ether or not it was a successful fight. Those details keep the reader in the game, so to speak.Another one of the author’s man ideas is using the leaders in separate points of view. In every chapter there was a different leader and his point of view. This showed how everyone felt about each battle or occurrence. The author did not attempt to sway the reader to one army or the other. He let the reader choose whose side he or she was on. Michael Shaara does not ever describe army or the other as the “bad guys” or the “good guys.”The strategies and tactics used during this war were described in detail. The more important thing described, however, is not the actual strategy, but who made these strategies and what the other leaders thought of them. When General Lee decided to attack the enemy head on instead of going around them, not everyone agreed with the plan. Longstreet, for one, thought that they should have gone around the enemy and hit them from the back. These conflicts were great to see because it showed that everything was not going in perfect unison. It showed that these strategies we not always etched in stone. These plans had the potential to be changed many times. No successful strategy has gone uncontested and unchanged. All of the things that were said and done in the book are all at least somewhat true. Although, many of the numbers, such as the casualties or wounded, may be close, but they are definitely not exact. The conversation is all not completely exact because there is no record of what exactly was said during the war. The book gives basically what is thought to be said. However, what was said cannot be proven false because there is nothing to prove it wrong.The strategies used in the book were the ones used in the war. The maps in the book also give the true location of both armies. These maps helped the readers have an idea of the geography. They helped show where ...
