Albert Castel

Another classic from Castel. The military narrative is standard, but his insight into the rivalries and interactions among the Federal high command is fascinating and outstanding. I was concerned about the dual authorship, as Castel stated in the preface that Simpson helped with the final five chapters. Fortunately, those chapters still retain Castel’s sometimes caustic wit. Castel maintains his unforgiving critique of the over-rated Sherman but his evaluation of Grant seems to have been show more boosted by Grant fan-boy Simpson. Castel even fails to make clear that Grant’s horse accident in New Orleans after Vicksburg was another drunken episode. Halleck, especially, is fleshed out in this book much more fully than the usual caricature he receives. And Rosecrans receives much praise, all of it well deserved.

Must read for insight into the interactions of the Federal high command. show less

A classic account from the estimable Albert Castel. Very balanced, he establishes Quantrill as a great guerrilla leader while at the same time acknowledging he was a cold blooded killer. But there were many far more murderous men in his gang. Castel provides blow by blow accounts of Quantrill’s raids with exciting detail... if exclamation marks in history books bothers you, consider yourself forewarned! There is also great context, with a prequel describing the Kansas-Missouri prewar show more violence which is essential to understanding why the civil war in Missouri and Kansas was so bloody and merciless, and a concluding sequel describing the post-Quantrill gang, especially the legendary but actually rather pathetic James-Younger gang. show less

Historian Albert Castel puts General William T. Sherman's 1864 campaign to capture Atlanta in the context of General Ulysses Grant's Overland campaign in Virginia and Abraham Lincoln's re-election bid that fall. The author describes what the various commanders thought, what they knew, what they did not know, what options were before them, and what they actually did. He is critical of many people in their conduct during this campaign, including Sherman, whose objective was Atlanta and not to show more destroy the Confederate army before him. On the Union side, he is much more favorable towards George Thomas who made many wise and prescient observations and tactical/strategical suggestions that Sherman generally ignored. On the Confederate side, he singles out Generals S.D. Lee and Leonidas Polk for their deficiencies on the battlefield, but also Generals John Hood and Braxton Bragg for their scheming (as well as some oft their decisions). Confederate President Jefferson Davis is faulted for picking commanders based on their relationship to him, not competency, and for harboring some unrealistic expectations. Decisions in the West is told in present tense, which is unusual for a history book. There are ten chapters. One for each month from January through September, plus a last one about the fall. Because of this strict chronological format, the size of the chapters fluctuate from 13 to 134 pages. show less

Many (many!) years ago I took a couple classes from Albert Castel. The first, a major-required history survey, I only barely recall; the second, a joint HIST/ROTC offering, was a mistake on my part. I found it boring.

This book is not boring. It's more fun that its topic perhaps deserves, full of asides and opinions and occasional wordplay. It's also an excellent, albeit limited, overview of the Civil War's major battles, and of the northern army's command issues. Frankly it's as much about show more military (and "real") politics as it is about warfare, and valuable precisely because of this.

Because it's decidedly a "blue" book, the command structure and issues on the grey side don't get as much discussion as I might have liked, though they're by no means completely ignored.

Castel warns the reader at the beginning that his views are a bit controversial. Some of the controversy I recognize, but mostly I suspect I missed it; this book's outside my usual reading, and far from my expertise.

Glad I read it. And glad it showed me a side of Professor Castel I missed in the mid-1970s when I was a student. show less