Shelby Foote completely satisfied my appetite for books about the ACW for a decade or so, but it looks like I'm reading this stuff again.

This is very well-written, although it gets a little purple near the end. Very thorough on the Battle of Antietam, and good on McClellan as well.

A very positive reference to Sandburg's Lincoln biography has made me decide to revisit that. ( )

Fascinating story and beautifully written, absolutely compelling account of the North's Army of the Potomac and the Civil War up to the terrible battle of Antietam and McClellan’s removal. ( )

After ignoring the Shenandoah Valley and giving a a very short synopsis of the Peninsula Campaign, Catton proceeds to skip over Second Bull Run and Cedar Mountain to get to the heart of the book, Antietam. From here on out the storytelling is terrific and I enjoyed it very much. Still, to attempt to tell the story of the Civil War while ignoring it's most important theater where the war was actually won is curious and misleading. ( )

This was devoured during my Shelby Foote feast. I likened Catton to Hemingway if Foote were Proust. I find that apt. ( )

The rating for this book really doesn't reflect the degree to which I enjoyed reading it. I've read a lot of American Civil War related books and this definitely has something to offer interested readers, but it is also the most unevenly written book I have encountered. The author is particularly skilled -- outstanding even -- at presenting narrative vignettes surrounding historical events, such as battles. Unlike, Stephen Ambrose, for instance, whose work I have read, seemed like a middle schooler during a book report rushing through index cards he had pieced together of bits and pieces of information he had come upon, this author comes close at times to getting his vignette gems to nearly outshine the major events to which they are attached. He's like the best campfire story teller ever in that regard. He falters somewhat when he starts to get philosophical about events and personalities, not always justifying his positions or stating them clearly. In many regards, he is the ultimate Civil War history buff. Extremely well versed (much of this book assumes a certain level of prior knowledge by the reader on the subjects he discusses), he has positions to take, but I don't think he reaches the level of academician in all he proposes. Most odd about the book is the way the author jumps around and about several early battles, Bull Run, Ball's Bluff, the Seven Days, Second Bull Run, without ever going into much, if any, depth, and then, almost out of nowhere, he dives head first into the battle of Antietam, oozing with detail. What made the other battles so insignificant to not deserve more detail? Finally, it should be said that the books title is inappropriate. Very little is discussed about how the Army of the Potomac is "Mr. Lincoln's Army", not to mention the fact that there were multiple Union armies for which Lincoln was Commander in Chief, while this book is all about General McClellan's army, and that's what it should have been called. ( )