We do have a separate book forum but it's about as lively as an actual library, so I thought I'd post this here.
I recently read, back to back, two books on the First Battle of Bull Run. The first was "Donnybrook" by David Detzer (2004) and the second was "The Early Morning of War" by Edward Longacre (2014).
I won't go into a ton of detail with the books because you all know the history. But if I had to point you towards one book over the other - I would point at Donnybrook. The writing style of Detzer was less formal and more amusing than the more academic style of Longacre. Detzer was also able to tell the full story of the First Manassas Campaign in just over 300 pages while Longacre told it in just about 450 pages. I was hoping I would "learn more" from Longacre's bigger book... but I didn't. While Detzer would give you the facts and the interesting stories, Longacre would give you facts, maybe a story, and then a lot of fluff. I found Detzer's conclusions often more interesting and thoughtful than Longacre's.
I also appreciated that Detzer admitted when the history wasn't clear. While starting the discussion of the fighting on Henry House Hill, Detzer made it clear that the primary sources of the events on that part of the field are extremely contradictory and that any attempt to definitively determine the sequence of events is wasted time. Detzer still covered the fighting in detail but often pointed out how often participants disagreed on the movements of their units, the times, the direction they were facing, and even what the orders were. All of these were a result of two very unprepared armies, and leaders, fighting a battle that neither army was prepared for. Longacre makes no such admission that the events were contradictory and confusing and drones on for quite a while trying to make sense of the swirling fighting around Henry Hill. At the end of Longacre's account of the battle I felt exhausted and a bit perplexed.
I know someone is wondering which had better maps in the book. I've gotten to the point in life that I just use Gottfried's series of books for maps and never rely on the maps within any book. I will never understand why publishers don't invest more money in maps for their books... but I guess they do cost money and so in order to keep costs down they sacrifice the maps.
If you are going to read one of these books on the Battle of First Bull Run - read Donnybrook. I believe Detzer makes an excellent case that the scapegoat for the Union, Robert Patterson, was treated unfairly and that the real fault of the Union disaster rested with McDowell's poor staff which totally failed in every way on the day of battle. McDowell and Winfield Scott are also given much of the blame by Detzer in his history (and rightfully so). Overall, a very good book on the first major battle of the war.
If anyone has read either of these and has anything to add, feel free. You may disagree and my feelings won't be hurt at all
I'm reading Timothy B. Smith's "Corinth 1862" at present. I will let you know what I think when I am done.