David Jeremiah. Revealing the Mysteries of Heaven. Edited by Robert J. Morgan, Turning Point, 2017.

Revealing the Mysteries of Heaven is a refreshing, inspiring book. The author takes a look at most of the verses in the Bible that deal with heaven. By heaven here he means the dwelling place of God and the future dwelling place of redeemed humans. The book does delineate how the words translated heaven or heavens in English Bibles can refer to the atmosphere, the universe, or God’s abode. Clearly in this context, the book refers to the third.

Revealing the Mysteries of Heaven focuses on what the future in heaven will be like for the redeemed. While the author draws from books of the Bible throughout including Genesis, Daniel, Isaiah, and Matthew, it focuses on Revelation. That has more detail about heaven than any other book of the Bible and speaks of the future in more detail as well.

One chapter deals with a question that we often hear today in our secular culture. We can see the question just in the title of the chapter: “Won’t Heaven Be Boring?” If we understand all the possibilities and promises about heaven, that seems unlikely. Besides, as the author points out, to paraphrase a bumper sticker: Heaven—Consider the alternative. No, the book is not about hell, but when we are speaking of eternity, we cannot overlook that side of eternity.

The author sticks to the subject. While he does mention certain dispensationalist ideas in the book, that is not the focus. This really is written for all Christian believers regardless of their view of the millennium or tribulation. This is what the Bible says about heaven.

One part I would like to share in some detail. The Bible tells us that in the new heaven and earth there will be no more sea (Revelation 21:1). Those of us who enjoy the sea may ask why, or may wonder if we would like a world without oceans.

But the Bible doesn’t tell us there won’t be beautiful bodies of water. When you think about it, the surface of our planet is primarily water—about 71 percent. The oceans hold over 96 percent of all the earth’s water, and these vast wastelands of salt water are essentially uninhabitable. The new earth will be more beautiful than anything we can imagine and more gorgeous than anywhere we’ve ever been. There will clearly be bodies of water…But evidently, there will not be huge wastelands of salty seas.

…Henry M. Morris explained it like this: “There will, in fact, be no need for a sea on the new earth. The present sea is needed, as was the original antediluvian sea, as a basic reservoir for the maintenance of the hydrological cycle and the water-based ecology and physiology of the animal and human inhabitants of the earth.”

The composition of the the planet will be so different—and the nature of our glorified bodies will be so superior—that the very ecology of the new creation will be altered.

…Give God a little credit here, for if He made the seas so beautiful and pleasant in the first place, He will certainly design a new world with even greater levels of marvel and magnificence. (214-215)

Parts of this book, particularly the chapter entitled “Worship in Heaven” seem especially powerful. That has to do with the subject matter. Some of the most powerful songs ever written take songs in heaven from the Book of Revelation and set them to music. An obvious example is the “Hallelujah” Chorus from Handel’s Messiah (Revelation 11:15 and 19:6).

Such songs are particularly powerful because they are the same songs, we are told, that people and angels sing in heaven. Reading a chapter full of such songs and sayings can uplift the coldest heart. Reading a chapter full of such lyrics makes the reader understand a little better that petition from the Lord’s Prayer, “Thy kingdom come.”

And perhaps even more will the reader understand the Bible’s last prayer: “Even so, come, Lord Jesus” (Revelation 22:20 NKJV).

Robert M. Thorson. The Guide to Walden Pond. Houghton, 2018.

The Guide to Walden Pond does essentially what the title promises: It is a guide, a nearly pocket-sized book, to take along if or when we visit Walden Pond. Walden Pond, of course, was made famous by Thoreau’s book Walden; or, Life in the Woods. The book guides us on a walk around the perimeter of the pond from Henry David Thoreau’s perspective.

The guide takes us through fourteen stops around the pond from the parking lot and visitor’s center through the woods to Thoreau’s cabin site and bean field to the railroad and back around on the south side of the pond. I grew up not far from Walden Pond. In fact, I learned to swim there. The guide has a photograph of the Red Cross Beach there, but does little to explain it or how it got its name. It was called the Red Cross Beach because the Red Cross used to give swimming lessons there.

While I have never circumambulated the pond, I have been there many times, often guiding school field trips. The Guide to Walden Pond does a good job of explaining many features and providing a history of the pond, not just Thoreau’s stay there.

After reading this book, I will have to change a few of the things I tell about Walden and the pond. I recall reading that the cabin site had disappeared from memory until it was rediscovered in 1922. The inscription on the marker at the site even suggested this. However, Thorson makes it clear that friends of Thoreau knew exactly where it was, that Thoreau, a surveyor by trade, delineated its exact location in his writings, and that by 1872 people were bringing stones to place on a memorial cairn at the site.

I suspect the confusion may have come from some details the book clarifies. Shortly after Thoreau moved away, the cabin itself was purchased from Emerson (who owned the land) and moved closer to Walden Street (now a highway). I recall reading years ago that a diary from the 1880s mentions the cabin, but by then, according to Thorson, it had been dismantled and its wood sold in a manner similar to the way Thoreau originally purchased many of the parts second-hand. Perhaps that diary was talking of the cabin site. And because it was moved, there may have been some confusion about which site was the original one. That’s a guess.

The book explains the geology of the pond. I tell my students that it was something of a mystery because there is neither an inlet or an outlet. It really is a kind of open well or spring flowing into a kettle hole. It is not part of a river or stream system but part of an aquifer that happens to surface through the kettle hole. Thoreau referred to the pond as a well, and that was an accurate description. The Guide says that the bottom of Walden Pond has the lowest elevation of any spot in the whole state.

We learn, ironically, that by the time Walden was published, seven years after Thoreau lived there, the woods were practically gone. Thoreau himself planted some pines and other trees that survived, but most of those would come down in the twentieth century in a couple of bad storms, one being the Hurricane of 1938.

While I have read Walden and visited the pond many times, some of the explanations and photographs clarify things in the book. I always pictured his bean field next to the cabin. The bean field was uphill from the cabin on a flat area that had already been partially cleared. When Thoreau said the field was over two acres, he was not exaggerating.

Thoreau mentions walking along the railroad that passed by at the west end of the pond. It is still there today. The railroad was completed just a year before he went to live by the pond, and he used it as a trail or path to walk to the part of town where his family lived.

When he spoke of an ice fort at that end of the pond, he was not exaggerating here, either. While he lived there, ice cutters cut the ice and piled it up at the end of the pond next to the railroad.. Thorson estimates about 300,000 cubic feet of ice were stacked there. Unfortunately, the people who cut that ice did not have a market, so most of the ice just sat there, unsold. It took over two years for it all to melt. When I was young, I recall visiting an ice house in rural New Brunswick. It was July but this barn-like structure had hundreds of blocks of ice inside. It was all insulated by sawdust.

Of course, there is much about the flora and fauna, both then and now. Many of the plants and creatures we can still find there. I was under the impression, for example, that loons had nested there in the 1840s, but Thorson states that one or two stopped there on migration to points farther north. Of course, back in those days the Canada Geese mainly nested in Canada and so were only passing through on migration. Some time in the fifties and sixties they began to change their habits. Some still migrate to the north, but many now nest in the United States.

If there is a conflict in the book, it is the conflict between the recreationists and the conservationists. Shortly after the Civil War ended (Thoreau died in 1862), an amusement park was built next to west end of the pond and the railroad. There was actually railroad stop there. People also began swimming at the east end of the pond where they still do today. On one day in 1952, they counted 35,000 bathers. I had friends who fished there on the opening day of fishing season in the sixties. One told me it was shoulder-to-shoulder to fish there.

At one point The Guide quotes Thoreau’s famous observation about the battle between the red and black ants. It suggests that the ant battle could represent the conflict between the recreationists and the conservationists. Obviously, that would not have been Thoreau’s intent; however, it might have suggested the Mexican War which was going on while Thoreau was at Walden. Like Congressman Abraham Lincoln and many others, Thoreau opposed the war—a fact we learn from “On Civil Disobedience.”

In the 1950s, though, the conservationists got the upper hand. Much of the land surrounding the pond owned by an Emerson descendant had been deeded to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts as a reservation. Conservationists were able to get planned development to stop and to encourage limits on the land use. Much of the woods has grown back, and it likely is a little more like the way Thoreau would have remembered it.

There are a few minor errors in The Guide to Walden Pond. The book says that when Thoreau called the kettle hold of “diluvial” origin, he was being “cryptic.” No, he was not. In the same passage, the book quotes Thoreau alluding to Ovid’s Metamorphoses. Diluvial means “related to a flood.” Ovid, like ancient writers from around the world, describe a worldwide flood. In his telling, Deucalion and Pyrrha are the Mr. and Mrs. Noah. Ironically, though the author is a uniformitarian rather than catastrophist, the book describes the “alluvial plain” and moved rocks in terms of a large flood and ice sheet. Not much difference there, really. It helps to know Ovid to understand Walden because the book frequently quotes him.

At one point we are told that Thoreau described a hooting owl sounding like “Hoo hoo hoo, hoorer hoo.” That is the sound that a Barred Owl makes. The book attributes that to the Great Horned Owl, what Thoreau called a cat owl because its face resembled cat’s. Both species were and are found near Walden. The Barred Owl prefers damp places. The Great Horned Owl likes woods, and in New England, pine woods especially.

The book also confuses Black Birch and Gray Birch. There is a correctly identified photo of a Gray Birch, but we are told this is what Thoreau meant by “sweet-scented black birch.” Black Birch, not Gray Birch, is sweet scented. It is a source of natural wintergreen and is used to make birch beer. Gray Birch just smells like wood. I worked as a nature counselor at a summer camp six miles from Walden and Black Birch was very common there. Perhaps because of the logging and storms there are none left around Walden according to the book, but Black Birch has black bark, hence its name, not the whitish bark that the Gray Birch has. Black Birch would have been common there, and no one would mistake it for Gray Birch, which does not grow much beyond the sapling stage.

I hope to be able to visit my hometown this summer. After reading The Guide to Walden Pond, I am tempted to bring it with me and revisit the site of my swimming lessons. It will no doubt bring back some memories, but it will also be helpful to follow in its steps. If I take any more students on a tour, I will have a better idea of how to present it. And even if I had never set foot in the state of Massachusetts, it would be a great book to accompany any reading of Walden.

William Faulkner. Intruder in the Dust. 1948; Vintage, 1975.

It struck me part of the way through Intruder in the Dust that William Faulkner really was the American James Joyce. Intruder in the Dust is dense. There is stream of consciousness. It is hard to tell how much of the detail will matter in the story. There is also a well-founded fear that the reader may miss something that really is important buried in the arcana of Southern Americana, just as Joyce notes details embedded in his thoughts on Irish Catholicism and politics.

Some of the characters I knew from other stories. The main character, Lucas Beauchamp, appears in Go Down Moses. From that collection of stories I recalled that a relative of Lucas called Ike McCaslin her uncle. He was, even though he was white and she was black. Lucas is black but he knows that his grandfather was an Edmonds. We understand that Lucas considers himself a man, no different, really, from the white people. I also learned that Roth Edmonds’ (“Race at Morning”) given name is Carothers.

Lucas was present when Vinson Gowrie was shot in the back. He knew he could say little—the story is set around 1940. (A few times the problems in Germany and Europe are mentioned.) He was holding a pistol which he always carried with him, but he said that his pistol was not the murder weapon. Still, he is arrested.

The Gowries are a redneck clan that live in an almost lawless part of the county. They are talking about a lynching. Talk is not just about hanging but about dousing Lucas with gasoline.

Lucas is not without friends. Four years earlier he had rescued a twelve-year-old Chick Mallison after he fell through the ice. Chick was indebted to him and tried to come up with things to repay that debt. Lucas, independent man that he was, refused any attempt. Now four years after his rescue, Chick sees a chance to help Lucas now; besides, he is certain Lucas would not murder anyone.

Chick gets his uncle Gavin Stevens who is a lawyer to try to defend Lucas. Lucas is in the county jail where the Sheriff and some others are keeping an eye on him. The Sheriff would like to see the case go to trial to avoid the vigilantism. Chick’s young black friend Alex Sander helps.

Another person persuaded of Lucas’ innocence is Miss Habersham, a seventy-year-old spinster from a respected family. She grew up with Lucas’s now deceased wife and, in some ways, might consider herself his sister-in-law.

Together they hatch an unorthodox plan to prove Lucas’ innocence. If they can exhume Vinson Gowrie’s body, they might be able to show that Lucas is telling the truth and that someone else shot Vinson. There is a detailed and even humorous description of their midnight attempt at grave robbing.

Without going into too much detail (and Faulkner provides a lot of detail), there is a surprise when they dig up the Gowrie grave. Sheriff Hampton gets involved because of the new developments. The question is simply this—will the evidence be enough to persuade a jury of Lucas’ innocence and, more importantly, keep the Gowrie clan and their neighbors from lynching Lucas?

I could not help thinking a bit of To Kill a Mockingbird. Of course, that book reads in a more straightforward manner, but it also involves a question of the guilt of an innocent black man accused of a crime against a white person. I could not help wondering if Harper Lee might have been inspired by Intruder in the Dust.

Like Go Down Moses, Faulkner is really pretty optimistic about black-white relations. He understands the history and prejudices, but he also understands the general human appreciation of justice. Intruder in the Dust, unlike To Kill a Mockingbird, does not focus on a trial, but on a mystery. Who really shot Vinson Gowrie? How do we know? What was the motive?

As is often the case with Faulkner, some of his quotable passages are the asides or the thoughts of men on the human condition or the American South. Early in the novel, Attorney Stevens is meditating on what will probably happen to Lucas:

…and now the white people will take him out and burn him, all regular and in order and themselves acting exactly as he is convinced Lucas would wish them to act: like white folks; both of them [white and black] observing implicitly the rules…no real hard feelings on either side (since Mr. Lilley is not a Gowrie) once the fury is over; in fact, Mr. Lilley would probably be one of the first to contribute cash money toward Lucas’ funeral and the support of his widow and children if he had them. (48)

He also observed, “Not all white people can endure slavery and apparently no man can stand freedom…” (146)

Part of Faulkner’s optimism comes through this meditation of Uncle Gavin:

Someday Lucas Beauchamp can shoot a white man in the back with the same impunity to lynch-rope or gasoline as a white man; in time he will vote anywhen and anywhere a white man can and send his children to the same school anywhere the white man’s children go and travel anywhere the white man travels as the white man does it. But it won’t be next Tuesday. (151-152)

That has largely come to pass. Many changes have happened since 1948 when Intruder in the Dust came out. We are well beyond next Tuesday.

Considering we recently reviewed three books that had something to do with the Battle of Gettysburg, there is this following meditation. When I was in college in the seventies, when we spoke of the War, we meant Vietnam. When our parents talked of the War, they were speaking of World War II; likewise, our grandparents, World War I. But a college friend from Tennessee told us where he came from the War was still the Civil War. This time it is our teenaged Chick Mallison thinking:

For every Southern boy fourteen years old, not once but whenever he wants it, there is that instant when it’s still not yet two o’clock on that July afternoon in 1863, the brigades are in position behind the rail fence, the guns are laid and ready in the woods and furled flags are already loosened to break out and Pickett himself with his long oiled ringlets and his hat in one hand probably and his sword in the other looking up the hill waiting for Longstreet to give the word and it’s all in the balance, it hasn’t happened yet, it hasn’t even begun yet, it not only hasn’t begun yet but there is still time for it not to begin against that position and those circumstances which made more men than Garnett and Kemper and Armstead and Wilcox look grave yet it’s going to begin, we all know that , we have come too far with too much at stake and this moment doesn’t need even a fourteen-year-old boy to think This time. Maybe this time…(190)

Yes, except for the last three words, that is one sentence. Why? Because it is a single thought. The next sentence is nearly the same length. This perhaps illustrates why Faulkner is challenging to read but also why he can be rewarding.

John Paul Jackson. Unlocking Heaven’s Power. Daystar, 2015.

I once attended a conference in which John Paul Jackson was a speaker. Even though it was over 20 years ago, I still recall some things he shared. He had a widely recognized ministry. A book we reviewed a few years ago speaks highly of him. Unlocking Heaven’s Power was published posthumously from notes. For that reason, it may not be his final draft, but even so, it is a powerful and encouraging book.

If anyone reads the New Testament, he or she understands that faith in God is a key to experiencing the power of God—heaven’s power. Still, this is not a word of faith “name it and claim it” book. This really examines two things, what faith is and who the believer is in Christ.

Oddly enough, fear and faith share the same basic root: both are the belief that something is going to happen. Faith is the belief that something good is going to happen, while fear is the belief that something bad is going to happen. (7-8)

And, yes, faith is taking someone at his word. So faith in God is taking God at His Word, especially His revealed Word in Scripture and sometimes a specific word to the person or group.

A key chapter, and perhaps a key concept of the book, is titled “The Moment of Choice.” Jackson notes that people are constantly faced with choices, many of them moral in nature. Even the lapsed Unitarian Henry David Thoreau wrote, “Our whole lives are startlingly moral.” So, yes, choose life, choose God’s way, enter into His covenant.

The book then describes in some inspiring detail what it means to live in covenant with God. When Jesus said, “The Kingdom of God is within you,” (Luke 17:20-21 NKJV) He was not addressing some New Age navel-gazing mantra. He was expressing the reality for any believer who has the Holy Spirit.

The message of this book is inspired. Oh, I say and pray, let me live like this. The more aware we are of God’s presence, the more we will understand and share His power. Jackson uses the illustration of Elisha being attacked by the Syrian army. Elisha’s servant was scared, but Elisha was relaxed. He prayed that his servant’s eyes be opened, and his servant saw that their valley was surrounded by chariots of fire. Elisha had God’s vision.

Jackson emphasizes that God is the creator. He has authority over everything. Anything that is not God was created by Him. Therefore, He has authority over it. If we are part of His Kingdom, we can share in and be protected by that authority.

Like other teachers—Watchman Nee (Ni To-Sheng) comes to mind—Jackson notes that man has a body, a soul, and a spirit. The spirit is the eternal part that relates to God. The root of the spiritual battle everyone faces is in the mind, the soul. The soul is torn many times between the body (or the flesh) and the spirit. If we choose Jesus and His way, we choose the spiritual side, and our soul can experience God’s Kingdom. As many have said, our mind is the battleground. See II Corinthians 10:3-6.

Because this is based on an unpublished manuscript that Jackson was working on when he died, this may not be the way a final copy would have been. I did note one slight problem. The books quotes Romans 7:14-18 and says that the word translated flesh is the Greek word psyche, or soul (25). I looked those verses up in a Greek New Testament, and the word is sark, not psyche. It is flesh, not soul. (For what it is worth, sark is the root of the English word sarcastic, which literally means “flesh tearing.”) It is a minor point and does not detract from the overall ministry this book can effect.

Let your Kingdom come—to our minds. Let us see things the way You do, Lord. Amen.

M. C. Beaton. Death of a Village. Warner, 2003. A Hamish Macbeth Mystery.

Recently we discovered the nineties’ BBC television show Hamish Macbeth. We have gotten a kick out of the episodes and were curious about the novels the show is based on.

Hamish Macbeth is the constable for the Highland village of Lochdubh. Nothing much happens there, and Macbeth would be happy to spend his entire career there. His problem is that he is clever at solving mysteries and corralling criminals. His superiors want to promote him, but that would mean going away from Lochdubh to a more populated area like Inverness. Some skilled lawmen might end up at Glasgow.

Macbeth’s beat includes some even smaller hamlets in the hills. A fire destroys a house in the village of Stoyre. There is an explosion, but no one responds. Someone may have been killed. To a person, the villagers say it was an act of God. Hamish cannot help thinking that there is something more.

It appears that there is some kind of religious revival going on. People meet in the church daily. But Hamish sees no inspired preaching or repentant souls. It is almost cultish, as if the inhabitants of Stoyre have become like the wives of Stepford, with a religious veneer.

There are also a couple of things closer to home. A newlywed couple in town are having some difficulties. The wife claims her husband is beating her, but it appears that she may be abusing him. She may have married him for his money, but is she a gold digger or a black widow?

An older woman in town suspects foul play at a relatively new nursing home. People seem to be dying there at an unusual rate. It may have something to do with the financial arrangements the facility makes with its residents. Is she willing to become a guinea pig to prove her point, or is it all a misunderstanding? This has echoes of our recently reviewed Act of Negligence.

Hamish then, has four problems, the mysterious cultish arson at Stoyre (with maybe a murder), the injured wife (with a potential murder), the suspicious medical facility (maybe with a record of murders), and how to do his job well without getting promoted. The first three involve lots of action and some clever crime solving. The last involves some funny antics to try to get his supervisors to forget about him.

They all make for an entertaining read: a most unusual mystery plus two others joined with a plan that could backfire disastrously but involve some real fun if it works. I suspect this will not be the last Hamish Macbeth tale we will read.

James Longstreet. From Manassas to Appomattox: Memoirs of the Civil War in America. 1891; Skyhorse, 2013.

Arthur James Fremantle. Three Months in the Southern States April-June 1863. 1863; Project Gutenberg, 29 Mar. 2007.

Longstreet’s and Fremantle’s memoirs are two primary sources that anyone studying the American Civil War in any detail goes to. Longstreet was a leading Confederate general, though after the war many Southerners considered him a traitor. Fremantle was a British army lieutenant-colonel dispatched to observe the Confederate government and army for England.

Longstreet’s memoir mostly follows the battles he was involved in, a few in the Mexican War and then detailed for the Civil War. He throws in many additional pieces of information that give us a sense of what things were like during the time he writes about.

He directly says, for example, that the 1844 election was largely about the annexation of Texas. When Polk, the Democrat, won, everyone knew that Texas would be admitted to the Union and that Mexico would not like it. While an agreement was being worked out with the Mexican government, the Mexican government was overthrown by a more nationalistic junta. So we had the war. To Longstreet it was simple and obvious.

After the Civil War, Longstreet went into business in New Orleans. Later, under Presidents Grant, McKinley, and Theodore Roosevelt, Longstreet would have government jobs. His view was simply that the South lost the war, so let us put that in the past and work together. We can see such a matter of fact approach throughout his memoirs.

For example, at one point he quoted a fellow officer who believed that if the Confederacy lasted seven years, it would be a dictatorship. Longstreet quotes him without comment, but it is interesting that he quoted him at all.

Near the beginning, Longstreet names all the men on both sides that he went to West Point with or served in the Mexican War with. So many were friends and knew each other well. After his home state of Alabama seceded, Longstreet joined the Confederate Army. An army friend from the North asked him why since he knew what Longstreet believed about slavery and the other issues. Longstreet simply said, if your home state left the Union, you would go with them. His friend admitted that he would. Again, it was as simple as that.

Longstreet does note that he was born in South Carolina, his family moved to Georgia when he was quite young, and eventually moved to Alabama. He says that his father was from New Jersey and his mother from Maryland. He wants us to know that he is an American.

Generally, he believes that the only way the Southern army could be successful was what he calls a “defensive-aggressive” strategy. That is largely the way Lee operated and helps explain his success in many engagements despite being outnumbered. The defensive part was to take the most advantageous position under the circumstances to make it difficult for the enemy to attack. But at the same time, it had to be aggressive, to demoralize the enemy and divide the populace in its support of the war. Until Gettysburg, the South was largely successful doing just that, at least in the East.

The two defeats from 1861 through 1863 that Longstreet was involved with were both where the South did not do that. At Antietam, McClelland got a hold of some of Lee’s orders, so he knew what Lee was doing. Longstreet suggests that Antietam was more of a stalemate, but it was enough for Lincoln to issue a draft of the Emancipation Proclamation.

Longstreet is even blunt about that. He sounds almost grateful to Lincoln for releasing it. Politicians could no longer be coy and claim Unionism or states’ rights:

This was one of the decisive political events of the war, and at once put the great struggle outwardly and openly upon the basis where it had before only rested by tacit and covert understanding. (290)

Yes, states’ rights might have been an issue, but mostly because certain states claimed the right to own people as property, to use Lincoln’s language.

The other battlefield loss Longstreet witnessed before 1864 was, of course, Gettysburg. There, Lee was certainly aggressive, but he was not as defensive as usual. The Union Army held the better ground, the better defensive position. Longstreet tells us that he thought Lee’s plan would not work even though Lee was being aggressive. Although he fully went along with it, he did feel that his proposal for the third day might have worked better.

Interestingly, he does not fault Meade as some do for not following hard on Lee’s army as it retreated. He notes two things in particular. One is simply that the Federals lost many men and had many casualties, that most of them were not in an especially good condition to keep fighting. He notes also that in its retreat, the Army of Northern Virginia camped on good ground, and any troops trying to dislodge them would have found it difficult. In other words, Lee was being defensive-aggressive, even in retreat.

Longstreet also notes the failure of Confederate intelligence prior to Gettysburg. Grant in his memoirs noted that Lee was successful in Virginia. It was his home state, he knew the territory, and most of the free people there supported him. He had plenty of intelligence most of the time there. He has access to better maps. In Pennsylvania, especially without Jeb Stuart’s information, Lee was fighting nearly blind. Longstreet’s spy Harrison (Longstreet does not give him a rank or first name) had the best information, but Lee was guessing, especially on the third day.

Because Longstreet was not there, he does not speak a whole lot about the fall of Vicksburg the day after the loss at Gettysburg. He does suggest that if the Confederate army command had made better use of its resources, they might have been able to repel Grant there. In the fall of 1863 Longstreet was ordered West to try to shore up the fighting in Tennessee and Georgia. He describes their success at Chickamauga, but it was not enough.

Early in 1864, Longstreet was sent back to the eastern front. He describes in some detail the Battle of the Wilderness. Until really the bitter end, when Richmond fell, Longstreet sounded optimistic. Some of that, of course, had to do with Federal politics. Lee was convinced that a battle victory in the North would so demoralize the Union Army and many of the Northern citizens so that Lincoln would have to sue for peace.

From Petersburg to Five Forks to Appomattox Court House, Longstreet describes the desperate end of fighting. When Lee surrendered, he was virtually surrounded and completely cut off from supplies.

Longstreet devotes a chapter to summarize his life after the war. This was written before he would be appointed as an ambassador under McKinley and Roosevelt. As noted before, many Southerners, especially the “Lost Cause” types, did not like Longstreet and considered him a traitor after the war in spite of the good things Lee would say and write about him. From Longstreet’s perspective, it had nothing to do with the war and his conduct in the war. It was his conduct after the war.

Not only did he believe that his side should accept the fact that they lost the war and face the new reality of a new country without slavery, but in 1867 he wrote an eloquent editorial supporting voting rights for black citizens. From that, white Southerners began to call him a traitor to the Lost Cause.

In the past two years, there has been a lot of news about people tearing down and destroying statues. Some of the statues were, in this writer’s opinion done out of ignorance, e.g. Frederick Douglass and Jesus. However, many places in the American South are dealing with the question of what to do about statues of Confederate soldiers. That is a non-issue for statues of Longstreet. I read that there were only two: one near his birthplace in South Carolina and one at Gettysburg that was not erected until 1998. I guess the Lost Cause never forgave him.

Another first person account of a slice of the Civil War is Fremantle’s Three Months in the Southern States. Arthur Fremantle was an English military officer who came to North America to gather information about the Confederacy. To skirt the Union naval blockade, he had to land in Mexico and cross into Texas that way.

Today people are mostly interested in this work because he ended up as an impartial military witness to the Battle of Gettysburg. Because he spent most of his time in the South, he actually wrote quite a bit about the siege of Vicksburg and the fighting in Mississippi at the time. He also wrote quite a few observations about Texas.

He spoke to veterans of the Texas war for independence and the Mexican War. He noted that he had only been in Texas for three hours when he observed his first lynching. The victim was white and no doubt a criminal, but it does call to mind Lincoln’s first major speech “On the Preservation of our Political Institutions,” (1838) in which the future president worried about vigilantism.

Fremantle even visited the King Ranch, already known for its size. He met Sam Houston, whom he described as being “much disappointed” not only by Texan secession but by his loss of status in the state as a result of his support of the Union.

He engaged in numerous conversations with Southerners defending slavery. It seemed he mostly listened and recorded their beliefs. He spoke several times of groups of slaves “escaping” Union soldiers. Again, he simply took what they said at face value. I am reminded of what Douglass wrote, that a slave would never say anything against his or her master for fear of what punishment might come. He did note that some escaped slaves helped the Union with intelligence.

He observed that Union troops would destroy “railroad, Government property, and arms, and paroled all men, both old and young, but they committed no barbarities.” (1138) He noted that nearly all free men in the South had some kind of title, sometimes judge or sheriff, but usually a military title. When asked about this General Joseph Johnston told him,

You must be astonished to find how fond all Americans are of titles, though they are republicans; and as they can’t get any other sort, they all take military ones. (1339)

Colonel Sanders, anyone?

He also noted that most educated Southern men spoke in an accent “exactly like an English Gentleman.” (1561) Even recordings from the early twentieth century make us realize that the British and American accents were very similar to one another until just a little over a century ago.

Fremantle also records rumors and speculation during this time that to us seem almost humorous. One Southerner, for example, told him that if the Confederacy won the war, that “Maine would probably try to join Canada.”

He arrived in Virginia shortly after the Battle of Chancellorsville. He noted that “Stonewall Jackson was considered a regular demigod in this country.” (2469)

De Tocqueville in his famous Democracy in America noted that the free states were very industrious and the people there hard working, but cross the Ohio River and all is lethargy and indolence. Fremantle quotes a Southerner admitting such: “Before this war we were a lazy set of devils.” (2488)

He called Winchester, Virginia, a “shuttlecock” between the two sides. I think the official tourist guide from Winchester claims it changed sides forty-three times in the course of the war.

Fremantle is best known today for his observations on the Battle of Gettysburg. He spent much of the time there up in a tree so he could get a better view of the action. To him it appeared the South had the advantage until the third day. He seemed to admire Longstreet as much as any of the officers of either side that he met. Fremantle also noted that the Southern army would have been more successful with a coordinated cavalry. (He may not have been aware of Jeb Stuart’s adventures.) He does mention a Southern spy, more than likely Harrison.

Fremantle also comes to a conclusion similar to Longstreet about the Battle of Gettysburg. There was, he wrote, “the universal feeling in the army was one of contempt for an enemy whom they have beaten so constantly, and under so many disadvantages.” (2806) They did indeed underestimate their enemy at both Gettysburg and Vicksburg. Like Longstreet, he also believed, probably correctly, that no one was expecting a fight at Gettysburg, and Lee was unable to draw up his usual defensive plans.

Fremantle was not the only foreign military officer observing the Confederate Army. On the third day at Gettysburg, he was joined by an Austrian colonel and a Prussian captain. Europe was curious. He also noted that some Yankee soldiers were “dressed in bad imitations of the Zouave costume.” (2869)

Fremantle, too, defends Meade in not going after the retreating Army of Northern Virginia.

I think, after all, that General Meade was right not to advance—his men would never have stood the tremendous fire of artillery they would have been exposed to. Rather over 7000 Yankees were captured during the three days. (3000)

We note that one difficulty the Confederate troops had at Gettysburg was a lack of artillery ammunition. It was still some miles behind the lines during the battle but could have been deadly if Meade had followed their retreat.

Fremantle also noted, contrary to what Southerners had been telling him, that the part of Maryland he passed through was “entirely Unionist.” He returned to England via Philadelphia and New York. He spoke highly of nearly every Southern officer he met, and he felt the same way about the few Union officers he met as well. “I can truly say that the only Federal officers I have ever come in contact with were gentlemen.” (3218)

One thing Fremantle noted about the North that may still be true about the United States in general is that the war did not affect the day to day life of most Northerners. Many of the men felt no pressure to join the army, and there seemed to be almost an indifference in the cities. Nowadays, some fifty years after the last military draft, things do not seem much different in spite of American military presence overseas.

Both books are among the better firsthand accounts of the Civil War. We know that anyone writing about Gettysburg or studying the battle in any detail will want to consult these books. Some of Longstreet’s writing can be dry as he discusses the ebb and flow of a particular battle, but he is an excellent primary source for those conflicts.

One aside concerning Hollywood we picked up on: Col. Fremantle is a character in the film Gettysburg. So that he stands out in the film, he is dressed in the red dress uniform of the British “redcoats.” His book tells us that he only had a gray business suit while he was in North America. But, I get it. If I were directing a film or play about Gettysburg, I would probably do the same for the visual effect and perhaps to help keep some of the characters straight.

N.B. The parenthetical citations from the Fremantle book are Kindle locations, not pages.

John Bishop. Act of Negligence. Mantid, 2021.

Act of Negligence is the latest in the Doc Brady Mystery series. It looks like we may have to start listing these as we have done for Tom Clancy and Gordon Korman. This is the most pure detective novel of the four novels so far in the series.

Something weird seems to be going on in Dr. Jim Bob Brady’s hospital. A number of patients, all diagnosed with Alzhemer’s Dementia, have come for bone surgery of one type or another. Three out of four die shortly after surgery. The one survivor only makes it because he had a pacemaker and a heart surgeon who was called in got his pacemaker replaced in time. All the patients came from the same nursing home.

Most of what goes on involves piece by piece detective work. This includes some happy coincidences; for example, Dr. Brady and a friend attend a convention in New York City where one of the speakers, now semi-retired, was a leading authority on senior dementia until he got in trouble for some experiments he did on his patients.

Gradually, a body of evidence seems to be growing. One positive thing Dr. Brady sees is that one of the nurses who has taken care of the patients takes their humanity seriously in spite of their mental incapacity.

Unlike some of the other Doc Brady mysteries, Dr. Brady is not directly accused of malpractice. As he puts it, he is just the carpenter. The patients are dying of heart problems. The anesthesiologists are nervous. But in this case, Dr. Brady partners with the hospital’s pathologist, Dr. Clarke. Among other things, Dr. Clarke has a mug that says, “I see dead people.” An old friend of mine had a wife who was a pathologist. She had a similar sense of humor.

Dr. Clarke, prodded by Dr. Brady, makes a couple of unusual discoveries. Things get weirder, and if there is negligence, it seems to go back to the nursing home. But the doctor who runs the home and the home itself have sterling reputations. When Dr. Brady visits the place incognito, it does look like they run the place very well.

What is going on?

Step by step we can see the two doctors getting closer the root cause or causes of the problem. I was beginning to think that this was going to be different from the other Brady stories: not as much action, a more clever cerebral mystery. Wrong. The action kicks in near the end. Imagine a drug-induced car chase with helicopters. Helicopters do provide some of the action in a couple of places, actually.

This may be the most puzzling and most pure mental detective work of any of the Doc Brady mysteries. Brady keeps on guessing. So will the readers. In past novels, we have learned a lot about orthopedics, plastic surgery, and malpractice law. Here we are introduced to both pathology and brain science. Not only do we see a couple of doctors using their brains, but we learn a little more about the amazing organ known as the human brain. We are fearfully and wonderfully made indeed.

Gordon Korman. Unplugged. Balzer + Bray, 2021.

The latest Young Adult (YA) contribution from Gordon Korman has not failed to entertain us. Korman has a knack for inventing wacky but close enough to reality characters and situations. Unplugged does it again.

In this novel we focus on Jett Baranov, son of Silicon Valley billionaire Vlad Baranov (echoes of Sergei Bryn?). He was tagged by a journalist as Silicon Valley’s Number One Spoiled Brat. As one comment notes, “We’re talking about California!” He ranks above all the Hollywood kids and other offspring of tech giants and politicians.

Jett is sent to a New-Age health and mindfulness camp in the middle of nowhere in Arkansas called the Oasis. With him comes Matt, an executive for Mr. Baranov’s Fuego Inc. whose job is to handle or babysit Jett.

Here Jett meets up with a number of other middle-school aged campers. All are there because their parents are there. Grace is gung-ho. She buys into the program and admires the camp’s leaders, director Magnus and his assistant Ivory. The program consists of non-competitive outdoor activities (like a zipline and a hot spring bath), meditation, and a vegetarian diet.

Tyrrell is allergic to nearly everything. His skin breaks out for what seem almost random reasons. The diet has helped some, but there are still a lot of vegetables he cannot touch. He just wants to have a somewhat normal life.

Brooklynne knows her way around the camp better than any of the other kids. She has been going there since she was six. When a couple of the kids rescue a small lizard from the hot spring, they decide to keep it as a pet. It would not survive in the hot water or in the current of the nearby Saline river. Brooklynne knows where there is an old utility shed that is not being used for anything where they can keep the creature. She also knows where they keep the key for the diesel motorboat that the camp ground crew uses.

Camp rules prohibit electronic or communication devices of any kind (hence the book’s title), no meat, and no pets. Campers are allowed to write and receive letters. Some of the fun comes from when the kids alter letters Tyrrell’s older sister gets from her boyfriend.

The focus, though, is on Jett and his complaints about “Nimbus” and his camp. The four kids, even Grace, know that they could all get in trouble for keeping a pet. It is just that Jett goes farther in his rebellion. While Korman would never psychoanalyze a character, we get the sense that Jett may be acting out. His family is so rich, he is used to getting what he wants. But his father, whom he does seem to respect, works long hours, and his mother travels all over the world working on her favorite charity, Orthodontists without Borders.

Things escalate, especially as Jett and Tyrrell begin to believe that Ivory is going beyond meditation to brainwashing, and as the kids use the boat to go to the nearby town to buy meats and candy. Alert readers might be able to figure out what kind of lizard their contraband pet is. Jett brought a second phone that he did not surrender to the camp. He began ordering things such as a hovercraft and Dance-Dance Revolution. He has to return all the items, but no one notices that he has hidden some fireworks under his camp bunk.

The ending is wild. The kids actually discover an illegal operation going on which puts them in danger. There is a lot of action which reminded this reader of some of Korman’s Swindle mysteries. Readers of all ages will get a kick out of this one. Korman remains a favorite with us.

Stephen W. Sears. Gettysburg. Houghton, 2004.

Sears’ Gettysburg may be the definitive book on the Battle of Gettysburg. It covers nearly all the aspects about as carefully as possible. It discusses the military and political events leading up to the battle—including a reminder of what was going on in and around Vicksburg, Mississippi. It covers each of the various fronts in the battle and gives credit where credit is due.

Both Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis thought that a successful incursion into Northern states would get many Northern politicians talking of peace. Lee was convinced it could affect the outcome of the 1864 elections. Things have not changed much. We see how in 2021 different countries have reacted to the outcome of the recent American elections. As they say, follow the money.

Sears notes that in many cases such as Fredericksburg and even Chancellorsville, Lee more or less chose where to fight. His army had the better ground. Being outnumbered in most instances, he felt he had to be aggressive. That strategy had worked. Lee’s problem according to Sears was that he began to believe Confederate propaganda, that the Southern leaders were smarter and the Northern soldiers were cowards. See Proverbs 16:18.

Some of the Union military leaders understood the importance of good ground, especially after the disaster at Fredericksburg. When Buford and Reynolds saw that a significant portion of the Army of Northern Virginia was coming towards Gettysburg, they chose good ground. When General Meade finally arrived, he commended them for it and took a defensive position on the higher ground.

Another important factor Sears notes is that this time the Union had much better intelligence. Several cavalry units were trailing Lee’s army and the Bureau of Military Intelligence (B.M.I.) was doing its job. Lee, on the other hand, was depending on Stuart’s cavalry, and Stuart was raiding and causing some problems in Pennsylvania towns, but he was out of touch with Lee or any of his men. If it had not been for the freelance spy Henry Thomas Harrison, the Rebels would have known even less.

As it was, the first two days resulted in pretty much a stalemate. The Rebels made a few advances, but their main thrusts were stopped. In some cases it probably had to do with generals who were too cautious and missed some good chances. In other cases, it may have just been luck or the army ran out of daylight. On the Confederate side, A.P. Hill comes under criticism for being too cautious, although part of the problem may have been poor intelligence.

One Union general who comes in for great criticism is Sickles. It appears that either he misunderstood or openly did not follow the orders he was given. He also was a politician with little military experience and simply may have misjudged some things. He needlessly lost many men, and the Union was fortunate that the Rebels were kept at bay on other fronts.

General Longstreet comes out of the battle and this book looking pretty good. He disagreed with Lee’s plan. There is some evidence, especially considering Sickles’ poor leadership, that Longstreet’s plan may have worked better. But that is 20-20 hindsight. At any rate, once Longstreet got his orders, he obeyed them to the best of his and his men’s ability. When Pickett was asked why his charge failed (and he was under Longstreet), he replied “I think the Union army had something to do with it.” (78)

There were many little fronts surrounding the town of Gettysburg, and Sears covers them all. Thanks to the great Gettysburg film, based on the novel The Killer Angels, the opening salvos, the battle for Little Round Top, and Pickett’s Charge on the last day are the best known today, and Sears does not slight them.

There were other fights as well: Culp’s Hill, Cemetery Ridge, the Wheatfield, the Peach Orchard, Rose’s Farm, Devil’s Den. All had an effect on the eventual outcome. Since Lee’s attacks on the flanks the second day did not budge the Union army much, Lee guessed that the center was weaker, that most of the soldiers in blue had been on the flanks. His solution was a massive attack on the center.

If there was a single factor on the third day, it was that the Union artillery was much stronger than Lee thought. Artillery barrages literally mowed down Southern attackers in the charge on the last day. As others have done, Sears notes that that charge should be known as the Pickett-Pettigrew-Trimble charge. The other two generals had more men in the charge, but postwar publicity in particular seemed to single out Gen. Pickett.

In spite of great losses in getting there, some Rebel soldiers made it to the Union lines and engaged in close combat. Still, they eventually had to retreat if they were not killed or captured. Close to 120,000 men were involved in the three-day battle. About 57,000 were casualties according to Sears.

As he put it, Gettysburg with the fall of Vicksburg the next day was probably not so much the beginning of the end of the war as the end of the beginning of the war. Winfield Scott’s Anaconda Plan would work in time. The seceding states would be surrounded. It became a war of attrition.

Sears uses hundreds of primary sources: letters, memoirs, periodical articles, government documents. We get a good sense of what was happening in many units and from many perspectives. Where I live and teach, there is a certain interest in the 14th Connecticut Infantry regiment because most of its men came from the area. While I certainly did not expect him to delineate specific exploits of specific soldiers in that unit, I was happy to note that he mentioned them a few times as they had a hot time at the Angle on the third day.

He mentions that the British envoy Col. Arthur Fremantle wrote a book on his observations of the Civil War. A piece from someone who was not on either side might be worth reading. Sears notes that military observers from Prussia and Austria also came to Gettysburg. (N.B. I did eventually follow up and read Fremantle’s memoir.)

The book ends with a brief description of the November dedication of the Military Cemetery at Gettysburg. He gives President Lincoln a lot of credit for succinctly, plainly, and effectively describing the Union cause. It was ultimately for freedom.

Sears writes very well. In spite of the detail, he narrates the events as though he were telling a story. The quotations and actions keep the tale moving.

Many people have criticized Meade and the Army of the Potomac for not following through and attacking the retreating Rebels. Some felt if Meade had made hot pursuit, he could have finished off Lee’s army then. Sears doubts it. Yes, the Union won the battle, but they were pretty beaten up, too. Lee also made a point of setting up his encampments on good ground during his retreat. Sears thinks Meade was wise in not following, that he likely would have fallen into a trap.

He notes that Meade remained the commander of the Army of the Potomac for the rest of the war. When Grant moved to the East, he was given charge over all the armies, not just those in Virginia and Maryland. Sears also speaks highly of Winfield Scott Hancock. His knowledge and resolve helped win the battle. His contribution to the ultimate Union success is important as well. Even engineering chief General Gouverneur Warren gets kudos for his vision. An army is more than just one man.

One side note. I am a fan on the film Gettysburg. This may sound like heresy, but I actually think the film is a little better than The Killer Angels, the novel that the film is based on. One thing that struck me was that nearly all the lines delivered by the officers in the film are direct quotations from what was written in primary sources. Yes, some of the characters, notably Sergeant Buster Kilrain, are fictional, but the movie gets the main thrust right.

N.B. The parenthetical reference is a Kindle location, not a page number.