I have to agree with Kevin, and though I truly respect the Civil War Interactive’s Top 50 Civil War books declaration, I feel this new list is nothing but more of the same. I understand that a huge majority of Civil War enthusiasts are “battle narrative” folks, but does that mean that those are the best books? No, most popular? Probably. Yes the list is titled “Top 50,” but that implies the best.
There are excellent social historical works that are not on the list. Too numerous to list. There are also numerous excellent non-battle narrative books not on the list and so many other excellent studies and even regimental histories also not listed. Mark Dunkleman’s work, Brother’s One and All, for one, is an incredible book and is easily one of the top 50, yet it is not there.
Their methodology is limited and therefore the validity is lacking and deserves scrutinty. I understand that the goal was limited to a popularity contest, but that in itself is reason enough to dismiss it.
Hi Chris,
I enjoy your blog…
I agree with both you and Kevin. The battles and leaders books can be interesting, but in many ways, I think it reflects the “old hat” interest of the war. I think a lot of us who have moved on sort of stand back and groan when we see the deeper studies being neglected. There are so many great books out there dealing with the social aspects (my introduction to these books began in the Spring of 2006 with Alice Fahs’ Imagined Civil War) and, quite honestly, the older I have gotten, the more I have become interested in the social dynamics. It’s time for Civil War Interactive to ratchet-up their standards when it comes to books.
Robert Moore