Civil War recommendations?

[Jozawun]

Originally Posted by issybird

Say what? The OP quite properly referred to the American Civil War. Wasn't anyone else allowed to have one? Or is it that we can't read about it or discuss it, even though it was the seminal event in the history of a nation with over 300 million people? Seriously, who's being insular and provincial, really?

In an international forum, it's insular to head a topic Civil War, or Revolution, or War of Independence, or President, or Senate, etc, and just assume the prefixes American, or U.S.
And, of course, I never said you weren't free to have or read or discuss anything you like, whether you are a nation of 300 or 300 million people.
Although there are many (U.S.A. and other) people who would strenuously object to describing the (U.S.) Civil War as the seminal event in U.S.A. history.

Originally Posted by JOZAWUN

In an international forum, it's insular to head a topic Civil War, or Revolution, or War of Independence, or President, or Senate, etc, and just assume the prefixes American, or U.S.
And, of course, I never said you weren't free to have or read or discuss anything you like, whether you are a nation of 300 or 300 million people.
Although there are many (U.S.A. and other) people who would strenuously object to describing the (U.S.) Civil War as the seminal event in U.S.A. history.

This is really a dumb disagreement, especially in this thread. LoveMacs requested information about books on the American Civil War and so that is the question people responded to. Yes, there was also a Civil War in England. I can name off of the top of my head two others; The Spanish Civil War and the Russian Civil War. That's even still keeping a European/North American point of view. But the question was about the American Civil War.

The Civil War in America was a seminal event in American history. In addition to resolving the long simmering issue of slavery (on the correct side of course) it also transformed political and public views from thinking “These United States of America” to “The United States of America.”

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by issybird

Say what? The OP quite properly referred to the American Civil War. Wasn't anyone else allowed to have one? Or is it that we can't read about it or discuss it, even though it was the seminal event in the history of a nation with over 300 million people? Seriously, who's being insular and provincial, really?

+1 I am a European and I fully agree with you here. It was quite clear what the subject under discussion was. Anyone interested in other civil wars should start a separate thread.

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by JOZAWUN

Bit rough, considering that I was only objecting to gross insularity and provincialism.i

I thought this was gentle. I didn't think of curmudgeon as being much of a put down. Oh well, sorry if you are much offended.

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by JOZAWUN

In an international forum, it's insular to head a topic Civil War, or Revolution, or War of Independence, or President, or Senate, etc, and just assume the prefixes American, or U.S.
And, of course, I never said you weren't free to have or read or discuss anything you like, whether you are a nation of 300 or 300 million people.
Although there are many (U.S.A. and other) people who would strenuously object to describing the (U.S.) Civil War as the seminal event in U.S.A. history.

The technical term for such a person is " ignoramus". That's not a put down-that's truth in labeling.
N.B. Its A seminal ("seminal" meaning "highly influential" ) event. It is arguably THE most important event.
Nobody who knows anything about US history thinks its an unimportant event

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by Hamlet53

This is really a dumb disagreement, especially in this thread. LoveMacs requested information about books on the American Civil War and so that is the question people responded to. Yes, there was also a Civil War in England. I can name off of the top of my head two others; The Spanish Civil War and the Russian Civil War. That's even still keeping a European/North American point of view. But the question was about the American Civil War.

The Civil War in America was a seminal event in American history. In addition to resolving the long simmering issue of slavery (on the correct side of course) it also transformed political and public views from thinking “These United States of America” to “The United States of America.”

TBH, I would like to see threads on other civil wars( goes off to start thread).

[Jozawun]

Originally Posted by stonetools

The technical term for such a person is " ignoramus". That's not a put down-that's truth in labeling.
N.B. Its A seminal ("seminal" meaning "highly influential" ) event. It is arguably THE most important event.
Nobody who knows anything about US history thinks its an unimportant event

A better definition of "ignoramus" is a person who can't tell the difference between "the seminal" and "a seminal".

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by JOZAWUN

A better definition of "ignoramus" is a person who can't tell the difference between "the seminal" and "a seminal".

(Shrugs)
I drew that distinction in my post. We're splitting hairs at this point. Tell you what, if you want to make a positive contribution to the discussion, why don't you go other to the "Other civil Wars" thread and post some recommendations? We would all benefit from that.

[Jozawun]

Originally Posted by stonetools

(Shrugs)
I drew that distinction in my post. We're splitting hairs at this point. Tell you what, if you want to make a positive contribution to the discussion, why don't you go other to the "Other civil Wars" thread and post some recommendations? We would all benefit from that.

Your first sentence is completely false.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by Hamlet53

The Civil War in America was a seminal event in American history. In addition to resolving the long simmering issue of slavery (on the correct side of course) it also transformed political and public views from thinking “These United States of America” to “The United States of America.”

Some argue that it was the War of 1812 that changed the U.S. from a collection of states to a nation: e.g., Walter R. Borneman in 1812: The War That Forged a Nation.

[LovesMacs]

This arguing could have been avoided if I had just named the topic "Book recommendations dealing with the conflict between the political, military, social, and economic entities variously described as 'The Union', 'The North', 'The Yanks (or Yankees)'; and 'The Confederacy', 'The South', 'The Rebels', or 'The Confederate States'; from which both entities form(ed) collectively 'The United States of America' prior to and succeeding said conflict?"

Anyway, I finished McPherson's Battle Cry of Freedom, and I am currently continuing to learn more about this war by reading the highly recommended The Civil War by Shelby Foote and Abraham Lincoln:Vampire Hunter by Seth Grahame-Smith.

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by LovesMacs

This arguing could have been avoided if I had just named the topic "Book recommendations dealing with the conflict between the political, military, social, and economic entities variously described as 'The Union', 'The North', 'The Yanks (or Yankees)'; and 'The Confederacy', 'The South', 'The Rebels', or 'The Confederate States'; from which both entities form(ed) collectively 'The United States of America' prior to and succeeding said conflict?"

Anyway, I finished McPherson's Battle Cry of Freedom, and I am currently continuing to learn more about this war by reading the highly recommended The Civil War by Shelby Foote and Abraham Lincoln:Vampire Hunter by Seth Grahame-Smith.

I think your proposed title is entirely too brief and peremptory for the nitpickers.
Abraham Lincoln : Vampire Hunter, eh? What next:" Stonewall Jackson: Werewolf" or " General Grant's Dragons?" I wonder if centuries from now, such books will be taken as history.?

[LovesMacs]

Originally Posted by stonetools

I think your proposed title is entirely too brief and peremptory for the nitpickers.
Abraham Lincoln : Vampire Hunter, eh? What next:" Stonewall Jackson: Werewolf" or " General Grant's Dragons?" I wonder if centuries from now, such books will be taken as history.?

You mean it's not history? But...but...the book says it is based upon a long-lost journal kept by President Lincoln, and brought to light by the coauthor of Pride and Prejudice and Zombies! That last fact in particular means that the biography must be true!

There are a number of books along these lines, but the only pseudo-biography that comes to mind is a journal purportedly kept by Queen Elizabeth I, slayer of demons (or vampires or something).

In the far off future, archeologists may stumble upon these books and not perceive their satire.

[RDaneel54]

If you want more reading later...

1. War for the Union, Allan Nevins, Four Volumes.
2. The Civil War, Bruce Catton, Three volumes in one.

Nevins' works are particularly in depth.

[LovesMacs]

Originally Posted by RDaneel54

If you want more reading later...

1. War for the Union, Allan Nevins, Four Volumes.
2. The Civil War, Bruce Catton, Three volumes in one.

Nevins' works are particularly in depth.

Thanks for the recommendations. I haven't heard of Nevins before. Going solely from the title, does this collection have any bias towards the Union?

I ask this because of something I noticed in my current read, the 3 volume set by Shelby Foote. I don't know if I would call it a bias toward the South (I am not very far in the books), but I noticed that in his description of Lincoln's suspension of habeus corpus, Foote did not explain it as a reaction to pro-Southern acts of sabotage in the vicinity of Washington, D.C. Other authors have explained this suspension as a defensive measure.

I have a book by Catton somewhere in the house, a big thick hardcover with many period photographs. I don't remember the title, so I don't know if this is the same work you mention.