Mark Grimsley

[milhistbuff1]

I highly recomend the textbook he co-wrote with Doughty, Flint, Gruber, Herring, Horwrd, Lynn and Murry called Warfare in the Western World: Military Operations from 1600 to 1871. It's vol. 1 of a two volume set I bought for a simliarly named class. Grimsley wrote the civil war chapters, 11-14. At the back of each is a suggested reading list with prominant historians such as Catton, Cozzens, MacPherson, Nevins, Rhea, Sears, Trudeau, Wert, and Williams among those on the lists.

 

[samgrant]

Interesting guy, not familair with him till I heard an interview he did on CivilWarTalk Radio.

http://people.cohums.ohio-state.edu/grimsley1/default.htm

http://www.worldtalkradio.com/show.asp?sid=150

 

[Calicoboy]

Ya learn something new

For a pacifist I have a strong interest in military history. I'll have to search it out and read it. Thanks for the tip. CivilWarTalk radio...whoa! Never knew there was such a thing. Thank you gentlemen


Calicoboy

 

[milhistbuff1]

Calicoboy, if any local universities use Barnes and Noble, they should be able to order it for you.
Matt

 

[samgrant]

How about this intro?

What do you think Grimsley is suggesting by this dramatic intro?

http://warhistorian.org/

 

[ole]

What do you think Grimsley is suggesting by this dramatic intro?

http://warhistorian.org/

Whoa. Too much thinking! What? Indeed. Ole

 

[william42]

Sam... not really sure what Grimsley is suggesting. Maybe he's trying to present two men who were in rebellion, with the same goal of installing a different form of government?? Of course, R.E. Lee was attempting to help establish a new independent country, and Guevara was trying to overthrow an existing, established government in his country in order to put in place a different political philosophy. That's a stretch, but that's the only connection I can really think of right now, and it's not a very solid connection either... really kind of baffled by the whole thing. I've never seen Che Guevara and Robert E. Lee presented together as they are in that intro. Actually, I can't think of any time I've seen them presented together anywhere at all, before now. I didn't go very far into the site to explore, so maybe Grimsley clarifies that in there somewhere. Good question.

Terry

 

[matthew mckeon]

Che and Lee

If you read the site, and it's worth it, Grimsley says he put Lee and Che on to show two utterly different warriors, different in philosophy, methods, character and goals. Lee being the ideal western commander, conservative defender of the status quo, while Che is a ideal revolutionary guerilla, seeking to establish a socialist utopia, and not fussy in his methods.

Maybe I mean "idealized" or "legendary" instead of ideal.

 

[samgrant]

If you read the site, and it's worth it, Grimsley says he put Lee and Che on to show two utterly different warriors, different in philosophy, methods, character and goals. Lee being the ideal western commander, conservative defender of the status quo, while Che is a ideal revolutionary guerilla, seeking to establish a socialist utopia, and not fussy in his methods.

Maybe I mean "idealized" or "legendary" instead of ideal.

I asked Grimsley about it and here the link he provided:

http://warhistorian.blogspot.com/2005/02/polarities-of-power.html