This Mighty Scourge consists of sixteen essays written by the United States' most celebrated Civil War historian, James M. McPherson. McPherson serves as the George Henry Davis '86 Professor of History Emeritus at Princeton University. Thirteen of the essays in this work appeared earlier in the New York Review of Books, North and South Magazine, the American Historical Review, and other publications. McPherson's book is well suited for undergraduate Civil War classes, since each chapter presents a clear and well-written analysis of a crucial issue or historiographical debate related to the war. An emphasis on military strategy and political developments that affected it permeates the essays. Along with undergraduate students, general readers in need of a better understanding of the questions central to the war will find The Mighty Scourge an excellent resource.

The author leaves few of those questions unexplored in this collection of writings. In one essay, for example, he demonstrates that the stalemate at the Battle of Antietam played a major role in preventing European recognition of the Confederacy, a point well established in Civil War historiography. In another essay, he delves into the personalities and leadership styles of Ulysses S. Grant and William T. Sherman, as well as the intensely loyal relationship between the two Union officers. Grant, McPherson writes, was the embodiment of “simplicity,” to use Union general John Schofield's description of his fellow officer (112). Grant's tendency to write extremely lucid orders, his constant display of bravery in battle, and his ability to achieve clearly established goals for his troops, all became hallmarks of his leadership. Sherman's effectiveness, says McPherson, stemmed from his ability to employ evasive tactics on the battlefield in order to avoid huge numbers of Union casualties while still subduing his Confederate opponent. In another essay, McPherson takes issue with revisionist arguments which downplay the importance of the Battle of Gettysburg and contend that Robert E. Lee achieved the primary goals he sought during the Gettysburg campaign, namely, as Lee wrote, “To take the armies out of war-ravaged Virginia and to provide the Army of Northern Virginia with food, forage, horses, and other supplies from the rich agricultural countryside of Pennsylvania” (77). McPherson, following an older and probably more accurate line of reasoning, points to evidence that Lee sought to win a decisive victory on northern soil, a victory which would supply Confederate officials with the leverage needed to seek a negotiated peace with Union leaders. Each one of McPherson's sixteen essays contains cogent arguments such as these.

While both general readers and undergraduate students will benefit greatly from reading This Mighty Scourge, scholars will find it to be of limited value. McPherson breaks little new ground in this work. The questions he examines are not new to Civil War historiography, but are instead questions numerous historians have exerted considerable effort attempting to answer. This Mighty Scourge, nevertheless, provides a superb summary of the issues that ultimately decided the Civil War.