrait of a complex man whose personal and professional life are not as easily summarized as one might suppose. Dealing with those who came before her who served as Lee's uncritical biographers, Pryor demythologizes Lee in a respectful way, allowing him to be not only three dimensional but also multifaceted. She also gives an outstanding précis of aspects of the Lee hagiography and misconceptions that have persisted through repetition. It would be correct to call Pryor's approach even-handed. She clearly appreciates that Lee was a towering figure in his time; she also allows the reader to see his eccentricities.

The book is excellent on some challenging subjects such as Lee's attitude toward slavery and how it compares to the attitudes of his contemporaries. Pryor also gives us an account of Lee's unabashed affection for women. The chapter on Lee's tenure as head of West Point speaks volumes about how Lee was perceived by those who observed him as a professional soldier preparing others to be professional soldiers.

The book has many fine illustrations scattered throughout the text, including many portraits and photographs of Lee from youth to old age.

Elizabeth Brown Pryor has previously given us a similar life of Clara Barton. Pryor is both an award-winning historian and senior diplomat in the American Foreign Service, having served as a senior adviser to the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe of the U.S. Congress.

As of the writing of this review (5/13/07) I am only 50 some pages into this book and I am already finding it the best book written for any one with a desire to place RE Lee the man into the framework of family, society, and the unique culture of his time.

I will add to this review as I move through the book.