“Thought-provoking and entertaining . . . What if Lincoln had dodged the assassin’s bullet? What if Lee had waged guerrilla warfare in April 1865?” —Gordon C. Rhea, author of the Overland Campaign series “What if. . . ?” Every Civil War armchair general asks the question. Possibilities unfold. Disappointments vanish. Imaginations soar. More questions arise. “What if . . .” can be more than an exercise in wistful fantasy. A serious inquiry sparks rigorous exploration, demands critical thinking, and unlocks important insights. The Great “What Ifs” of the American Civil War: Historians Tackle the Conflict’s Most Intriguing Possibilities is a collection of fourteen essays by the historians at Emerging Civil War, and includes a Foreword by acclaimed alternate history writer Peter G. Tsouras. Each entry focuses on one of the most important events of the war and unpacks the options of the moment. To understand what happened, we must look with a clear and objective eye at what could have happened, with the full multitude of choices before us. “What if” is a tool for illumination. These essays also explode the assumptions people make when they ask “what if” and then jump to wishful conclusions. This collection offers not alternate histories or counterfactual scenarios, but an invitation to ask, to learn, and to wonder . . . “A lively and engaging examination of those perennial ‘second guesses’ no student of the war fails to appreciate. No ‘pie in the sky’ here—each exploration is firmly rooted in fact, with a keen appreciation of context, providing provocative insight without sacrificing history.” —David A. Powell, author of the award–winning series The Chickamauga Campaign

To ask "What If" about great moments of history is to simultaneously unleash imagined possibilities and embrace the rigorous confines of fact.Every armchair general asks "What If," but serious students of the war avoid making assumptions when they ask it. They go beyond wishful thinking and use "What If" as a springboard to explore not only what happened but also their own assumptions about what happened. A serious inquiry sparks rigorous exploration, demands critical thinking, and unlocks important insights.More Great "What Ifs" of the American Civil War: Historians Tackle More of the Conflict's Most Intriguing Possibilities picks up where volume one left off: with historians at Emerging Civil War tackling more of the war's most enduring questions.Each essay focuses on a key event of the war and, much like an army staff ride, examines the options of the moment. To understand what happened, we must look at what could have happened, with the full multitude of choices before us and a clear and objective eye. "What if" becomes a tool for illumination.This is not a collection of alternate histories or counterfactual scenarios. Rather, it is an invitation to ask, to learn, and to wonder, "What if . . . ?"

Referring to the war that was raging across parts of the American landscape, Abraham Lincoln told Congress in 1862, "We shall nobly save, or meanly lose, the last best hope on earth." Lincoln recognized what was at stake in the American Civil War: not only freedom for 3.5 million slaves but also survival of self-government in the last place on earth where it could have the opportunity of developing freely. Noted historian Steven E. Woodworth tells the story of what many regard as the defining event in United States history. While covering all theaters of war, he emphasizes the importance of action in the region between the Appalachians and the Mississippi River in determining its outcome. Woodworth argues that the Civil War had a distinct purpose that was understood by most of its participants: it was primarily a conflict over the issue of slavery. The soldiers who filled the ranks of the armies on both sides knew what they were fighting for. The outcome of the war—after its beginnings at Fort Sumter to the Confederate surrender four years later—was the result of the actions and decisions made by those soldiers and millions of other Americans. Written in clear and compelling fashion, This Great Struggle is their story—and ours.

Historical parallels are pitfalls for the politician, because history never really repeats itself. One event may resemble another event, one situation another, although there is an interval of scores of years, or perhaps centuries, between them. Yet the conditions under which those events happened can never be the same, since change of place and progress of time forbid it. If we search a little we shall find that the superficial resemblances conceal fundamental differences, just as, when we look beneath the surface of things, we shall often perceive a real likeness where at first sight only the dissimilarity struck the eye. Suppose then that we take events which possess some general resemblance, and examine into the reasons why they resemble each other, and the extent to which they differ, and consider why they differ. Such a comparison is often profitable for the historian. It helps him to understand the real character of both events better; it brings out the special characteristics of each, the essential qualities which distinguish those particular events from each other, and from others of the same kind. It is for this reason that I have chosen an historical parallel as my subject to-day. The two events which I shall try to compare or contrast have a special interest for me one is the first political event in which I was interested as a boy, the other has been the study of my manhood. Their comparison has often been suggested by American writers. Mr J. F. Rhodes, for instance, in his History of the American Civil War, says, "The most interesting and instructive parallel to this period of our history is the great Civil War in England." The parallel was often suggested while the American Civil War was in progress: it occurred to some of the actors themselves. Once President Lincoln was pressed to offer terms to the South, and said that he could not treat with parties in arms against the government. The Confederate emissary argued that it had been often done, "especially by Charles I when at war with the British Parliament." Lincoln nimbly avoided the pitfall. "I do not profess," said he, "to be posted in history. On all such matters I will turn you over to Seward. All I distinctly recollect about Charles I is that he lost his head hi the end." It is natural that there should be many points of similarity. Take two races of the same stock, both trained by free institutions and both nurtured by the same creeds, heat them in the fire of political passions, subject them to the strain and pressure of civil war, and we should expect results of much the same kind to follow.

Just a touch here and a tweak there . . . . MacKinlay Kantor, Pulitzer Prize-winning author, master storyteller, shows us how the South could have won the Civil War, how two small shifts in history (as we know it) in the summer of 1863 could have turned the tide for the Confederacy. What would have happened: to the Union, to Abraham Lincoln, to the people of the North and South, to the world? If the South Had Won the Civil War originally appeared in Look Magazine nearly half a century ago. It immediately inspired a deluge of letters and telegrams from astonished readers and became an American classic overnight. Published in book form soon after, Kantor's masterpiece has been unavailable for a decade. Now, this much requested classic is once again available for a new generation of readers and features a stunning cover by acclaimed Civil War artist Don Troiani, a new introduction by award-winning alternate history author Harry Turtledove, and fifteen superb illustrations by the incomparable Dan Nance. It all begins on that fateful afternoon of Tuesday, May 12, 1863, when a deplorable equestrian accident claims the life of General Ulysses S. Grant . . . . At the Publisher's request, this title is being sold without Digital Rights Management Software (DRM) applied.

Although most Americans believe that the Battle of Gettysburg was the only turning point of the Civil War, the war actually turned repeatedly. Turning Points of the American Civil War examines key shifts and the context surrounding them, demonstrating that the war was a continuum of watershed events.

Could the South have won the Civil War? Based on real battles, actions, and characters, ten scenarios have been carefully constructed to reveal how at points of decision a different choice or minor incident could have set in motion an entirely new train of events. What if Sherman was stalled outside Atlanta, or Lincoln lost the crucial 1864 election? Or if Stuart's Cavalry at Gettysburg arrived in time to give Lee the freedom of operation he lacked in reality? These and many more scenarios are played out against the dramatic and colorful backdrop of this critical and bloody era of American history. Based on a series of "what ifs" posed by leading military historians, this new speculative history reconstructs moments during the American Civil War that could conceivably have altered the entire course of the war and led to a Confederate victory.--From publisher description.