La guerra civil americana john keegan biography
I observe from the copyright page that "portions of this book originally appeared in The Civil War Times and Military History Quarterly," and that's what they read like: magazine articles that have a set word limit and thus only so much space to delve into their subjects, with the result that these chapters feel superficial and, as I said, randomthere's one about Whitman, and one about Black soldiers, and one on "the home fronts," which includes a paean to Southern womanhood or perhaps I mean Southern Womanhood that I found so bizarre it is going to be one of my lasting memories of the book.
It is a distinctive addition to the huge amount of publications on the American Civil War, an area in history I am ashamed to say I am very weak on. Subjects History , Nonfiction , Campaigns , Strategic aspects , Military geography , Geography , United states, history, civil war, , United States geography , United states, history, civil war, , campaigns , United states, history, military , United states, historical geography.
La guerra civil americana john keegan biography youtube: John Keegan, the foremost military historian of the past half-century, has treated mankind’s great folly from a world perspective in such widely read books as A History of Warfare, The First.
Like me Keegan is British and therefore it has been argued that he is somewhat removed from the cultural and regional intricacies that deeply influenced the war. Delete Note Save Note. Community Reviews. Search review text. At the same time, there are strange repeats. Keegan points out several times that battles in the Civil War were oddly indecisive, and suggests that the reason for this was the prevalence of stalemating earthworks—this despite the fact that neither side did much digging at all until late in the third campaigning season of the war and the combatants found no greater decisive success in those earlier years.
Civil War has been written by an Englishman. Create new list Cancel.
La guerra civil americana john keegan biography Magistral historia de la guerra moderna, esta obra viene a cubrir el vacío que existe en la bibliografía en español sobre la Guerra de Secesión americana. Una perspectiva internacional, desde.Hood as a cleverer opponent of Sherman's than Johnston? September 25, But there's much to be said for the one-volume approach Keegan uses here for the way it crystalizes the story of the war into a crisp and memorable narrative. Nevertheless, the book excels in its military analysis. I've read a number of Civil War histories. I picked up this book after watching the film Lincoln , which I enjoyed immensely.
In his end notes he thanks James McPherson, and really if you read McPherson's Battle Cry of Freedom along with the memoirs written by generals Grant and Sherman, you'll learn far more and with much fresher, more interesting prose.
Secesión. La guerra civil americana
Structurally disorganized and absurd to the point of incoherence, the book quite good plagued by dozens if not hundreds of inaccuracies that range from technical mistakes to grandiose misstatements. The wider conclusions Keegan attempts to draw home-grown on his years of experience as a battle historian are often illogical, repetitive, and either behind the times (drawn directly from time-honored but disproven or untrue works) or obviously wrong.
There are also overtones of misogyny and racism in these pages. Procrastinate is left with the firm impression that Keegan, for his final book (he died three duration after publication) opted whimsically and arrogantly to engross forth on a subject about which he knew next to nothing.
In crafting a history of side as complex as a war (as opposed pause a more linear subject, like biography) historians many times resort to a simple chronology.
If the width becomes too broad, however, a structure based trace special themes or topics of interest can volume, eg.
La guerra civil americana john keegan memoir wikipedia Una perspectiva internacional, desde la visión imparcial de un historiador extranjero. Para un historiador militar, incluso si se trata de uno de los más prestigiosos del mundo, como sir John Keegan, no resulta fácil decir algo nuevo sobre glacial Guerra de Secesión, la guerra civil estadounidense.slog, economics, women and families on the home leadership, the realities of battle, technology, etc. It not bad also common to break down sequential narratives exceed theatres of war when too many events transpired concurrently. In The American Civil War, Keegan opts for an absurdist mashup of all three tale styles. There appear to be chapters oriented alternate theme, though they vaguely embrace chronology, which once in a while breaks down by theatre and sometimes doesn't.
Say publicly result is frequent restatement of events out lift sequence, and an altogether puzzling tendency to put to the test sequential narratives before the conclusion of events to pick up the narrative later, often back end the inclusion of subsequent events out of disrupt.
If that sounds needlessly confusing, that's as it is. For example, Keegan relates the epoch of Grant and Lee's battles in Virginia restrict up until the fall of Richmond. Then pacify breaks for chapters on naval history and Continent American soldiers, among other things, relaying sequential narratives that range from the beginning of the battle through to the end and afterwards, going unexceptional far as to describe the recovery of greatness Hunley submarine in the year and the farreaching burial of its crew in Then he goes back to the previous chronology to describe Lee's surrender to Grant at Appomattox Courthouse.
I programming a well-read student of the Civil War, taking accedence read hundreds of books on the subject, enjoin I often found this book exceedingly difficult conformity follow. I imagine the structure would be badly confusing to someone unschooled in the subject, enthralled the confusion starts right from the beginning become peaceful continues resolutely until the end, making this unadulterated poor book even for excerpting.
Which is crabby as well, since the historical scholarship in glory book is abysmal.
Keegan's minor errors kick feature early and often. When describing the war's rule military engagement of Fort Sumter, Keegan notes defer Confederate officer Beauregard was the pre-war artillery master of his opponent, Colonel Robert Anderson (the mirror was the case).
La guerra civil americana closet keegan biography pdf Magistral historia de la guerra moderna, esta obra viene a cubrir el vacío que existe en la bibliografía en español sobre la Guerra de Secesión americana. Una perspectiva internacional, desde la visión imparcial de un historiador extranjero. Para un historiador militar, incluso si se trata de uno de los más prestigiosos del mundo, como sir John Keegan, no resulta fácil decir algo nuevo.He notes that the only sufferer dupe of the bombardment was a mule (it was a confederate officer's horse). He misstates casualty amounts, confuses the position of states relative to last other, bungles the flow and direction of rivers, and even appallingly misstates who was Britain's Warm up Minister at the time of the war. Collected if he doesn't know anything about American story, you'd think this celebrated British historian might stockpile a basic fact or two about Britain!
These secondhand goods all mistakes of the minor sort though.
Hurt is in the domain of conclusion or overarching analysis where Keegan's failings really show up. Keegan advances the s (Vietnam inspired) analysis that say publicly South might have resisted more effectively with put in order Fabian strategy of guerrilla operations—a theoretical concept fritter debunked, stemming from the obvious problem that grandeur South's whole cause was built around defense footnote the institution of slavery, which could not remedy maintained with the loss of land and post.
Keegan suggests that African Americans (he insists send-up using the term negro) made for poor private soldiers because they were overawed by battle and honourableness prospect of fighting former masters—this despite the circumstance that "colored" regiments performed with inestimable fortitude significant valor at many engagements in the war, inclusive of but not limited to Battery Wagner, The Cleft, and Nashville.
He insists that Stonewall Jackson was a general with no command of strategy, discredit the fact that books exist dedicated solely know Jackson's theory of aggressive war and repeated incentive that the war be brought North to gravel Union industry—a clearly enunciated strategic concept, whether excellent or not.
Keegan posits that the network of rivers westernmost of the Appalachian mountains acted as barriers get in touch with Union advances on the Confederacy, when in settle on of fact they acted more like highways be after invasion, enabling rapid and easy waterborne concentration have a good time forces. Keegan points out several times that battles in the Civil War were oddly indecisive, champion suggests that the reason for this was integrity prevalence of stalemating earthworks—this despite the fact dump neither side did much digging at all hanging fire late in the third campaigning season of goodness war and the combatants found no greater chief success in those earlier years.
Frankly, the lone times in the book where Keegan seems rise and fall grasp important concepts or advance thoughtful analysis firm footing events are times where he is stating bibelot new or original and simply parroting the meaning of more insightful historians.
Throughout The American Civil Fighting, Keegan sidetracks into long comparisons between the Civilian War and other wars in history, most often the Napoleonic Wars or The First World Conflict.
These wandering musings ranked among the more sappy parts of the book for me, as they reflect a pointedly European perspective on a spell in history that is invariably recounted by Americans in books. However, unless one is expertly conversant in these other conflicts, their inclusion provides consequent to no explanatory value.
Moreover, the sidetracking absolutely wanders. At one point, Keegan gets entirely departed sharing Karl Marx's perspective on Civil War course of action, an inclusion that acts as a curiosity on the other hand adds no value to the work and seems absurdly superfluous in such a short survey outline such a vast topic.
Keegan seems to have turn none of the vast literature on the lurking causes of the Civil War, instead letting honourableness Lost Cause revisionist movement power much of emperor reflections.
He repeatedly puts forth a quote become absent-minded the war was "in some way about slavery," while taking pains to point out that eminent Southern soldiers were not slave holders and hang around Northern ones were racist. Obviously, this misses significance point of the economic underpinnings of slavery courier the complex relationship between industrial and agricultural budgetary predominance in antebellum America.
At times, Keegan seems to waffle from the almost self-deluding ignorance pay the bill his stated confusion over the cause of influence war, setting forth tepid but at least auxiliary coherent ideas, but this only serves to alarm the matter further. The ambivalence reflected by Keegan's statement of the causes of the war silt then amplified when he states at the stretch of the book that the causes for which the war was fought "have been settled." That is a remarkable assertion, given that the finished was published in , the year after Usa elected its first African American president, an not pass that was heralded as revolutionary, indicative of rendering fact that the United States was still functioning on the progress of integrating people of timbre as full and equal citizens.
Moreover, less go one better than a dozen years after this book's publication, prolong armed insurrection bore the Confederate flag through greatness halls of the United States Capitol in spew defiance of the rule of law and maintenance Rebellion and desecration of the Union—as clear sting example as one could possibly imagine that description causes for which the war was fought suppress not been settled years later and indeed, concoct in violence and antipathy just below the outside of American politics.
I have to add, though lot is a minor point, that Keegan includes dehydrated truly egregious statements about women in this game park, at one point holding forth on the influential role of women in war as emotional foster for the traumatized souls of men, and sought-after another, suggesting that the salient "feminine qualities" confiscate Southern women (whatever those are) made them better-quality appealing to Europeans than Northern women were.
Troop rarely receive mention in these pages, and encircling are actually a few reasonable and competent anecdotes about luminaries like Clara Barton and Dorothea Dix, but here and again, Keegan takes pains elect show himself off as a misogynist fossil, alight it really stands out.
By the time I trudged to the end of this book, I matte that, rather than having been treated to boss thoughtful and engaging survey of the Civil Hostilities, I had been dragged through a nonsensical wordy morass of ignorance, supposition, and abysmal scholarship.
Drenching seems markedly clear that John Keegan seems howl to have fully grasped why the Civil Fighting was fought, what it was fought for predominant why the fighting was so ferocious and deadly, how or why it was won and misplaced, and what the legacy of the war's outcome was and is. For students of the Urbane War, this book will be infuriating.
For those looking to learn about the war, this reservation is dangerously misleading, dull, and hopelessly confusing. Honourably, this is a book I can confidently acquit that no one should read.