Great finish in an outstanding trilogy, 04 Apr 2007
I think this book, and the two preceding it should be required reading in school. I had no idea how horrific this war was, particularly more so as the brutalities committed on both sides were against our own. There were so many moments when I wanted to stop and cry for the loss of life, and especially at the end when the one man who was capable of healing the country and bringing us all back together as one nation, Abraham Lincoln, was assassinated.

The research was impeccable and telling the story from the viewpoints of the various generals absolutely fascinating. The honorable Robert E. Lee, Chamberlain (loved his gracious salute to the surrendering army), and the ever fascinating U.S. Grant.

One quote from so many in the book that just brought tears to my eyes: "Yes, it was horrible, horrible indeed. But he had to tell himself that, remind himself to see it that way. There was no sickening revulsion, no outrage, no indignation at the barbarism. It was just one more scene from this war, one more horror, one more mass of death, blending together with all the rest."

Highly highly recommended, and will definitely open your eyes to the horror of war.


Like father-like son?, 19 Nov 2000
Jeff Shaara sets himself a large task here, and for the most part suceeds. His fathers' book was a monumental acheivment, and he does very well for himself. The great character of Chamberlain comes shining through in both books, here Jeff does better than his father, Lee fares less well, and Longstreet is just to difficult to convey. What I really like was his treatment of Grant, his discriptions of battles, espcially the Wilderness, and the little biographies at the end. I could have cried at the sheer waste of so many young lives, but it was a long time ago so I will save my tears for a more recent war.

Extraordinary, 14 Jul 1999
Only THE KILLER ANGELS and THE TRIUMPH AND THE GLORY can top Jeff Schaara's Civil War epic, THE LAST FULL MEASURE. Ultra-realistic, captivating theme, absorbing characters, accuracy, it has everything one could ask of a historical fiction novel

The Trilogy is Complete!!!, 29 Jun 1999
The Last Full Measure continues the spirit of Gods and Generals and Killer Angels. The whole series has been so intriguing that I read each book in a matter of days. Both Shaaras bring you so close to all of the characters that every chapter you find yourself hoping for the other side.

Best of the series, 21 Jun 1999
I have read all 3 books of this trilogy and this one is the most exciting of the three. For history novel lovers, this book is captivating.

You do become drawn in as the author describes the battle of Yellow Tavern where JEB Stuart becomes mortally wounded and as the war comes to a close at Appotmataox.

Although the author is still learning his style or writing, I truly believe The Last Full Measure will keep you interested until the end.

Great finish in an outstanding trilogy, 04 Apr 2007
I think this book, and the two preceding it should be required reading in school. I had no idea how horrific this war was, particularly more so as the brutalities committed on both sides were against our own. There were so many moments when I wanted to stop and cry for the loss of life, and especially at the end when the one man who was capable of healing the country and bringing us all back together as one nation, Abraham Lincoln, was assassinated.

The research was impeccable and telling the story from the viewpoints of the various generals absolutely fascinating. The honorable Robert E. Lee, Chamberlain (loved his gracious salute to the surrendering army), and the ever fascinating U.S. Grant.

One quote from so many in the book that just brought tears to my eyes: "Yes, it was horrible, horrible indeed. But he had to tell himself that, remind himself to see it that way. There was no sickening revulsion, no outrage, no indignation at the barbarism. It was just one more scene from this war, one more horror, one more mass of death, blending together with all the rest."

Highly highly recommended, and will definitely open your eyes to the horror of war.


Like father-like son?, 19 Nov 2000
Jeff Shaara sets himself a large task here, and for the most part suceeds. His fathers' book was a monumental acheivment, and he does very well for himself. The great character of Chamberlain comes shining through in both books, here Jeff does better than his father, Lee fares less well, and Longstreet is just to difficult to convey. What I really like was his treatment of Grant, his discriptions of battles, espcially the Wilderness, and the little biographies at the end. I could have cried at the sheer waste of so many young lives, but it was a long time ago so I will save my tears for a more recent war.

Extraordinary, 14 Jul 1999
Only THE KILLER ANGELS and THE TRIUMPH AND THE GLORY can top Jeff Schaara's Civil War epic, THE LAST FULL MEASURE. Ultra-realistic, captivating theme, absorbing characters, accuracy, it has everything one could ask of a historical fiction novel

The Trilogy is Complete!!!, 29 Jun 1999
The Last Full Measure continues the spirit of Gods and Generals and Killer Angels. The whole series has been so intriguing that I read each book in a matter of days. Both Shaaras bring you so close to all of the characters that every chapter you find yourself hoping for the other side.

Best of the series, 21 Jun 1999
I have read all 3 books of this trilogy and this one is the most exciting of the three. For history novel lovers, this book is captivating.

You do become drawn in as the author describes the battle of Yellow Tavern where JEB Stuart becomes mortally wounded and as the war comes to a close at Appotmataox.

Although the author is still learning his style or writing, I truly believe The Last Full Measure will keep you interested until the end.

You learn more about the Mexican War than about Robert E Lee, 18 Feb 2003
"Gone for Soldiers," a novel of the Mexican War, has the odd position of being a prequel to a prequel. The son of Michael Shaara the Pulitzer Prize winning author of "The Killer Angels" which tells the story of the battle of Gettysburg from the perspective of four major participants (Lee and Longstreet for the Confederates, Buford and Chamberlain for the Federals), Jeff Shaara authored both a prequel, "Gods and Generals" and a sequel "The Last Full Measure" to his father's novel. Both volumes maintained a focus on Lee, Longstreet and Chamberlain while working in other familiar figures from the war, most notably Jackson for the prequel and Grant for the sequel. In "Gone for Soldiers" the focus is primarily on Captain Robert E. Lee and his mentor Winfield Scott during the Mexican War.

More than the other two volumes, "Gone for Soldiers" is able to benefit from the shifts in perspective used in "The Killer Angels." Most of the chapters focus on Lee and Scott, although there are a few focusing on the Mexico military dictator Santa Anna and several chapters during the final assault on Mexico City that tell of the exploits of Longstreet, Jackson and Grant--all figures who will become prominent in the main trilogy (the chapter on Grant is the most interesting). Certainly it is difficult to get the most out of this volume if you have not read "The Killer Angels," or at least seen the movie "Gettysburg," although I can not imagine why someone would come to this book except through those other volumes. After all, there are not a lot of novels about the Mexican War out there. But the element of irony underscores many scenes in the book, whether it is Lee briefly meeting Longstreet, Jackson, Pickett, Meade and Grant, or Scott telling his chief engineer about the need to take the high ground. What happened with Picket's Charge at Gettysburg in particular and the Civil War in general colors much of what happens in this novel.

If anything, Shaara's characterization of Lee is still too sanctified; his modest and humility become just to oppressive by the end of the novel. Because one of the point of these books is to gain insight into what these men were thinking, you can make a case that Lee, even more so that Scott, is over-reflective, which makes his combination of military genius and political naivete rather unbelievable. The relationship between Lee and Scott is more important that the war itself; years later Scott went on record as calling Lee the best officer he ever saw and one of the biggest surprises is that the old man does not serve more explicitly as a father figure to Lee, whose father "Light Horse" Harry Lee, the Revolutionary War hero, died when the boy was fairly young. Thus we read the book in anticipation of a relationship developing between the two that simply never comes about. As for Scott, we come away from the novel concerned more with his bickering staff and political headaches more than his military genius, especially since time and time again that boils down to have Captain Lee come up with the plan, or scout the enemy, or place the guns, or command the troops. Most of the supporting characters are presented as inept clowns of various degrees, although Nicholas Trist the diplomat sent by President Polk to negotiate a peace treat is the exception that proves the rule. The main thing you will come away with from reading "Gone for Soldiers" are the details of Scott's campaign during the Mexican War. The book is quite readable except for a few rough spots during the action when the characters insist on thinking too much about what they think about what they are doing. But overall, I still prefer the realism of the fictional Lee of Harry Turtledove's "The Guns of the South" to the figure in this book.

Fascinating view of a forgotten war, 02 May 2002
Those who are fans of Jeff Shaara's work, and, indeed, that of his father, Michael, will be delighted by his foray into the Mexican-American War.

I cannot recall any substantial fiction work which covers the War in question, whereas, of course, the American Civil War which followed 13 years afterwards has proved to be a never-ending source for fiction writers.

Shaara's system, as, again, with his father, is to write the story from the point of view of the various main characters, here, Winfield Scott, Robert E Lee and Santa Anna, with a few others thrown in, mainly Thomas Jackson.

Whereas the characters of the Civil War characters are comparatively well-known, it is difficult to know how accurately Shaara (and, admittedly other writers such as Eisenhower) portrays Worth, Twiggs and Pillow. I think that one must presume that all three, for varying reasons, were indeed extremely frustrating subordinates to work with. It perhaps explains Scott's apparent readiness to take the brilliant (and very respectful) Lee into his confidence.

In lesser hands Lee could appear dour, but Shaara makes him a multi-faceted character, yet at the same time ever-mindful of the position of superior-ranking officers in the US Army at the time.

Scott comes across as an extremely subtle commander, which may not have been quite so apparent in other books on the subject, and I was certainly unaware of the (at times) bitter rivalry between him and Zachary Taylor.

The book would have rated 5-stars were it not for the portrayal of Santa Anna. One of the successes of the Civil War books was in obtaining view-points from senior officers of the two armies in contention. With the Mexican War, things are made difficult by the fact that Santa Anna was in supreme command of the Mexican forces, and all of his subordinate generals are very shadowy figures in history. Santa Anna himself is a fascinating historical character, but one who it is extremely difficult to comprehend. What was it about him that made the Mexican people reject him totally on several occasions and yet welcome him back a few years later, and, then, give (or allow) him absolute power?

The picture which Shaara gives is of a petulant character, rather reminiscent of some portrayals of Napoleon or, perhaps Caligula. Perhaps that is the problem with figures who are considerably "larger than life"?

Having said that, the book is, as usual, well written and gives a very well-explained view of the Southern campaigns in a forgotten war.

Great finish in an outstanding trilogy, 04 Apr 2007
I think this book, and the two preceding it should be required reading in school. I had no idea how horrific this war was, particularly more so as the brutalities committed on both sides were against our own. There were so many moments when I wanted to stop and cry for the loss of life, and especially at the end when the one man who was capable of healing the country and bringing us all back together as one nation, Abraham Lincoln, was assassinated.

The research was impeccable and telling the story from the viewpoints of the various generals absolutely fascinating. The honorable Robert E. Lee, Chamberlain (loved his gracious salute to the surrendering army), and the ever fascinating U.S. Grant.

One quote from so many in the book that just brought tears to my eyes: "Yes, it was horrible, horrible indeed. But he had to tell himself that, remind himself to see it that way. There was no sickening revulsion, no outrage, no indignation at the barbarism. It was just one more scene from this war, one more horror, one more mass of death, blending together with all the rest."

Highly highly recommended, and will definitely open your eyes to the horror of war.


Like father-like son?, 19 Nov 2000
Jeff Shaara sets himself a large task here, and for the most part suceeds. His fathers' book was a monumental acheivment, and he does very well for himself. The great character of Chamberlain comes shining through in both books, here Jeff does better than his father, Lee fares less well, and Longstreet is just to difficult to convey. What I really like was his treatment of Grant, his discriptions of battles, espcially the Wilderness, and the little biographies at the end. I could have cried at the sheer waste of so many young lives, but it was a long time ago so I will save my tears for a more recent war.

Extraordinary, 14 Jul 1999
Only THE KILLER ANGELS and THE TRIUMPH AND THE GLORY can top Jeff Schaara's Civil War epic, THE LAST FULL MEASURE. Ultra-realistic, captivating theme, absorbing characters, accuracy, it has everything one could ask of a historical fiction novel

The Trilogy is Complete!!!, 29 Jun 1999
The Last Full Measure continues the spirit of Gods and Generals and Killer Angels. The whole series has been so intriguing that I read each book in a matter of days. Both Shaaras bring you so close to all of the characters that every chapter you find yourself hoping for the other side.

Best of the series, 21 Jun 1999
I have read all 3 books of this trilogy and this one is the most exciting of the three. For history novel lovers, this book is captivating.

You do become drawn in as the author describes the battle of Yellow Tavern where JEB Stuart becomes mortally wounded and as the war comes to a close at Appotmataox.

Although the author is still learning his style or writing, I truly believe The Last Full Measure will keep you interested until the end.

You learn more about the Mexican War than about Robert E Lee, 18 Feb 2003
"Gone for Soldiers," a novel of the Mexican War, has the odd position of being a prequel to a prequel. The son of Michael Shaara the Pulitzer Prize winning author of "The Killer Angels" which tells the story of the battle of Gettysburg from the perspective of four major participants (Lee and Longstreet for the Confederates, Buford and Chamberlain for the Federals), Jeff Shaara authored both a prequel, "Gods and Generals" and a sequel "The Last Full Measure" to his father's novel. Both volumes maintained a focus on Lee, Longstreet and Chamberlain while working in other familiar figures from the war, most notably Jackson for the prequel and Grant for the sequel. In "Gone for Soldiers" the focus is primarily on Captain Robert E. Lee and his mentor Winfield Scott during the Mexican War.

More than the other two volumes, "Gone for Soldiers" is able to benefit from the shifts in perspective used in "The Killer Angels." Most of the chapters focus on Lee and Scott, although there are a few focusing on the Mexico military dictator Santa Anna and several chapters during the final assault on Mexico City that tell of the exploits of Longstreet, Jackson and Grant--all figures who will become prominent in the main trilogy (the chapter on Grant is the most interesting). Certainly it is difficult to get the most out of this volume if you have not read "The Killer Angels," or at least seen the movie "Gettysburg," although I can not imagine why someone would come to this book except through those other volumes. After all, there are not a lot of novels about the Mexican War out there. But the element of irony underscores many scenes in the book, whether it is Lee briefly meeting Longstreet, Jackson, Pickett, Meade and Grant, or Scott telling his chief engineer about the need to take the high ground. What happened with Picket's Charge at Gettysburg in particular and the Civil War in general colors much of what happens in this novel.

If anything, Shaara's characterization of Lee is still too sanctified; his modest and humility become just to oppressive by the end of the novel. Because one of the point of these books is to gain insight into what these men were thinking, you can make a case that Lee, even more so that Scott, is over-reflective, which makes his combination of military genius and political naivete rather unbelievable. The relationship between Lee and Scott is more important that the war itself; years later Scott went on record as calling Lee the best officer he ever saw and one of the biggest surprises is that the old man does not serve more explicitly as a father figure to Lee, whose father "Light Horse" Harry Lee, the Revolutionary War hero, died when the boy was fairly young. Thus we read the book in anticipation of a relationship developing between the two that simply never comes about. As for Scott, we come away from the novel concerned more with his bickering staff and political headaches more than his military genius, especially since time and time again that boils down to have Captain Lee come up with the plan, or scout the enemy, or place the guns, or command the troops. Most of the supporting characters are presented as inept clowns of various degrees, although Nicholas Trist the diplomat sent by President Polk to negotiate a peace treat is the exception that proves the rule. The main thing you will come away with from reading "Gone for Soldiers" are the details of Scott's campaign during the Mexican War. The book is quite readable except for a few rough spots during the action when the characters insist on thinking too much about what they think about what they are doing. But overall, I still prefer the realism of the fictional Lee of Harry Turtledove's "The Guns of the South" to the figure in this book.

Fascinating view of a forgotten war, 02 May 2002
Those who are fans of Jeff Shaara's work, and, indeed, that of his father, Michael, will be delighted by his foray into the Mexican-American War.

I cannot recall any substantial fiction work which covers the War in question, whereas, of course, the American Civil War which followed 13 years afterwards has proved to be a never-ending source for fiction writers.

Shaara's system, as, again, with his father, is to write the story from the point of view of the various main characters, here, Winfield Scott, Robert E Lee and Santa Anna, with a few others thrown in, mainly Thomas Jackson.

Whereas the characters of the Civil War characters are comparatively well-known, it is difficult to know how accurately Shaara (and, admittedly other writers such as Eisenhower) portrays Worth, Twiggs and Pillow. I think that one must presume that all three, for varying reasons, were indeed extremely frustrating subordinates to work with. It perhaps explains Scott's apparent readiness to take the brilliant (and very respectful) Lee into his confidence.

In lesser hands Lee could appear dour, but Shaara makes him a multi-faceted character, yet at the same time ever-mindful of the position of superior-ranking officers in the US Army at the time.

Scott comes across as an extremely subtle commander, which may not have been quite so apparent in other books on the subject, and I was certainly unaware of the (at times) bitter rivalry between him and Zachary Taylor.

The book would have rated 5-stars were it not for the portrayal of Santa Anna. One of the successes of the Civil War books was in obtaining view-points from senior officers of the two armies in contention. With the Mexican War, things are made difficult by the fact that Santa Anna was in supreme command of the Mexican forces, and all of his subordinate generals are very shadowy figures in history. Santa Anna himself is a fascinating historical character, but one who it is extremely difficult to comprehend. What was it about him that made the Mexican people reject him totally on several occasions and yet welcome him back a few years later, and, then, give (or allow) him absolute power?

The picture which Shaara gives is of a petulant character, rather reminiscent of some portrayals of Napoleon or, perhaps Caligula. Perhaps that is the problem with figures who are considerably "larger than life"?

Having said that, the book is, as usual, well written and gives a very well-explained view of the Southern campaigns in a forgotten war.

A great way to get your history lesson, 26 Mar 2007
Fascinating portrayal of a sad time in US History, as told from the perspectives of the generals involved in these campaigns. I was most particularly moved by Lee and his torn loyalties to the US Army and his home state of Virginia, and most especially by the great Stonewall Jackson. I've come across the names in history classes (oh so long ago) and the occasional novel covering this period, but it was wonderful to have them brought to life as this author did, and we are once again reminded that was is indeed h***. One moment in the book that particularly touched me was during a retreat of Federal soldiers. One of them slipped in the mud and was told that since the general decreed the roads to be in good condition therefore there is no mud.

A very good book and recommended for anyone interested in this period of US History. Four stars instead of five as the author's habit of inserting a comma instead of the word "and" was a bit of a distration for me. I'm not sure where the editors were, and why they didn't correct it.


Astounding prequel to father's Killer Angels!, 17 Feb 2003
My first love is Scottish History, but since I was raised on both sides of the pond, I grew to have a great love for the complexities of the War Between the States in the US. So, it was great pleasure I read this book.

Shaara, in this case Jeff, the son of Michael, had a hard act to follow. His father was the author of Pulitzer Prize Winning Killer Angels (1974). Killer Angels looked at the high watermark of the Confederacy which ended with the battle of Gettysburg. That was the single most important event of the whole War Between the States, in a war that shaped the United States. It gave such insight, such reality into the horror, the glory, the humanity and inhumanity of war, of Generals Lee, Hancock, Pickett and Chamberlain. Shaara's words brought alive the battle and made you feel it all, the anticipation, the frustration, the fear and the anger.

In Gods and Generals, Jeff picks up his father's pen and gives you another masterpiece. Though father and son, both have a different writing voices. Jeff picks up the threads of what happened before Gettysburg, a prequel to his father's award winning novel, giving you insight into the men facing what would be their hardest trial. He again centres on the driven Lee, the bumbling Chamberlain, the dashing Hancock, but we also see Jackson, the man who could march his men 40 miles in a day and then fight a battle, one of the most efficient Generals of the whole war on either side, yet overwhelming a religious man. What interested me most, was his portrait of Lee, his dedication to the Confederacy winning and yet the pain of being torn by his loyalty to the Union army he once served and likely of which he would have been General had he not resigned his commission.

A tour de force for a first time writer.

gripping stuff, 05 Jul 2001
with an iterest in the american civil war i found this book an read that i could not put down. from the word go the author has you wanting to read more and more all the time. Using the veiw of the Generals eyes you can perceive the actual size of the battle-fields and the stress and strain these commanders were under. in the form of the Northern commanders the inability to make use of their supirior numbers(not pressing home attacks because they could not see the whole battle-field and would not listin to their subordinates). On the Confederates side you General Lee, General 'Stonewall' Jackson, General Longstreet, General Jubal Early and of course who could forget the ever presant thorn in the norths flank and rear General Stuart. If i was to recommend any book for someone interested in this era this would definatly be one.

At last a book that made sense of a most confusing battle., 03 Jul 2001
In my opinion Chancerlorsville is a battle very hard to work out because of its dimensions & the general confusion. Jeff Shaara dons his father's mantle and whilst I feel he lacks a little of Michael's charisma, he gives us an unputdownable book which is also extremely informative. I read it; reread "The Killer Angels" then went back to "Gods & Generals" I now feel I have a working knowledge of a conflict which has always fascinated me.Thanks Jeff Shaara!What if Jackson had survived to fight at Gettysburg?

A very good novel, 04 Sep 1999
I am a 14 year old who loves reading and trys to get hold of any war novel/biography about it. If you like reading about war also this is a great book. It shows how the men felt and it is a great preceeding book of Killer Angels.

Great finish in an outstanding trilogy, 04 Apr 2007
I think this book, and the two preceding it should be required reading in school. I had no idea how horrific this war was, particularly more so as the brutalities committed on both sides were against our own. There were so many moments when I wanted to stop and cry for the loss of life, and especially at the end when the one man who was capable of healing the country and bringing us all back together as one nation, Abraham Lincoln, was assassinated.

The research was impeccable and telling the story from the viewpoints of the various generals absolutely fascinating. The honorable Robert E. Lee, Chamberlain (loved his gracious salute to the surrendering army), and the ever fascinating U.S. Grant.

One quote from so many in the book that just brought tears to my eyes: "Yes, it was horrible, horrible indeed. But he had to tell himself that, remind himself to see it that way. There was no sickening revulsion, no outrage, no indignation at the barbarism. It was just one more scene from this war, one more horror, one more mass of death, blending together with all the rest."

Highly highly recommended, and will definitely open your eyes to the horror of war.


Like father-like son?, 19 Nov 2000
Jeff Shaara sets himself a large task here, and for the most part suceeds. His fathers' book was a monumental acheivment, and he does very well for himself. The great character of Chamberlain comes shining through in both books, here Jeff does better than his father, Lee fares less well, and Longstreet is just to difficult to convey. What I really like was his treatment of Grant, his discriptions of battles, espcially the Wilderness, and the little biographies at the end. I could have cried at the sheer waste of so many young lives, but it was a long time ago so I will save my tears for a more recent war.

Extraordinary, 14 Jul 1999
Only THE KILLER ANGELS and THE TRIUMPH AND THE GLORY can top Jeff Schaara's Civil War epic, THE LAST FULL MEASURE. Ultra-realistic, captivating theme, absorbing characters, accuracy, it has everything one could ask of a historical fiction novel

The Trilogy is Complete!!!, 29 Jun 1999
The Last Full Measure continues the spirit of Gods and Generals and Killer Angels. The whole series has been so intriguing that I read each book in a matter of days. Both Shaaras bring you so close to all of the characters that every chapter you find yourself hoping for the other side.

Best of the series, 21 Jun 1999
I have read all 3 books of this trilogy and this one is the most exciting of the three. For history novel lovers, this book is captivating.

You do become drawn in as the author describes the battle of Yellow Tavern where JEB Stuart becomes mortally wounded and as the war comes to a close at Appotmataox.

Although the author is still learning his style or writing, I truly believe The Last Full Measure will keep you interested until the end.

You learn more about the Mexican War than about Robert E Lee, 18 Feb 2003
"Gone for Soldiers," a novel of the Mexican War, has the odd position of being a prequel to a prequel. The son of Michael Shaara the Pulitzer Prize winning author of "The Killer Angels" which tells the story of the battle of Gettysburg from the perspective of four major participants (Lee and Longstreet for the Confederates, Buford and Chamberlain for the Federals), Jeff Shaara authored both a prequel, "Gods and Generals" and a sequel "The Last Full Measure" to his father's novel. Both volumes maintained a focus on Lee, Longstreet and Chamberlain while working in other familiar figures from the war, most notably Jackson for the prequel and Grant for the sequel. In "Gone for Soldiers" the focus is primarily on Captain Robert E. Lee and his mentor Winfield Scott during the Mexican War.

More than the other two volumes, "Gone for Soldiers" is able to benefit from the shifts in perspective used in "The Killer Angels." Most of the chapters focus on Lee and Scott, although there are a few focusing on the Mexico military dictator Santa Anna and several chapters during the final assault on Mexico City that tell of the exploits of Longstreet, Jackson and Grant--all figures who will become prominent in the main trilogy (the chapter on Grant is the most interesting). Certainly it is difficult to get the most out of this volume if you have not read "The Killer Angels," or at least seen the movie "Gettysburg," although I can not imagine why someone would come to this book except through those other volumes. After all, there are not a lot of novels about the Mexican War out there. But the element of irony underscores many scenes in the book, whether it is Lee briefly meeting Longstreet, Jackson, Pickett, Meade and Grant, or Scott telling his chief engineer about the need to take the high ground. What happened with Picket's Charge at Gettysburg in particular and the Civil War in general colors much of what happens in this novel.

If anything, Shaara's characterization of Lee is still too sanctified; his modest and humility become just to oppressive by the end of the novel. Because one of the point of these books is to gain insight into what these men were thinking, you can make a case that Lee, even more so that Scott, is over-reflective, which makes his combination of military genius and political naivete rather unbelievable. The relationship between Lee and Scott is more important that the war itself; years later Scott went on record as calling Lee the best officer he ever saw and one of the biggest surprises is that the old man does not serve more explicitly as a father figure to Lee, whose father "Light Horse" Harry Lee, the Revolutionary War hero, died when the boy was fairly young. Thus we read the book in anticipation of a relationship developing between the two that simply never comes about. As for Scott, we come away from the novel concerned more with his bickering staff and political headaches more than his military genius, especially since time and time again that boils down to have Captain Lee come up with the plan, or scout the enemy, or place the guns, or command the troops. Most of the supporting characters are presented as inept clowns of various degrees, although Nicholas Trist the diplomat sent by President Polk to negotiate a peace treat is the exception that proves the rule. The main thing you will come away with from reading "Gone for Soldiers" are the details of Scott's campaign during the Mexican War. The book is quite readable except for a few rough spots during the action when the characters insist on thinking too much about what they think about what they are doing. But overall, I still prefer the realism of the fictional Lee of Harry Turtledove's "The Guns of the South" to the figure in this book.

Fascinating view of a forgotten war, 02 May 2002
Those who are fans of Jeff Shaara's work, and, indeed, that of his father, Michael, will be delighted by his foray into the Mexican-American War.

I cannot recall any substantial fiction work which covers the War in question, whereas, of course, the American Civil War which followed 13 years afterwards has proved to be a never-ending source for fiction writers.

Shaara's system, as, again, with his father, is to write the story from the point of view of the various main characters, here, Winfield Scott, Robert E Lee and Santa Anna, with a few others thrown in, mainly Thomas Jackson.

Whereas the characters of the Civil War characters are comparatively well-known, it is difficult to know how accurately Shaara (and, admittedly other writers such as Eisenhower) portrays Worth, Twiggs and Pillow. I think that one must presume that all three, for varying reasons, were indeed extremely frustrating subordinates to work with. It perhaps explains Scott's apparent readiness to take the brilliant (and very respectful) Lee into his confidence.

In lesser hands Lee could appear dour, but Shaara makes him a multi-faceted character, yet at the same time ever-mindful of the position of superior-ranking officers in the US Army at the time.

Scott comes across as an extremely subtle commander, which may not have been quite so apparent in other books on the subject, and I was certainly unaware of the (at times) bitter rivalry between him and Zachary Taylor.

The book would have rated 5-stars were it not for the portrayal of Santa Anna. One of the successes of the Civil War books was in obtaining view-points from senior officers of the two armies in contention. With the Mexican War, things are made difficult by the fact that Santa Anna was in supreme command of the Mexican forces, and all of his subordinate generals are very shadowy figures in history. Santa Anna himself is a fascinating historical character, but one who it is extremely difficult to comprehend. What was it about him that made the Mexican people reject him totally on several occasions and yet welcome him back a few years later, and, then, give (or allow) him absolute power?

The picture which Shaara gives is of a petulant character, rather reminiscent of some portrayals of Napoleon or, perhaps Caligula. Perhaps that is the problem with figures who are considerably "larger than life"?

Having said that, the book is, as usual, well written and gives a very well-explained view of the Southern campaigns in a forgotten war.

A great way to get your history lesson, 26 Mar 2007
Fascinating portrayal of a sad time in US History, as told from the perspectives of the generals involved in these campaigns. I was most particularly moved by Lee and his torn loyalties to the US Army and his home state of Virginia, and most especially by the great Stonewall Jackson. I've come across the names in history classes (oh so long ago) and the occasional novel covering this period, but it was wonderful to have them brought to life as this author did, and we are once again reminded that was is indeed h***. One moment in the book that particularly touched me was during a retreat of Federal soldiers. One of them slipped in the mud and was told that since the general decreed the roads to be in good condition therefore there is no mud.

A very good book and recommended for anyone interested in this period of US History. Four stars instead of five as the author's habit of inserting a comma instead of the word "and" was a bit of a distration for me. I'm not sure where the editors were, and why they didn't correct it.


Astounding prequel to father's Killer Angels!, 17 Feb 2003
My first love is Scottish History, but since I was raised on both sides of the pond, I grew to have a great love for the complexities of the War Between the States in the US. So, it was great pleasure I read this book.

Shaara, in this case Jeff, the son of Michael, had a hard act to follow. His father was the author of Pulitzer Prize Winning Killer Angels (1974). Killer Angels looked at the high watermark of the Confederacy which ended with the battle of Gettysburg. That was the single most important event of the whole War Between the States, in a war that shaped the United States. It gave such insight, such reality into the horror, the glory, the humanity and inhumanity of war, of Generals Lee, Hancock, Pickett and Chamberlain. Shaara's words brought alive the battle and made you feel it all, the anticipation, the frustration, the fear and the anger.

In Gods and Generals, Jeff picks up his father's pen and gives you another masterpiece. Though father and son, both have a different writing voices. Jeff picks up the threads of what happened before Gettysburg, a prequel to his father's award winning novel, giving you insight into the men facing what would be their hardest trial. He again centres on the driven Lee, the bumbling Chamberlain, the dashing Hancock, but we also see Jackson, the man who could march his men 40 miles in a day and then fight a battle, one of the most efficient Generals of the whole war on either side, yet overwhelming a religious man. What interested me most, was his portrait of Lee, his dedication to the Confederacy winning and yet the pain of being torn by his loyalty to the Union army he once served and likely of which he would have been General had he not resigned his commission.

A tour de force for a first time writer.

gripping stuff, 05 Jul 2001
with an iterest in the american civil war i found this book an read that i could not put down. from the word go the author has you wanting to read more and more all the time. Using the veiw of the Generals eyes you can perceive the actual size of the battle-fields and the stress and strain these commanders were under. in the form of the Northern commanders the inability to make use of their supirior numbers(not pressing home attacks because they could not see the whole battle-field and would not listin to their subordinates). On the Confederates side you General Lee, General 'Stonewall' Jackson, General Longstreet, General Jubal Early and of course who could forget the ever presant thorn in the norths flank and rear General Stuart. If i was to recommend any book for someone interested in this era this would definatly be one.

At last a book that made sense of a most confusing battle., 03 Jul 2001
In my opinion Chancerlorsville is a battle very hard to work out because of its dimensions & the general confusion. Jeff Shaara dons his father's mantle and whilst I feel he lacks a little of Michael's charisma, he gives us an unputdownable book which is also extremely informative. I read it; reread "The Killer Angels" then went back to "Gods & Generals" I now feel I have a working knowledge of a conflict which has always fascinated me.Thanks Jeff Shaara!What if Jackson had survived to fight at Gettysburg?

A very good novel, 04 Sep 1999
I am a 14 year old who loves reading and trys to get hold of any war novel/biography about it. If you like reading about war also this is a great book. It shows how the men felt and it is a great preceeding book of Killer Angels.

Well presented History, 22 Jul 2008
I first encountered Jeff Shaara with his prequel to his father's novel, The Killer Angels. Gods and Generals was excellent and in many ways Mr Shaara repeats the format and approach of that novel, in The Rising Tide. This time his theatre of conflict is North Africa in 1943. The story initially follows Rommel and Monty as they fight east and then west across the North African desert. Later the book engages with the Americans, led by Eisenhower. The book is fictionalisation and Shaara draws upon records and diaries to build a more intimate picture of the main characters, and a few minor ones, to tell the toils and terrors of the campaign. I thoroughly enjoyed the insights into the motivations of these men, which Shaara provides. I found the view to be well balanced, not favouring any particular viewpoint excessively. I think if you have enjoyed Jeff Shaara's other works then you will enjoy this. If you haven't I wouldn't dissuade you from this, but I would say try Gods and Generals first.

Read how the Americans won World War II!, 20 Apr 2008
This is a solid fictional account of the Allies efforts in North Africa, before moving to Sicily. I enjoy the format of the book, but the style is a little dry at times, and heavily biased in favour of the Americans. I was bored of reading about how great America was by the end, and had heard often enough of how the British army slowed them down. You'd never know the Russians were even in the war, but then again that is not the point of this book. At the time of reading I have little knowledge of the historical aspects of the war in North Africa, so I can't vouch for it's authenticity, but the book is definitely a decent read. I am not sure yet if I will read the other two books in this planned trilogy.

Great finish in an outstanding trilogy, 04 Apr 2007
I think this book, and the two preceding it should be required reading in school. I had no idea how horrific this war was, particularly more so as the brutalities committed on both sides were against our own. There were so many moments when I wanted to stop and cry for the loss of life, and especially at the end when the one man who was capable of healing the country and bringing us all back together as one nation, Abraham Lincoln, was assassinated.

The research was impeccable and telling the story from the viewpoints of the various generals absolutely fascinating. The honorable Robert E. Lee, Chamberlain (loved his gracious salute to the surrendering army), and the ever fascinating U.S. Grant.

One quote from so many in the book that just brought tears to my eyes: "Yes, it was horrible, horrible indeed. But he had to tell himself that, remind himself to see it that way. There was no sickening revulsion, no outrage, no indignation at the barbarism. It was just one more scene from this war, one more horror, one more mass of death, blending together with all the rest."

Highly highly recommended, and will definitely open your eyes to the horror of war.


Like father-like son?, 19 Nov 2000
Jeff Shaara sets himself a large task here, and for the most part suceeds. His fathers' book was a monumental acheivment, and he does very well for himself. The great character of Chamberlain comes shining through in both books, here Jeff does better than his father, Lee fares less well, and Longstreet is just to difficult to convey. What I really like was his treatment of Grant, his discriptions of battles, espcially the Wilderness, and the little biographies at the end. I could have cried at the sheer waste of so many young lives, but it was a long time ago so I will save my tears for a more recent war.

Extraordinary, 14 Jul 1999
Only THE KILLER ANGELS and THE TRIUMPH AND THE GLORY can top Jeff Schaara's Civil War epic, THE LAST FULL MEASURE. Ultra-realistic, captivating theme, absorbing characters, accuracy, it has everything one could ask of a historical fiction novel

The Trilogy is Complete!!!, 29 Jun 1999
The Last Full Measure continues the spirit of Gods and Generals and Killer Angels. The whole series has been so intriguing that I read each book in a matter of days. Both Shaaras bring you so close to all of the characters that every chapter you find yourself hoping for the other side.

Best of the series, 21 Jun 1999
I have read all 3 books of this trilogy and this one is the most exciting of the three. For history novel lovers, this book is captivating.

You do become drawn in as the author describes the battle of Yellow Tavern where JEB Stuart becomes mortally wounded and as the war comes to a close at Appotmataox.

Although the author is still learning his style or writing, I truly believe The Last Full Measure will keep you interested until the end.

You learn more about the Mexican War than about Robert E Lee, 18 Feb 2003
"Gone for Soldiers," a novel of the Mexican War, has the odd position of being a prequel to a prequel. The son of Michael Shaara the Pulitzer Prize winning author of "The Killer Angels" which tells the story of the battle of Gettysburg from the perspective of four major participants (Lee and Longstreet for the Confederates, Buford and Chamberlain for the Federals), Jeff Shaara authored both a prequel, "Gods and Generals" and a sequel "The Last Full Measure" to his father's novel. Both volumes maintained a focus on Lee, Longstreet and Chamberlain while working in other familiar figures from the war, most notably Jackson for the prequel and Grant for the sequel. In "Gone for Soldiers" the focus is primarily on Captain Robert E. Lee and his mentor Winfield Scott during the Mexican War.

More than the other two volumes, "Gone for Soldiers" is able to benefit from the shifts in perspective used in "The Killer Angels." Most of the chapters focus on Lee and Scott, although there are a few focusing on the Mexico military dictator Santa Anna and several chapters during the final assault on Mexico City that tell of the exploits of Longstreet, Jackson and Grant--all figures who will become prominent in the main trilogy (the chapter on Grant is the most interesting). Certainly it is difficult to get the most out of this volume if you have not read "The Killer Angels," or at least seen the movie "Gettysburg," although I can not imagine why someone would come to this book except through those other volumes. After all, there are not a lot of novels about the Mexican War out there. But the element of irony underscores many scenes in the book, whether it is Lee briefly meeting Longstreet, Jackson, Pickett, Meade and Grant, or Scott telling his chief engineer about the need to take the high ground. What happened with Picket's Charge at Gettysburg in particular and the Civil War in general colors much of what happens in this novel.

If anything, Shaara's characterization of Lee is still too sanctified; his modest and humility become just to oppressive by the end of the novel. Because one of the point of these books is to gain insight into what these men were thinking, you can make a case that Lee, even more so that Scott, is over-reflective, which makes his combination of military genius and political naivete rather unbelievable. The relationship between Lee and Scott is more important that the war itself; years later Scott went on record as calling Lee the best officer he ever saw and one of the biggest surprises is that the old man does not serve more explicitly as a father figure to Lee, whose father "Light Horse" Harry Lee, the Revolutionary War hero, died when the boy was fairly young. Thus we read the book in anticipation of a relationship developing between the two that simply never comes about. As for Scott, we come away from the novel concerned more with his bickering staff and political headaches more than his military genius, especially since time and time again that boils down to have Captain Lee come up with the plan, or scout the enemy, or place the guns, or command the troops. Most of the supporting characters are presented as inept clowns of various degrees, although Nicholas Trist the diplomat sent by President Polk to negotiate a peace treat is the exception that proves the rule. The main thing you will come away with from reading "Gone for Soldiers" are the details of Scott's campaign during the Mexican War. The book is quite readable except for a few rough spots during the action when the characters insist on thinking too much about what they think about what they are doing. But overall, I still prefer the realism of the fictional Lee of Harry Turtledove's "The Guns of the South" to the figure in this book.

Fascinating view of a forgotten war, 02 May 2002
Those who are fans of Jeff Shaara's work, and, indeed, that of his father, Michael, will be delighted by his foray into the Mexican-American War.

I cannot recall any substantial fiction work which covers the War in question, whereas, of course, the American Civil War which followed 13 years afterwards has proved to be a never-ending source for fiction writers.

Shaara's system, as, again, with his father, is to write the story from the point of view of the various main characters, here, Winfield Scott, Robert E Lee and Santa Anna, with a few others thrown in, mainly Thomas Jackson.

Whereas the characters of the Civil War characters are comparatively well-known, it is difficult to know how accurately Shaara (and, admittedly other writers such as Eisenhower) portrays Worth, Twiggs and Pillow. I think that one must presume that all three, for varying reasons, were indeed extremely frustrating subordinates to work with. It perhaps explains Scott's apparent readiness to take the brilliant (and very respectful) Lee into his confidence.

In lesser hands Lee could appear dour, but Shaara makes him a multi-faceted character, yet at the same time ever-mindful of the position of superior-ranking officers in the US Army at the time.

Scott comes across as an extremely subtle commander, which may not have been quite so apparent in other books on the subject, and I was certainly unaware of the (at times) bitter rivalry between him and Zachary Taylor.

The book would have rated 5-stars were it not for the portrayal of Santa Anna. One of the successes of the Civil War books was in obtaining view-points from senior officers of the two armies in contention. With the Mexican War, things are made difficult by the fact that Santa Anna was in supreme command of the Mexican forces, and all of his subordinate generals are very shadowy figures in history. Santa Anna himself is a fascinating historical character, but one who it is extremely difficult to comprehend. What was it about him that made the Mexican people reject him totally on several occasions and yet welcome him back a few years later, and, then, give (or allow) him absolute power?

The picture which Shaara gives is of a petulant character, rather reminiscent of some portrayals of Napoleon or, perhaps Caligula. Perhaps that is the problem with figures who are considerably "larger than life"?

Having said that, the book is, as usual, well written and gives a very well-explained view of the Southern campaigns in a forgotten war.

A great way to get your history lesson, 26 Mar 2007
Fascinating portrayal of a sad time in US History, as told from the perspectives of the generals involved in these campaigns. I was most particularly moved by Lee and his torn loyalties to the US Army and his home state of Virginia, and most especially by the great Stonewall Jackson. I've come across the names in history classes (oh so long ago) and the occasional novel covering this period, but it was wonderful to have them brought to life as this author did, and we are once again reminded that was is indeed h***. One moment in the book that particularly touched me was during a retreat of Federal soldiers. One of them slipped in the mud and was told that since the general decreed the roads to be in good condition therefore there is no mud.

A very good book and recommended for anyone interested in this period of US History. Four stars instead of five as the author's habit of inserting a comma instead of the word "and" was a bit of a distration for me. I'm not sure where the editors were, and why they didn't correct it.


Astounding prequel to father's Killer Angels!, 17 Feb 2003
My first love is Scottish History, but since I was raised on both sides of the pond, I grew to have a great love for the complexities of the War Between the States in the US. So, it was great pleasure I read this book.

Shaara, in this case Jeff, the son of Michael, had a hard act to follow. His father was the author of Pulitzer Prize Winning Killer Angels (1974). Killer Angels looked at the high watermark of the Confederacy which ended with the battle of Gettysburg. That was the single most important event of the whole War Between the States, in a war that shaped the United States. It gave such insight, such reality into the horror, the glory, the humanity and inhumanity of war, of Generals Lee, Hancock, Pickett and Chamberlain. Shaara's words brought alive the battle and made you feel it all, the anticipation, the frustration, the fear and the anger.

In Gods and Generals, Jeff picks up his father's pen and gives you another masterpiece. Though father and son, both have a different writing voices. Jeff picks up the threads of what happened before Gettysburg, a prequel to his father's award winning novel, giving you insight into the men facing what would be their hardest trial. He again centres on the driven Lee, the bumbling Chamberlain, the dashing Hancock, but we also see Jackson, the man who could march his men 40 miles in a day and then fight a battle, one of the most efficient Generals of the whole war on either side, yet overwhelming a religious man. What interested me most, was his portrait of Lee, his dedication to the Confederacy winning and yet the pain of being torn by his loyalty to the Union army he once served and likely of which he would have been General had he not resigned his commission.

A tour de force for a first time writer.

gripping stuff, 05 Jul 2001
with an iterest in the american civil war i found this book an read that i could not put down. from the word go the author has you wanting to read more and more all the time. Using the veiw of the Generals eyes you can perceive the actual size of the battle-fields and the stress and strain these commanders were under. in the form of the Northern commanders the inability to make use of their supirior numbers(not pressing home attacks because they could not see the whole battle-field and would not listin to their subordinates). On the Confederates side you General Lee, General 'Stonewall' Jackson, General Longstreet, General Jubal Early and of course who could forget the ever presant thorn in the norths flank and rear General Stuart. If i was to recommend any book for someone interested in this era this would definatly be one.

At last a book that made sense of a most confusing battle., 03 Jul 2001
In my opinion Chancerlorsville is a battle very hard to work out because of its dimensions & the general confusion. Jeff Shaara dons his father's mantle and whilst I feel he lacks a little of Michael's charisma, he gives us an unputdownable book which is also extremely informative. I read it; reread "The Killer Angels" then went back to "Gods & Generals" I now feel I have a working knowledge of a conflict which has always fascinated me.Thanks Jeff Shaara!What if Jackson had survived to fight at Gettysburg?

A very good novel, 04 Sep 1999
I am a 14 year old who loves reading and trys to get hold of any war novel/biography about it. If you like reading about war also this is a great book. It shows how the men felt and it is a great preceeding book of Killer Angels.

Well presented History, 22 Jul 2008
I first encountered Jeff Shaara with his prequel to his father's novel, The Killer Angels. Gods and Generals was excellent and in many ways Mr Shaara repeats the format and approach of that novel, in The Rising Tide. This time his theatre of conflict is North Africa in 1943. The story initially follows Rommel and Monty as they fight east and then west across the North African desert. Later the book engages with the Americans, led by Eisenhower. The book is fictionalisation and Shaara draws upon records and diaries to build a more intimate picture of the main characters, and a few minor ones, to tell the toils and terrors of the campaign. I thoroughly enjoyed the insights into the motivations of these men, which Shaara provides. I found the view to be well balanced, not favouring any particular viewpoint excessively. I think if you have enjoyed Jeff Shaara's other works then you will enjoy this. If you haven't I wouldn't dissuade you from this, but I would say try Gods and Generals first.

Read how the Americans won World War II!, 20 Apr 2008
This is a solid fictional account of the Allies efforts in North Africa, before moving to Sicily. I enjoy the format of the book, but the style is a little dry at times, and heavily biased in favour of the Americans. I was bored of reading about how great America was by the end, and had heard often enough of how the British army slowed them down. You'd never know the Russians were even in the war, but then again that is not the point of this book. At the time of reading I have little knowledge of the historical aspects of the war in North Africa, so I can't vouch for it's authenticity, but the book is definitely a decent read. I am not sure yet if I will read the other two books in this planned trilogy.

a big let down, 30 Oct 2008
I thoroughly enjoyed Jeff Shaara's Civil War novels and as a keen student of World War 1 thought this would be a great present for my Dad. He was politely luke warm about it after reading it and he lent it me to read.

I think it's unreadable. When I read the opening chapter or so, I asked myself why were Americans in Ypres in 1915? Slowly it dawned on me. His characters were actually British Tommies but the author has absolutely no idea how British soldiers talked. The British Tommies in the book talk like US troops in Vietnam. They use words like "Greenie" - meaning new recruit. And have nicknames like "Snake".

I skipped to the end where the author pronounces something along the lines of: if it hadn't been for the USA, Britain and France would have lost the War. At that point I put it down. I say don't waste your time or money.

However, on Amazon.com the Americans love it!

Does this author know anything?, 07 Aug 2008
With the quote on the first page "the best novel about the Great War since "All Quiet on the Western Front"" and the further comments by Generals Franks and Clark I had high expectations but on reading the glaring inaccuaracies on first few pages I can now understand why the American capacity for friendly fire seems so prevalent. On page 22 he has the BEF in August 1914 of nearly 500,000 (we only sentjust under 100,000).The first chapter set in the autumn of 1915 has British soldiers in helmets (not issued until the following year), a company at one tenth its strength (somewhat exaggerated)and men in the frontline for months(3-4 days being the norm). Within hours of arrival the recruit is going over the top in a mass attack - a rare event in reality and certainly not carried out at one tenth strength. Most over the top activity was in the form of trench raids and reparing the wire. At this point I gave up preferring not to waste my time. I conclude that the author's research probably consisted of watching a few episodes of "Black Adder goes forth". My advice to any one seeing this book - Don't bother. Read "Birdsong" instead.It is far better researched and atleast has some literary merit.

A let down, 25 May 2008
The book starts out pretty well but slows down and becomes less interesting after the death of the two flyers. It is also painfully pro-American which would not be so difficult to deal with if it were not for the heavy anti-British bias. America is portrayed as being a fantastic military power hampered by a poorly run government. Any success the British achieve is always dismissed as being due to luck or being more a failure of the Germans. Even the French are treated better with many of their failures being generously excused by the author. The version I have is also heavily marred by the constant and clearly random hyphenating of many words and names, its clearly a clerical error as on some pages a characters name will have a hyphen in it and then further down the page will not, its annoying. The only positive I can find is the authors style is fairly readable.

A shabbily written and y poorly researched piece of work, 06 May 2008
If this book were at least written with any finesse or depth, I could overlook the many crass errors, and complete absence of professional research. Even the material concerning Americans in this work is innacurate. The characters are so thinly drawn as to be barely distinguishable. They do not seem to undergo any experience of fear, desire, hunger, ambition or despair. I very much enjoyed the author's father's work (The Killer Angels) on Gettysburg, but reading this farrago of a novel has led me to question the integrity of his offspring. Of the 23 sources cited, all are American save three German (von Richthofen, von Hindenburg, Falkenhayn), one French (Foch), and two British (Lloyd George, not celebrated for his honesty or integrity, and a Private Arthur G Empey, presumably the source for the single opening chapter cameo of the BEF). Suffice to say, with such a skewed research base, an unbalanced work comes as no great surprise.

Doesn't live up to the blurb..., 07 Sep 2007
An interesting take on the First World War, from a distinctly USA point of view - but the book is ultimately disappointing. A historical novel woven around real characters and events, it is never quite clear where historical fact becomes confused with dramatic licence. The portrayal of Sir William Robertson as a Cockney is simply inaccurate, for example. However, I suspect the book is aimed squarely at the USA market, where the consistent portrayal of Europeans as hidebound, unimaginative prisoners of their colonial past will play better than the more complex reality of the situation.

The underlying theme of the book is "If it hadn't have been for the Americans, Britain and France wouldn't have won the war." It's good in parts, and overall probably worth reading if you have an interest in First World War history, but the blurb on the cover promises "The best novel about the First World War since 'All Quiet on the Western Front'" - to which I can only comment: not in my opinion.

Great finish in an outstanding trilogy, 04 Apr 2007
I think this book, and the two preceding it should be required reading in school. I had no idea how horrific this war was, particularly more so as the brutalities committed on both sides were against our own. There were so many moments when I wanted to stop and cry for the loss of life, and especially at the end when the one man who was capable of healing the country and bringing us all back together as one nation, Abraham Lincoln, was assassinated.

The research was impeccable and telling the story from the viewpoints of the various generals absolutely fascinating. The honorable Robert E. Lee, Chamberlain (loved his gracious salute to the surrendering army), and the ever fascinating U.S. Grant.

One quote from so many in the book that just brought tears to my eyes: "Yes, it was horrible, horrible indeed. But he had to tell himself that, remind himself to see it that way. There was no sickening revulsion, no outrage, no indignation at the barbarism. It was just one more scene from this war, one more horror, one more mass of death, blending together with all the rest."

Highly highly recommended, and will definitely open your eyes to the horror of war.


Like father-like son?, 19 Nov 2000
Jeff Shaara sets himself a large task here, and for the most part suceeds. His fathers' book was a monumental acheivment, and he does very well for himself. The great character of Chamberlain comes shining through in both books, here Jeff does better than his father, Lee fares less well, and Longstreet is just to difficult to convey. What I really like was his treatment of Grant, his discriptions of battles, espcially the Wilderness, and the little biographies at the end. I could have cried at the sheer waste of so many young lives, but it was a long time ago so I will save my tears for a more recent war.

Extraordinary, 14 Jul 1999
Only THE KILLER ANGELS and THE TRIUMPH AND THE GLORY can top Jeff Schaara's Civil War epic, THE LAST FULL MEASURE. Ultra-realistic, captivating theme, absorbing characters, accuracy, it has everything one could ask of a historical fiction novel

The Trilogy is Complete!!!, 29 Jun 1999
The Last Full Measure continues the spirit of Gods and Generals and Killer Angels. The whole series has been so intriguing that I read each book in a matter of days. Both Shaaras bring you so close to all of the characters that every chapter you find yourself hoping for the other side.

Best of the series, 21 Jun 1999
I have read all 3 books of this trilogy and this one is the most exciting of the three. For history novel lovers, this book is captivating.

You do become drawn in as the author describes the battle of Yellow Tavern where JEB Stuart becomes mortally wounded and as the war comes to a close at Appotmataox.

Although the author is still learning his style or writing, I truly believe The Last Full Measure will keep you interested until the end.

You learn more about the Mexican War than about Robert E Lee, 18 Feb 2003
"Gone for Soldiers," a novel of the Mexican War, has the odd position of being a prequel to a prequel. The son of Michael Shaara the Pulitzer Prize winning author of "The Killer Angels" which tells the story of the battle of Gettysburg from the perspective of four major participants (Lee and Longstreet for the Confederates, Buford and Chamberlain for the Federals), Jeff Shaara authored both a prequel, "Gods and Generals" and a sequel "The Last Full Measure" to his father's novel. Both volumes maintained a focus on Lee, Longstreet and Chamberlain while working in other familiar figures from the war, most notably Jackson for the prequel and Grant for the sequel. In "Gone for Soldiers" the focus is primarily on Captain Robert E. Lee and his mentor Winfield Scott during the Mexican War.

More than the other two volumes, "Gone for Soldiers" is able to benefit from the shifts in perspective used in "The Killer Angels." Most of the chapters focus on Lee and Scott, although there are a few focusing on the Mexico military dictator Santa Anna and several chapters during the final assault on Mexico City that tell of the exploits of Longstreet, Jackson and Grant--all figures who will become prominent in the main trilogy (the chapter on Grant is the most interesting). Certainly it is difficult to get the most out of this volume if you have not read "The Killer Angels," or at least seen the movie "Gettysburg," although I can not imagine why someone would come to this book except through those other volumes. After all, there are not a lot of novels about the Mexican War out there. But the element of irony underscores many scenes in the book, whether it is Lee briefly meeting Longstreet, Jackson, Pickett, Meade and Grant, or Scott telling his chief engineer about the need to take the high ground. What happened with Picket's Charge at Gettysburg in particular and the Civil War in general colors much of what happens in this novel.

If anything, Shaara's characterization of Lee is still too sanctified; his modest and humility become just to oppressive by the end of the novel. Because one of the point of these books is to gain insight into what these men were thinking, you can make a case that Lee, even more so that Scott, is over-reflective, which makes his combination of military genius and political naivete rather unbelievable. The relationship between Lee and Scott is more important that the war itself; years later Scott went on record as calling Lee the best officer he ever saw and one of the biggest surprises is that the old man does not serve more explicitly as a father figure to Lee, whose father "Light Horse" Harry Lee, the Revolutionary War hero, died when the boy was fairly young. Thus we read the book in anticipation of a relationship developing between the two that simply never comes about. As for Scott, we come away from the novel concerned more with his bickering staff and political headaches more than his military genius, especially since time and time again that boils down to have Captain Lee come up with the plan, or scout the enemy, or place the guns, or command the troops. Most of the supporting characters are presented as inept clowns of various degrees, although Nicholas Trist the diplomat sent by President Polk to negotiate a peace treat is the exception that proves the rule. The main thing you will come away with from reading "Gone for Soldiers" are the details of Scott's campaign during the Mexican War. The book is quite readable except for a few rough spots during the action when the characters insist on thinking too much about what they think about what they are doing. But overall, I still prefer the realism of the fictional Lee of Harry Turtledove's "The Guns of the South" to the figure in this book.

Fascinating view of a forgotten war, 02 May 2002
Those who are fans of Jeff Shaara's work, and, indeed, that of his father, Michael, will be delighted by his foray into the Mexican-American War.

I cannot recall any substantial fiction work which covers the War in question, whereas, of course, the American Civil War which followed 13 years afterwards has proved to be a never-ending source for fiction writers.

Shaara's system, as, again, with his father, is to write the story from the point of view of the various main characters, here, Winfield Scott, Robert E Lee and Santa Anna, with a few others thrown in, mainly Thomas Jackson.

Whereas the characters of the Civil War characters are comparatively well-known, it is difficult to know how accurately Shaara (and, admittedly other writers such as Eisenhower) portrays Worth, Twiggs and Pillow. I think that one must presume that all three, for varying reasons, were indeed extremely frustrating subordinates to work with. It perhaps explains Scott's apparent readiness to take the brilliant (and very respectful) Lee into his confidence.

In lesser hands Lee could appear dour, but Shaara makes him a multi-faceted character, yet at the same time ever-mindful of the position of superior-ranking officers in the US Army at the time.

Scott comes across as an extremely subtle commander, which may not have been quite so apparent in other books on the subject, and I was certainly unaware of the (at times) bitter rivalry between him and Zachary Taylor.

The book would have rated 5-stars were it not for the portrayal of Santa Anna. One of the successes of the Civil War books was in obtaining view-points from senior officers of the two armies in contention. With the Mexican War, things are made difficult by the fact that Santa Anna was in supreme command of the Mexican forces, and all of his subordinate generals are very shadowy figures in history. Santa Anna himself is a fascinating historical character, but one who it is extremely difficult to comprehend. What was it about him that made the Mexican people reject him totally on several occasions and yet welcome him back a few years later, and, then, give (or allow) him absolute power?

The picture which Shaara gives is of a petulant character, rather reminiscent of some portrayals of Napoleon or, perhaps Caligula. Perhaps that is the problem with figures who are considerably "larger than life"?

Having said that, the book is, as usual, well written and gives a very well-explained view of the Southern campaigns in a forgotten war.

A great way to get your history lesson, 26 Mar 2007
Fascinating portrayal of a sad time in US History, as told from the perspectives of the generals involved in these campaigns. I was most particularly moved by Lee and his torn loyalties to the US Army and his home state of Virginia, and most especially by the great Stonewall Jackson. I've come across the names in history classes (oh so long ago) and the occasional novel covering this period, but it was wonderful to have them brought to life as this author did, and we are once again reminded that was is indeed h***. One moment in the book that particularly touched me was during a retreat of Federal soldiers. One of them slipped in the mud and was told that since the general decreed the roads to be in good condition therefore there is no mud.

A very good book and recommended for anyone interested in this period of US History. Four stars instead of five as the author's habit of inserting a comma instead of the word "and" was a bit of a distration for me. I'm not sure where the editors were, and why they didn't correct it.


Astounding prequel to father's Killer Angels!, 17 Feb 2003
My first love is Scottish History, but since I was raised on both sides of the pond, I grew to have a great love for the complexities of the War Between the States in the US. So, it was great pleasure I read this book.

Shaara, in this case Jeff, the son of Michael, had a hard act to follow. His father was the author of Pulitzer Prize Winning Killer Angels (1974). Killer Angels looked at the high watermark of the Confederacy which ended with the battle of Gettysburg. That was the single most important event of the whole War Between the States, in a war that shaped the United States. It gave such insight, such reality into the horror, the glory, the humanity and inhumanity of war, of Generals Lee, Hancock, Pickett and Chamberlain. Shaara's words brought alive the battle and made you feel it all, the anticipation, the frustration, the fear and the anger.

In Gods and Generals, Jeff picks up his father's pen and gives you another masterpiece. Though father and son, both have a different writing voices. Jeff picks up the threads of what happened before Gettysburg, a prequel to his father's award winning novel, giving you insight into the men facing what would be their hardest trial. He again centres on the driven Lee, the bumbling Chamberlain, the dashing Hancock, but we also see Jackson, the man who could march his men 40 miles in a day and then fight a battle, one of the most efficient Generals of the whole war on either side, yet overwhelming a religious man. What interested me most, was his portrait of Lee, his dedication to the Confederacy winning and yet the pain of being torn by his loyalty to the Union army he once served and likely of which he would have been General had he not resigned his commission.

A tour de force for a first time writer.

gripping stuff, 05 Jul 2001
with an iterest in the american civil war i found this book an read that i could not put down. from the word go the author has you wanting to read more and more all the time. Using the veiw of the Generals eyes you can perceive the actual size of the battle-fields and the stress and strain these commanders were under. in the form of the Northern commanders the inability to make use of their supirior numbers(not pressing home attacks because they could not see the whole battle-field and would not listin to their subordinates). On the Confederates side you General Lee, General 'Stonewall' Jackson, General Longstreet, General Jubal Early and of course who could forget the ever presant thorn in the norths flank and rear General Stuart. If i was to recommend any book for someone interested in this era this would definatly be one.

At last a book that made sense of a most confusing battle., 03 Jul 2001
In my opinion Chancerlorsville is a battle very hard to work out because of its dimensions & the general confusion. Jeff Shaara dons his father's mantle and whilst I feel he lacks a little of Michael's charisma, he gives us an unputdownable book which is also extremely informative. I read it; reread "The Killer Angels" then went back to "Gods & Generals" I now feel I have a working knowledge of a conflict which has always fascinated me.Thanks Jeff Shaara!What if Jackson had survived to fight at Gettysburg?

A very good novel, 04 Sep 1999
I am a 14 year old who loves reading and trys to get hold of any war novel/biography about it. If you like reading about war also this is a great book. It shows how the men felt and it is a great preceeding book of Killer Angels.

Well presented History, 22 Jul 2008
I first encountered Jeff Shaara with his prequel to his father's novel, The Killer Angels. Gods and Generals was excellent and in many ways Mr Shaara repeats the format and approach of that novel, in The Rising Tide. This time his theatre of conflict is North Africa in 1943. The story initially follows Rommel and Monty as they fight east and then west across the North African desert. Later the book engages with the Americans, led by Eisenhower. The book is fictionalisation and Shaara draws upon records and diaries to build a more intimate picture of the main characters, and a few minor ones, to tell the toils and terrors of the campaign. I thoroughly enjoyed the insights into the motivations of these men, which Shaara provides. I found the view to be well balanced, not favouring any particular viewpoint excessively. I think if you have enjoyed Jeff Shaara's other works then you will enjoy this. If you haven't I wouldn't dissuade you from this, but I would say try Gods and Generals first.

Read how the Americans won World War II!, 20 Apr 2008
This is a solid fictional account of the Allies efforts in North Africa, before moving to Sicily. I enjoy the format of the book, but the style is a little dry at times, and heavily biased in favour of the Americans. I was bored of reading about how great America was by the end, and had heard often enough of how the British army slowed them down. You'd never know the Russians were even in the war, but then again that is not the point of this book. At the time of reading I have little knowledge of the historical aspects of the war in North Africa, so I can't vouch for it's authenticity, but the book is definitely a decent read. I am not sure yet if I will read the other two books in this planned trilogy.

a big let down, 30 Oct 2008
I thoroughly enjoyed Jeff Shaara's Civil War novels and as a keen student of World War 1 thought this would be a great present for my Dad. He was politely luke warm about it after reading it and he lent it me to read.

I think it's unreadable. When I read the opening chapter or so, I asked myself why were Americans in Ypres in 1915? Slowly it dawned on me. His characters were actually British Tommies but the author has absolutely no idea how British soldiers talked. The British Tommies in the book talk like US troops in Vietnam. They use words like "Greenie" - meaning new recruit. And have nicknames like "Snake".

I skipped to the end where the author pronounces something along the lines of: if it hadn't been for the USA, Britain and France would have lost the War. At that point I put it down. I say don't waste your time or money.

However, on Amazon.com the Americans love it!

Does this author know anything?, 07 Aug 2008
With the quote on the first page "the best novel about the Great War since "All Quiet on the Western Front"" and the further comments by Generals Franks and Clark I had high expectations but on reading the glaring inaccuaracies on first few pages I can now understand why the American capacity for friendly fire seems so prevalent. On page 22 he has the BEF in August 1914 of nearly 500,000 (we only sentjust under 100,000).The first chapter set in the autumn of 1915 has British soldiers in helmets (not issued until the following year), a company at one tenth its strength (somewhat exaggerated)and men in the frontline for months(3-4 days being the norm). Within hours of arrival the recruit is going over the top in a mass attack - a rare event in reality and certainly not carried out at one tenth strength. Most over the top activity was in the form of trench raids and reparing the wire. At this point I gave up preferring not to waste my time. I conclude that the author's research probably consisted of watching a few episodes of "Black Adder goes forth". My advice to any one seeing this book - Don't bother. Read "Birdsong" instead.It is far better researched and atleast has some literary merit.

A let down, 25 May 2008
The book starts out pretty well but slows down and becomes less interesting after the death of the two flyers. It is also painfully pro-American which would not be so difficult to deal with if it were not for the heavy anti-British bias. America is portrayed as being a fantastic military power hampered by a poorly run government. Any success the British achieve is always dismissed as being due to luck or being more a failure of the Germans. Even the French are treated better with many of their failures being generously excused by the author. The version I have is also heavily marred by the constant and clearly random hyphenating of many words and names, its clearly a clerical error as on some pages a characters name will have a hyphen in it and then further down the page will not, its annoying. The only positive I can find is the authors style is fairly readable.

A shabbily written and y poorly researched piece of work, 06 May 2008
If this book were at least written with any finesse or depth, I could overlook the many crass errors, and complete absence of professional research. Even the material concerning Americans in this work is innacurate. The characters are so thinly drawn as to be barely distinguishable. They do not seem to undergo any experience of fear, desire, hunger, ambition or despair. I very much enjoyed the author's father's work (The Killer Angels) on Gettysburg, but reading this farrago of a novel has led me to question the integrity of his offspring. Of the 23 sources cited, all are American save three German (von Richthofen, von Hindenburg, Falkenhayn), one French (Foch), and two British (Lloyd George, not celebrated for his honesty or integrity, and a Private Arthur G Empey, presumably the source for the single opening chapter cameo of the BEF). Suffice to say, with such a skewed research base, an unbalanced work comes as no great surprise.

Doesn't live up to the blurb..., 07 Sep 2007
An interesting take on the First World War, from a distinctly USA point of view - but the book is ultimately disappointing. A historical novel woven around real characters and events, it is never quite clear where historical fact becomes confused with dramatic licence. The portrayal of Sir William Robertson as a Cockney is simply inaccurate, for example. However, I suspect the book is aimed squarely at the USA market, where the consistent portrayal of Europeans as hidebound, unimaginative prisoners of their colonial past will play better than the more complex reality of the situation.

The underlying theme of the book is "If it hadn't have been for the Americans, Britain and France wouldn't have won the war." It's good in parts, and overall probably worth reading if you have an interest in First World War history, but the blurb on the cover promises "The best novel about the First World War since 'All Quiet on the Western Front'" - to which I can only comment: not in my opinion.

Igniting the Flame of Freedom, 02 Feb 2008
Jeff Shaara provides readers with another realistic sounding novel which brings to life the American Revolutionary war and many of its heros. Told from the viewpoints of George Washington, Nathaniel Greene, Benjamin Franklin and Charles Cornwallis, the book is vivid and engaging in its portrayal of life during those most challenging of times. Most outstanding is how simple life was and how many of the colonists were divided in their loyalties ... but the time had come when they must take a stand, for one side or the other. Michael Shaara shows how the Founding Fathers gradually developed the principles upon which the United States would base its Constitution. He shows the birthing pains which led to a nation that is so unique among the nations of the world.

As always, the author's meticulous research for accuracy, along with his fluid and insightful writing, keeps the reader hanging on his every word. The reader gets a sense of how the Crown had no clue of what the Boston Tea Party truly represented. The Colonies were supposed to show gratitude to England, for the privilege of being taxed, it seemed. Once it was clear the goal was to become independent of England, the battle lines were clearly drawn. Amazing how with so little funding and with a volunteer army of men from many different states, a leader arose. George Washington stood firm and tall but most importantly, he won the hearts, minds and *loyalty* of the soldiers. He gave them courage during the most difficult times, when they were hungry and worn out. His strategies during key battles provided successful outcomes ... demonstrating his patience and perseverance against all odds. Washington withstood the hardships along with his men, and fought hard for the cause for which he and his men were willing to lose their lives ...

Michael Shaara excels at revealing the political process behind the war. He describes an aged Ben Franklin who becomes a diplomat for the soon-to-be-born nation. Franklin's visit to France with his grandson as his trusted secretary is particularly well written and enjoyable. The strengths and weaknesses of the leadership of the British Army is woven tightly into the fabric of the novel. The treachery of some Colonists is revealed ... The maps are especially helpful in picturing the battles and the challenges as the armies battle each other and the natural elements. Shaara pulls together many diverse influences which helped tip the scales on the side of the Colonists ...The roles played by General Von Steuben and the Marquis de Lafayette are especially informative and enlightening. Overall, Michael Shaara has written an outstanding novel which will delight many readers who otherwise might find reading about battles and war rather tedious. His book is a fascinating story which awakens the reader to a much greater appreciation for freedom and the men who fought for this most noble ideal. Other highly recommended books by Jeff Shaara are Rise to Rebellion: A Novel of the American Revolution and books about the Civil War, The Killer Angels. The Last Full Measure, plus "Gods and Generals". Erika Borsos [pepper flower

A better sense of history than psychology this time around, 18 Feb 2003
I wonder if I would have liked "The Glorious Cause" more if I had never read "The Killer Angels." Of course, the great irony is that Jeff Shaara has been writing his historical novels because of the critical success of his father's Pulitzer Prize winning novel. However, having read Jeff Shaara's prequel and sequel on the Civil War, his volume about the Mexican War, and these two novels about the American Revolution, I keep coming back to the conclusion that the wrong lesson has been learned from "The Killer Angels." What the books all share in common is the shifting of narrative perspective amongst key participants in the events under consideration. For the Battle of Gettysburg in the original that meant Robert E. Lee, James Longstreet, and Lewis Armistead on the Confederate side, and John Buford and Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain on the Union side. Jeff Shaara has followed Michael Shaara's example in using the same technique, albiet by including many more characters who are often reduced to a single chapter to tell their story from their perspective. But an important consideration in the success of "The Killer Angels" was that it focused on a four day period. Consequently, we followed Longstreet and Chamberlain throughout the entire battle. There were not gaps of weeks and months like you will often find in "The Glorious Cause."

This becomes a concern for me because "The Killer Angels" was more about psychology than history, per se, detailing what these men were thinking during the pivotal battle of the Civil War. Most people who read the book knew the basic particulars of what the Army of Northern Virginia and the Army of the Potomac did from June 30 to July 3, 1863. At the very least they know about Pickett's Charge. When it comes to the American Revolution my historical knowledge is probably average, which means that "The Glorious Cause" really did teach me more about that war than I knew previously. But it lacks the impact of "The Killer Angels" because the story is full of giantic gaps. It would not have bothered me if Shaara had done more volumes in this series than just the two. Single books devoted to the Second Continental Congress writing the Declaration of Independence, the embassy of Benjamin Franklin and others to the French court, the failed defense of New York City, the winter of Valley Forge, or the siege of Yorktown all could have worked in a similar manner. This would be why "Gone For Soliders" is probably my favorite of Jeff Shaara's books, for the simple reason that it offers up the smallest time frame.

I would think that most readers will get a better understanding of how the American Revolution was fought and the changing strategies on both sides. But there will be a few chapters, such as Chapter 49 Morgan, which makes the battle at Hannah's Cowpens a memorable experience, clearly reminds us of what this approach to historical fiction can do at its best. We get glimpses of similar insights to George Washington and Nathaniel Greene, but the gaps in the chronological narrative get in the way of providing a complete portrait. Ironically, by the end of the book, I think we have a better idea of the mind of British General Charles Cornwallis more than any other figure.

Certainly "The Glorious Cause" is worth a read, even if you have not read "Rise to Rebellion" first, but the expanded breadth of the scope of this novel necessarily sacrifices depth. However, I am optimstic because whether Shaara continues to go back in history, to the French & Indian Wars or goes back to following up the Civil War by looking at either the Plains Indian War or the Spanish-American War, there is the opportunity to deal with a much more limited historical frame of reference than he has done to date. Furthermore, I think this could only be a good thing.

Great finish in an outstanding trilogy, 04 Apr 2007
I think this book, and the two preceding it should be required reading in school. I had no idea how horrific this war was, particularly more so as the brutalities committed on both sides were against our own. There were so many moments when I wanted to stop and cry for the loss of life, and especially at the end when the one man who was capable of healing the country and bringing us all back together as one nation, Abraham Lincoln, was assassinated.

The research was impeccable and telling the story from the viewpoints of the various generals absolutely fascinating. The honorable Robert E. Lee, Chamberlain (loved his gracious salute to the surrendering army), and the ever fascinating U.S. Grant.

One quote from so many in the book that just brought tears to my eyes: "Yes, it was horrible, horrible indeed. But he had to tell himself that, remind himself to see it that way. There was no sickening revulsion, no outrage, no indignation at the barbarism. It was just one more scene from this war, one more horror, one more mass of death, blending together with all the rest."

Highly highly recommended, and will definitely open your eyes to the horror of war.


Like father-like son?, 19 Nov 2000
Jeff Shaara sets himself a large task here, and for the most part suceeds. His fathers' book was a monumental acheivment, and he does very well for himself. The great character of Chamberlain comes shining through in both books, here Jeff does better than his father, Lee fares less well, and Longstreet is just to difficult to convey. What I really like was his treatment of Grant, his discriptions of battles, espcially the Wilderness, and the little biographies at the end. I could have cried at the sheer waste of so many young lives, but it was a long time ago so I will save my tears for a more recent war.

Extraordinary, 14 Jul 1999
Only THE KILLER ANGELS and THE TRIUMPH AND THE GLORY can top Jeff Schaara's Civil War epic, THE LAST FULL MEASURE. Ultra-realistic, captivating theme, absorbing characters, accuracy, it has everything one could ask of a historical fiction novel

The Trilogy is Complete!!!, 29 Jun 1999
The Last Full Measure continues the spirit of Gods and Generals and Killer Angels. The whole series has been so intriguing that I read each book in a matter of days. Both Shaaras bring you so close to all of the characters that every chapter you find yourself hoping for the other side.

Best of the series, 21 Jun 1999
I have read all 3 books of this trilogy and this one is the most exciting of the three. For history novel lovers, this book is captivating.

You do become drawn in as the author describes the battle of Yellow Tavern where JEB Stuart becomes mortally wounded and as the war comes to a close at Appotmataox.

Although the author is still learning his style or writing, I truly believe The Last Full Measure will keep you interested until the end.

You learn more about the Mexican War than about Robert E Lee, 18 Feb 2003
"Gone for Soldiers," a novel of the Mexican War, has the odd position of being a prequel to a prequel. The son of Michael Shaara the Pulitzer Prize winning author of "The Killer Angels" which tells the story of the battle of Gettysburg from the perspective of four major participants (Lee and Longstreet for the Confederates, Buford and Chamberlain for the Federals), Jeff Shaara authored both a prequel, "Gods and Generals" and a sequel "The Last Full Measure" to his father's novel. Both volumes maintained a focus on Lee, Longstreet and Chamberlain while working in other familiar figures from the war, most notably Jackson for the prequel and Grant for the sequel. In "Gone for Soldiers" the focus is primarily on Captain Robert E. Lee and his mentor Winfield Scott during the Mexican War.

More than the other two volumes, "Gone for Soldiers" is able to benefit from the shifts in perspective used in "The Killer Angels." Most of the ch