William C. Davis (1) (1946–)

William C Davis sometimes doesn't get his due from academic historians because he sells books. Most academics write dry, boring tomes that nobody reads because they are full of inane and pretentious theories that only interest other academic pedants. William C Davis, however, is a historian and the old mode. This book is thoroughly, thoroughly, thoroughly researched. The endnotes are several hundred pages long, and some of the individual notes spanned several pages. He explains in these show more notes where his sources come from how they're better than previous books, etc. Nobody, even the most academic of Texas historians, can quibble that this book is well researched, well written, and just flat out good. This is the best triple biography of Davy Crockett, Jim Bowie, and William Barrett Travis ever done. Had Davis decided to split this in the three books, there would be the best three books on these three Texas heroes ever. Davis corrects many historical inaccuracies about these characters, putting their lives into focus, defining them as men of their times. Jim Bowie was a land swindler and slave smuggler; Davy Crockett was a failure as both farmer and Congressman, probably a failure into being a second husband, and, in the end, unable to live up to a legend of his own making; William B. Travis was a debtor, an adulterer, and a horrible father; yet they are all representative of the frontier type, to various degrees, the men who turned the untamed wilderness of the American West into pure opportunity. It also serves as a decent introduction to the Texas Revolution, though the last chapter on actual battle of the Alamo was way too short. It was almost a letdown. Davis should have expended his talent, research, and industry into describing the muck mess that is the historiography and historical depiction of the battle (although he probably did that in his later book, specifically on the Texas Revolution, which I own but have not yet read). All in all, a brilliant book. show less

I had hoped that this would be an rather interesting read, being a narrative of actions taken by Americans who were living in Spanish West Florida and eventually lead a revolution. However, the author's style was to follow every character through every month with lots of mundane detail; this is probably fine for a historian but it makes for slow and for me somewhat dull reading. I'm sure that it would be of more interest to those who prefer that type of detailed history.

"Crucible of Command" isn't intended to be a complete history of the Civil War, and doesn't provide a detailed review of various battles, but instead is a comparative biography of Generals Lee and Grant. The book made me rethink what I knew, or thought I knew, about the two generals. Previously, I would have described General Grant as being somewhat of a minor military man, lucky to even be named a General much less overall commander of military forces; a heavy drinker if not a drunk; and show more someone whose military style was to send wave after wave of soldiers headlong into battle regardless of the numbers sacrificed. In contrast, I would have described General Lee as a brilliant leader and military strategist. I also had the belief that the Confederacy was fully committed to their cause, and that the men of the South were fully dedicated with nary a straggler or deserter among them.
William Davis' book changed a lot of my preconceptions about my earlier preconceptions, and about the conduct of the war itself. Because the book isn't really about the battles and chronology of the war, it made me realize that there was a lot I'd forgotten or just didn't know about the Civil War, and motivated me to read more. As a result, I just picked up one of Bruce Catton's books on the History of the Civil War, and am looking forward to refreshing my memory and learning more about this important part of our U.S. history. show less

In my journey of Presidents, I felt it important to read about the 1st and only President of the Confederate States. Though repetitive, this biography is extensive and comprehensive.

It's impossible not to compare Davis and Lincoln, and Davis is opposite in every way: impatient, nepotistic, vindictive, and obstinate. Without being the President of the Confederate States, Davis would be a side character in someone else's biography.