Very readable prose, and Ayers' use of manuscript census records to flesh out millitary casualty lists from his two Shenandoah valley localities is particularly nice. Highly enjoyable both for Civil War scholar and Virginia history buffs.

Most Civil War books concentrate on the battles fought; Edward L. Ayers, in this superb account of the War in the eastern theatre from the election of 1860 to Gettysburg, focuses on the consequences of not only the major battles but also the politics and motivations of the citizens of two near-border counties - Augusta in Virginia and Franklin in Pennsylvania. Using contemporary newspapers and diaries, Ayers reveals how the border inhabitants from these two counties interpreted Lincoln's election, thought about slavery as the major issue of the war, supplied recruits, and responded to the results of battles and strategies waged by their leaders. It's interesting to see how many Augustans were Unionists at the time of the election, even after Lincoln was nominated, but had turned "Yankee haters" by the end of 1862 as they saw their property destroyed by Federal soldiers as the war raged on Virginia soil.

Ayers writes extremely well and in the early pages is able to create a great deal of suspense: the book is a real page-turner. A couple of places he leaves the reader wondering, though: after spending over 30 pages on the 1860 election and revealing certain poll returns, he never says how many Augustans voted for Lincoln (any?) or how many Franklinites voted for Bell or Breckinridge, the two Southern candidates. Also he tells the story of a free black man named Frank Jones who is attacked by Union soldiers in Chambersburg and murdered in broad daylight, but not what, if anything, happened to the guilty soldiers afterwards.

The book ends with the Battle of Gettysburg about to begin, and one wonders whether Ayers plans a second volume taking the reader to the end of the war. How Augustans and Franklinites responded to Sheridan's destructive 1864 Valley campaign and the burning of Chambersburg (also in 1864) would be of major interest. One hopes he does. In the meantime, this is an excellent account of how the earlier stages of the Civil War personally affected inhabitants of two border counties, North and South.

I've had the book for so long I didn't know by whom it was given. I don't believe I bought it and it took me a long time to find the time to read it. It is VERY interesting. For one thing, I'm a resident of Staunton and a former member of a descendent unit if the 5th Virginia Infantry and the Stonewall Brigade. The history of the Civil War is part and parcel of living here. But I'm also a native of upstate New York and my family's stories of their part in the ACW have also been prominent in my life. To read what I've heard as a sort of verbal record of the times was quite interesting. As an amateur genealogist I must also note that many of the families mentioned in the Staunton and Augusta County portions of the book are still here and some are still influential in the community.

However, there are differences of opinion. For example, the author seems to believe that slavery was a cause of the conflict. Most Staunton locals seem to think that it was only one point of conflict/discussion that was part of the broader states' rights arguments of the time. I always found it interesting that although there was slavery here the area was strongly pro-Union right up until the firing on Fort Sumter. There was a degree of dissatisfaction with the Virginia Commonwealth government as well which goes unmentioned but this part of the state was not nearly as disaffected as the counties that became West Virginia. The railroads and one less mountain barrier is what made the difference. For more on that, read "Rebels at the Gates" by W. Hunter Lesser.

All in all, this book is a good first effort in this series and a worthy addition to any library focused on the Civil War. I think it likely to be a necessary addition to local libraries in the Staunton, VA and Chambersburg, PA areas as well.

First off, Ayers' book has won two of the most prestigious prizes that can be awarded by the American historical profession: the 2004 Bancroft Prize and the American Historical Association's Albert J. Beveridge Award. Ayers writes well, and in any case, an author would have to be an unusual bungler to write a totally boring book about the American Civil War. Nevertheless, although this is a good book, it is not a great one.

Ayers describes the conflict through the stories of two counties in the Great Valley, one in Pennsylvania and the other in Virginia, based on one of the earliest history websites, the Valley of the Shadow Project hosted by the University of Virginia. Many things can be learned about the home front of the Civil War through such a study, although they are not necessarily the things that the author intends the reader to learn.

For instance, Ayers offers repeated examples of obtuse newspaper commentary on the War, including seemingly logical but totally erroneous predictions about the effects of the Emancipation Proclamation. One can almost predict that when journalists are quoted, they will be quoted as saying something dumb. It is hard to imagine an academic history of a more recent war in which the media could be so thoroughly derided.

Nevertheless, there are weaknesses to writing a local treatment of national history. For one thing, the big picture has to be worked in around the story of the two counties because major action frequently takes place off-stage. Ayers also introduces many people to his readers, but few are treated at the sort of length that makes them rounded individuals. (Jedediah Hotchkiss, Lee's mapmaker, is an exception.)

Usually I either read histories quickly or give them up, but Ayers I read slowly. Like eating my vegetables, I knew reading Ayers' book was good for me. But it's no page-turner.

First off, Ayers' book has won two of the most prestigious prizes that can be awarded by the American historical profession: the 2004 Bancroft Prize and the American Historical Association's Albert J. Beveridge Award. Ayers writes well, and in any case, an author would have to be an unusual bungler to write a totally boring book about the American Civil War. Nevertheless, although this is a good book, it is not a great one.

Ayers describes the conflict through the stories of two counties in the Great Valley, one in Pennsylvania and the other in Virginia, based on one of the earliest history websites, the Valley of the Shadow Project hosted by the University of Virginia. Many things can be learned about the home front of the Civil War through such a study, although they are not necessarily the things that the author intends the reader to learn.

For instance, Ayers offers repeated examples of obtuse newspaper commentary on the War, including seemingly logical but totally erroneous predictions about the effects of the Emancipation Proclamation. One can almost predict that when journalists are quoted, they will be quoted as saying something dumb. It is hard to imagine an academic history of a more recent war in which the media could be so thoroughly derided.

Nevertheless, there are weaknesses to writing a local treatment of national history. For one thing, the big picture has to be worked in around the story of the two counties because major action frequently takes place off-stage. Ayers also introduces many people to his readers, but few are treated at the sort of length that makes them rounded individuals. (Jedediah Hotchkiss, Lee's mapmaker, is an exception.)

Usually I either read histories quickly or give them up, but Ayers I read slowly. Like eating my vegetables, I knew reading Ayers' book was good for me. But it's no page-turner.

If you are looking for a truly unique perspective on the civil war this is it. This takes a look at two counties one in the north and one in the south and gives a perspective of how the civil war took shape. It chronicles the start of the war and gives an excellent sense of what happened in the north and the south. It is really the perspective on the south that gives the best example and although this is part one of two (two is unpublished at this time) there is no other history like it. If you are a true civil war buff this is a must read. There is very little literature on the southern perspective of the war and Ed Ayers is looking to fill that gap.

Without doubt, this is the most brilliant civil war history of have ever been printed! You can go on reading Shelby Foote, etc., but you'll never see the war as it was until you've read Ayers! Ayer's is, thankfully, the future of historical studies in academia!

Ayers is a well respected writer of Southern history, but I had not read any of his works until I came across this one at a local bookstore. I was not disappointed. Ayers' writing style is very readable and entertaining. I am usually a slow reader, but I made my way through this book relatively quickly because it was so interesting.

The subject of the book are two bordering counties--one in Virginia and one in Pennsylvania. Ayers details the differing points of view of these counties as the sectional crisis unfold and as it devolves into Civil War. He uses countless letters, diaries, newspaper accounts, and other primary source materials that really bring this book to life. Ayers adds some of his own commentary, but so much of the book is primary sources that you really feel as if you just picked up a newspaper in 1859 or you are reading someone's diary, not a book. The book truly is social history at its best as it is well written, highly readable, and features some very interesting people. Highly recommended for casual students of history and Civil War buffs alike.

The War between States remains one of the most important events in American history, not so much because of its impact on slavery (it substituted the exploitative feudal relationship of antebellum slavery with democratic hegemony), but because of the way it radically changed the conception of the United States. Rather than an agreement among states, Union was seen -- as a result of the war -- to be a compulsory membership organization under a strong national government. This event has been treated by many interpretations which I would regard as irrelevant or not worth quite the weight they are given. People and ideas in these times are regarded as abstractions and contorted to fit all kinds of bizarre theories. Ayers' strength is the intimacy of his ground-level account of the preceding year and outbreak of the war. By focusing on the common American, he tells a story of the conflict that is all the more vivid and convincing. His book centers around two counties, one in Pennsylvania, one in Virginia -- they are geographically close, they are culturally close -- the difference between them is slavery. Ayers book follows their lives and thoughts, taken from reams of letters. Reconstructed from myriad first-hand accounts of events, it reads much like a good story. Because of the nature of Ayers approach to his subject, his thesis is difficult to discern. But it is there to be found if one combines attentive reading with an understanding of the impact of war on people's lives. Ayers indicates, against politically correct orthodoxy, that the War between States was not inevitable, but the result of any emotions and ideologies swept up in the sectional conflict. Partly hidden is the implication that Republican ideas concerning Unionism and secession was the contingent factor in turning what might have been peaceful secession into nation-breaking bloodshed. John Imboden, an important Virginia slaveholder in Ayers' story, is illustrative. Imboden, like many others in the border south, opposed secession and would have preferred to stay in the Union. Yet when Lincoln called for 75,000 volunteers to crush the "rebels" in South Carolina, Imboden supported Virginia's secession because although he disagreed with the South's secession, he recognized their right to do it, and therefore opposed Lincoln's aggression. Professor Ayers is the chief of the Valley of the Shadow project, an excellent online resource for scholars on this subject. Also recommended is James McPherson's _What They Fought For_. McPherson studies thousands of letters written by soldiers on both sides of the conflict. It makes a good companion to this volume.

Ayers offers a near flawless account of the initial years of the War for Southern Independence though a unique spotlight on two counties -Franklin (PA) and Augusta (VA). The "everyman" of each county is the focus of this tale -from the local newpaper editor to the local merchant to the nearby free-man-of-color. From the late 1850's to the opening of what would become the Gettysburg Campaign, Ayers examines, warts and all, the hopes, dreams and fears of Americans soon to be caught up in this dreadful conflict. Ayers is very adept at the many framing sequences which put the "smaller picture" of these respective counties into the "large" picture. This account is very reader friendly -Ayers assists the novice Civil War student with his framing sequences, yet those more versed in the history of the conflict will enjoy the micro-examination of Franklin County, PA, and Augusta County, VA. The focus is not Lee, or Grant, or Jackson -the interest is in the loves, the lives, and the sense of loss felt by the "little guy". This is not necessarily a story of war, but a story of "people". Well done, indeed.