Article Review

A part of learning history is understanding who is making what argument or claim about a subject. What is the strength of the argument and how does the author support the argument with evidence.

In the article review, you will identify the thesis or primary argument made by the author. You will identify the main arguments stated in the first or second paragraph and found in the body of the article with evidence.

Thesis: America has always been conflicted between whether it should go with leaders or managers, professionals or amateurs, genius or intellect. Yet for the most part in antebellum America, the idea that military genius was better than military intellect (i.e., military education) prevailed. Ultimately, when the Civil War began in 1861, the debate about who should lead included factors of genius, intellect, and character.

Main Arguments by Author:

The North turned to genius (Scott), then to intellect (McClellan) and finally to character (Grant) for leadership in the war.

However, losses mounted, and the erosion of public confidence in Stone, Scott, and especially McClellan spawned a distrust of professional soldiers as a class...

He was something much differenta real warrior on the battlefield, not just on paper or in the imagination. This article makes that abundantly clear and clears up a lot of myths about the war. The authors overall aim might have been made a little clearer, however, because it did not really start out with a statement of purpose or an indication of what the main point of the essay would be. Overall, however, I would definitely recommend this article for anyone interested in the Civil War, as it does a good job of discussing the finer points of the issues. The evidence is sufficiently provided with lots of references to primary and secondary sources.

Bibliography

Reardon, Carol.With a sword in one hand…