Douglas’s memoir has been criticized for a couple of reasons. First, it was not completed until many years later, although it was roughed out much earlier. Also, his memory does not jibe with other records at some places. Whether he romanticizes or exaggerates his role in some instances is also a question.
Nonetheless, if you read it with the most critical eye, it is still a terrific read. Your technique applied here is also what I did. I read many “objective” histories also, but a book like this allows a special insight into the War. Douglas’s position allowed a unique perspective.
Oldplayer
Good summary. It’s hard to get the real sense of the time except from a contemporaneous account ... but people in the throes of the situation aren’t usually the most accurate about the facts. You best learning experience incorporates first-person accounts and up-to-date research.
General Richard Taylor’s ‘Destruction and Reconstruction: Personal Experiences of the Late War’ is a very good memoir of the war in the west.