Didn't think I would be a fan of Civil War fiction preferring the actual reported tales to author creative liberties. I was wrong. Peters does an incredible job of using the actual recorded events and comments and fills the gaps with believable dialog, characters, and moments. The story never slowed. I read others report that there wasn't enough action. The action, however, is plentiful and intense. I found it more believable and engaging to also take the reader through the thoughts of soldiers on the line between battles. It's convincing to think much of the Civil War involved long moments of planning, strategizing and waiting peppered with moments of hellish fighting. If you're looking for action Peters pulls no punches describing the battle horrors. A historical fiction novel much like Shaara's Killer Angels, around the battle of Gettysburg. It concentrates on the people and conversations that might have occurred during the 3-day battle. It emphasizes Longstreet and Meade as well as some individuals in the trenches. Although nobody really knows the conversations that may have occurred, these are believable and one gets the idea of presence in the battle. I was especially impressed with the piece about Union general Dan Sickles, who counter to orders, caused the battles of the peach orchard and wheat field on the second day...by sheer obstinance and in search of glory. He spent the lives of his men for political capital.
What do You think about Cain At Gettysburg (2012)?
I enjoyed this account of the Battle of Gettysburg...
—Cristy
Very good. General Meade gets his due in this book.
—mtrembl
