Customer Reviews:
The Lincoln Interpreters.......2004-02-19
"The Historian's Lincoln" is a collection of essays coming out of a Lincoln Symposium at the 175th anniversary of his birth. It offers a great deal of insight about Lincoln and about the Historical consciousness of the mid 1980s.
One of the things I like about this volume is the commentary and criticism about almost every individual article, sometimes including counter reactions. The reader benefits from the debate and critical analysis of the each essay.
The book has five parts. The First, "The Common People's Lincoln", is about Abraham Lincoln as seen in public. A Collection of photos from 'The Face of Lincoln' prefaces a discussion of the Public perception of "Honest Abe". For instance, Lincoln's growing a beard following his victory in the 1860 election kept photographers interested in his appearance.
Also in this section, "Abe Lincoln Laughing" by P.M.Zall argues that Lincoln used his sense of humor and the funny stories to win over his audience and get his message across. The critique, by Mark E. Neely, is that the humor was part of Lincoln's character, not an instrument for appeasing crowds. "His humor was a political liability with large segments of the populace... [the] fallacy that underlies much of Zall's paper - ... the "instrumental" view of Lincoln's humor" (p.29).
The second part of the book is titled "Ideology and Politics" and discusses some main issues of Lincoln's policies and presidency. In "Lincoln and the Economics of the American Dream", Editor Gabor S. Boritt argues that the American Dream "the prosperity and liberties of the people" in Lincoln's words, were the goals Lincoln cared most about, and he defended the Union as the vehicle for it (p. 100).
The Critiques of this interesting essay are not very convincing. M. E. Bradford elaborates on how unfairly he has been treated by critics. His claims: Lincoln did prefer Freedom over slavery, constitutional rights over Tyranny and peace over war, "other things being equal" ,but he stuck by his ideals only so long as they "fed fuel into that little engine that knew no rest, his political ambition" (p.110). His argument consists of a few lawsuits Lincoln filed which were related to Slavery, his anti-Black sayings, and lots of Latin words supposed to impress the reader.
Phillip S. Paludan's critique is somewhat more substantial, but it amounts to, essentially, stating his dislike for the industrial revolution.
The second essay, Glen E. Thurow's "Abraham Lincoln and American Political Religion" deals with a contradiction between Lincoln's Gettysburg address and his second inaugural. In the Gettysburg address, Lincoln says the Civil War is a test: whether democracy can survive. It is a problem of Free Will - Americans must prove their ability to defend the Jeffersonian values of equality. The second inaugural deals with predestination - God's justice in making Americans pay for their sin of slavery, even if "every drop of blood drawn with the lash, shall be paid by another drawn by the sword" (Lincoln, p. 128). Thus the inaugural, claiming that the Civil War is the unraveling of God's justice, undermines Lincoln's claim that it as a test. Thurow's solution - the second inaugural "transcends" the Gettysburg address. One is from the point of view of the nation, the other from that of God. Thurow argues that "These perspectives do not abolish each other; neither expresses the whole truth" (p. 140). You may find this more convincing then I do - it seems to me that this is merely one of the inherent contradictions in postulations about God - if the Lord is righteous, free will could not exist.
David A. Nichols's "Lincoln and the Indians" discusses the relations between the Sixteenth president and Native Americans. Essentially, Lincoln was well meaning but too busy with the Civil War to help American Indians, and his racist views affected him.
The weakest of the essay in this section is Lawanda Cox's "Lincoln and Black Freedom" arguing that Lincoln, though racist, was a great friend of the blacks.
The third section, titled "The Psychohistorian's Lincoln", is about Psychohistory, a historical method that was briefly popular in the 1980s. It attempts to use the insights of psychoanalysis in History. Psychohistory seems to have gone away with the eighties, and if these essays are any indication, that is no great loss for scholarship.
The psychohistorians make claims which are sometimes surprising, but usually merely silly. Charles B. Strozier argues that "after 1854 [Lincoln] found his private concerns with intimacy and a troubled union [his marriage] reflected in the country" (p. 405). Dwight G. Anderson argues that the dead President Lincoln saw in his dream in April 1865 was George Washington, and that Lincoln was his "ghostly assassin" (p. 254). In a slightly saner mold, George B. Forgie argues that Lincoln believed that the real threat to the Union was not the South, but a few evil conspirators in the leadership of the Democratic party, and that when the young Lincoln argued that the threat for the republic was in talented, over ambitious men who would turn into Tyrants, " [It] seems obvious enough: Lincoln had himself in mind when he composed the entire speech."(p.296).
The section titled "Assassinations" deals with Lincoln's murder in history and historiography, and particularly with the conspiracy theories that grew after the Death, believing everyone from secretary of war Stanton the Freemasons to be behind the assassination.
The Final section, "The Lincoln Biographies" contains book reviews by Richard N. Current and Don E. Fehernbacher. Current is enthusiastic about Stephen Oates's "With Malice Towards None", but argues that Oates makes Lincoln more of a radical then he really was. Feherenbacher's discussion of Gore Vidal's Lincoln is sadly all too brief, but it is a fascinating if inconclusive discussion about the criteria upon which historical works of fiction should be evaluated.
'The Historian's Lincoln' is a fascinating read, and even the essays about Psychohistory, which are hardly illuminating about Lincoln, tell us much about the Historian of the title.
Customer Reviews:
The Rise of Abraham Lincoln.......2004-07-26
After losing his Congress seat in 1849, former Whig representative Abraham Lincoln did not hold any public office for 12 years. He lost two Senatorial elections - but in 1861, he was elected as the first Republican president of the United States of America.
The main thrust of "Prelude to Greatness: Lincoln in the 1850s" is the attempt to explain how that happened. This is not a biography - rather, it is a collection of interconnected essays exploring, among other things, the importance of Lincoln's Illinois background, his transformation from Whig to Republican, the House Divided speech, and above all, the contest between Lincoln and the most important politician of the 1850s, Stephen A. Douglas.
The late Don E. Fehrenbacher was one of the best scholars of American Law & Politics in the 19th century, and of its relations with slavery. He is best known for his study of the Pulitzer winning account of the Dred Scot Case, but has also written books about the Secession Crises in the United States and about the relations of the US Government to Slavery.
Those who have read Professor Fehrenbacher before will reencounter not only his masterful prose and careful analysis, but many themes that he has written about elsewhere - Slavery in the territories, the "Freeport doctrine", the Dred Scot Case, etc. But the greatness of Fehrenbacher was his ability to offer every time a new insight into these issues, widening and deepening your understanding of it.
This time, the focus is on the interplay between the ambitions and ideals of Abraham Lincoln and Stephen A Douglas. We see the famous "House Divided" speech as Lincoln's attempt to distinguish between the Anti-Lecompton Douglas (the Lecompton constitution was a fraudulent pro slavery creation, which Stephen Douglas opposed because he felt it violated the principle of popular sovereignty) and the Republicans: Republicans saw slavery as evil, whereas Douglas treated it with indifference.
Fehrenbacher maintains that the 'House Divided' speech was less revolutionary then it sometimes appears. "The bright promise of ultimate extinction [of slavery] was one of the consequences expected to flow naturally from a settled policy of restrict[ing the expansion of slavery]" (p. 76). So Southerners could supposedly be satisfied that, beyond restricting its extension, no further steps against slavery were intended. Yet, as Fehrenbacher points out, Lincoln believed in a national policy against slavery, treating it as an evil (p. 148). For Southerners, who saw Slavery as a matter of the States, and who have come to appreciate it as a positive good, that was unacceptable.
Yet, at least with the benefit of hindsight, The South promoted the worst policy possible, if the defense of the "Peculiar Institution" was what it was after. By their insistence of the repeal of the Missouri compromise (forbidding slavery in the part of the Missouri territory north of the Mason Dixon line), a harsh fugitive trade law, and accepting the fraudulent Lecompton constitution, Southerners agitated the Northern public about the slavery issue, thus strengthening the Republican Party.
When Stephen Douglas, courting his Northern audience, adopted increasingly anti-Slavery positions (interestingly, Fehrenbacher here sees Douglas's position as entirely opportunistic. Later, in 'The Dred Scot Case' he saw Douglas's motives as a mix of calculation and principle, see Fehrenbacher, Dred Scot Case p. 465), the South's alienation from Douglas made it even more extreme - thus, the "Freeport doctrine", which said that the people of a territory had the ability to reject slavery by unfriendly legislation (essentially, the observation that unpopular laws are difficult to enforce), initially acceptable to the South, became anathema once it was identified with Douglas.
Lincoln's rise had much to do with Stephen Douglas. Without the Lincoln-Douglas debates of 1858, he probably wouldn't have become president, at least not in 1860. But Lincoln's triumph in the Republican convention in Chicago was based on his apparent moderation - the leading candidate William H. Seward, was far too anti-Slavery; and his public opposition to nativism was also objectionable.
Lincoln was elected because he was a compromise candidate - his public profile of moderation, essential for winning over the lower Northern states, and being a representative of Illinois, one of the crucial states in the election. But he also won because of his careful political maneuvering. Lincoln certainly 'grew' as a president, but facing the most crucial presidency in American history, Lincoln was already the right man.
Great and concise look at the turmoil of the 1850s.......2003-02-26
In this short, carefully- and concisely-argued book, the author does an excellent job in situating Lincoln within the political setting of the 1850s and in describing the course of events that resulted in his election to the Presidency. This book is largely an answer to those who would contend that Lincoln showed little promise of greatness before supposedly stumbling into the Presidency, where it is acknowledged even by those critics that he rose to the heights demanded by the times. The author certainly admits to the elements of circumstance in Lincoln's ascent. He was a Whig, or a moderate, in a state Illinois that had become increasingly important in national elections.
While it may have appeared that Lincoln was politically dormant in the early 50s, his behind-the-scenes political activity became obvious when he became a key anti-Nebraska activist in 1854. As a Whig, Lincoln lost a very close contest in the Illinois legislature for the U.S. Senate (legislatures elected senators in that era). From 1854 to 1856 it had become obvious that both the Whigs and the upstart Know-Nothings could not deal with the slavery issue, which led to their demise. By 1856 Lincoln had finished second in the running for the Vice-Presidential nomination at the first national Republican convention, and in the process had firmly established himself as a leading Republican in Illinois.
It was the continued Kansas crisis and the Dred Scott Supreme Court decision in March of 1857 and the reactions to them that put Lincoln on the national stage. The court decision had affirmed the repeal of the Missouri Compromise in the Kansas-Nebraska Act under a principle of Congressional non-intervention in territories. But Senator Stephen Douglas contended that his doctrine of popular sovereignty continued to hold. Both Lincoln and most Republicans found the indifference or neutrality of popular sovereignty to the spread of slavery to be repugnant. Thus began a series of exchanges and seven formal debates between Douglas and Lincoln before the elections of 1858.
As a senator from mostly anti-slavery Illinois, Douglas had been forced, at the end of 1857, to denounce the machinations of the proslavery element in Kansas in trying to force their constitution on a mostly slave-free territory. In a shrewd and unprecedented political move, Illinois Republicans nominated Lincoln for the U. S. Senate to counter the infatuation of Eastern Republicans with the newly recreated Douglas. Lincoln fired the first shot in the senatorial campaign with his famous "House Divided" speech where he insisted that a nation divided over slavery could not stand.
One of the more controversial ideas that emerged from the debates was Douglas' Freeport Doctrine. In skirting Lincoln's question of whether territorial legislatures could exclude slavery, Douglas claimed that such a legislature's failure to pass laws that favorably policed slavery was tantamount to formally excluding it. The Democratic illusion that non-intervention and popular sovereignty were benignly equivalent had been exploded. According to the author "Southerners could see the walls closing in on them, and the defection of Douglas vividly dramatized the growing isolation of slave society." Ignoring Dred Scott, the South began to insist on the enactment of positive slave codes for the explicit protection of slavery in territories.
Lincoln narrowly lost the senatorial contest in Illinois in 1858, but the issue of slavery had been discussed on the national stage, as it never had been before. While Lincoln had asked the hard questions about slavery, he remained a moderate in Republican circles, and, as such, perhaps the only Republican that could have been elected President in 1860. It is clear that Lincoln had no intention of attacking the institution of slavery in the South. The Southern demand for slave codes applicable to territories was simply irrational given the fact that it was generally agreed upon that no territories were even suitable for slavery. It is most clear from reading this book that had the extremists of the South permitted Lincoln to exercise the fundamental decency and strength of character that he had, that there would have been no reason to precipitate the destruction of an entire way of life.
Book Description
Freedom Rising is a fresh, intensely human account of how the Civil War transformed the nation’s capital from the debating forum for a loose union of states into the seat of a forceful central government.
Before 1861, Washington was a dusty, muddy city of 60,000, joked about by urban sophisticates from New York and Boston. But at the onset of war, thousands of soldiers, job seekers, nurses, good-time girls, gamblers, newly freed slaves–all kinds of Americans–poured in. For days, Washington was cut off from the North, and no one was sure whether it would become the capital of the Union or the Confederacy.
Ernest Furgurson–author of the widely acclaimed Chancellorsville 1863, Ashes of Glory, and Not War but Murder–tells the story through the men and women who brought the city to rambunctious life. He re-creates historic figures such as William Seward, who fancied himself Abraham Lincoln’s prime minister; poet Walt Whitman, who nursed the wounded; and detective Allan Pinkerton, who tracked down Southern sympathizers; and he introduces intriguing others, such as Mayor James Berret, arrested for disloyalty; architect Thomas Walter, striving to finish the Capitol dome in the middle of war; and accused Confederate spy Antonia Ford, romancing her captor, Union Major Joseph Willard, operator of the capital’s premier hotel. Here is Mary Lincoln, mourning the death of her son Willie, seeking solace from fakers who conducted séances in the White House. And here is the president–in all his compassion, determination, and complexity–inspiring the nation, wrangling with generals, pardoning deserters, and barely escaping death on the ramparts of Fort Stevens as Jubal Early’s Southern army invades the outskirts of Washington and fights the Union Army within five miles of the White House. For four years, the city was awash in drama and sometimes comedy, until the assassination of Lincoln by John Wilkes Booth became the tragedy of the century.
By the time the grand two-day victory parade of 150,000 troops surged along Pennsylvania Avenue, the men and women who had arrived in such great numbers at the start of the war had made Washington a capital to be reckoned with throughout the world. Freedom Rising is an invaluable aid to understanding the making of America.
Customer Reviews:
needs better fact checking.......2007-07-26
This is a well written book. It is comprehensive yet not overwelming with detail. I am confused though how a journalist with Mr. Ferguson'snewapaper backgound would get some of the little facts WRONG! I am a member of the voluminous number who would be called Civil War Buffs (whatever that means)...yet I am not by any means an expert or an academic. But, with my ameteur acquantence with the topic I am appalled that in one line Mr. Ferguson puts Gettysburg in "Franklin" not Adams county, Pennsylvania and in another states that Mrs. Lincoln's Brother in law was killed in September at "Chattanooga"-when in fact he was killed at the Battle of Chickamauga. I must confess that such looseness with the facts-easlily checked-tends to put distrust in any other factual information he presents. A newspaperman, which Mr. Ferguson was for many years, must get the Who, What and Where correct! Sloppyness might be a result of poor editing...the final responsibility goes to the author.
Freedom Rising - The Capital in Crisis.......2007-01-17
Ernest Furgurson uses the statue atop the Capitol as a metaphor for the survival of the U.S. and the liberation of African-Americans. Even throughout the turmoil of the war, construction of the Capital continued, albeit haltingly, its progress symbolizing the triumph of the Union. This book is a must read for anyone who lives or works in the capital.
Riddled with southern sympathizers and spies, the capital nevertheless became a truly federal city. Slave markets stood on the south side of Independence Ave, now a two-mile-long chain of government departments, and even on Lafayette Square. D St. and 21st, the present location of the State Department, was a huge stables; on Boxing Day, 1861, a fire broke out that killed thousands of horses and sent thousands more running through the city. For days afterwards, the city stank of burned horse meat. Present day conservatives would say that they still haven't cleaned out all the horse---- from the area. Federal Triangle was the red light district, catering to all tastes; digs have found piles of bottles of expensive French champagne where the bawdy houses one stood. Constitution Avenue was a canal -- Tiber Creek -- and all of the mall west from the Washington monument was the Potomac. Within months of the outbreak of war, Washington saw a string of firsts -- the first use of trains for strategic mobility, the first use of aerial reconnaissance, the first machine gun, the first suspension of habeas corpus, the first nursing corps, the first aircraft carrier (a balloon moored to a boat in the Potomoc that allowed the feds to observe the Confederate withdrawal from Occoquan and the Pohick Creek area where I now live). Furgurson writes of Lincoln, Stanton, Seward, Chase, Winfield Scott, Grant, and McLellan; of Confederate spies such as Antonia Ford; of dozens of soldiers and nurses, poets such as Whitman, and others who created the rich fabric of a capital at war, surrounded by hostiles. Washington, Furgurson writes, went from a town divided and fearful in 1861 to a "place of focused and confident power" in 1865. He does a superb job of reporting this huge political and physical transformation.
Some other notes. George Washington's grand-nephew fought on behalf of the Confederacy, and was killed in September 1861. Some vengeful Northerners wanted to confiscate Mt. Vernon but a collection of women persuaded the military authorities to let them retain it as a national historic landmark. If the hallmark of sharp political speech is that it remains as relevant today as when it was uttered, these words of Lincoln to a crowd celebrating his re-election bear diirectly on the calls of some to postpone the Iraqi elections of January 30, 2005. "We cannot have free government without elections, and if the rebellion could force us to forgo or postpone a national election, it might fairly claim to have already conquered and ruined us."
"Freedom Rising" was enlightening as well in how deeply runs the Democratic Party's visceral distrust of the federal government, whether as a player on the national stage or more currently in the international arena. The Democratic platform in 1864 "shrugged at slavery" and all but assured Lincoln's reelection. Gideon Wells described the platform as "unpatriotic, almost treasonable to the Union. The issue is made up. It is whether a war shall be made against Lincoln to get peace with Jeff Davis. Those who met at Chicago prefer hostility to Lincoln rather than to Davis." Democratic Party leaders still struggle with the dilemma of supporting a Republican leader in time of war.
Excellent feel for what was going on in the city during the war.......2006-12-11
I work in Washington, D.C, specifically in the US Capitol, and I felt that while this work lacks significant historical interpretation (as some reviewers point out) we should remember that the author is a journalist first. This book gives a strong feel for what was going on in the city during the civil war, as if the reader were following events as they were likely to be covered in the newspapers at the time. There is also more in depth coverage, gleaned from personal accounts - as though the author were interviewing those writers, and as though the author / reader were working or living in the city at the time. It should be noted that MANY of the sites by the author are from contemporaneous periodicals. No surprise there. All these first hand accounts shed some much needed light on other than a typical military history of the city and its suburbs.
Looked at in that light, this is an excellent work. It is unfettered with the typical historian's personal academic spin on events. I felt I was looking through a clearer and more familiar window into the past, as opposed to those fogged by the breath of the historian. Based on this read, I will definitely purchase the author's work on Richmond during the civil war.
Strong Presentation........2006-11-02
I must begin this review by stating that this is the first book I have ever read on the Civil War. My review, thus, will be from the perspective of a person who possessed limited knowledge of the subject in retrospect to the other fine reviewers who have written in great detail about the subject.
Overall, I enjoyed Ernest B. Furgurson's 'Freedom Rising: Washington in the Civil War', as I found many interesting and well researched subject matter easily presented and carefully constructed in the narrative. Through an incredible amount of research that is well placed, Furgurson managed to keep my interest from the beginning of the book, which starts out with the creation of Lady Liberty's bronze statue, all the way through the inevitable. In between, the reader learns of the many scandels, the outlandish behavior of all the players, the suggested but failed compromises, and the evolution of the slavery issue from not as significant with respect to Lincoln's desire to keep the Union as one, to the importance of the matter in keeping the country one nation. In contrast to the detail, I felt some of the more important players were minamized, particularly of U.S. Grant. There were times that I felt there was a lack of consistancy on the author's direction, but was more than willing to take the journey, and understand the issues presented in the country's capitol.
A History of Official Washington, not the District of Columbia.......2006-07-28
This book is not what I thought it would be (or possibly wanted it to be). To be certain, it is a fine story of the Civil War written from the perspective of Washington. But instead of detailing the events and personalities in the District of Columbia and the environs that make up its modern-day suburbs, it focuses instead on official Washington and the decisions it made for the nation. Ferguson spends a lot of time explaining legislation, military orders, and presidential decrees that were issued from the capital, but the ramifications of them have little or nothing to do with Washington itself. Furthermore, for anyone who has studied the Civil War in any detail, there is very little offered on these subjects that is revealing.
I was hoping for a Civil War-era version of David Brinkley's "Washington Goes to War" (which is limited to observations of how the nation's capital evolved during World War II). That book is riveting reading for anyone who wants to understand how Washington looked, felt, and grew during a critical period in its history. This was the expectation, which admittedly may have been unfair, that I held for Freedom Rising.
To suggest that there is nothing pertaining to my interests in the book would be inaccurate. There is, for an example, an interesting tale of how Mount Vernon was preserved from hostilities. There also is a great chapter on the history of slavery in the area and Lincoln's compensated emancipation in the District. There are other stories taken from the Capitol, White House, and streets of the city. But these nuggets are few and far between, leaving me feeling unfulfilled most of the times that I sat down to read it.
The purpose of this submission is not to discredit Ferguson or his work. It is well-written and well-intentioned. I mean the author no disrespect. But for readers like me who are interested in a detailed account of Washington the city during the Civil War, I cannot recommend this book.
Book Description
Lincoln at Cooper Union explores Lincoln's most influential and widely reported pre-presidential address -- an extraordinary appeal by the western politician to the eastern elite that propelled him toward the Republican nomination for president. Delivered in New York in February 1860, the Cooper Union speech dispelled doubts about Lincoln's suitability for the presidency and reassured conservatives of his moderation while reaffirming his opposition to slavery to Republican progressives.
Award-winning Lincoln scholar Harold Holzer places Lincoln and his speech in the context of the times -- an era of racism, politicized journalism, and public oratory as entertainment -- and shows how the candidate framed the speech as an opportunity to continue his famous "debates" with his archrival Democrat Stephen A. Douglas on the question of slavery.
Holzer describes the enormous risk Lincoln took by appearing in New York, where he exposed himself to the country's most critical audience and took on Republican Senator William Henry Seward of New York, the front runner, in his own backyard. Then he recounts a brilliant and innovative public relations campaign, as Lincoln took the speech "on the road" in his successful quest for the presidency.
Customer Reviews:
How Lincoln got creditable...........2007-02-17
Harold Holzer's book on Abraham Lincoln's speech at Cooper Union gives a clarity to the importance of that speech and how it affected Lincoln as a speaker, politican and future candidate for his Republican Party. While Lincoln was well known among the western states, he wasn't that well regarded along the northeastern seaboard. One of the most important things about the book was how the author explained how this speech gave Lincoln so much creditability among the easterners and how that speech firmly put Lincoln on the political map national wide. This helped pave the way for Lincoln's nomination when others were looking for alternative choices beside William Seward who was at that time, the leading Republican front runner.
The book proves to be quite informative. Abraham Lincoln is obviously one person you cannot judge by your first impression. The author throughly explained the mannerism of Lincoln's speech skills and the way it contrast to his physical appearances which often led to initial misgiving by the audience before they roared in their approval at the end of the speech.
Its pretty clear that Mr. Holzer have complete command of his subject matter which is reflected on the superb writing and ease of reading material that only an expert can do to any subject. The book appears to be well researched and it was about time that a book on this subject came out (I think the last book about this speech came out before Mr. Holzer was born).
I would considered this book to be a mandatory reading material for anyone interested in Abraham Lincoln and probably a good background material for anyone interested in the coming of the American Civil War.
Another side of Lincoln.......2007-01-05
There are so many books written on Lincoln and many different prespectives on his life and presidency. Holzer looks at the Cooper Union Speech and shows how Lincoln, the master politician used the speech and his trip East to get the 1860 nomination. Many historians assert that the speech made Lincoln. However, Holzer shows a unique view of the trip and the speech and how Lincoln used the opportunity to campaign in the East before he was officially a candidate. Ironically, Holzer points out that Salmon Chase turned down the opportunity to speak at Cooper Union demonstrating just one more ocassion when Chase blew an opportunity to get to the White House.
While dispelling many myths about the speech and Lincoln's trip, Holzer also shows the brillance of Lincoln and the time and effort that he spent in preparation for this speech. He also shows how this speech became Lincoln's stump speech. Once nominated, Lincoln followed the tradition of the time and did not campaign but used the Cooper Union Speech as essentially his platform.
For the person just beginning their interest in Lincoln or the seasoned scholar, this book is well worth the read. To add to that it is a quick and enjoyable read.
"The Founding Fathers said . . .".......2006-02-24
For anyone who wants to use the founding fathers as a justification for their belief system should read this speech and this book.
Lincoln in tight, careful reasoning lays out exactly what the founding fathers believed in regard to slavery. Eloquent, exciting and challenging.
This is much needed study to the speeches of Lincoln.
Democracy in 1860.......2006-01-30
I enjoyed this book immensely and now look forward to reading more from Holzer about this period. It answered so many questions I had about the messy circumstances surrounding slavery and the formation of the country. What I had always thought of as such hypocrisy was, as I now understand it, an incredible lesson in the human tension between reality and ideals -- such a Christian tension and so true to life, and on such a grand and significant scale. Rather than merely acknowledging the "stain", as indeed it was, the focus today should be on the triumph of overcoming it.
In his highly detailed telling, Holzer over and over exposes Linclon myths surrounding the event and that are, in themselves so revealing of human tendencies. While deflating so many of these myths, in the doing he does so much to explain the likely origins -- often humourous, sometimes self serving, but always understandable and enriching to his story.
And not just myths. One I found particularly poignant was repeated on occasion by son Robert who was at Exeter at the time of the speech. While it had been only about 4 months since they had seen each other, a visit to Robert was one of Lincoln's excuses for taking the time and incurring the expense of going East to speak. Lincoln ultimately made about 10 subsequent stops to speak in New England on his return trip to and from Exeter before heading home. While these speeches laid the foundation for his calculating father's ultimate nomination and election, Robert steadfastly maintained the purpose of the trip was to see him. I found that very touching -- it's one thing to be a father to your country, but still another to be so to your son.
At the heart of it all was the speech itself and the eager ears, eventually eyes, which took it in. While Lincoln's personality was a factor, the power of his words was what carried he day. I found this revealing and a tonic to today's politics -- an altogether different America then.
This was democracy at its best. There is clearly, to me at least, no ideal political system, as all can be manipulated. Now with Hamas the victors in Palestine, I guess even the current administration might be thinking this.
I could go on, but won't other than to quote the following recollection attributed to Lincoln and which might best be read with the thought of current schooling in mind:
I remember how, when a mere child, I used to get irritated when any body talked to me in a way I could not understand. I don't think I ever got angry at anything else in my life . . . I can remember going to my little bedroom, after hearing the neighbors talk of an evening with my father, and spending no small part of the night walking up and down, and trying to make out what was the exact meaning of some of their, to me, dark sayings. I could not sleep, though I often tried to, when I got on such a hunt after an idea, until I had caught it; and when I thought I had got it, I was not satisfied until I had repeated it over and over, until I had put it in language plain enough, as I thought, for any boy I knew to comprehend. This was a kind of passion with me, and it has stuck by me; for I am never easy now, when I am handling a thought, till I have bounded it North, and bounded it South, and bounded it East, and bounded it West. Perhaps that accounts for the characteristic you observe in my speeches, though I never put the two things together before.
PS As a graduate of Cooper Union, I did find Holzer's account of Cooper's amazing building a bit thin. Plans and photos are available on the web. The stage is on the West, not the North as Holzer says, and there are 18 obstructing columns, not 16. These inaccuracies have not altered my faith in his account. I have inserted a plan of the hall in my copy.
Highly recommended.......2005-08-24
Another wonderful contribution to Lincoln scholarship by Harold Holzer! Like all of his previous contributions to our understanding of the Civil War president, this book is thoroughly researched, gracefully written, and richly informative.
Lincoln spoke on February 27, 1860, to a large crowd in New York's Cooper Union on the great political issue of the day, the extension of slavery into the American territories. The 90-minute speech was carefully researched, logically argued, and powerfully delivered, and, at its conclusion, the audience burst into cheers. The following day, it was printed in full in the major newspapers of New York City. In the weeks and months ahead, it was reprinted and avidly read in all parts of the country (except the slaveholding states of the South).
Holzer argues that the Cooper Union speech was, in a sense, both the first and the last of Lincoln's presidential campaign speeches, for it was the first major address in which he believed that he might actually be elected president, and after he returned to Illinois he never again delivered a campaign address (the custom of the time prohibited presidential candidates from actively seeking the office). But the speech was so warmly received and so widely read by voters from New England to California that it served its purpose over and over again, placing Lincoln's views before the electorate and demonstrating the formidable powers of reason and persuasion that he would bring to the presidency.
Holzer discusses the circumstances that led up to the Cooper Union speech, the time-consuming preparations Lincoln made for it, the effect that it produced (both in New York City and in the broader nation), and its historical significance. I was particularly fascinated by his description of New York in 1860, already the nation's preeminent metropolis, with a seething commercial, political, and journalistic life, and of Lincoln's experiences there, both inside and outside Cooper Union.
Highly recommended.
Customer Reviews:
A Chapter in a History of Sadness.......2001-01-03
This is a paperback reprint of a book published in 1978. The message today is as timely as it was then -- or, for that matter as it was during Civil War America. Professor Nichols book is a good overview of Indian policy during the Civil War-- an often overlooked part of the Lincoln story.
The book begins with an overview of the system of Indian administration as it had developed by 1860. It was dominated by the political spoils system and by corruption resulting from the power accorded to the Indian agents. As a master of the art of pragmatic politics, Lincoln used the system -- as he needed to do--to hold the Union together-resulting in tragedy for too many of our country's Indian wards.
The book discusses the Five Civilized Tribes of Oklahoma (then Indian territory) and their relationship to both the Union and the Confederacy. The story picks up focus, though, in the discussion of the Minnesota Sioux rebellion, the summary trials and capital sentences of over 300 Sioux Indians, and Lincoln's remission of the death sentence in all but 39 cases. Nichols tells this story well, perhaps giving Lincoln's actions less credit and less courage than they may deserve.
The book discusses Lincoln's attempts in 1862 to reform Indian policy, which were defeated by War exegencies and by Congressional inaction.He discusses a famous meeting held between Lincoln and the Indian chiefs in 1863 in the White House, again perhaps undervaluing Lincoln's intentions and the difficulties he faced.
He discusses the policy resulting from the Sioux war of concentrating the Indians under the control of the military with unsuccessful and inhumane results in Arizona and New Mexico. The book also includes an account of the too little known Sand Hill Massacre in Colorado in 1864.
The treatment of the American Indians does not constitute one of our nation's or of President Lincoln's prouder accomplishments. Professor Nichols is correct that this story deserves to be known as part of our history. The book ties Lincoln's treatment of the Indians to prevailing ideologies at the time involving a disprespect of cultural differences, to westward expansion, industrialization, the political patronage system, and, first and foresmost, the Civil War. Even Nichols appears to acknowledge that given the War, there was little that might have been done differently at the time in the way of systematic reform.
As is unfortunately the case with most histories of Indian affairs, it is easier, as Nichols does, to find a great deal of deserved fault than it is to develop answers, as he does not. This book is still worth reading as a good history of Indian affairs during the Civil War era.
Book Description
The late C. A. Tripp, a highly regarded sex researcher and colleague of Alfred Kinsey, and author of the runaway bestseller The Homosexual Matrix, devoted the last ten years of his life to an exhaustive study of Abraham Lincoln's writings and of scholarship about Lincoln, in search of hidden keys to his character. In The Intimate World of Abraham Lincoln, completed just weeks before he died, Tripp offers a full examination of Lincoln's inner life and relationships that, as Dr. Jean Baker argues in the Introduction, "will define the issue for years to come." Throughout this riveting work, new details are revealed about Lincoln's relations with a number of men. Long-standing myths are debunked convincingly -- in particular, the myth that Lincoln's one true love was Ann Rutledge, who died tragically young. Ultimately, Tripp argues that Lincoln's unorthodox loves and friendships were tied to his maverick beliefs about religion, slavery, and even ethics and morals. As Tripp argues, Lincoln was an "invert": a man who consistently turned convention on its head, who drew his values not from the dominant conventions of society, but from within.
For years, a whisper campaign has mounted about Abraham Lincoln, focusing on his intimate relationships. He was famously awkward around single women. He was engaged once before Mary Todd, but his fiancée called off the marriage on the grounds that he was "lacking in smaller attentions." His marriage to Mary was troubled. Meanwhile, throughout his adult life, he enjoyed close relationships with a number of men. He shared a bed with oshua Speed for four years as a young man, and -- as Tripp details here -- he shared a bed with an army captain while serving in the White House, when Mrs. Lincoln was away. As one Washington socialite commented in her diary, "What stuff!"
This study reaches far beyond a brief about Lincoln's sexuality: it is an attempt to make sense of the whole man, as never before. It includes an Introduction by Jean Baker, biographer of Mary Todd Lincoln, and an Afterword containing reactions by two Lincoln scholars and one clinical psychologist and longtime acquaintance of C.A. Tripp. As Michael Chesson explains in one of the Afterword essays, "Lincoln was different from other men, and he knew it. More telling, virtually every man who knew him at all well, long before he rose to prominence, recognized it. In fact, the men who claimed to know him best, if honest, usually admitted that they did not understand him." Perhaps only now, when conventions of intimacy are so different, so open, and so much less rigid than in Lincoln's day, can Lincoln be fully understood.
Customer Reviews:
A mind in time.......2007-09-30
Let me state the obvious. Each of us is a product of our time - of all the people and events we encounter, and the values of the societies we live in. So was Lincoln. So was Tripp. Current Gay and Queer identities are 20th cent constructs and could not have been embraced by Lincoln, nor does Tripp claim this to have been the case. Nor does Tripp present a view that all Gay people will see as politically acceptable - his work helped build the current identity but he was, himself, a product of another era. However, as Robert Aldrich and others have demonstrated, homosexuality is as ancient as humanity and exists in many forms across societies. Tripp gives a good portrait of a remarkable man coping with homosexual urges in an emerging nation. Tenuous though some of his arguments may be, his critics are, in many cases subject to the academic biases of reliance on surviving documentation (often ignoring context and the nature of covert behaviour), lack understanding of the experience of being in a hidden minority and even, in a few cases, rely on arguments that make Tripp's weakest sound strong. The truth is that here is meticulously well researched book that presents a convincing arguement but shows evidence of the author not having survived to do the last few re-writes that would have bought it up to his usual high standard.
A disappointing book.......2007-08-23
The world of Lincoln scholarship can be highly contentious, but controversy about this book relates to Tripp's use of evidence, not the topic he examines. My own specialty is Lincoln's pre-presidential life. Determining what happened in those years can involve surmise and supposition. I don't fault Tripp for lacking unobtainable proof. Even outright speculation can freshen thought.
I am concerned, however, by Tripp seizing a kernel of evidence, extrapolating from it, and pronouncing the resultant structure to be proof of his contention. For example, he finds a unique statement from Bill Greene noting that Lincoln had well-developed thighs. Tripp then turns to the Duncan and Nichols biography of Mentor Graham, a source I consider so unreliable that I have never dared cite it as authority for anything. Relying on an undependable source and a single comment from Greene, Tripp claims to prove a homosexual relationship between Greene and Lincoln.
Tripp extrapolates further and argues that because Greene became embarrassed when Lincoln introduced him to Secretary of State Seward as Lincoln's grammar teacher, that meant Greene was uneasy about his old homosexual relationship with Lincoln. Tripp considers and rejects the possibility that Greene said little during the meeting because he didn't want to reveal his poor grasp of grammar to Seward, thereby belying Lincoln's praise and humiliating himself. I find the possibility that Tripp rejects to be more plausible than the one he embraces.
Another type of reasoning is illustrated by Tripp arguing for a homosexual relationship between Lincoln and Joshua Speed because (in part) when Lincoln moved into their sleeping quarters, Speed failed to say anything about his admiration of a Lincoln speech. Tripp here assumes that because Speed failed to mention this in his account of his conversation with Lincoln, that absence means no conversation about the speech occurred. Lincoln and Speed may have talked about many things that Speed didn't mention (weather, crops, politics). Tripp seems to think that if an account doesn't say something happened, then it didn't happen. That's invalid reasoning.
Regarding Lincoln and Speed being bed mates, neither man was secretive about the arrangement, and some men Lincoln slept with had definite heterosexual orientation. Public comment about a politician's sex life was rare in that era, but I have seen examples in Illinois newspapers. If anyone had thought the Lincoln-Speed sleeping arrangement could be portrayed as homosexual, I think political opponents would have raised the issue regardless of whether they believed it.
We can speculate all day about Lincoln's place on the sexual continuum between heterosexual and homosexual, and speculate reasonably, but speculation isn't proof. Still, the topic is worthy. For me, the big disappointment in Tripp's book was in finding him wrong again and again about things I know about. If it had been the other way around I would probably have found the book exciting rather than frustrating.
Text Book for Queer Theory.......2006-12-11
Most art, literature and history is studied from the straight, white, male perspective. If a famous man professed his undying devotion to a woman and slept with her for years, SWM academic theory would presume the couple was sexually involved and use that as proof of heterosexuality. C.A. Tripp simply looks at the facts of Lincoln's intimate life from the position of a queer theory scholar. Interpreting findings from a queer point of view takes this book beyond the genre of biography and helps us understand how all historical theory about any minority has been skewed to fit a mainstream mold, disregarding history as it most probably was.
More Leftist Rewriting of History.......2006-02-21
What is it that propels peopel to reinterpret history? This book is so chock full of speculative flim flam. It is written by a person who is applying 21st century culture to 19th century culture. It was not uncommon for men to share quarters 200 years ago and ...GUESS WHAT? Not be gay.
The irrational claim this author makes is based on this one single premise:
"OOOH two men shared a room...they MUST have had gay sex!"
In the military I slept in very close quarters to other men, and NOT ONCE did I have any inclination of homosexual conduct. What is wrong with leftists? Why must everything be centered around sex? Is there anything else to life for them, than fleshly gratification? Good grief.
Lincoln had a close friend and shared a bedroom with him. AND? Does that AUTOMATICALLY mean he was gay? Cmon people!
Can you not see the obvious fallacy? It is a false conclusion. It is a desperate attempt by the left to twist history into something that suits them. Its taking a *REPUBLICAN* president and trying to make him into a liberal!
Hows this for the left? Lincoln advocated PRAYER in school. Next thing you know, the left will be trying to twist that around.
You might as well just buy a tabloid..........2006-01-27
...because that's all this erroneous piece of trash is. I'm not homophobic. I am against people trying to cash in on the name of a legendary historic figure simply to cause controversy, and thereby gain some extra dollars.
Brad Pitt, Jennifer Aniston, Tom Cruise and others can sue the tabloids when they twist stories. Lincoln's dead. He can't.
Just remember that.
Book Description
The real truth behind the assassination of our 16th president
Customer Reviews:
Don't disregard because of your prejudices.......2006-06-18
A fascinating read. While not a historian myself, I do have a problem with critics here who find alliances between North and South brewing a conspiracy to be "unbelievable" because the 2 sides would ever agree on anything.
This is why black-ops against leaders always succeed - we are too conditioned to accept the power that large sums of money truly has over individuals. (You can find examples of Arabs and Isrealis who mutually profit from businesses.) It's time we wake up and realize the control that banks and bankers have over world societies, by way of war-created debt and their media ownership.
The plot detailed in this book is simply a result of that - and I think that's why this book has been raked over the coals. It's simply more evidence of that centuries of increasing control.
Hard to believe........2006-05-31
This book is hard to believe. There are some elemental truths in this book, like the black market trade in cotton, which some in the government sanctioned. Other things, like the two groups of fugitives going across the Potomic and the attack on Seward supposedly by his eldest is just unbelieveable. The authors roll out some sketchy facts, but not sufficient proof that an actual conspiracy took place. The alleged conspiracy itself is kind of hard to believe. The authors would have us believe that greedy businessmen, along with radical Republicans and Southern government officials combined to rid the government of Abraham Lincoln. I am not sure you could get all those people in the same room, lest agree.
This is a poor book in revisionist history. I liked the review of the clandestine business deals that took place with the South. Much of the rest of the book was not very believeable.
Mixed thoughts..........2005-12-16
I have mixed thoughts on this book as it does bring to light the possibility of an early war conspiracy to assassinate Lincoln. I did like how Guttridge brought ideas to the table about how the food for cotton program started, but a lot of this book is full of "could be" situations. I found it a bit confusing as to how Booth came involved with the early war plot or how he came into the fold with the profiteers and their connection. I did like reading about the chase to find Booth at the end of the book and how questions arised from whether or not Booth was actually captured.
I found this book covering a few topics that at times didn't seem to mix well or flow with each other. At the end of the book, it seemed more like a Booth biography, but didn't really match the original content. The Lincoln assassination does bring up a lot of possibilities though I think Guttridge needed to focus on one and kept it simple versus jumping on a lot of different ideas and making me wonder how some related to others.
Could Be - But I'm Not Convinced.......2005-08-28
I came across "Dark Union" the other evening in a late-night visit to a bookstore and was immediately intrigued by its premise. However, I am, like President Lincoln, "vacillating"...vacillating between continuing to read this book or returning it to the bookstore.
Why?
To begin with, while I don't doubt the integrity of Mr. Guttridge, a very good historian, there are too many things here - unresolved issues, unconnected dots, that don't hold water. The authors claim that Lincoln authorized a "meat-for-cotton" deal to save the Union financial structure. Fine, if one considers that if Lincoln truly needed the cotton, he would have authorized another "Red River" expedition headed by someone more militarily astute than Nathaniel Commissary Banks. He would not have agreed on a financial deal to save the Union based on Confederate cotton.
Secondly, Andrew Johnson's chief aide? Relations were already bad between Johnson and some of the other alledged co-conspirators (Edwin Stanton, et. al.,) that why would they want someone affiliated with the detested Johnson to run the show. And bringing in John Wilkes Booth, a blatant Confederate symp and hater of Lincoln to be part of the team? C'mon.
John Wilkes Booth was, according to nearly every account that I've read, never married. If he was, where's the proof. On the other hand, women like the relative of Senator Sumner who tried to distance herself from any association with him, or the poor beautiful actress who tried to kill herself after her lover murdered the President are much more numerous and much more known.
As for Lafayette Baker and Stanton, sure, these were very powerful and yes, very despicable men. But this deal to kidnap Lincoln when he vacillated on the deal, preferring, according to the book a decisive military victory, simply is too unwieldly - and there would have been too many people who would have spilled the beans, no matter who might have been involved. General Grant allowing Lincoln to be kidnapped or murdered - and Lew Wallace described as being close to Grant??? Anyone who has read about Grant's anger towards Wallace after Shiloh would have known better, even if Wallace did get back into Grant's good graces after his valiant one-day stand at Monocacy against Jubal Early.
Finally, John Wilkes Booth being smuggled out of the country to India, courtesy of Stanton. This is just too rich for me.
A good conspiracy call, - but just too unwieldly, too unbelieveable, even if Stanton was involved up to his armpits. I'll leave it to some of my friends who are Lincoln experts to sort this thing out.
Were Leonard Guttridge and Ray Neff playing a joke on all of us??
Has the DNA been checked yet???
Too Thin to Hold Up.......2005-03-12
Who does not enjoy a delicious conspiracy theory and the Lincoln assissination has been one of the best around for a very long time now. It has it all, money, corruption, shadowy figures, false corpses, and a little sex. The problem with this book by Leonard F. Guttridge (of the much better and recommended Icebound and Ghosts of Cape Sabine) and Ray A Neff is that these characters, coincidences, schemes, and double dealings are paraded in a brief fashion before the reader resulting in more of a confusion than a sustainable conspiracy. It seems that everyone (both from the North and the South) was invovled at one point or another for a wide range of multiple reasons. The whole sequence of events becomes quite chaotic and, in the end, it appears John Wilkes Booth committed murder without any regard to the previous plans, although seems vague as well. The authors play the usual game of conspiracy theorists by leaving out any facts not suited to their ideas but commit the error of then replacing the missing ideas with a plethora of every shady notion attached to those months, regardless of the contraditions. A confusing book, that while often interesting, could have used a little more space to fully explain and connect all the dots.
Book Description
Lincoln's death, like his life, was an event of epic proportions. When the president was struck down at his moment of triumph, writes Merrill Peterson, "sorrow--indescribable sorrow" swept the nation. After lying in state in Washington, Lincoln's body was carried by a special funeral train to Springfield, Illinois, stopping in major cities along the way; perhaps a million people viewed the remains as memorial orations rang out and the world chorused its sincere condolences. It was the apotheosis of the martyred President--the beginning of the transformation of a man into a mythic hero. In Lincoln in American Memory, historian Merrill Peterson provides a fascinating history of Lincoln's place in the American imagination from the hour of his death to the present. In tracing the changing image of Lincoln through time, this wide-ranging account offers insight into the evolution and struggles of American politics and society--and into the character of Lincoln himself. Westerners, Easterners, even Southerners were caught up in the idealization of the late President, reshaping his memory and laying claim to his mantle, as his widow, son, memorial builders, and memorabilia collectors fought over his visible legacy. Peterson also looks at the complex responses of blacks to the memory of Lincoln, as they moved from exultation at the end of slavery to the harsh reality of free life amid deep poverty and segregation; at more than one memorial event for the great emancipator, the author notes, blacks were excluded. He makes an engaging examination of the flood of reminiscences and biographies, from Lincoln's old law partner William H. Herndon to Carl Sandburg and beyond. Serious historians were late in coming to the topic; for decades the myth-makers sought to shape the image of the hero President to suit their own agendas. He was made a voice of prohibition, a saloon-keeper, an infidel, a devout Christian, the first Bull Moose Progressive, a military blunderer and (after the First World War) a military genius, a white supremacist (according to D.W. Griffith and other Southern admirers), and a touchstone for the civil rights movement. Through it all, Peterson traces five principal images of Lincoln: the savior of the Union, the great emancipator, man of the people, first American, and self-made man. In identifying these archetypes, he tells us much not only of Lincoln but of our own identity as a people. More than thirty years ago, Peterson won the prestigious Bancroft Prize for The Jefferson Image in the American Mind. The New York Times Book Review hailed it as "an engrossing story of the uses and abuses of a great legend," saying that Peterson's writing is often "brilliant." This absorbing book follows in the footsteps of that landmark work, leading us on a revealing tour through our changing image of our greatest president--and our changing image of ourselves.
Customer Reviews:
Exceptional!.......2002-03-30
This fascinating volume considers how Lincoln has been viewed from the time of his death to the time this work came out. The account of the historical research related to Lincoln's genealogy and his early life is particularly intriguing. It discusses some of the Lincoln literature and indicates what is worth reading. For instance, he downgrades Otto Eisenschiml's sensational Why Was Lincoln Murdered?, which made such a splash when it came out in 1937, and recommends The Lincoln Murder Conspiracies, by William Hanchett as the best book on the assassination and its historiography. This was the best book I read in the year when I read it, a year in which I read 126 books.
An interesting book on the Lincoln image.......2000-05-26
Merrill D. Peterson, a renowned Jefferson scholar, enters the field of Lincoln studies with this book on how Lincoln has been remembered, memorialized and celebrated in the years since his death. Peterson examines an interesting variety of sources, including statues and prints made of Lincoln over the years in addition to the numerous biographies written. Among the images examined are the Emancipator, the martyr, and Savior of the Union. Peterson examines the origins of these images and how they have carried through the generations by historians and others.
Average customer rating:
|
Abe Lincoln Goes to Washington
Cheryl Harness
Manufacturer: National Geographic Children's Books
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
 Political
| Biographies
| People & Places
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
United States
| Biographies
| People & Places
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
Historical
| Biographies
| People & Places
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
U. S. Presidents & First Ladies
| Biographies
| People & Places
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
General
| History & Historical Fiction
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
General
| United States
| History & Historical Fiction
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Ages 4-8
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Literature
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
General
| United States
| Americas
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Lincoln, Abraham
| ( L )
| People, A-Z
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
ASIN: 0792237366
Release Date: 1999-12-01 |
Book Description
From Lincoln's early practice of law in Springfield, Illinois, through his election to the Presidency of the eve of the Civil War, to his untimely assassination, Harness weaves an enormous amount of information into this compelling picture of our 16th President's public and private life. Readers see Lincoln happy and gangly during his first dance with Mary Todd, playful with his young sons, and strong under pressure as he drafts the Emancipation Proclamation and delivers the Gettysburg Address.
Book Description
In Lincoln's Constitution Daniel Farber leads the reader to understand exactly how Abraham Lincoln faced the inevitable constitutional issues brought on by the Civil War. Examining what arguments Lincoln made in defense of his actions and how his words and deeds fit into the context of the times, Farber illuminates Lincoln's actions by placing them squarely within their historical moment. The answers here are crucial not only for a better understanding of the Civil War but also for shedding light on issues-state sovereignty, presidential power, and limitations on civil liberties in the name of national security-that continue to test the limits of constitutional law even today.
Customer Reviews:
If you think Dubya should be impeached..........2007-07-11
REad this book. It will make you realize that some President's have gone much farther in their goal to make America safe and protect the Constitution. Of course Lincoln's example may not always be the best guide to PResidential actions.
An interesting read with some problems.......2005-01-08
My actual rating would be 3.5 if possible because the book is somewhere between good and very good. I've long been interested in the relationship between the Civil War and the Constitution. At its base the Civil War was a constitutional struggle between two ideologies: the compact theory and the popular theory of the nature of the Constitution. Ultimately this conflict could not be resolved through politics and war became necessary.
The best part of Farber's book is the first half dealing with secession. Farber examines the debate over states' rights and ultimately secession from the Founding up to the actual secession of 1860. By doing this, Farber shows that both sides of the debate had valid historical support for their theories, though he personally sides with Lincoln. All in all, this section provides a clear, concise presentation of secession and its history.
My problem with this book comes from Farber's intent to retroactively validate the constitutionality of Lincoln's presidential power. Lincoln used presidential power in unprecedented ways. Farber notes that the exercise of presidential power had been practically non-existent, with Jackson being the only user of it in a significant manner, and, even then, it did not approach Lincoln's actions. Farber presents Lincoln's theories and support that he gave for his actions, but he goes further and uses subsequent development in executive power to validate most of Lincoln's actions. The problem with this is that in many ways it was the experience under Lincoln that shaped our evolving understanding of executive authority. For example, the three cases from the late 19th century were clearly influenced by Lincoln and the Civil War experience. Farber quotes from Jackson's Youngstown concurrence, but he should consider Frankfurter's opinion. Frankfurter noted that our understanding of the war and presidential powers have been substantially influenced by historical development and political understandings outside of Court opinions. Fundamentally, our understanding of the president's power starts with Lincoln and using subsequent developments built upon Lincoln's actions to validate those actions is akin to using the Equal Protection Clause to retroactively validate the Emancipation Proclamation.
In its entirety, I found the book thought-provoking. It provides an interesting presentation of the constitutional issues involved in the Civil War and Farber supports his position compellingly, though I find holes in some of it.
Highly Recommended.......2003-09-27
The Civil War was, at its heart, a constitutional struggle. Although it was fought out on bloody battlefields, the causes for which the opposing armies risked their lives were starkly different views of fundamental legal principles. As the war raged on, Abraham Lincoln and Jefferson Davis came to symbolize the two sides of the constitutional debate, but their voices were only parts of a great chorus that, at various times, included Hamilton and Jefferson, Wilson and Madison, Clay, Calhoun, Webster, Jackson, Douglas, and even the irresolute James Buchanan. The overriding constitutional question, of course, was whether a state could lawfully secede from the Union. But this great question was intertwined with other fundamental questions: Did the Constitution create a national government for the benefit of "the people of the United States" or a mere league or compact of independent states? To what extent did the Constitution protect slavery and slave owners against the anti-slavery agitation of northerners? What action, if any, could the United States government (and particularly its chief executive) properly take in response to the military challenge of secession?
Farber addresses all these questions, and many more. He is a legal scholar with impressive credentials. More than that, he is a historian who understands the importance of using history in constitutional interpretation. In seeking answers to the thorny constitutional problems expressed in the war, he weighs the contrary arguments, explores their strengths and weaknesses, and offers nuanced analyses. He believes, for example, that the South's claim to the right of secession was wrong, but that it was not a frivolous claim. He believes that Lincoln's responses to the war were, on the whole, firmly within his constitutional authority, although he did occasionally stray into unconstitutional action. The remarkable fact about Lincoln's conduct of the war, Farber believes, is that the President was able to maintain a sense of perspective. He clearly saw that "the times demanded extraordinary measures," but he did not forget that "the long-term goal was not merely to crush the rebellion but to save the nation as a bastion of liberty."
Many academics are, to put it kindly, miserable writers who cannot escape the straight-jackets of narrowly departmentalized thinking and crabbed professional jargon. Farber is a refreshing exception. He writes clearly, concisely, and gracefully. His prose should be a model for all academic writers.
It has been a long time since I have enjoyed a book so much. I highly recommend "Lincoln's Constitution" to all who seek a greater understanding of the great legal principles that lay just below the surface of the bloodiest war in American history.
Popular legal history at its best.......2003-06-18
"Lincoln's Constitution" first examines the Constitution as Lincoln found it at the beginning of his administration, with emphasis on state - federal relations, including the right of secession. Like most modern legal scholars, Prof. Faber clearly sides with Lincoln on this (and most other constitutional issues), but he is also careful to show that believers in states' rights and secession had good historical reasons for their views. With this background, the author then examines the Constitutional issues Lincoln faced in dealing with the unprecedented challenge of waging the Civil War. Here the focus shifts to presidential war powers and civil liberties in time of war. The author points out where Lincoln was right (in light of later precedents) and where he was wrong. Again, the views of both his supporters and his critics are fully examined. Finally, Faber clearly explains the relevance of all these issues for citizens of our own time.
Authoritative, up-to-date and balanced, "Lincoln's Constitution" is an essential supplement to J.G. Randall's classic (but now dated) "Constitutional Problems Under Lincoln."
Great Book, but heavy history.......2003-05-13
Being interested in the legality of Lincoln calling on troops to supress a domestic and not a foreign threat is appealing to me, since it was, what I thought, a violation of the powers of the presidency. Grabbing this, I thought it might bring aboveboard his actions. The title is somewhat deceieving in that the first 4 1/2 chapters discuss the founding fathers and their ideaology on various presidential powers and states' rights: intriguing to read, but way too much history of the constitutional debates. Finishing the book, I came to realize this was the author's way of defending his conclusions: that Lincoln did not abuse his powers and acted within the bounderies of constitutional law (though the last chapter discussing Lincoln's enfringement on Free Speech is hard to swallow as legal.) Still a fascinating read on the topic of constitutional power,that is just as important today as it was then.
Books:
- The Imus Ranch: Cooking for Kids and Cowboys
- The Island at the Center of the World: The Epic Story of Dutch Manhattan and the Forgotten Colony That Shaped America
- The Mayan Prophecies: Unlocking the Secrets of a Lost Civilization
- The New Cambridge Medieval History, Vol. 1: c. 500-c. 700
- The Occupation of Iraq: Winning the War, Losing the Peace
- The Rockabilly Legends: They Called It Rockabilly Long Before It Was Called Rock 'n' Roll (Book & DVD)
- The Templar Pirates: The Secret Alliance to Build the New Jerusalem
- The Wages of Destruction: The Making and Breaking of the Nazi Economy
- The Worst Hard Time: The Untold Story of Those Who Survived the Great American Dust Bowl
- This Terrible War: The Civil War and its Aftermath
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- Global Networks, Linked Cities
- Covert Action As a Tool of Presidential Foreign Policy: From the Bay of Pigs to Iran-Contra
- Your Career: How to Make it Happen
- Accounting and Finance for Insurance Professionals
- Business Analysis and Valuation: Using Financial Statements, Text and Cases
- Brother Odd
- Business Plan Example
- Intermediate Accounting: Rockford Practice Set
- A World of Difference: Society, Nature, Development
- Benjamin, My Son
The Lincoln Enigma: The Changing Faces of an American Icon
Building the Myth: Selected Speeches Memorializing Abraham Lincoln
Lincoln Reconsidered: Essays on the Civil War Era
Lincoln in American Memory
Lincoln and the Radicals
