Choice
Copyright American Library Association, used with permission.

The sesquicentennial of the Battle of Gettysburg has generated an array of new books and articles, but few will have the impact of this title by Gettysburg College professor Guelzo. By dusting off some old debates for new scrutiny, he reinvigorates the discussion of the Battle of Gettysburg, already the topic of many monographs over the decades. As the title suggests, Guelzo characterizes Lee's Pennsylvania campaign as a true invasion of the North, with the goal of ending the war. The subsequent campaign featured mistakes leading to lost opportunities as well as questionable command decisions by both respective commanders, Robert E. Lee and George G. Meade. Guelzo provides a suitable prelude and a postscript to the battle, as well as comprehensive (but not overwhelming) descriptions of the clashes between the two armies. In addition, he presents plenty of biographical information about each major participant mentioned in the book to facilitate understanding of the motivation for their actions, although his consistent use of political bias to explain Union command decisions is perhaps overdone. His research is impeccable, and the book contains a suitable number of maps and diagrams to complement the text. Summing Up: Essential. All levels/libraries. S. J. Ramold Eastern Michigan University

Kirkus
Copyright © Kirkus Reviews, used with permission.

A stirring account of the "greatest and most violent collision the North American continent [has] ever seen," just in time for the 150th anniversary of the Battle of Gettysburg. Though the battle site was not inevitable, the actual battle was: The giant armies of North and South were destined to lumber into one another in a time when, as Guelzo (Fateful Lightning: A New History of the Civil War and Reconstruction, 2012, etc.) cites a Confederate officer as observing, they "knew no more about the topography of the country than they did about Central Africa." What is certain is that Robert E. Lee's arrival in Pennsylvania sent "Yankeedom," to quote another Confederate officer, "in a great fright." The Union had reason to be concerned, but, as Guelzo documents, their foe was scattered and divided, with rivalries and miscommunication--and perhaps even insubordination--keeping James Longstreet from attacking, J.E.B. Stuart from arriving on the battlefield in time, and the much-disliked George Pickett from enjoying a better fate than being cannon fodder. And what fodder: If there is a leitmotif in Guelzo's book, it is the image of brains being distributed on the grass and the shirts of fellow soldiers, of limbs disappearing and soldiers on both sides disintegrating in a scene of "muskets, swords, haversacks, human flesh and bones flying and dangling in the air or bouncing above the earth." The author ably, even vividly, captures the hell of the battlefield while constantly keeping the larger scope of Gettysburg in the reader's mind: It was, he argues, the one central struggle over one plank of the Civil War, namely the preservation of the Union, that nearly wholly excluded the other one, the abolition of slavery. Robust, memorable reading that will appeal to Civil War buffs, professional historians and general readers alike.]] Copyright Kirkus Reviews, used with permission.

Book list
From Booklist, Copyright © American Library Association. Used with permission.

*Starred Review* Few battles provoke debate like Gettysburg, whose bibliography exceeds 6,000 items. One more won't settle the what-ifs, but Guelzo's entry identifies key controversies, trenchantly advocates its interpretations, and rests on a sensible foundation, the confusion of a Civil War battle. A noisome cacophony opaque with smoke, the Gettysburg battlefield allowed officers and soldiers only fragmentary glimpses of the action, limiting their situational awareness to their immediate surroundings. Wary, moreover, of postwar memoirists' tendencies to justify themselves or fault others, Guelzo constructs his Gettysburg as much as possible from contemporaneous sources like orders, reports, and letters. His result reads like the battle might have been experienced, as an episodic series of terrifying minibattles directed by colonels and fought by regiments, whose clashes guided the outcome more than anything done by the respective army commanders on the scene. Rather dismissive of Union general Meade, Guelzo derogates Confederate general Lee less for his decisions at Gettysburg than for failing to strategically arrange a defensive battle and falling into the offensive one that developed. A political historian of the Civil War (Lincoln and Douglas, 2008), Guelzo demonstrates versatile historical skill in this superior treatment of Gettysburg.--Taylor, Gilbert Copyright 2010 Booklist

Library Journal
(c) Copyright Library Journals LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Media Source, Inc. No redistribution permitted.

Much ink has been spilled over the Battle of Gettysburg. Readers might think there is little left to say and no fresh way of saying it, but Guelzo (Henry R. Luce Professor of the Civil War Era, Gettysburg Coll.; Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation) proves such skeptics wrong with his riveting account of both the events leading up to the battle and the battle itself. Refreshingly, he makes clear that this account is his own: in any battle analysis a historian must weigh unclear and sometimes contradictory accounts by participants who could only see and interpret (or misinterpret) events in their own immediate vicinity. Using a wealth of 19th-century sources, from letters and diaries to regimental histories to the indispensable "Official Records" series, Guelzo has composed a narrative that is detailed and compelling on a human level but easy to follow on an operational and tactical one. Readers will discover Guelzo's own distinctive positions, defended by citations, such as that bayonet charges were frequent and often effective in 19th-century warfare. The lack of a bibliography will be a sore point for some serious readers. VERDICT A triumph of source use and presentation, engaging for the general reader but rigorous enough for the scholar. Highly recommended.-Richard Fraser, Univ. of California, Los Angeles, Libs. (c) Copyright 2013. Library Journals LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Media Source, Inc. No redistribution permitted.