What do you think?
Rate this book
The White Tecumseh: A Biography of General William T. Sherman
"Extraordinarily readable." --Paul D. Casdorph, author of Jackson and Lee
Best remembered as the man who burned Atlanta and marched his army to the sea, cutting a swath of destruction through Georgia, William Tecumseh Sherman remains one of the most vital figures in Civil War annals. In The White Tecumseh, Stanley Hirshson has crafted a beautiful and rigorous work of scholarship, the only life of Sherman to draw on regimental histories and testimonies by the general's own men. What emerges is a landmark portrait of a brilliant but tormented soul, haunted by a family legacy of mental illness and relentlessly driven to realize a powerful military ambition.
"Sympathetic yet excellent . . . insight into how Sherman's own troops felt about him and his relationships with fellow generals, especially Grant. . . . Highly recommended." --Library Journal
Best remembered as the man who burned Atlanta and marched his army to the sea, cutting a swath of destruction through Georgia, William Tecumseh Sherman remains one of the most vital figures in Civil War annals. In The White Tecumseh, Stanley Hirshson has crafted a beautiful and rigorous work of scholarship, the only life of Sherman to draw on regimental histories and testimonies by the general's own men. What emerges is a landmark portrait of a brilliant but tormented soul, haunted by a family legacy of mental illness and relentlessly driven to realize a powerful military ambition.
"Sympathetic yet excellent . . . insight into how Sherman's own troops felt about him and his relationships with fellow generals, especially Grant. . . . Highly recommended." --Library Journal
496 pages, Paperback
First published April 9, 1997
54 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
November 27, 2011
This has been a very laborious book to read. The author often only seems interested in Sherman's correspondence with his wife and contemporaries.
The interesting parts include Sherman's March through Tennessee, Georgia and the Carolinas. I might say that his move through the south was a form of lightening warfare. Sherman was not a great tactician but was a great problem solver and understood how to put people in place to wage war. He understood that war was a cruel thing and understood that inflicting pain and suffering was necessary to achieve victory. I don't think that Sherman was an ideologically or politically-motivated figure, but he does seem to have had a clear desire to serve and fight for the preservation of the Union. Sherman's relationship with Grant is an interesting substory.
However, this just isn't a very good read. The author fails to tell the story about why things happened to Sherman the way they did, and how he affected things though his actions. The author only seems interested in writing that things happened in Sherman's life, not why, no attempt to link anything or develop connections between the events. That is probably the biggest flaw in this book. Why would you write a biography about a historically significant figure and not include the historical context of his life?
Other reviews have mentioned the author's bias towards defending Sherman. Well yea, its there. I haven't read too many bios where the author didn't have a bias towards the subject.
On Sherman's racism, I can see how he would be viewed as a racist, especially through a year-2011 lens. In his time, I think he was neither a racist nor a promoter of equality. I think his racial views were shaped by the time he lived. We might call him a racist from our point of view, but I don't think that he actively engaged in racist/separatist actions, and in that context, I wouldn't call him an ideological racist.
My final impressions are that the book relies too much on letters and quotes. The first hundred pages seemed like one long discussion between Sherman and his wife about how to furnish a house.
The interesting parts include Sherman's March through Tennessee, Georgia and the Carolinas. I might say that his move through the south was a form of lightening warfare. Sherman was not a great tactician but was a great problem solver and understood how to put people in place to wage war. He understood that war was a cruel thing and understood that inflicting pain and suffering was necessary to achieve victory. I don't think that Sherman was an ideologically or politically-motivated figure, but he does seem to have had a clear desire to serve and fight for the preservation of the Union. Sherman's relationship with Grant is an interesting substory.
However, this just isn't a very good read. The author fails to tell the story about why things happened to Sherman the way they did, and how he affected things though his actions. The author only seems interested in writing that things happened in Sherman's life, not why, no attempt to link anything or develop connections between the events. That is probably the biggest flaw in this book. Why would you write a biography about a historically significant figure and not include the historical context of his life?
Other reviews have mentioned the author's bias towards defending Sherman. Well yea, its there. I haven't read too many bios where the author didn't have a bias towards the subject.
On Sherman's racism, I can see how he would be viewed as a racist, especially through a year-2011 lens. In his time, I think he was neither a racist nor a promoter of equality. I think his racial views were shaped by the time he lived. We might call him a racist from our point of view, but I don't think that he actively engaged in racist/separatist actions, and in that context, I wouldn't call him an ideological racist.
My final impressions are that the book relies too much on letters and quotes. The first hundred pages seemed like one long discussion between Sherman and his wife about how to furnish a house.
November 11, 2023
This is a mediocre biography of William Tecumseh Sherman. I was hoping (expecting?) that the title was being used ironically, or at least with self-awareness or at LEAST quoting something said about Sherman during his lifetime, and nope. So that's cringeworthy. Otherwise, Hirshson seems to be an honest biographer, not trying to cover over any of the giant flaws in Sherman's character, and following his subject faithfully through pre-Civil War, Civil War, and post-Civil War life. He's just not a very interesting writer (it's possible he comes off particularly badly against Reading the Man: A Portrait of Robert E. Lee Through His Private Letters, which is the book I finished immediately prior). This book plodded along from birth to death.
It's a pity, because Sherman himself was such a firecracker of a person, exploding here in a nervous breakdown, there in a fantastically ill-advised attempt to dictate terms, not just to Johnston and the Confederates, but to the Union government in Washington D.C. And of course burning Atlanta and marching through Georgia. "War is cruelty," he said at one point (also "War is hell"), and for someone who does not seem to have been particularly self-aware, he understood war in a searingly honest way that few generals on either side did. (Grant did. Jackson did.) Sherman was also appallingly racist (although not more racist than a lot of other white Americans in the second half of the nineteenth century), and is one of the many white men who should not be forgiven for their treatment of Native Americans. (When your opinion is, "Yes, well, it's a pity we're committing genocide but (a) it has to happen and (b) they asked for it," you really need to sit down and think about your choices, which of course Sherman never did.) He was also a petty bitch (egged on by his wife, whom I disliked immensely) and a father of a rather selfish stripe. (When his elder surviving son decided to become a Jesuit instead of a lawyer, Sherman took it as a personal, devastating insult and swore enmity to the Catholic Church. He seemed to feel that Tom OWED it to him to become a lawyer and it just unhinged him that Tom was determined to do something else.)
So a rather boring biography about an interesting person.
It's a pity, because Sherman himself was such a firecracker of a person, exploding here in a nervous breakdown, there in a fantastically ill-advised attempt to dictate terms, not just to Johnston and the Confederates, but to the Union government in Washington D.C. And of course burning Atlanta and marching through Georgia. "War is cruelty," he said at one point (also "War is hell"), and for someone who does not seem to have been particularly self-aware, he understood war in a searingly honest way that few generals on either side did. (Grant did. Jackson did.) Sherman was also appallingly racist (although not more racist than a lot of other white Americans in the second half of the nineteenth century), and is one of the many white men who should not be forgiven for their treatment of Native Americans. (When your opinion is, "Yes, well, it's a pity we're committing genocide but (a) it has to happen and (b) they asked for it," you really need to sit down and think about your choices, which of course Sherman never did.) He was also a petty bitch (egged on by his wife, whom I disliked immensely) and a father of a rather selfish stripe. (When his elder surviving son decided to become a Jesuit instead of a lawyer, Sherman took it as a personal, devastating insult and swore enmity to the Catholic Church. He seemed to feel that Tom OWED it to him to become a lawyer and it just unhinged him that Tom was determined to do something else.)
So a rather boring biography about an interesting person.
May 13, 2023
A good biography for those who want to learn lots of detail about Sherman's life, much of it gleaned from letters to and from him, so no doubt it was laborious to write.
Don't expect much on his battles. But of course, there's plenty to read on them elsewhere.
Don't expect much on his battles. But of course, there's plenty to read on them elsewhere.
April 12, 2020
This is the most excellent biography I have ever read of the general.
Recommend most heartily.
Recommend most heartily.
May 13, 2015
This is a straightforward biography of William Tecumseh Sherman. I didn't pick up much that was new, except an onerous march made in Mississippi in 1863. There is neither much criticism nor adulation here; it doesn't answer any "so what?" questions. Overall, I was disappointed; perhaps actual campaign studies may lend more information on his ability as a general.
November 8, 2009
its been too long. All I remember is that this book is very thorough.
December 20, 2013
Excellent book that cuts through the bias and hype to show the real man and general.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews