Richard McMurry compares the two largest Confederate armies, assessing why Lee''s Army of Northern Virginia was more successful than the Army of Tennessee. His bold conclusion is that Lee''s army was a better army--not just one with a better high command.

"Sheds new light on how the South lost the Civil War.--American Historical Review

"McMurry''s mastery of the literature is impressive, and his clear and succinct writing style is a pleasure to read. . . . Comparison of the two great rebel armies offers valuable insights into the difficulties of the South''s military situation.--Maryland Historian

Richard McMurry compares the two largest Confederate armies, assessing why Lee''s Army of Northern Virginia was more successful than the Army of Tennessee. His bold conclusion is that Lee''s army was a better army--not just one with a better high command.

"Sheds new light on how the South lost the Civil War.--American Historical Review

"McMurry''s mastery of the literature is impressive, and his clear and succinct writing style is a pleasure to read. . . . Comparison of the two great rebel armies offers valuable insights into the difficulties of the South''s military situation.--Maryland Historian

Richard McMurry compares the two largest Confederate armies, assessing why Lee''s Army of Northern Virginia was more successful than the Army of Tennessee. His bold conclusion is that Lee''s army was a better army--not just one with a better high command.

"Sheds new light on how the South lost the Civil War.--American Historical Review

"McMurry''s mastery of the literature is impressive, and his clear and succinct writing style is a pleasure to read. . . . Comparison of the two great rebel armies offers valuable insights into the difficulties of the South''s military situation.--Maryland Historian