This is a very good general history of the Civil War in one book. It is easy reading. Do not get this book if you are looking for great depth of history on the War. But if you are a novice enthusiast of the Civil War, this is a great book to read. It will give you a good base of knowledge to build upon.

This hefty tome is comprehensive and cram-packed with details. But fear not. You know the basics. You know the outcome. You know many of the key events. And yet this book is a gripping, edge-of-the-seat page turner.

The amount of research done in preparation for this book is simply incredible. Readers need not doubt the facts presented. Extensive quotations make the sentiments from all viewpoints come alive.

A large portion of the book is devoted to an exposition of factors that contributed to the Civil War: an economic downturn, legislation lowering tariffs impacting the North negatively but advantaging the South who imported many products, anti-immigrant proclivities, and so on.

The author does not shy away from offering personal opinions on some issues, but he presents enough facts for the reader to reach independent conclusions. For example, McPherson tackles the Constitutional legality of secession. He also examines the extent that non-slaveowners in the South where pro-slavery. Plantation magnates feared that non-slaveowners would sympathize with the anti-slavery movement and destroy the Confederacy from within, so they began a campaign preaching white supremacy.

Every twist and turn is there for your delight. Many abolitionists were dedicated to peaceful resistance, but as they witnessed the treatment of slaves who had escaped to free states, many became convinced that violence was necessary to break the bonds of slavery. John Brown was an early advocate of the necessity of violence in removing the cancer of slavery. McPherson's breathes life into Brown's exploits in the Kansas territory and his later misconceived attack on Harper's Ferry, leading to the popular perception of his martyrdom for the anti-slavery cause.

All in all, this is a fantastic book. And it's detail and heft is a boon, because it only makes the reader want more.

Enjoy!

I own over 500 Civil War books and this is by the best. It's very detailed, but still very interesting. I would recommend this book to an individual wanting to know something about the Civil War or to an individual already very knowledgeable on the Civil War.

This review is purely as to the flaws of the Kindle transfer -- the book itself is a masterpiece I've reread with pleasure on paper over the years. Unfortunately the transfer is a rough scanned-PDF type that is MUCH harder to read than other Kindle books. Caveat Emptor.

This book is full of infomation about the times of the Civil War. Very informative about why things happened. Excellent.

Yes, this is an excellent political history. But it is marred by political correctness. The culture of American Indians was "vital," we learn, and all Indians are treated strictly as victims. Southerners are almost without exception villainous. Little is said of Lincoln's view of the alleged inferiority of blacks before 1860. And there is no mention of Nat Turner!

Perhaps the author had no choice, given the nature of academia today. I continue to prefer earlier versions of American history, without the PC.

If you wanted to read just one book to get an understanding of the Civil War and its effects on the United States, you could do little better than James PcPherson's book. It is an intimidating book at over 800 pages. This thickness comes from the fact that the book does not just cover the battles from 1861 through 1865, but examines the political war that took place long before the armed conflict continued the "politics through other means".

The book has a fascinating focus on the political dimension that may distract from those solely interested in a tactical account of the battles. There are ample books that look into greater detail of the personalities of the generals and the intricacies of the individual battles. The Battle Cry of Freedom covers these battles and their key points, but this is not the focus of this book.

Where this book is unique in other civil war books that I have read is its treatment of the political-military aspect of the war. It has an excellent examination of the political situations that gave rise to the Republican party and the debates between radicals and moderates even within this party. It goes to great lengths examining how the democratic party, whig party, no-nothings and numerous other parties influenced the political scene.

During the war this political examination gives great treatment to the political challenges that both leaders, Lincoln and Davis, faced within their governments and how they tackled issues that are eerily familiar today - the legality and constitutionality of war and the suspicion of civil liberties (to include habeas corpus) during war.

McPherson closes his book with a very well reasoned look at how the civil war altered the course of the nation and made us the nation we are today, versus the union that we were before. While there are fascinating studies of the leadership and battles of the armed conflict, this books places these studies within the larger context that is crucial to anyone who wants to have a full understanding of the Civil War and what it truly meant to American civilization and culture.

In my humble opinion, Battle Cry of Freedom is one of the best one-volume histories of the Civil War. All aspects are covered: military, political, social, economic, etc.

The narrative flows smoothly, is easy and interesting to read without being overly dry or bogged down into too much detail, and is broad in the width of topics covered. The battle descriptions give enough detail of who won and the results. McPherson does a good job of the situations faced by and strategies employed by Lincoln, Davis, Grant, Lee, Sherman, Jackson, and a host of other military and political leaders.

If you are looking for a book that covers the "high points" of the war, then this one's for you. However, if you are looking for a book for detailed battle descriptions or biographies, then you are better off looking elsewhere. It just depends on what you are looking for.

Again, a highly recommended introductory study to the American Civil War. Expand the knowledge you learn in Battle Cry of Freedom by reading books on detailed battles or biographies.

Read and enjoy!

James McPherson has written a fine history of the Civil War. This dramatic period of American history can be treated as a numbing series of military and political events, but McPherson's narrative approach permits the reader to work smoothly through the material. The volume aims to be comprehensive and contains photos and maps of military campaigns and battles.

McPherson opens the curtain on the nation in 1850. In this way he is able to identify the cause of the war: a shrill sectional argument about the extension of slavery across the American continent. The final phase of this generations-old debate began when President Polk started a war with Mexico in order to secure Texas. Henry Clay and other Whigs, including a one-term ex-congressman from Illinois, Abraham Lincoln, objected to the acquisition of additional territory unless slavery was prohibited. Polk's critics insisted that human slavery was incompatible with the westward expansion of the nation. Southern leaders insisted that the slave-holding South must survive even at the cost of separation from the other states. The extreme Southern position enabled the enemies of slavery to win over the electorate by arguing that slavery posed a deadly threat to free labor and secession an equally dangerous threat to the future of the nation. The cogency of this attack propelled Lincoln into the White House in 1860.

Why did the North win the war? McPherson gives his reasons, including superior northern leadership, a strategy of total war employed by Grant and Sherman, and the industrial and numerical advantages enjoyed by the North. One of the greatest values of the book is its interpretative key: contingency. McPherson indicates how the course of events might have been changed at different points and leaves the reader to speculate. Suppose Robert E. Lee had developed a larger military vision than the Virginia countryside? Suppose England had not been so wary of French influence in America and had recognized the Confederacy right away? Suppose Lincoln had not issued the Emancipation Proclamation in 1862, a gesture that transformed the struggle into a fight for human freedom? Suppose Lincoln had been motivated more by expediency than by principle and had not pressed the issue to ultimate military victory?

What were the consequences of the war? Among the most important were that the principal of secession was killed along with slavery. After 1865, the central government began to dominate the life of the nation. McPherson points out that eleven of the first twelve Constitutional amendments limited the central government before the Civil War and that six of the next seven amendments expanded federal governmental authority. Federal court jurisdiction was expanded, a national currency and banking and tax systems were created. A truly national economy began to develop.

McPherson also points to a shift in political power from South to North, which made the United States less like the rest of the world. War-stimulated industrial development laid the foundation for United States world leadership for the next one hundred years. McPherson suggests that many of these changes were symbolized as "the United States" became a singular noun. "Nation" replaced "union" in Lincoln's vocabulary and in common parlance.

This book is part of the Oxford Press series of the history of the United States edited by the late C. Vann Woodward. What a pleasure to read an important and thoughtful book that combines valuable insights with clear, fluid writing. (In 1989, this book received the Pulitzer Prize in History.)

This review has been published in a collection of reviews and articles, That's What I'm Talking About (Nativa 2008). THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT

Calling an edition the "Oxford" requires it to be the finest! And this books definitely is. It came on time and is in exceptionally good condition.

If you like the Civil War, you will like this book. This is not one of Mr. McPhearson's better books though. I felt that it's place is in a High School or College Corriculum though. It seemed as though the Mr. McPhearson could have liven up the text and made it less technical. While I enjoyed all of his referances the booked lack something.

I felt that Mr. McPhearson missed the Civil War's most vital aspect; The Naval Operations. With out them from either side, the war could have turned out diferently.

I felt as though I had to put it down and come back to several times. I do think it is a must for all histirans, civil war enthusist, teachers, etc. Please beware that it is a little dry.

If you want a general knowledge on the civil war, you might be better off with any book by Shelby Foote, Bruce Caton, or The Civil War a History by Harry Hansen.

Enjoy

I can't imagine someone doing a better job with that subject matter than McPherson. He covered all the important events and policies that led to the Civil War, going back to war with Mexico, and he provided a great history of the Civil War era that is sure to turn readers into Civil War buffs who will seek out more books on the time period. Because there is so much information packed into these 800-plus pages, it was not a remarkably quick read; everything is so important, it's hard to breeze along. But his style of writing is outstanding, mixing in humor and emphasizing the right points. It was very valuable for me.

If your a Civil War Buff this is one of those books you cannot put down. It covers more of the the political aspect and skimps on the battles. This book put me in the frame of mind of how I would feel living in the 1860's reading the Daily news about how the war was progressing. Instead of cursing Bush I would be cursing Lincoln.

Unlike many other treatments of the Civil War, Battle Cry of Freedom gives a detailed explanation of life in America in the 1850s and shows how and why the differences over slavery cannot be resolved peacefully. These 250 pages of background history give detail and insight into the decisions made by Lincoln, Davis and others that is lacking from other treatments (say Ken Burns excellent documentary, The Civil War).

McPherson writes in a fluid, compelling style that makes this book hard to put down. Although the treatments of battles are brief, the narrative focuses on how these individual events changed the big picture. If you want to delve into details about the 2nd day at Shiloh or how Lee's cigars wrapped in war plans impacted Antietam, you can find that elsewhere. If you want a readable introduction to and synthesis of one of the most dramatic periods of American history, you must start with this book.

If you enjoyed this, you should check out some of the other titles in the Oxford History of the United States series. Too bad the volume on the reconstruction era has yet to be written.

That's what many say and it is hard to argue. From a lengthy survey of the pre-war forces that led the country to fracture through all the battles to the war's aftermath and legacy it is all here. Not just a textbook data-dump, it is written engagingly and does not bore. Personally, I much prefer McPherson's opinion that the war left us with an activist federal government to some of the daffy views expressed at the end of Ken Burns' war documentary (although the rest was excellent) that modern day homelessness is really the civil war still being fought. Beware- this book can turn a simply-curious-about-the-war reader into a Civil War history buff!!

Excellent book, very detailed and tells me about history that I was not taught in school. I like the book and its contents such that I cannot put it down and will have it read within several days.

Wow. I will only read books of this size if I am forced to. Especially, in this video-driven world I've grown up in. I was forced to read this for a college course on the Civil War, and I must tell you, it was absolutely enthralling. I can see why McPherson won the Pulitzer for this book.

The book paints a complete picture of policy, politics, and FACTS of the Civil War. McPherson treats the firing on Ft. Sumter as what it truly was, the beginning of the bloodiest war in US History. If you want to learn about the communication troubles, supply problems, tactical strategies and leadership traits from the Civil War, this book is the best you can buy. James McPherson paints a complete picture in this weighty book. The amout of knowledge you take away seems like it would come from 3 books at over 800 pages each!

Whether you're already a buff of the Civil War, or someone who wants to know more than just the basics, this book is perfect.

As many others have commented, this is a great one volume history of the Civil war and is easy to read.
The long build up to the firing on Fort Sumter also sets the political context well though I agree with some other reviewers that the narrative is a little thin on the battle sequences. But for a detailed account of the military campaigns to have been included you'd have needed alot more than the 862 pages of this book. So my verdict is that it's as good as it gets for a work of this size.
There's definitely a Northern bias so I'll be reading Shelby Foote's 3 volumes to get a more Southern perspective.
As MacPherson so aptly ends his work the point about the Civil War was that in many ways the secession consisted of a counter-Revolution. Southern Society in fact represented the old, pre-industrial world, mirrored in many parts of Europe at the time, while it was in the North that the real revolution had occurred. My one criticism therefore is that I would have liked to see this theme developed a little more. Was slavery really the central issue which MacPherson makes it or was the war more a clash of competing social visions, with the Southern States' vision more closely resembling that of the Founding Fathers?
With the power of Federal Government increasing daily over our lives this question has more relevance today than it has had in decades.
A great read.

First, prior to reading "Battle Cry for Freedom", I read "Team of Rivals" by Doris Kearns Goodwin which encompassed the political aspect of the era. "Team of Rivals" was one of the best books I have read in a while which made "Battle Cry of Freedom" pail in comparison. My saving hope was "Battle Cry of Freedom" would cover more of the war aspect which is done, sort of.

The beauty of this books is its scope in which it covers the war, the politics, daily lifestyles, North and South (I think its focused more on the Union), the economics, the issues and leaders of the era (1850's to 60's). It truly is comprehensive in terms of it being a single volume. To that point, simply the vast amount of information is crammed into the book and much detail is left out. For example, less than 40 pages (out of approx 850 pages) are dedicated to the closing year of the war when Grant took over command of the entire army. Numerous major battles and campaigns took place where a lot of detail was not allotted. I felt the author rushed through this part especially since it being a climatic part of the war. Another example is the assaination of Lincoln (and atteps of cabinet embers) was limited to one paragraph in the approx. 8 page epilogue. So with the ending of the war, the book ended just as abruptly. The book itself was all bones and very little meat. In this respect, this is a good book for one who would like a light, general background on the Civil War and the era. But for those who are truly interested in this American War and the politics, I find there are far better books and one book simply will not suffice.

The book read more or less like a text book (dry) vs. a good novel. There was a review in which someone said "every hear of a movie in which everyone was saying how great a film it was but when you watched it, you scratched your head wondering if you didn't get it cause it wasn't that good to justify the rave over it?" Well my sentiments exactly. This book gets high praise but I failed to see why it was so good. I contemplated putting it down numerous times and being satisfied with reading "Team of Rivals" for the politics and Shelby Foote's trilogy (for the war itself). But I persevered. I did learn a lot for this book, do not get me wrong. But it was a chore to remain interested with the author's style and drudge forward reading on. I probably would not recommend it to a friend but rather the Kern's or Foote's books instead.

First, prior to reading "Battle Cry for Freedom", I read "Team of Rivals" by Francis Goodwin Kerns which encompassed the political aspect of the era. "Team of Rivals" was one of the best books I have read in a while which made "Battle Cry of Freedom" pail in comparison. My saving hope was "Battle Cry of Freedom" would cover more of the war aspect which is done, sort of.

The beauty of this books is its scope in which it covers the war, the politics, daily lifestyles, North and South (I think its focused more on the Union), the economics, the issues and leaders of the era (1850's to 60's). It truly is comprehensive in terms of it being a single volume. To that point, simply the vast amount of information is crammed into the book and much detail is left out. For example, less than 40 pages (out of approx 850 pages) are dedicated to the closing year of the war when Grant took over command of the entire army. Numerous major battles and campaigns took place where a lot of detail was not allotted. I felt the author rushed through this part especially since it being a climatic part of the war. In this respect, this is a good book for one who would like a good general background on the Civil War and the era. But for those who are truly interested in this American War and the politics, I find there are far better books and one book simply will not suffice.

The book read more or less like a text book (dry) vs. a good novel. There was a review in which someone said "every hear of a movie in which everyone was saying how great a film it was but when you watched it, you scratched your head wondering if you didn't get it cause it wasn't that good to justify the rave over it?" Well my sentiments exactly. This book gets high praise but I failed to see why it was so good. I contemplated putting it down numerous times and being satisfied with reading "Team of Rivals" for the politics and Shelby Foote's trilogy (for the war itself). But I persevered. I did learn a lot for this book, do not get me wrong. But it was a chore to remain interested with the author's style and drudge forward reading on. I probably would not recommend it to a friend but rather the Kern's or Foote's books instead.

Having read about a quarter into the book so far, I find it a gripping account of the affairs leading up to the American Civil War and the war itself. Being a European I didn't know much about this era of American history (and I'm only beginning to scratch the surface of it!) but it gives a superb insight in what made this war happen and how it progressed. Every aspect of that time is covered: social, economic, political and judicial (my personal favorite) events that shaped the history of the first three quarters of 19th century America. I think this book will be a valuable addition to any one's library who's interested in Amercian history and politics, not just the civil war itself, even though that is of course the main theme of this book. A definite must-buy!

This is simply the best single volume history of the Civil War Era in existence. The book flows exceptionally well, reading almost like a good fiction story rather than nonfiction. Grossly entertaining yet informative, treatment and coverage of the period is pretty well balanced. Although I disagree with McPherson's analysis that a Northern Political Revolution started the war or his contingency theory that at several key instances, had events unfolded differently, the outcome of the south would have been successful in her attempt at permanent disunion. However, it is still the best, and still my favorite one volume history of the era.

As has been said here before: If you only read one book on the history of the Civil War, make it this book! I never expected such a comprehensive and detailed survey of the political, social and economic forces at play to be contained in this one book. There are few books I buy extra copies of to pass around to friends, but this is one that has earned that rank. The only other I can think of at this time is Unintended Consequences by John Ross. Don't pass this one by either.

Once again, when I checked this book against the narrow issue of my expertise, West Virginia statehood, Mr. McPherson gets it wrong on every point. He says 5 WV delegates in Richmond voted for the Secession Ordinance, the number was actually 15 (Charles Ambler 'A History of West Virginia', pg. 309). He states that West Virginians voted against secession 3 to 1, the actual number was less than 2 to 1 (R. Curry 'A House Divided' pg. 147). Aside from proclamations issued from Wheeling, there is no historical evidence that West Virginians wished to separate from Virginia. The Statehood referendum of Oct. 24 1861 is cited as proof of this wish, a referendum which was boycotted by over 70% of the voters. Wheeling was so desperate to validate their partition of Virginia that they let non-resident Union soldiers vote as citizens. One of the Wheeling delegates, Mr. Stewart of Doddridge County, when faced with the issue of voter ratification of statehood, said that if they had gone thus far with no popular sanction they could proceed just as far as was necessary in order to carry out their plan. He challenged any person to point to a solitary act that even had authorized them to assemble for the purpose of breaking away from Virginia, and if the convention was resolved to form a new state, let it do so without the farce of a popular election. (McGregor 'The Disruption of Virginia", pg. 235). If I can find this information without much trouble, how do so many historians like Mr. McPherson manage to miss it?

I would suggest, if you want a good one-volume history of the War, get a copy of J.G. Randall's "The Civil War and Reconstruction", preferably a 1960's edition. Mr. Randall, a Lincoln expert, gives 5 detailed pages, with map, on the machinations of Wheeling and the myth of West Virginia statehood, compared to the few incorrect paragraphs by Mr. McPherson. Mr. Randall deserved the Pulitzer.

Once again, when I checked this book against the narrow issue of my expertise, West Virginia statehood, Mr. McPherson gets it wrong on every point. He says 5 WV delegates in Richmond voted for the Secession Ordinance, the number was actually 15 (Charles Ambler 'A History of West Virginia', pg. 309). He states that West Virginians voted against secession 3 to 1, the actual number was less than 2 to 1 (R. Curry 'A House Divided' pg. 147). Aside from proclamations issued from Wheeling, there is no historical evidence that West Virginians wished to separate from Virginia. The Statehood referendum of Oct. 24 1861 is cited as proof of this wish, a referendum which was boycotted by over 70% of the voters. Wheeling was so desperate to validate their partition of Virginia that they let non-resident Union soldiers vote as citizens. One of the Wheeling delegates, Mr. Stewart of Doddridge County, when faced with the issue of voter ratification of statehood, said that if they had gone thus far with no popular sanction they could proceed just as far as was necessary in order to carry out their plan. He challenged any person to point to a solitary act that even had authorized them to assemble for the purpose of breaking away from Virginia, and if the convention was resolved to form a new state, let it do so without the farce of a popular election. (McGregor 'The Disruption of Virginia", pg. 235). If I can find this information without much trouble, how do so many historians like Mr. McPherson manage to miss it? He may be correct on many points, but on West Virginia he gets no Pulitzer.

This is an excellent book. It's thorough and scholarly without being boring. I always like to read two books on a subject that interests me, but if you're only going to read one book on the US Civil War this is the one for you. It explains how the events of these years led to the society we have today, including big labor, big business and big government. It covers political, military and sociological aspects well.

James McPherson is one of the top civil war historians and this is his greatest book. It covers not only the whole of the war with objective analysis that takes into consideration sources on both sides but also the start of the war. From the annexation of Texas and the war with Mexico where our commanders got their experience McPherson demonstrates his expert knowledge. The book recounts not only the Army of Northern Virginia and the Army of the Potomac, but also looks at the western front. The battles in the west were easily as important as the east and this provides a great summary. It also takes into account the slave question, economic concerns and foreign diplomacy. The two chapters on the navy and river battles are expertly done and capture the advancements made in naval technology during the times. The end of the war is well categorized and the book does not get bogged down in countless battle details. The final days of the confederacy are seen for what they are. It was a nation that was defeated and unable to keep its army in the field. The book is very well written and easy to read making it a sheer joy to understand the civil war. This is an essential book for any student of history or anyone who wants to learn about the Civil War.

Yes, this is a history book, but what a history book! It not only deals with what happened in the Civil War but the pre-Civil War history that led to the catastrophe. Mcpherson is a master writer because making history this facinating is a difficult task. Reading this book will draw you in like the History Channel on TV but instead of skimming the subject will submerse you in so deep you will fully understand the dynamics of our country's shakey and fragile beginnings that made the Civil War almost inevitable! It is detailed but in no way boring. Mcpherson paints a vivid and complete picture of our nation in that era.

This is my second reading from the Oxford History of the United States after The Glorius Cause and they just get better. I've never really read about the Civil War and I was surprised to learn about the anguish and fight that the South went thru to stay slave states. This book takes you from the beginning at about 1860 and explains both sides arguments about what to do about slaves in regards to "all men are created equal" phrase from the Constitution. The author did hit on 1862 alot and was surprised how Grant wasn't featured as much and how the Northern Generals failed time and again to maybe stop the war earlier than 1865 with their stop and go efforts. All in all a great book I really enjoyed it, if you like to read about The Civil War this is one you should get.

This is my second reading from the Oxford History of the United States after The Glorius Cause and they just get better. I've never really read about the Civil War and I was surprised to learn about the anguish and fight that the South went thru to stay slave states. This book takes you from the beginning at about 1860 and explains both sides arguments about what to do about slaves in regards to "all men are created equal" phrase from the Constitution. The author did hit on 1862 alot and was surprised how Grant wasn't featured as much and how the Northern Generals failed time and again to maybe stop the war earlier than 1865 with their stop and go efforts. All in all a great book I really enjoyed it, if you like to read about The Civil War this is one you should get.

Even though I have read tons of Civil War books, I never picked this volume up until I had to buy it for a college class. Good thing I did. This is perhaps the best single volume overview of the Civil War, and the causes of the war, that you can pick up. If you want a crash course in Civil War history, this is a good place to start. Sure, some reviewers have complained that McPherson focuses too much on slavery or has an anti-Southern bias, but even if you feel that way while reading the book, I really don't think it detracts from the book. The bottom line is that this is a very well written, thoroughly researched, excellent overview of the Civil War, its causes, and its aftermath.

MacPherson has written a thorough and thoroughly readable book that deals chiefly with the political and social background of the American Civil War. It's not exactly a military history. It explains things that, for me, were always puzzling although never to the point of obsession. Whatever happened to the Whig party? Who exactly were the "copperheads" again? What was MacLellan's problem, when you get right down to it?

It's a longie, but an instructive one.

MacPherson has written a thorough and thoroughly readable book that deals chiefly with the political and social background of the American Civil War. It's not exactly a military history. It explains things that, for me, were always puzzling although never to the point of obsession. Whatever happened to the Whig party? Who exactly were the "copperheads" again? What was MacLellan's problem, when you get right down to it?

It's a longie, but an instructive one.

I just finished this book today and I can honestly say that I'm sad that it's ended, and that once you start this book you'll be so engrossed that you'll move through the book's 800 pages very quickly.

I think McPherson is a very fine historian, and honestly - with apologies to you die-hard Confederates out there - I really don't see much of a Northern bias. I think he gives the South its due, even mentioning that history would have been written very differently had the South won instead. Indeed, I'm a proud Northerner who know feels much more understanding and sympathy for the Southerners as a result of reading this book. I think this is a very good book to start for a beginning Civil War buff. I'm now off to pick up some biographies of the people that fascinated me, and the battles that I want to know better. It really is a humbling reminder of the terrible sacrifices that these Americans made for our country. One of the best books I've read in a long time.

All of the superlatives heaped upon this book are justified. You won't walk away from this book an expert, but you will walk away able to intelligently discuss the Civil War from a military, cultural, social, and political standpoint. The only small flaw is that some of McPhereson's descriptions of the battles (from a military standpoint) are hard to follow, although from Chancellorsville on, he seems to finally have settled on a style. (Perhaps by Chancellorsville, I adapted to his style...) But with that said, I can honestly say that through the entire 800+ pages, I looked forward to picking it back up every time I had the chance. A recommended read for anyone interested in the Civil War, or just American history. A special recommendation for teachers and students of the subject.

Has all the build up towards the war that had to be had. A historian of this period, Shelby Foote was quoted in the Ken Burns documentary on the same subject that Americans are at their best when they compromise. What the Civil War proves and what this book shows is the sheer amount of death and destruction required to bring them to the negotiating table.

I recommend this book to anyone that wants to know how the United States became and 'is' from an 'are' and in the process discover a window into why that country is what it is today.

THis is by far the best single volume history of the war ever written. It is an enjoyable read and afterwards a great reference to have on your shelf.

This is quite simply the best short comprehensive history of the Civil War available, and has been since it was first published 20 years ago. It was the best short history of anything since Gibbon, and nothing has really rivalled it since.
McPherson places battles, people and politics in a definitive context that strikes the reader as being as close as any human can come to having a "true" understanding of that War. It is EXTREMELY well written as well, and set the stage for the Ambroses and McCulloughs who followed through and popularized scholarly history.

Since its publication nearly 20 years ago, Professor McPherson's Battle Cry of Freedom has enjoyed the status as the definitive single volume treatment of the Civil War. Over the years I have read Shelby Foote's great three part "Narrative History" and the three part Bruce Catton Civil War Trilogy, while those accounts are somewhat easier reads written with a novelist's touch, there is certainly much here to be admired.

McPherson is not content to merely provide an account of the battles, troop movements and casualty lists in the war, although to be sure some of that information is provided. Instead he starts out with a painstaking examination of the American society in the decades leading up to the war, devoting the first 250 or so pages of the book to the political, economic and social changes facing the nation during that period. By the time fighting starts in earnest, the book is about one third finished.

Occasionally Battle Cry of Freedom goes off in tangents, such as treatment of draft riots, political elections in border states, etc., which were all thoroughly-researched and illuminating. However some casual history buffs, and those more interested in accounts of the famous battles and commanders, might get a little bogged down in details during some of these chapters. Overall, I think this is a very well-written history text, clearly written by a historian, while books by Catton and Foote read like they were written by novelists.

You come away with this book understanding that Prof. McPherson has some strong opinions regarding many of the principal players in this conflict. He clearly has great admiration for Lincoln, as an astute politician as well as an emancipator. Grant and Sheridan come across as heroes, to no great surprise. McPherson has little use for Joe Johnston and McClellan, who both come across as windbags hestitant to ever fight and lose a battle and thus tarnish their legacy. McPherson seems to regard Ambrose Burnside as brave, loyal to a fault, but utterly incompetent; likewise John Bell Hood is brave and impetuous, but utterly outclassed by General Sherman. As for Jefferson Davis, McPherson is fond of quoting Davis' fiery speeches and bold pronouncements of impending victory, even as the Confederacy was collapsing around him, but you get the sense that the author understood and accounted for the extraordinary pressures facing Davis, and the impossibility of his task.

One other interesting note - I was amazed at how often McPherson quoted earlier works by Shelby Foote and Bruce Catton as sources in his footnotes. To be sure Battlecry of Freedom is a thoroughly well-researched text, but I was surprised how often a quote from a general or an account of a battlefield was attributed to one of Catton or Foote's histories, rather than the original sources.

This Pulitzer Prize winning book is touted by many as the `best one-volume history of the Civil War'. McPherson's preview says that US history, and the Civil War in particular, are a tapestry of many economic, religious, and social issues and that his intent is to weave them all together into a hermeneutical lesson as opposed to a topical one, since they all interact. He also gives us some history leading up to the Civil War and some history following the Civil War, since there is no such thing as a vacuum in history. It is about the X's and O's of the battles of the Civil War, as well as the reasons why the Civil War was inevitable.

McPherson does a masterful job of orchestrating the battle action in a detailed, but flowing manner, which was a little too much for me, but probably ideal for a genuine Civil War buff; he lets you know how complicated and confusing the battles must have been from the viewpoint of the participants. I was able to cull out of it what I was looking for, an overall picture of the flow of military action and a sense of what it must have been like.

He also has a way of bringing the reader right down into the scene by concise and telling quotes from the principals and the average person there. An example is the young Confederate who replied when asked why he was fighting: "I'm fighting because you are down here." The quotes, sometimes from unguarded, private correspondence, also helped you to get to know some of the principals up close, which was one of my main reasons for reading the book. McClellan, for example, was cautious, defensive, and arrogant. Lincoln was surgically concise, but almost painfully patient. Lee was aristocratic and noble, but a gambler at heart. Grant was quiet, reserved, responsible to a fault, and fearsome in his focus. I felt like cheering when he entered the picture, and doggedly persisted until finally overcoming Lee and his wheeling, dealing, smoke-and-mirrors style of leadership.

The book was illustrated to show plates of soldiers and battle scenes, as well as maps of the major battles. It also had a lot of political cartoons of the time which showed me that politics today is fairly mild compared to then. It was no-holds barred and often tastelessly racist, even in the North.

What I was really interested in were the attitudes and the stories behind the stories. I was astonished that the ineptitude of the Northern military leadership early in the war, squandering golden chances to end the war, actually promoted the end of slavery. I learned that the Reformation was a rudimentary cause of the Northern victory, even though it had taken place in Europe in the middle 1500's. I found that the Civil War was part of a bigger battle between the old rural ways of life (the past) versus the new industrialized way of life (the future). I was also intrigued by the plain irony of the slave-owning South feeling `tyrannized' and made into`vassalage' to the North. (Maybe they should have looked into the mirror.)You will have to read the book to see why and how these themes played out; it was fascinating to me.

This was a great book to get beyond the X's and O's of the Civil War battles.

This Pulitzer Prize winning book is touted by many as the `best one-volume history of the Civil War'. McPherson's preview says that US history, and the Civil War in particular, are a tapestry of many economic, religious, and social issues and that his intent is to weave them all together into a hermeneutical lesson as opposed to a topical one, since they all interact. He also gives us some history leading up to the Civil War and some history following the Civil War, since there is no such thing as a vacuum in history. It is about the X's and O's of the battles of the Civil War, as well as the reasons why the Civil War was inevitable.

McPherson does a masterful job of orchestrating the battle action in a detailed, but flowing manner, which was a little too much for me, but probably ideal for a genuine Civil War buff; he lets you know how complicated and confusing the battles must have been from the viewpoint of the participants. I was able to cull out of it what I was looking for, an overall picture of the flow of military action and a sense of what it must have been like.

He also has a way of bringing the reader right down into the scene by concise and telling quotes from the principals and the average person there. An example is the young Confederate who replied when asked why he was fighting: "I'm fighting because you are down here." The quotes, sometimes from unguarded, private correspondence, also helped you to get to know some of the principals up close, which was one of my main reasons for reading the book. McClellan, for example, was cautious, defensive, and arrogant. Lincoln was almost painfully patient. Lee was aristocratic and noble, but a gambler at heart. Grant was quiet, reserved, responsible to a fault, and fearsome in his focus. I felt like cheering when he entered the picture, and doggedly persisted until finally overcoming Lee and his wheeling and dealing style of leadership.

The book was illustrated to show plates of soldiers and battle scenes, as well as maps of the major battles. It also had a lot of political cartoons of the time which showed me that politics today is fairly mild compared to then. It was no-holds barred and often tastelessly racist, even in the North.

What I was really interested in were the attitudes and the stories behind the stories. I was astonished that the ineptitude of the Northern military leadership early in the war, squandering golden chances to end the war, actually promoted the end of slavery. I learned that the Reformation was a rudimentary cause of the Northern victory, even though it had taken place in Europe in the middle 1500's. I found that the Civil War was part of a bigger battle between the old rural ways of life (the past) versus the new industrialized way of life (the future). I was also intrigued by the plain irony of the slave-owning South feeling `tyrannized' and made into`vassalage' to the North. (Maybe they should have looked into the mirror.)You will have to read the book to see why and how these themes played out; it was fascinating to me.

This was a great book to get beyond the X's and O's of the Civil War battles.

I fall asleep at every single chapter. I think that it's meant for older people AND as a torturing device for high school students! (AHS -I hate summer assignments!) I mean, come on! We're only rising 11th graders! This kind of stuff doesn't interest most of us yet!

I am enthralled and intrigued with the history of the Civil War. I read history for information,answers to questions, as well as the authors incitefullmess. This book is an easy read, with flowing commentary that provides answers, and makes the reader THINK? This is the BEST book I have ever read about this subject.
The many events that occur are quite clear and plausible. I highly recommend it.

History of war as it should be written, factual, gripping, deeply involving, disturbing, revealing and horrifying. By far the best single volume on the Civil War

James McPherson's work has rightly been called the standard one-volume history of the US Civil War. It's comprehensive yet detailed, scholarly yet readable, modern but not anachronistic. A Great Book. I love my local library, but you really should have this one on your bookshelf at home.

I find myself rereading this book about once every 18 months or so. I've read recent books on the Gettysburgh Address, the Second Inaugural, and Lincoln's 1860 Cooper Union speech, as well as Doris Kearns Goodwins's Team of Rivals, but after tackling these other works I always return to McPherson, for he, in one volume, places the war and the era into the broader historical context that helps enrich other histories of the era. Indeed, almost the first quarter of the book is about this context, and is by itself one of the best histories of mid-19th century America before the Civil War.

McPherson is the greatest narrative historian, I would argue, because narratie is both his analytic method and his expositional style, and few historians \combine careful research with clear and compelling writing style the way McPherson does. The book requires a considerable commitment, but the commitment will be richly rewarded.

If you like this book, I also recommend "Abraham Lincoln and the Second American Revolution," which is one of the best treatments of the idea that the Civil War was the formative event of the *modern* United States.

The author has a gift for narrating history. His sections covering the years leading up to the War were enlightening and exciting to read (at times I felt reading as if there was still hope that War was avoidable!) He packs tons of information in every page but never to the point that it becomes tedious or pedantic. He covers not just military aspects of the war and even the denser areas (political, economic and social topics) make amenable reading.

McPherson has been faulted by some readers as having a liberal, pro-North slant. I agree he has a certain point of view, but overall his bias is subtle, and he presents a very equitable account.

This must be the best starting point for anyone wishing to learn more about the Civil War beyond their history textbooks.

Feudal nations that carried over in that era would have completely sided with the South, realizing that equality of all citizens means the lessening of privilege for the wealthy agrarian section of society. All present day nation states would completely agree with the Lincoln doctrine so eloquently expressed in this book, that of "popular sovereignity".

I find this book to be very engaging and not tedious even though it is huge! I would highly recommend it and would urge folks to read the chapters before the war even came about. The compromise of 1850 is not that well known and is worth the read.

James McPherson has produced an excellent one volume history of the American Civil war. I have read numerous Civil War non-fiction publications, and still greatly enjoyed "The Battle Cry of Freedom". I would recommend this book for the avid Civil War buff or the curious casual history reader. I was surprised at how much information was crammed into just over 800 pages.

Mcpherson has done a commendable job of researching the politics, economics and social conditions that led up to the war. He unabashedly deals with slavery and it's role in the conflict. Historical revisionists will probaly not like this book as it does not attempt to down play slavery as the principle political and social cause of the war between the states, nor does it recast President Lincoln as a tyrant. The author deals with these issues in a very fair manner, which will displease many of the historically illerate.

If you are looking for detailed battle accounts than this book also may be a bit dry and slow paced for you. The author gives more a high level view of the war and its various facets.

If you're an "armchair historian" looking for an introduction to the civil war, an expansion on your existing knowledge, or just a great read, James McPherson's "Battle Cry Of Freedom" is one of the most worthwhile contemporary American books that one can invest in.

Unlike many historical texts and books which focus on one battle, one personality or one aspect of a certain event, assuming the reader already knows about such history (there seems no end to Gettysburg-themed books...), Battle Cry satisfyingly covers the ENTIRE story, for those of us out there who like to understand a historical era or event from quiet beginning to explosive end.

Mr. McPherson has a solid handle on drama; he uses the breathtakingly true events of the Civil War era to his great literary advantage: the reader will be spellbound by the churning tides of war and compelled to read on further, of course, just to see what happens next. It's hard to believe such tragic and culturally cataclysmic events took place in our history -- and even harder to believe that this same series of events ultimately served to prove the mettle and illuminate the spirit of this great nation. James McPherson will make you believe it in this emotionally stirring narrative document of the American Civil War.

You will be all the better for reading it.