Robert E. Lee and the Fall of the Confederacy, 1863-1865

Controversial and compelling from first page to last, Robert E. Lee and the Fall of the Confederacy achieves a trifecta. It affirms Lee's stature as a perceptive strategist who understood Confederate independence could only be achieved by breaking the Union's will in battle, it demonstrates the Army of the Potomac as a fighting force and its successive generals as competent commanders, and it establishes Rafuse in the front rank of a new generation of scholars applying fresh perspectives to the Civil War. -- Dennis E. Showalter, Colorado College; author of Patton and Rommel: Men of War in the Twentieth Century
Is it really possible there's anything new to say about Robert E. Lee, who probably has had more written about him than any other Civil War military figure? Ethan Rafuse clearly thinks so, and in [this book] he argues his case. . . . Rafuse brings impeccable credentials to his quest. * America's Civil War *
Ethan Rafuse . . . has written one of the most objective, balanced, and perceptive accounts of Lee's strategy and tactics that one could wish for. It is a masterful blend of narrative and analysis. * Civil War News *
[A] clear, solidly researched, and stimulating book full of sensible, balanced judgments wholly free from the polemical self-indulgence bequeathed to this subject by the late Thomas L. Connelly. Rafuse is thus able to explore controversial issues in a no-nonsense fashion. * Journal of American History *
Rafuse's book contains many provocative passages and his thesis about Lee's inability to win Southern independence may well be valid. * Blue & Gray Magazine *
Combining lucid writing, judicious analysis, and refreshing common sense, this new study of Robert E. Lee's generalship shows once again why Ethan S. Rafuse is one of the finest Civil War military historians at work today. -- Mark Grimsley, The Ohio State University, author of And Keep Moving On: The Virginia Campaign, May–June 1864
The author achieved a fresh perspective in this campaign study by structuring his analysis within the framework of the current Army typology of the levels of war: strategic, operational, and tactical. . . . This well researched book is one of the more significant contributions to the historiography of the Civil War in the past decade. * The Journal Of Military History *
This is an important book for young people who are just starting to learn about our American Civil War. . . . I highly recommend this book as a learning tool for our young people who are studying our nation's history. * The Lone Star Book Review *
Rafuse's study thus reflects a reasonably stable scholarly consensus with regard to the high operational quality of Lee's generalship. . . . Rafuse also shows that some historians have too easily conflated a preference among McClellan's successors for the Peninsula as a line or operations with the earlier general's irresolute behavior on the battlefield. * Journal of Southern History *
This study of Lee’s war is a great companion volume to Refuse's works on George B. McClellan and Meade, and builds on the scholarship of historians like Steven E. Woodworth. It asks interesting questions and, at times, offers surprising answers and interpretations about the Civil War in the Virginia theater. Military and Civil War scholars will benefit from its insightfulness, while ‘buffs’ will enjoy another look at how the leaders in blue and gray fought the American Iliad. * Army History *