Just my opinion...observations, and comments:
All writers that are modern will write with what they have been able to access and research themselves. I chaff about authors writing on a subject that I know quite a lot about personally, that have zero experience in the total field of the subject where elements of it are not considered.
I prefer to read those written works by the veterans themselves, such as "Under Both Flags, etc." They will be opinionated of course, they may have many excuses for this or that, yet -- they were there, in those times and of a generation of a certain caliber that none after the 1915 would be able to copy.
As sons and or daughters wrote about their famous parents, it sheds much of the informational truth yet, much better than the modern. As grand-children write about their famous grandparents, it looses the luster as the 'story' is lost in bits and pieces. From there, unless there is some lasting proof of the mind, the opinion, the experience of that famous relative to the private--so much is lost.
With years worth of research that would be a life long work, due to the sheer volume of the information, includint the Official Records of the Rebellion's 128 volumes; the 128 volume suppliment to the O.R.s, the various publications such as the Southern Historical Society; Confederate Military History; News Paper publications; memoirs and the countless unpublished documents in the National Archives, people's private collections, etc. Yet, even so--imperfect due to the vast amount of destroyed documents for one cause or another.
Time consuming as it may be, it will be worthwhile to consider that any publication that has published proof of the root source will have a better chance to be on my book shelf. So much of the publications are recycled and just repeating from previous authors with a here and there new nugget of factual information.
For me, again -- my personal opinion on the matter -- The American Civil War still yields new evidence as the battlefields surrender from the soil, to this present day what happened 150 years ago. From the size of a button to the full sized sunken vessel, with all those in between.
Until such evidence reverses a per-conceived notion/opinion/perception/judgment that has been perpetuated since its beginnings, e.g. O.R.s, etc.; the unending quest for those who study and are students of the Civil War, is without bounds or without deadline.
It is folly to believe that any publication written without the interviewing of the original players, per se--of the American Civil War; to be without error or without prejudice/bias.
Those that specialize in any area of the Civil War we (in a general sense) study--may have passionate opinions with personal experiences and abilities lacking by others, to include authors--will be more critical on such. This s good, as it does no person keen on seeking the truth in all things about the American Civil War and or the individuals participating in such, good to accept anything thrown upon the table and unchallenged.
What I enjoy in reading, is the effort to include the elements of many parts of the total sum of facts, which are so important to understand why something happened the way it did, to why things failed and why things were successful. What was the weather, road conditions, condition of the troops, condition of the horses, the days of rest or lack thereof, the terrain to, from and at the battlefield, the level of the water, etc. It can than be seen that war was fought in various weather and conditions and, not always in good weather and good for troop performances. It brings more evidence of human judgment as to why things happened as they did--often the circumstances determined the battle, just as much as being on the offense or defense.
I can respect authors that express that they may know alot but, not know it all; more than someone who presents aires of a 'know it all.' There has been no human that I have met that knows it all. There will be always something new to learn--even a new way to look at something we've (in general terms) have looked at for years and entrenched opinions.
It is most difficult to shed all personal prejudices/bias. But, I urge readers to attempt to do so, for it is the sake of fairness and looking at evidence without jumping to conclusions, as to let the evidence speak for itself--sometimes leaving us (in a general sense) in a state of limbo or on a 'cliff hanger.' If it is possible, to have less anti-this or that feeling of either side of the War, to ask for opinions and when offered, even if its totally disagreeable, to attempt to see from their point of view and attempt to see what others see. This too, should be the approach with any books on the subject.
All have standards to which we (in a general sense) measure 'truth' -- some may be more lax than others yet, all are important to keep digging for 'truth.' Truth should be able to stand on its own, without any defense and no matter how much offense/attacks it suffers.
Just some thoughts, observations, comments and --opinions,
M. E. Wolf
Bringing the