What do you think?
Rate this book
William Tecumseh Sherman: In the Service of My Country: A Life
General William Tecumseh Sherman’s 1864 burning of Atlanta solidified his legacy as a ruthless leader. Evolving from a spirited student at West Point, Sherman became a general who fought in some of the Civil War’s most decisive campaigns—Shiloh, Vicksburg, Atlanta—until finally, seeking a swift ending to the war’s horrendous casualties, he devastated southern resources on his famous March to the Sea across the Carolinas. Later, as general-in-chief of the U.S. Army, Sherman relentlessly paved the way west during the Indian wars. James Lee McDonough’s fresh insight reveals a man tormented by fears that history would pass him by and that he would miss his chance to serve his country. Drawing on years of research, McDonough delves into Sherman’s dramatic personal life, including his strained relationship with his wife, his personal debts, and his young son’s death. The result is a remarkable, illuminating portrait of an American icon.
816 pages, Hardcover
First published June 13, 2016
388 people are currently reading
2143 people want to read
About the author
James Lee McDonough
22 books28 followersJames Lee McDonough is professor of history at Auburn University.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 210 reviews
July 24, 2016
A perennial problem with biographies of military figures is that they tend to skate over all the before and after material in order to focus on what the war or military campaign that made that person famous. Thankfully, in this biography of Sherman, it is very much 'a life' as the title says - McDonough devotes as much attention to Sherman's life before and after the Civil War as the four years of its duration. After all, whilst it may have the formative experience of his life, four years out of seventy-odd is too few to sustain the weight of an entire 'life'.
It is curious how many of the major generals of the Civil War struggled in their pre-war lives - Grant and Sherman being only the two most prominent examples. Perhaps it is a classic example of the difficulties military men experience in peacetime - what do men bred for war do when there is no war? Sherman struggled throughout his life with debt, with a family constantly urging him to leave the army, to turn his plentiful talents to other more profitable paths. Yet when he finally did, pursuing a career as a bank, he found no fortune, although through no lack of his own and his bank's troubles would have been far far worse in the various crashes and troubles of the era had it not been for Sherman's cool head in a crisis, determination, integrity and commitment to duty - all traits that would serve him well in the War.
The Civil War made Sherman, as it made Grant - and together they must surely go down in history as one of, if not the most successful military partnership in history. There was no ego between them, and they trusted one another implicitly. It was this bond that allowed them to operate in tandem to finally defeat the South, and allowed Sherman to set off on his famous 'March to the Sea', cutting loose from all supply lines and operating independently and in isolation in enemy territory, bringing total war to the civilian population. It was Sherman's chance to show the world his formidable military genius - as much for organisational ability, management and logistics as military strategy. Indeed, Sherman was a general who loathed bloodshed and massive casualties, who far preferred to manoeuvre his enemy out of positions than to fling troops headlong in attack. It is no wonder he is regarded as perhaps the first 'modern' general.
Sherman comes across in this biography as an immensely appealing man - although no doubt Southerners would disagree - a man who enjoyed theatre and dancing, outgoing and gregarious, a fine public speaker, a man of integrity and discipline, a man driven by ambition but not by ego, capable of great humility and restraint at times. If all history remembers of Sherman is the March to the Sea, it is doing him a grave disservice - one that thankfully this excellent biography does much to remedy.
It is curious how many of the major generals of the Civil War struggled in their pre-war lives - Grant and Sherman being only the two most prominent examples. Perhaps it is a classic example of the difficulties military men experience in peacetime - what do men bred for war do when there is no war? Sherman struggled throughout his life with debt, with a family constantly urging him to leave the army, to turn his plentiful talents to other more profitable paths. Yet when he finally did, pursuing a career as a bank, he found no fortune, although through no lack of his own and his bank's troubles would have been far far worse in the various crashes and troubles of the era had it not been for Sherman's cool head in a crisis, determination, integrity and commitment to duty - all traits that would serve him well in the War.
The Civil War made Sherman, as it made Grant - and together they must surely go down in history as one of, if not the most successful military partnership in history. There was no ego between them, and they trusted one another implicitly. It was this bond that allowed them to operate in tandem to finally defeat the South, and allowed Sherman to set off on his famous 'March to the Sea', cutting loose from all supply lines and operating independently and in isolation in enemy territory, bringing total war to the civilian population. It was Sherman's chance to show the world his formidable military genius - as much for organisational ability, management and logistics as military strategy. Indeed, Sherman was a general who loathed bloodshed and massive casualties, who far preferred to manoeuvre his enemy out of positions than to fling troops headlong in attack. It is no wonder he is regarded as perhaps the first 'modern' general.
Sherman comes across in this biography as an immensely appealing man - although no doubt Southerners would disagree - a man who enjoyed theatre and dancing, outgoing and gregarious, a fine public speaker, a man of integrity and discipline, a man driven by ambition but not by ego, capable of great humility and restraint at times. If all history remembers of Sherman is the March to the Sea, it is doing him a grave disservice - one that thankfully this excellent biography does much to remedy.
November 21, 2019
3.5 thoughts soon.
April 16, 2022
This was a truly extraordinary biography about this infamous (in both senses of the word depending on which side of the Mason-Dixon you are standing) general of the Civil War. It is written in a flowing manner and does an excellent job of describing his long career, his strained relationship with his wife, the controversies he got involved in, and the people he had in his social orbit. Sherman was a complex man - a white supremacist who fought despite his dislike of blacks for holding the Union together, a brilliant general and leader who nonetheless still faced challenges and lost a handful of his battles, a man who was never comfortable moneywise, and fighter and killer of American Indians despite deploring the conditions of their reservations. The most important battles he fought are all described in gripping detail.
All in all, this was an excellent biography on par with Chernow's about Grant and Goodwin's about Lincoln.
All in all, this was an excellent biography on par with Chernow's about Grant and Goodwin's about Lincoln.
February 7, 2019
I just finished this-- a very interesting tale, well told. The author has done great research. I found Sherman's life before the Civil War quite interesting, especially his time out west and in San Francisco.
His marriage is an enigma. There's more than enough to read between the lines to suspect that Sherman was very much a ladies man.
As interesting as reading about Sherman was, it's also a keen insight into a different time. People lived differently and viewed time differently. Just think about his deployment to the west coast around South America-- a trip that took many months. He claimed it was the worst time of his life, cooped up on board that vessel.
For those interested in a key figure in the Civil War and beyond, highly recommended.
His marriage is an enigma. There's more than enough to read between the lines to suspect that Sherman was very much a ladies man.
As interesting as reading about Sherman was, it's also a keen insight into a different time. People lived differently and viewed time differently. Just think about his deployment to the west coast around South America-- a trip that took many months. He claimed it was the worst time of his life, cooped up on board that vessel.
For those interested in a key figure in the Civil War and beyond, highly recommended.
May 23, 2019
So William Tecumseh Sherman was complicated. Alright? Okay, good I think we're done here. Alright, I'll write the damn review.
Sherman was a complicated man who could often, very often, be unpleasant, and racist, and bigoted against Catholics, and racist. And I won't try to deny these realities because they exist. However, for all of his faults, Sherman was also a complex man who enjoyed the theater, loved his children, believed in the cause of the United States, and held a passion for life that was often unequaled. Jame Lee McDonough has performed what a biographer should do with this text which brings real human complexity in the face of overwhelming bias against a popular individual and give his reader a sense of who Sherman was in every possible facet.
Rather than dwell solely on his faults or triumphs, McDonough delivers a balanced narrative of the life of Sherman seeing him in his military victories as well as his racist tirades against native Americans and Hispanics. He's a man who tired endlessly for his country's salvation while also denigrating the Catholic faith of his wife. These nuances are balanced and prevent the too often polarizing effect of Sherman that occurs in the popular culture, and such a text then allows the reader to come to their own assessment rather than fall comfortably into their biases for or against Sherman.
McDonough's book gave the Sherman I wanted to know more about, and I feel, truly, that I've come away with a deeper appreciation for a figure that, as of late, occurs far more often as a meme, rather than as the interesting man who fought for the union cause.
Sherman was a complicated man who could often, very often, be unpleasant, and racist, and bigoted against Catholics, and racist. And I won't try to deny these realities because they exist. However, for all of his faults, Sherman was also a complex man who enjoyed the theater, loved his children, believed in the cause of the United States, and held a passion for life that was often unequaled. Jame Lee McDonough has performed what a biographer should do with this text which brings real human complexity in the face of overwhelming bias against a popular individual and give his reader a sense of who Sherman was in every possible facet.
Rather than dwell solely on his faults or triumphs, McDonough delivers a balanced narrative of the life of Sherman seeing him in his military victories as well as his racist tirades against native Americans and Hispanics. He's a man who tired endlessly for his country's salvation while also denigrating the Catholic faith of his wife. These nuances are balanced and prevent the too often polarizing effect of Sherman that occurs in the popular culture, and such a text then allows the reader to come to their own assessment rather than fall comfortably into their biases for or against Sherman.
McDonough's book gave the Sherman I wanted to know more about, and I feel, truly, that I've come away with a deeper appreciation for a figure that, as of late, occurs far more often as a meme, rather than as the interesting man who fought for the union cause.
July 2, 2017
The cover of James Lee McDonough’s recent biography gives a glimpse of what is inside. Staring back is the fierce gaze of an intense warrior. The colorized photograph of William Tecumseh Sherman, one of America’s greatest generals, shows a man ready for war, one who knows the terrible cost of battle and is prepared to pay the price.
“William Tecumseh Sherman: In the Service of My Country: A Life” is a comprehensive look at the complex man who famously said “War is all hell.” McDonough plumbs the depths of this great leader – peerless as a tactician and strategist – who understood there was no glory in combat, only sacrifice. The ultimate goal was not necessarily victory on the battlefield, but the destruction of your enemy’s ability to conduct war.
McDonough provides a clear perspective into the mind of Sherman, a complicated person who was full of contradictions. He identified deeply with the South, yet he was determined to bring the Secessionists back into the Union. He reviled Catholicism, yet he married a Catholic and was deeply in love with her despite a flawed marriage. He was overwhelmingly racist, yet could be extremely magnanimous with the freed slaves who flocked to his army as it marched through the South.
Through meticulous research and with stark prose, McDonough details Sherman’s path from orphan in Ohio to hero of the Union. His austere march through history began simply but would culminate in a flourish. By the end of the Civil War, he was so highly regarded and admired by the nation’s citizens that he could have easily removed his general’s stars and walked into the Oval Office. Though highly opinionated about the government, he abhorred politics and wanted nothing more than to remain a soldier.
Sherman is often remembered for his “March to the Sea” through Georgia, yet he himself believed it was the following campaigns through South and North Carolina that brought ultimate victory to the North. By attacking these “breadbasket” states previously sheltered from the ravages of war, he snapped the back of the Confederacy and made even the most recalcitrant Rebel citizen realize they could not escape paying the cost of their transgressions. Sherman and his troops would exact a frightful price in destroyed infrastructure, pillaged farmland and leveled towns that would leave the South bowed and broken – and ready for peace.
McDonough even offers an interesting insight into one of Sherman’s most difficult moments. At the beginning of the Civil War, he suffered a mental breakdown and was believed to be completely incapacitated by his superior officers. The author shows how Sherman – at the time military commander of Kentucky, a position he did not want – gave way to his demons and succumbed to darker notions of the war. As McDonough carefully points out, the general was so consumed with the defense of his command that he had foregone eating, sleeping, and exercise to the point where complete emotional and mental collapse was inevitable.
Of course, Sherman rebounded, thanks in a great deal to the compassionate care of his wife, and would resume his role as an effective and eventually victorious leader. McDonough’s thorough research and critical analysis detail the events that led to his breakdown and offer an insightful explanation of the episode.
If nothing else, Sherman learned his lesson by better understanding his own shortcomings. His fierceness as a leader and determination to succeed had to be tempered by the reality of his physical and mental limitations. He was asthmatic and prone to an intense spirit that could run wild at times. To endure the grueling pace of a horrible war, the general would need to take care of himself.
McDonough’s biography is a wonderful introspective into the mind of one of America’s greatest military leaders. It does not bog down in details of battles and campaigns but rather provides a better understanding of what Sherman was thinking as he made the crucial decisions that would leave an indelible mark on our nation’s history. “William Tecumseh Sherman: In the Service of My Country: A Life” is well worth the read!
“William Tecumseh Sherman: In the Service of My Country: A Life” is a comprehensive look at the complex man who famously said “War is all hell.” McDonough plumbs the depths of this great leader – peerless as a tactician and strategist – who understood there was no glory in combat, only sacrifice. The ultimate goal was not necessarily victory on the battlefield, but the destruction of your enemy’s ability to conduct war.
McDonough provides a clear perspective into the mind of Sherman, a complicated person who was full of contradictions. He identified deeply with the South, yet he was determined to bring the Secessionists back into the Union. He reviled Catholicism, yet he married a Catholic and was deeply in love with her despite a flawed marriage. He was overwhelmingly racist, yet could be extremely magnanimous with the freed slaves who flocked to his army as it marched through the South.
Through meticulous research and with stark prose, McDonough details Sherman’s path from orphan in Ohio to hero of the Union. His austere march through history began simply but would culminate in a flourish. By the end of the Civil War, he was so highly regarded and admired by the nation’s citizens that he could have easily removed his general’s stars and walked into the Oval Office. Though highly opinionated about the government, he abhorred politics and wanted nothing more than to remain a soldier.
Sherman is often remembered for his “March to the Sea” through Georgia, yet he himself believed it was the following campaigns through South and North Carolina that brought ultimate victory to the North. By attacking these “breadbasket” states previously sheltered from the ravages of war, he snapped the back of the Confederacy and made even the most recalcitrant Rebel citizen realize they could not escape paying the cost of their transgressions. Sherman and his troops would exact a frightful price in destroyed infrastructure, pillaged farmland and leveled towns that would leave the South bowed and broken – and ready for peace.
McDonough even offers an interesting insight into one of Sherman’s most difficult moments. At the beginning of the Civil War, he suffered a mental breakdown and was believed to be completely incapacitated by his superior officers. The author shows how Sherman – at the time military commander of Kentucky, a position he did not want – gave way to his demons and succumbed to darker notions of the war. As McDonough carefully points out, the general was so consumed with the defense of his command that he had foregone eating, sleeping, and exercise to the point where complete emotional and mental collapse was inevitable.
Of course, Sherman rebounded, thanks in a great deal to the compassionate care of his wife, and would resume his role as an effective and eventually victorious leader. McDonough’s thorough research and critical analysis detail the events that led to his breakdown and offer an insightful explanation of the episode.
If nothing else, Sherman learned his lesson by better understanding his own shortcomings. His fierceness as a leader and determination to succeed had to be tempered by the reality of his physical and mental limitations. He was asthmatic and prone to an intense spirit that could run wild at times. To endure the grueling pace of a horrible war, the general would need to take care of himself.
McDonough’s biography is a wonderful introspective into the mind of one of America’s greatest military leaders. It does not bog down in details of battles and campaigns but rather provides a better understanding of what Sherman was thinking as he made the crucial decisions that would leave an indelible mark on our nation’s history. “William Tecumseh Sherman: In the Service of My Country: A Life” is well worth the read!
November 24, 2022
Very good biography. Learned a lot of things I didn’t know before hand. Did a great job balancing his professional and personal life.
Prior to the book, I didn’t know much more than his march through Georgia, but especially little of his previous life story, West Point, early military in Florida (fighting Indians) and the south, St Louis area, quitting the military and moving to be a banker in California, yearning to be back in the military, starting a military school in Louisiana (ended up being LSU), early Civil War (at Bull Run) , developing relationship with Grant, to a friendship, then his ascendance up the Union leadership usually moving into the spot left by Grant. Fascinating.
All the while, dealing with a rich (foster) family where he married a daughter, always trying to prove himself, be independent, fighting off their plans for him versus his love for the military, his wife and family’s Catholicism which he wanted no part of, wife wanted him to quit the military and move back to Ohio, he always loved California and even St Louis more. Great personal tension, and conflict.
Came away with much more respect for Sherman, even though hated in the south. (And this biography seemed to be way more pro-sherman and dismissive of most all the south’s charges/complaints. The north’s pillaging and “foraging” was justified and rationalized in the author’s eyes. Maybe? Two sides to that story.
Overall a good “listen” (audiobook). I did have the hard
Cover and two others of Sherman I will also read in the future.
Prior to the book, I didn’t know much more than his march through Georgia, but especially little of his previous life story, West Point, early military in Florida (fighting Indians) and the south, St Louis area, quitting the military and moving to be a banker in California, yearning to be back in the military, starting a military school in Louisiana (ended up being LSU), early Civil War (at Bull Run) , developing relationship with Grant, to a friendship, then his ascendance up the Union leadership usually moving into the spot left by Grant. Fascinating.
All the while, dealing with a rich (foster) family where he married a daughter, always trying to prove himself, be independent, fighting off their plans for him versus his love for the military, his wife and family’s Catholicism which he wanted no part of, wife wanted him to quit the military and move back to Ohio, he always loved California and even St Louis more. Great personal tension, and conflict.
Came away with much more respect for Sherman, even though hated in the south. (And this biography seemed to be way more pro-sherman and dismissive of most all the south’s charges/complaints. The north’s pillaging and “foraging” was justified and rationalized in the author’s eyes. Maybe? Two sides to that story.
Overall a good “listen” (audiobook). I did have the hard
Cover and two others of Sherman I will also read in the future.
January 4, 2023
In my youth Sherman was a tank in the hex strategy games I played back in the day. Of course, I knew he was a Civil War general, Grant's right hand man, but that was about all I knew. Fast forward a couple of decades and I came across this work. Intrigued to learn more about a man I knew little about in an era I know much about, I read it.
It's fine, really. There's nothing wrong with it. It traces the arc of Sherman's life, his youth, his time at West Point, his early military career, his staggering number of business failures, his marriage, his anti-religious feeling, his constant financial problems, his rise to fame, his time as General in Chief of the Army, and his retirement. It looks in some detail at most of what made the man.
...but what it doesn't do is hold the interest. This is all on the writer, for Sherman lived an interesting life. But the book was a slog. It wasn't a waste of time; I learned stuff. But it wasn't a fun way to spend the time, and I do not plan to read anything else the author writes.
It's fine, really. There's nothing wrong with it. It traces the arc of Sherman's life, his youth, his time at West Point, his early military career, his staggering number of business failures, his marriage, his anti-religious feeling, his constant financial problems, his rise to fame, his time as General in Chief of the Army, and his retirement. It looks in some detail at most of what made the man.
...but what it doesn't do is hold the interest. This is all on the writer, for Sherman lived an interesting life. But the book was a slog. It wasn't a waste of time; I learned stuff. But it wasn't a fun way to spend the time, and I do not plan to read anything else the author writes.
January 13, 2017
My father loved this book and gave it to me for my 66th birthday. The huge book with 796 pages incuding the notes. I started by the end of the book and decided it was well worth the effort. A life and a book which correspods exactly to my needs of understanding today. I am ever grateful. It helps a woman to understand more deeply the life and thoughts of a great military man.
October 21, 2021
A full length biography covering the entirety of Sherman's life, with the necessary 400+ page deep focus coverage of the Civil War years.
Sherman reminds me in many ways of Harry Truman. One can easily qualify the first 40 years of his life as a professional failure other than the military experience accrued. Truman was a failed haberdasher who found himself entering politics more on a lark than anything else, because he had some connections and hated the establishment. Sherman tried being a banker in the West and failed miserably, so he returned to military service when the Civil War beckoned and it made him as well. Sherman hated politicians, organized religion, slavery, and anything established other than the order and rigor of military life and the Union. McDonough touches all the tenacity bases and then some; Sherman gets more credit here than he typically does for Shiloh (covered in the Introduction), as well as the relentless strategy that he shared with Grant that won the war. Once the reader arrives at the infamous March to the Sea, it becomes apparent that the South has always exaggerated how unleashed the Yankees were in destroying Georgia. They did indeed reflect that "war is hell" (they expected him to show restraint?), but it wasn't unleashed horror always. Sherman explicitly stated that the infrastructure and will to fight should be attacked, but punished unwarranted foraging and brutality towards the civilian population. He was brutal however when he perceived that his soldiers were sniped at or unfairly attacked. For instance, the advent of primitive land mines in Georgia infuriated him as cowardly and he ordered Confederate POWs to take the risk of defusing them in retaliation.
Sherman almost certainly could have been elected President in 1884 had he chosen to pursue it or acquiesce in the nomination, but he never wanted it and firmly refused. His personal feelings were fierce but closely guarded and McDonough throughly researched the correspondence of the Ewing family, his wife and in-laws. Ellen was a tough cookie and it does appear that perhaps she was incompatible with WTS, but they ground it out together (she hated the places he loved to love and he loathed her devotion to Catholicism). His tomb reads "Faithful and Honorable" and I would add the word Integrity as words that describe him best. (We just lost Colin Powell this week and they both had comparable devotion to service and refusal to compromise their personal integrity - and refusal to run for President). Perhaps Powell was more consciously reserved in public than Sherman, but both will go down as two of the best generals in American history not to pursue the Presidency. Probably the most comprehensive recent biography in some time on Sherman and a pleasant enough read to justify my rating. An alternate possibility to read is Grant and Sherman: The Friendship That Won the Civil War, which splits the focus between Grant and Sherman if you prefer a book less than 721 pages, but covers both soldiers very well.
Sherman reminds me in many ways of Harry Truman. One can easily qualify the first 40 years of his life as a professional failure other than the military experience accrued. Truman was a failed haberdasher who found himself entering politics more on a lark than anything else, because he had some connections and hated the establishment. Sherman tried being a banker in the West and failed miserably, so he returned to military service when the Civil War beckoned and it made him as well. Sherman hated politicians, organized religion, slavery, and anything established other than the order and rigor of military life and the Union. McDonough touches all the tenacity bases and then some; Sherman gets more credit here than he typically does for Shiloh (covered in the Introduction), as well as the relentless strategy that he shared with Grant that won the war. Once the reader arrives at the infamous March to the Sea, it becomes apparent that the South has always exaggerated how unleashed the Yankees were in destroying Georgia. They did indeed reflect that "war is hell" (they expected him to show restraint?), but it wasn't unleashed horror always. Sherman explicitly stated that the infrastructure and will to fight should be attacked, but punished unwarranted foraging and brutality towards the civilian population. He was brutal however when he perceived that his soldiers were sniped at or unfairly attacked. For instance, the advent of primitive land mines in Georgia infuriated him as cowardly and he ordered Confederate POWs to take the risk of defusing them in retaliation.
Sherman almost certainly could have been elected President in 1884 had he chosen to pursue it or acquiesce in the nomination, but he never wanted it and firmly refused. His personal feelings were fierce but closely guarded and McDonough throughly researched the correspondence of the Ewing family, his wife and in-laws. Ellen was a tough cookie and it does appear that perhaps she was incompatible with WTS, but they ground it out together (she hated the places he loved to love and he loathed her devotion to Catholicism). His tomb reads "Faithful and Honorable" and I would add the word Integrity as words that describe him best. (We just lost Colin Powell this week and they both had comparable devotion to service and refusal to compromise their personal integrity - and refusal to run for President). Perhaps Powell was more consciously reserved in public than Sherman, but both will go down as two of the best generals in American history not to pursue the Presidency. Probably the most comprehensive recent biography in some time on Sherman and a pleasant enough read to justify my rating. An alternate possibility to read is Grant and Sherman: The Friendship That Won the Civil War, which splits the focus between Grant and Sherman if you prefer a book less than 721 pages, but covers both soldiers very well.
June 27, 2023
After a few days of reflection, I've changed my rating on this biography of great general.
January 7, 2024
A very solid one-volume bio of Sherman.
War is hell, and its glory is all moonshine.
War is hell, and its glory is all moonshine.
January 30, 2020
Sherman is never boring. This bio however...
McDonough's 2016 bio of Sherman begins strangely with a lengthy description of the Battle of Shiloh. As important as that was to Sherman's evolution as a battlefield commander, it's an odd place to start in a work that purports to be a biography of the man's whole life.
Any biography of the leading figures of the civil war must necessarily cover that conflict in detail. Often that comes at the expense of their pre and post war life. If it's a wartime biography, that's fine.The problem is when a book purports to be a full biography of a man that lived another THIRTY years after the conflict and did some pretty impressive stuff during that time, neglecting that post war life is an odd choice.
That's what we have here. McDonough does a fine, thorough, job taking the reader through Sherman's early life up to the Civil War, shedding a lot of interesting detail on his somewhat strained marriage and his ambivalent, if not hostile, views towards religion and Catholicism in particular.
The wartime section is sufficiently detailed although McDonough has a VERY annoying tendency to cite/ quote contemporary historians all too frequently. He does this almost exclusively to bolster his point or simply restate it. Citing to Bruce Catton or B.H. Lidell Hart is fine, quoting them is lazy and needless bolstering.
After the war we get a VERY truncated summation (about 1/5 of the book) of Sherman's post war life. Considering he was general in chief of the Army during some rather substantial times (reconstruction, Indian wars, etc), this was very disappointing.
If it's a military biography, then cut both the pre and post war sections. If it's a full bio, then the final third of Sherman's life should've been more thoroughly exploited. But this weird hybrid model that was 30% prewar, 55% wartime, and 15% post war feels incomplete.
McDonough's 2016 bio of Sherman begins strangely with a lengthy description of the Battle of Shiloh. As important as that was to Sherman's evolution as a battlefield commander, it's an odd place to start in a work that purports to be a biography of the man's whole life.
Any biography of the leading figures of the civil war must necessarily cover that conflict in detail. Often that comes at the expense of their pre and post war life. If it's a wartime biography, that's fine.The problem is when a book purports to be a full biography of a man that lived another THIRTY years after the conflict and did some pretty impressive stuff during that time, neglecting that post war life is an odd choice.
That's what we have here. McDonough does a fine, thorough, job taking the reader through Sherman's early life up to the Civil War, shedding a lot of interesting detail on his somewhat strained marriage and his ambivalent, if not hostile, views towards religion and Catholicism in particular.
The wartime section is sufficiently detailed although McDonough has a VERY annoying tendency to cite/ quote contemporary historians all too frequently. He does this almost exclusively to bolster his point or simply restate it. Citing to Bruce Catton or B.H. Lidell Hart is fine, quoting them is lazy and needless bolstering.
After the war we get a VERY truncated summation (about 1/5 of the book) of Sherman's post war life. Considering he was general in chief of the Army during some rather substantial times (reconstruction, Indian wars, etc), this was very disappointing.
If it's a military biography, then cut both the pre and post war sections. If it's a full bio, then the final third of Sherman's life should've been more thoroughly exploited. But this weird hybrid model that was 30% prewar, 55% wartime, and 15% post war feels incomplete.
December 11, 2017
Didn’t really love it, but Sherman seems like an interesting person, if kind of terrible. That said, learned a lot I didn’t know about the Civil War and can appreciate how people get interested in seeing battlegrounds in person. Custer, Sherman...on to Grant, I suppose!
May 1, 2024
An incredibly detailed account of the leader I consider the most interesting and charismatic of the Civil War era. Often brash, sometimes cunning, and always straightforward, Sherman expertly led his forces through critical campaigns of the war and his victories were essential to the overall success of the union. I admire that there were few airs about him and he seemed to always tell it like it was, refusing to pull punches in anyone’s company; there was no confusion about his situation or his attitude about it.
The biography includes his youth, even the background of his warrior namesake which would prove almost prophetic. It shows his behavior was consistent throughout his life, even in antics like placing gun powder into yarn-baseballs because a grumpy neighbor kept throwing them into his fire. Through USMA, it points out his biggest hindrance was an almost rebellious lack of adherence to demerits because he didn’t agree with the system but instead just did what he felt was right in the conduct of his service. Then, markedly as a young officer in the Florida Seminole wars, how he learned to defeat an enemy by attacking his will to fight and his psyche as much or more than attacking his forces; this included raiding villages, destroying crops, and damaging supplies year-round to decrease their ability to endure, making war so terrible people no longer wish to continue it. This tactic, along with an additional 4 years stationed in the Deep South, would foster lessons infamously well implemented during the Civil War.
Strikingly, it emphasizes his ability to accurately assess the military situation, both tactically and strategically. He was deemed crazy as the war began for his high casualty predictions and numbers of troops needed to win campaigns and the war, which turned out to be true. Even in the early phases of the war, he and Grant seemed to be the only generals in the union, who didn’t put the southern forces’ abilities and leadership on a pedestal and failed to be intimidated during battle or in pursuit of rebel armies. A lesson in leadership from the relationship of the two generals was Grant “not providing [Sherman] a plan of campaign but simply to lay down the work it is desirable to have done” and trusting him to execute his own plan to achieve that success (intent and end state).
I was surprised to learn of some of his personal traits I was previously unaware of. Especially his openly racist views equal to or exceeding most southerners of the time (although against slavery) lasting throughout his life, even after the war. Additionally, I learned how his thoughts about himself very much paralleled a lot of my own feelings, professionally believing “Why don’t I leave the Army… why should I? It is the profession for which my education alone fits me.” Most famously his stance that “many… look on war as all glory, but boys, it is all hell… I look upon war with horror, but if it has to come, I am here.” Even his dips into melancholy based on what he perceived as his struggles or failures as an officer and his lifelong mistrust of the press. From a military standpoint, I believe we would have gotten along as army officers.
The biography includes his youth, even the background of his warrior namesake which would prove almost prophetic. It shows his behavior was consistent throughout his life, even in antics like placing gun powder into yarn-baseballs because a grumpy neighbor kept throwing them into his fire. Through USMA, it points out his biggest hindrance was an almost rebellious lack of adherence to demerits because he didn’t agree with the system but instead just did what he felt was right in the conduct of his service. Then, markedly as a young officer in the Florida Seminole wars, how he learned to defeat an enemy by attacking his will to fight and his psyche as much or more than attacking his forces; this included raiding villages, destroying crops, and damaging supplies year-round to decrease their ability to endure, making war so terrible people no longer wish to continue it. This tactic, along with an additional 4 years stationed in the Deep South, would foster lessons infamously well implemented during the Civil War.
Strikingly, it emphasizes his ability to accurately assess the military situation, both tactically and strategically. He was deemed crazy as the war began for his high casualty predictions and numbers of troops needed to win campaigns and the war, which turned out to be true. Even in the early phases of the war, he and Grant seemed to be the only generals in the union, who didn’t put the southern forces’ abilities and leadership on a pedestal and failed to be intimidated during battle or in pursuit of rebel armies. A lesson in leadership from the relationship of the two generals was Grant “not providing [Sherman] a plan of campaign but simply to lay down the work it is desirable to have done” and trusting him to execute his own plan to achieve that success (intent and end state).
I was surprised to learn of some of his personal traits I was previously unaware of. Especially his openly racist views equal to or exceeding most southerners of the time (although against slavery) lasting throughout his life, even after the war. Additionally, I learned how his thoughts about himself very much paralleled a lot of my own feelings, professionally believing “Why don’t I leave the Army… why should I? It is the profession for which my education alone fits me.” Most famously his stance that “many… look on war as all glory, but boys, it is all hell… I look upon war with horror, but if it has to come, I am here.” Even his dips into melancholy based on what he perceived as his struggles or failures as an officer and his lifelong mistrust of the press. From a military standpoint, I believe we would have gotten along as army officers.
September 8, 2018
I've long been fascinated by this guy, mostly because of his middle name, which is awesome.
Sherman, like Grant, was seemingly plucked from obscurity and a string of failures to lead the Union army during the Civil War. Unlike Grant, Sherman's brother and foster father were both U.S. Senators from Ohio and Secretaries of the Treasury. Unlike Grant, he seemed to have a strangely tense relationship with his Ohio-loving, devoutly Catholic wife as Sherman refused to ever move back to Ohio and resented his wife's attempts to convert him. And unlike Grant, Sherman was more a product of his age in terms of his views on race and equality. McDonough's account of Sherman's march to the sea conveys what a truly impressive feat that was. And though his march through South Carolina never captured the popular imagination the way his sacking of Georgia did, it was an even more impressive military achievement (and more gratifying to those who wanted to stick it to the state that was the biggest instigator of secession). All in all, excellent account of an very interesting life.
Sherman, like Grant, was seemingly plucked from obscurity and a string of failures to lead the Union army during the Civil War. Unlike Grant, Sherman's brother and foster father were both U.S. Senators from Ohio and Secretaries of the Treasury. Unlike Grant, he seemed to have a strangely tense relationship with his Ohio-loving, devoutly Catholic wife as Sherman refused to ever move back to Ohio and resented his wife's attempts to convert him. And unlike Grant, Sherman was more a product of his age in terms of his views on race and equality. McDonough's account of Sherman's march to the sea conveys what a truly impressive feat that was. And though his march through South Carolina never captured the popular imagination the way his sacking of Georgia did, it was an even more impressive military achievement (and more gratifying to those who wanted to stick it to the state that was the biggest instigator of secession). All in all, excellent account of an very interesting life.
November 30, 2019
"Faithful and honorable" are the words Sherman chose to describe himself, yet his character remains somewhat of an enigma despite this detailed biography. Faithful to what? Certainly not to any specific religion or creed. Sherman was virulently anti-Catholic, to the extent that it caused significant rifts with his wife and his sole surviving son. Not to any protestant creed, yet he appeared to have always been faithful to doing right by others, providing loyalty to his fellow soldiers, and particularly focused on ensuring that he paid his debts, despite being pressured by his wife and in-laws into leaving the military. Yet he was faithful to his Army, to West Point, and to his beliefs. He seemed to have always been frank in his opinions, yet many peers seemed to have resented him and held grudges against him. He seemed to not hold grudges against the people of the Confederacy, first living among them during his antebellum military postings, and then returning frequently after the war to speak at several gatherings, where he was repeatedly honored. He was faithful to his pro-Union beliefs and critical of the abuses of slavery, but held racist opinions and stereotyped beliefs about the "inferiority" of other races. He appeared to be grandiose in his description of his campaigns in his memoirs, to the point of receiving criticism from others who were there, but did not seek political office despite the popularity engendered by his military success. He repeatedly and faithfully wrote to his family, but maintained a distance that began when he gave in to demands of his wife and in-laws to raise the children away from his presence.
He was most well-known for his destructive campaign from Atlanta to the sea, but the book highlights his strategic approach to Atlanta, and his ability and logistical expertise to move his Army from Savannah through the swamps of Carolina in the winter. Despite his commitment to the military, his bravery and fearlessness in combat, and his campaigns and victories, he is most famous for his declaration that "war is all hell".
There are enough interesting details and descriptions that make the book worthwhile as history, while not being a hagiography of Sherman himself.
He was most well-known for his destructive campaign from Atlanta to the sea, but the book highlights his strategic approach to Atlanta, and his ability and logistical expertise to move his Army from Savannah through the swamps of Carolina in the winter. Despite his commitment to the military, his bravery and fearlessness in combat, and his campaigns and victories, he is most famous for his declaration that "war is all hell".
There are enough interesting details and descriptions that make the book worthwhile as history, while not being a hagiography of Sherman himself.
May 4, 2025
28.32 hours on Audible. Thoroughly enjoyed. Was surprised to discover how Sherman rejected religion, specifically Roman Catholicism, all his life, and maintained his racist views that African-Americans and Hispanics were inferior to Anglo-Saxons all his life. Still, he was a great general and critical to the Union’s winning of the Civil War.
October 26, 2019
A good book, providing a detailed biography of Civil War General William T. Sherman. The author does a good job diving into the full character of Sherman, putting aside the many myths which have shaped our understanding of this very complex military leader. The first half of the book shows Sherman’s pre-war life, traveling across the country and developing a deep understanding of the relation between commerce, politics, and geography in mid-19th Century America. As with Grant, Lee, and other Civil War leaders many of the traits which would benefit him during the war were fine tuned by his experiences in the years prior; experiences which didn’t, at the time, seem like they would be important later on. Sherman, the author points out, represented many majority views of Americans with relation to the Civil War. Through his writings to friends and family we can see a reluctant warrior, but one who understood, better than most, how to win. The author spends a fair chunk of time correcting a number of myths and half-truths concerning Sherman’s war service. I was a little disappointed that certain segments of the Civil War campaigns were brushed aside quickly whereas others, some only peripheral to Sherman’s story, were covered in great detail. All in all a fine biography of a General who was essential to America’s victory against the Secessionists. Highly recommended for those wanting to know more about the General and the in which he lived.
August 14, 2017
McDonough's new biography on Sherman does an excellent job detailing the events of the general's life, especially his antebellum years and career in the army. However, he spends so much detail outlining the many battles and marching formations that I felt like there wasn't enough of Sherman the person at the expense of Sherman the military genius.
My biggest complaint about the book is that it doesn't have a thesis. At a moment in history where war seems ubiquitous, I expected a biography of Grant's second-in-command - who spent almost his entire life serving the country - to in some way connect to or reflect on present day. There is much to be learned about Sherman's philosophy and execution of war, but McDonough focuses on merely presenting the facts rather than analyze them.
While I enjoyed the biography and learned a lot, in the end the scope was too narrow and at times it ventured into overly detailed Civil War battle summaries.
My biggest complaint about the book is that it doesn't have a thesis. At a moment in history where war seems ubiquitous, I expected a biography of Grant's second-in-command - who spent almost his entire life serving the country - to in some way connect to or reflect on present day. There is much to be learned about Sherman's philosophy and execution of war, but McDonough focuses on merely presenting the facts rather than analyze them.
While I enjoyed the biography and learned a lot, in the end the scope was too narrow and at times it ventured into overly detailed Civil War battle summaries.
October 17, 2017
William Tecumseh Sherman was one of those Civil War figures I had read a great deal about through biographies of other generals, but I had never read anything specific to him. This book is a very comprehensive look at his time before and during the Civil War. I thought the author was very fair presenting all sides of him, although he did seem to err on the side of assuming Sherman was always in the right when it came to military decisions. I wish there was more detail about Sherman after the War as I would loved to have read more about that. In terms of the battles, they are written very well, but there were not enough maps included to help me visualize the troop movements and the terrain. Recommended for Civil War fans.
October 2, 2016
This is long book. The descriptions of the geography, troop movements, and other battle descriptions needed better maps to really follow along in any meaningful way. As a biography it was a rich, deep view of a complicated man. As a history book it was insightful, well balanced and thorough. The history and the man together, with a vast quoting of Sherman, was fascinating and enlightening expose. It kept me rapt and thinking about war, the military, politics, racism, marriage, economics and more on every page.
February 18, 2025
One of the greatest biographies I’ve read. With amazing details and insights into one of the most pivotal Americans of his time. Showing the hardships, heart aches, and joys of his. I would recommend this book to non history buffs as it is great at showing the complexities of human life that everyone can relate to no matter the era of time.
March 8, 2020
As far as biographies go, I have certainly read better. For the majority of this work, I really did find that McDonough relied a bit too heavily on Sherman's letters to his wife, Ellen. A bit let down with this book, when it comes down to it all.
October 8, 2021
Very entertaining and clarified some points I did not understand about the civil war. Where Sherman does not look good (in historical light) the author does not try to justify the actions or writing. A fascinating book and a complex subject.
July 2, 2018
A truly great biography reveals both the subject and the spirit of the times, and McDonough does both, tracing the tumultuous American adolescence through the life of General Sherman. Sherman was born in the Old Northwest of Ohio, named after the powerful Indian chief Tecumseh, who had lead a failed coalition against the Americans. After his father died, he was adopted into the influential Ewing family, and went to West Point, where he thrived as a cadet and in his early posting to Florida during the Seminole Wars, and California during the Mexican-American Wars. Early military posting across the South and Mississippi convinced him of the importance of the American heartland, and ironically in light of his later career, the basic friendship of Southerners. Sherman had a marriage to Ellen Ewing troubled by his wife's staunch Catholicism, and an uncertain career as a banker, when the Civil War broke out, and lifted Sherman to greatness.
Sherman struggled as a commander in the opening phases of the war, but he was never "insane", except in scurrilous newspaper columns, and after the Battle of Shiloh, repeatedly demonstrated his abilities as a strategist and logistician. Sherman excelled in operations along major rivers and railroads to dislocate strongpoints and force Confederate armies back without battle. His campaign to capture Atlanta was a masterpiece of maneuver.
Sherman's name will be forever connected with the March to the Sea, and scorched earth warfare. McDonough justifies the strategy as necessary in a framework of total war, and argues it was carried out as humanely as possible, without mass violence. Georgia howled, as Sherman burned anything with a potential military use, from railroads to cotton bales. In his use of economic warfare against the South and American Indians on the frontier, Sherman prefigured the worst of the 20th century.
Post-war, Sherman served as General-in-chief for over a decade, and took up a whirlwind of social engagements, speeches, and nights at the theater. The Sherman who comes across in his letters is a man of strong opinions: pro-Union, anti-Catholic, opposed to political nonsense and journalistic slander, confident in the superiority of white people, while still able to treat individual blacks and Indians humanely. As McDonough reveals through letters and archival research, Sherman was not above shading his memoirs in his favor, but in general he was scrupulously honest. A great biography of a fascinating man!
Sherman struggled as a commander in the opening phases of the war, but he was never "insane", except in scurrilous newspaper columns, and after the Battle of Shiloh, repeatedly demonstrated his abilities as a strategist and logistician. Sherman excelled in operations along major rivers and railroads to dislocate strongpoints and force Confederate armies back without battle. His campaign to capture Atlanta was a masterpiece of maneuver.
Sherman's name will be forever connected with the March to the Sea, and scorched earth warfare. McDonough justifies the strategy as necessary in a framework of total war, and argues it was carried out as humanely as possible, without mass violence. Georgia howled, as Sherman burned anything with a potential military use, from railroads to cotton bales. In his use of economic warfare against the South and American Indians on the frontier, Sherman prefigured the worst of the 20th century.
Post-war, Sherman served as General-in-chief for over a decade, and took up a whirlwind of social engagements, speeches, and nights at the theater. The Sherman who comes across in his letters is a man of strong opinions: pro-Union, anti-Catholic, opposed to political nonsense and journalistic slander, confident in the superiority of white people, while still able to treat individual blacks and Indians humanely. As McDonough reveals through letters and archival research, Sherman was not above shading his memoirs in his favor, but in general he was scrupulously honest. A great biography of a fascinating man!
December 30, 2022
One can't help but make comparisons between William Tecumseh Sherman and Ulysses S. Grant. The author does so repeatedly, and seems to feel Sherman is superior to Grant in numerous prominent ways. While I disagree, I'm glad to know Sherman better by way of this biography. However, I don't see myself pursuing any additional books about him. As a book, apart from this bias of the author, the book was well-written, and laid out. The pacing was as could be expected when the subject had relatively few accomplishments after the Civil War. Cump's fascination with California makes me chuckle, as do some of his curmudgeonly ways.
While Uncle Willie was undoubtedly a great leader and general during a time of great need for the country, he had some characteristics I struggle with, and furthermore seems a bit hard to like. He had a pro-to-middle-of-the-road sentiment about slavery (which thankfully evolved into being anti-slavery), and while he was cordial and congenial with people who weren't white he was a devout believer of their inferiority. While raised and surrounded by devoutly religious people, Sherman's nearly anti-religious stance wasn't fully explored - which may have been due to lack of openness by Sherman himself. Of interest, I was somewhat saddened for Sherman at how unsupportive his wife Ellen seemed to be. Obviously there are two sides to every story, but if she really was the way described, I can only imagine how trying that may have been at times.
As a General in the Army, he'll continue to be known for his march to Atlanta, Savannah, and through the Carolinas. Grant's overall vision of how to defeat the south was great, and Sherman brought that vision to fruition. I love reading about the defeat of the Southern armies every time. What a mistaken cause it all was. Sherman's execution and pointed retribution was great.
That said, he'll also continue to be known for his blunt view on war - that it's "hell", as well as "a terrible thing", and "cruelty, and you cannot refine it." While I enjoy reading about wars, I still know I cannot truly fathom how terrible they are.
Lastly, I know Sherman was a favorite of my grandfather's. And while I see a number of similarities between those two men, among the many other topics I'd love to cover with him, I'd love to have my grandfather back to discuss his interest in this particular man. May they both rest in peace.
While Uncle Willie was undoubtedly a great leader and general during a time of great need for the country, he had some characteristics I struggle with, and furthermore seems a bit hard to like. He had a pro-to-middle-of-the-road sentiment about slavery (which thankfully evolved into being anti-slavery), and while he was cordial and congenial with people who weren't white he was a devout believer of their inferiority. While raised and surrounded by devoutly religious people, Sherman's nearly anti-religious stance wasn't fully explored - which may have been due to lack of openness by Sherman himself. Of interest, I was somewhat saddened for Sherman at how unsupportive his wife Ellen seemed to be. Obviously there are two sides to every story, but if she really was the way described, I can only imagine how trying that may have been at times.
As a General in the Army, he'll continue to be known for his march to Atlanta, Savannah, and through the Carolinas. Grant's overall vision of how to defeat the south was great, and Sherman brought that vision to fruition. I love reading about the defeat of the Southern armies every time. What a mistaken cause it all was. Sherman's execution and pointed retribution was great.
That said, he'll also continue to be known for his blunt view on war - that it's "hell", as well as "a terrible thing", and "cruelty, and you cannot refine it." While I enjoy reading about wars, I still know I cannot truly fathom how terrible they are.
Lastly, I know Sherman was a favorite of my grandfather's. And while I see a number of similarities between those two men, among the many other topics I'd love to cover with him, I'd love to have my grandfather back to discuss his interest in this particular man. May they both rest in peace.
May 4, 2024
A fascinating biography of the second most important Union general during the American civil war…
William Tecumseh Sherman: In the Service of My Country: A Life by James L McDonough covers the early life and war experience and post war life of General Sherman…
At over seven hundred pages, roughly 2/3 of the book is focused on the four years of Sherman’s life that covered the American civil war. The post civil war period barely gets any focus outside some generalities…
Fortunately, the first third covering his youth, early army career, and banking pursuits are the most interesting in the book.
Sherman’s life is very much Abe sample of the evolution of the United States throughout the middle 19th century.
The book heavily covers the politics, economics, and other aspects that Sherman grew up in, with a focus on each presidential election, the issues of the time, and Sherman’s own opinions in greater detail than I typically see with the mid 19th century ins school textbooks.
Sherman’s life features appearances by a veritable who’s who of notable figures and we often get foreshadowing of what role some of these key figures will play either in his later life or American history.
A great deal of surviving records contains quotes or notes by Sherman or others giving us a look at their personalities, and it’s good to know that Sherman stood up for what he believed in and was fairly knowledgeable about what was going on around him.
I would have liked less focus on the civil war, but I get it since that’s what he’s better known for, but there’s also a ton of other books covering his campaigns and relationships with other officers.
The index is nearly 30 pages, and the footnotes are nearly a hundred pages so there’s a lot of extra detail to look into.
William Tecumseh Sherman: In the Service of My Country: A Life by James L McDonough covers the early life and war experience and post war life of General Sherman…
At over seven hundred pages, roughly 2/3 of the book is focused on the four years of Sherman’s life that covered the American civil war. The post civil war period barely gets any focus outside some generalities…
Fortunately, the first third covering his youth, early army career, and banking pursuits are the most interesting in the book.
Sherman’s life is very much Abe sample of the evolution of the United States throughout the middle 19th century.
The book heavily covers the politics, economics, and other aspects that Sherman grew up in, with a focus on each presidential election, the issues of the time, and Sherman’s own opinions in greater detail than I typically see with the mid 19th century ins school textbooks.
Sherman’s life features appearances by a veritable who’s who of notable figures and we often get foreshadowing of what role some of these key figures will play either in his later life or American history.
A great deal of surviving records contains quotes or notes by Sherman or others giving us a look at their personalities, and it’s good to know that Sherman stood up for what he believed in and was fairly knowledgeable about what was going on around him.
I would have liked less focus on the civil war, but I get it since that’s what he’s better known for, but there’s also a ton of other books covering his campaigns and relationships with other officers.
The index is nearly 30 pages, and the footnotes are nearly a hundred pages so there’s a lot of extra detail to look into.
September 15, 2021
William Tecumseh Sherman was indeed a complicated figure. He understood war, perhaps too well, and in spite of mistakes he emerged as the most heroic figure of the American Civil War. Being a member of a family where some members consider him Satan Incarnate, I wish they could read this biography, as it offers some insight the thinking behind his strategy and tactics, especially during the Atlanta campaign and his March (through Georgia) to the Sea. Sherman understood early on that the South was capable of fighting to the last man, and that a war against their resources and morale would save time and, most importantly, lives on both sides. This is a man who was a born warrior, but was sickened by his first sight of a battle's aftermath (contributing to his mental breakdown early in the war). A man who loved the South, having lived there for many years, yet had no qualms about razing it. A man who hated slavery and fought for blacks, even though he personally thought them inferior, and who didn't want them to fight for the North because he saw it as a white man's war - and, likely, an act of atonement. It's all here in these pages for anyone willing to give the man a reappraisal. If there's any complaint about this book it's that, after so much detail is given of his early life and civil war years, his post-war life is rushed through without much detail on his work as General of the Army during the Indian Wars. True, it may not hold a candle to his civil war exploits, but would have been a welcome part of the read nonetheless.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 210 reviews