Lincoln Books

Candace Fleming had already won me over with her biography, Our Eleanor: A Scrapbook Look at Eleanor Roosevelt's Remarkable Life, so I was excited to read The Lincolns: A Scrapbook Look at Abraham and Mary. Fleming not only did not disappoint, she exceeded my expectations with this rich and impressive peek into the lives of Abraham and Mary Lincoln.

I read every page and every caption that explained the history from birth to death of these amazing individuals. Everyone knows the basic history of Abraham Lincoln, but the author went far beyond log cabins and Ford's Theatre. She delved into the individual relationships between Abraham and the many people who were a part of his life, most importantly, his relationship with his wife. Mary had such a fascinating background that much of the book discussed her own upbringing and her role in making Abraham who and what he was.

No stone was left unturned in this biography. A balanced view of the positive and negative aspects of each personality trait and action was presented, giving readers the scoop on subjects often skimmed by in general American history.

Aside from engaging, storytelling-style writing, readers can look forward to accompanying illustrations that don't frequent other Lincoln biographies. Dozens and dozens of photographs of the Lincolns, their children, their homes, and their companions fill the pages, along with copies of letters written in their own hands, receipts for purchases, ledgers, and famous speeches.

I came away from this biography feeling well-informed and satisfied. The book will have a permanent place on my bookshelf, right next to Our Eleanor, with future space left for Ms. Fleming's next brilliant creation.

This review is cross posted from YA (& Kids) Books Central: www.yabookscentral.com

"Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth, upon this continent, a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that 'all men are created equal.'" -- Lincoln, from the Gettysburg Address

"One February afternoon in 1817, while Abraham's father was away, a flock of turkeys strutted into a clearing outside his cabin. Inside, Abraham grabbed his father's rifle, 'shot through a crack and killed one of them.' Proud of his marksmanship, he raced to collect his prize...then stopped short. The turkey, he saw, was beautiful! Guilt washed over him. How could he have killed something so majestic? 'My early start as a hunter,' he later recalled, 'was never much improved afterward.' In fact, he never again 'pulled a trigger on any larger game.'"

Early in the morning, one hundred and forty-three years ago today (April 15), Abraham Lincoln, having been shot the previous evening by John Wilkes Booth in Ford's Theater, died across the street from the theater in Petersen's Boarding House. Mary Lincoln, his wife of thirty-two years, never really recovered from that night.

Mary, in contrast to Abraham's oft-told humble beginnings, was brought up with "piano lessons, Persian rugs, and slaves to wait on her." Mary was an unusual young woman for her time because she was exceptionally well-educated:

"After reading Wollstonecraft's book [A Vindication of the Rights of Woman], Mary's father was convinced Mary should receive 'a substantial rather than ornamental education.' While his other daughters were also given formal educations, it was Mary -- with her sharp mind -- who studied mathematics and philosophy. Of course, Mr.Todd didn't expect his daughter to use this education; she wasn't going to take up a profession. He believed its purpose was to attract a better husband."

And who did she attract?

"Tall and gawky, wearing a swallowtail coat that was too short, shabbily patched trousers, and mismatched socks, Abraham made his way to Mary's side. 'Miss Todd,' he said, 'I want to dance with you in the worst way.' And, as Mary remembered it, 'he certainly did.'"

As with Candace Flemings previous scrapbook-style biographies on Ben Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt, THE LINCOLNS is a must-have for anyone serving ten- through fourteen-year-olds. What more could one hope for from a biography than accuracy, readability, excellent timelines and source notes, rarely-if-ever-seen images, and relevance to the Twenty-first Century lives of readers?

But unlike the Ben Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt stories, which feel so triumphant because their subjects succeed in living long, satisfying, and productive lives, THE LINCOLNS is a true story that seems to begin with great potential and hope and eventually becomes an incredibly tragic tale: Hundreds of thousands die in the War Between the States. Abraham and Mary repeatedly lose their children at terribly young ages. Abraham is assassinated. Mary is swallowed up in embarrassing financial affairs, and her remaining and bitter son temporarily succeeds in paying off people to have her adjudicated as being insane.

(I shudder to imagine what it would have been like if the public had heaped the sort of scorn on Jackie Kennedy or Lady Bird Johnson or Nancy Reagan in their declining years that was frequently shown the widowed Mary in hers.)

But what also makes THE LINCOLNS such a thoroughly intriguing and sometimes amusing read for me (the news junkie) in 2008 are the host of parallels one can find between the perceptions that presidential candidates seek to achieve today and the many images of Abraham Lincoln that Fleming provides:

"Abraham was scrupulously honest when it came to money -- especially money collected on behalf of his campaigns. After winning his seat in Congress in 1847, he returned $199.25 of the $200 received from his supporters. He gave this explanation:
"I made the canvass on my own horse; my entertainment, being at the house of friends, cost me nothing; and my only outlay was 75 cents for a barrel of cider, which some farmhands insisted I should treat to."

"While [Stephen] Douglas traveled to the debate sites in a private railroad car, accompanied by his personal valet, an entourage of reporters, and his beautiful wife, who was once labeled the 'Belle of Washington' by the Chicago Tribune, Lincoln came by ox-drawn cart, stagecoach, or, most often, train, where he always rode in a regular passenger car. Even though he was the most successful and prominent attorney in the state, Lincoln wanted the voters to see him as a common man with simple tastes."

"And the night comes again to the circle studded sky
The stars settle slowly, in loneliness they lie
'Till the universe explodes as a falling star is raised
Planets are paralyzed, mountains are amazed
But they all grow brighter from the brilliance of the blaze
With the speed of insanity, then he dies."
-- Phil Ochs, "Crucifixion"

After reading THE LINCOLNS, one cannot possibly expect that the United States of America would be existing in its current form if there had not been an Abraham Lincoln filled with a steadfast determination to hold it together -- refusing to permit either secession or continued spread of slavery -- no matter what the cost. And it is difficult to fathom the possibility of there having been a President Lincoln had there not been a Mary Lincoln by his side.

In THE LINCOLNS, as she has so successfully done before, Candace Fleming takes what would seem to be one of most common of biographic subjects in American history and crafts a book that is absolutely new, unique, and entertaining.

it is hard to sum it up. two words, buy i

it is hard to sum it up. two words, buy i

My classroom kids are always look at this one and reading and making new art.

When you're not sure whether you're looking at an art book or a children's book ... you're looking at a children's book illustrated by Jackie Morris. In this volume, the story is okay, but the compelling watercolor illustrations are memorable, even haunting.

James Swanson's "Manhunt:The 12-Day Chase to Catch Lincoln's Killer" is a captivating book. It's so spellbinding that it seemed like the shortest 400 page book I'd ever read. I'll read more books by James Swanson.

Manhunt: The 12-Day Chase for Lincoln's Killer, by James Swanson, is an excellent read. The author takes the reader to gaslight lit streets and a time of joy, followed by great sorrow. Swanson tells the story of President Lincoln's assassin in an almost - but not quite - sympathetic manner. Swanson introduces the reader to many secondary characters that assisted Booth in his 12-day escape from the authorities.

The book is written in a style that is less text book than mystery thriller. Swanson does an excellent job in making the reader feel the urgency that both sides felt, in trying to locate and/or hide Booth. The P.S. portion of this version of the book provides excellent insight into the author's goals and objectives in telling the story.

This is a 5-star read that I highly recommend. Learning about the strong emotions that existed during this tumultuous time period in U.S. history. Enjoy.

My son loves this book! He loves seeing how Max makes new friends when he moves to a new place. He loves wondering what happens to the lost balls and he loves the surprise at the end. The illustrations are beautiful as well!

My kids absolutely love this book! The illustrations are beautiful and the story is entertaining and educational. I would highly recommend it for children of all ages.

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.

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.

Samuel Bland Arnold was the only one of the convicted conspirators in the assassination of Abraham Lincoln to later write his memoirs. Mr. Kauffman has done an excellent job of editing in this fascinating account of Arnold's time in the prison at Fort Jefferson.

Fascinating account of John Wilkes Booth's conspiracy told by a co-conspirator. The "Notes" section alone is worth the purchase price of the book!

Along with Adam Smith's Theory of Moral Sentiments and Herbert Spencer's Principles of Ethics, this treatise is one of the great under-read masterpieces of British moral philosophy. The book reflects both wide learning and careful study. Sidgwick casts a broad net, and pulls in some very fish.

The three "methods of ethics" he explores are, basically, egoism, intuitionism, and utilitarianism. Though his arguments ultimately fail to convince me of what he is trying to convince me, they are amazingly fecund. You will not stop thinking about this book after you have read it.

The highlight of the book, for me, I'm afraid, was his brilliant few pages criticizing libertarianism in social ethics. This is probably the first such critique that stays on point, and is worth careful study by all who place primacy on liberty.

The Methods of Ethics is Sidgwick's great systematic treatise on ethics. It's also a central text in the history of philosophy, and it can be understood as the work that initiated contemporary ethical theory in the English-speaking world. Of course, this isn't a work that came out of nowhere. In fact, it's informed by Sidgwick's firm grounding in the history of previous ethical thought. And unlike many great philosophers, what Sidgwick has to say about his intellectual forbears is usually reasonably accurate. (See his Outlines of the History of Ethics for additional evidence of his knowledge--and for an excellent introduction to the history of ethics.)

This book is long; it's detailed; and it aspires to comprehensiveness. Indeed, all of the main areas of philosophical ethics (viz. meta-ethics, normative ethics, and moral psychology) are covered herein. Consequently, it's simply impossible to summarize Sidgwick's argument here. Instead of futilely attempting to do so, I'll simply provide the barest outline of Sidgwick's aims and his results.

According to Sidgwick, there are three fundamental methods of ethics: egoistic hedonism, intuitionism, utilitarianism. He wants to examine the nature and plausiblity of each of these methods. The fundamental principle of egoistic hedonism is that what one ought to do (i.e. what one has most reason to do) is what will maximize one's own net amount of pleasure in the long run. The method of hedonism is the method of determing what one ought to do by accumulating empirical evidence about the consequences of particular actions for one's own happiness. Intuitionism, according to Sidgwick, is the view that we have an ability to discern the rightness and wrongness of actions without drawing on empirical evidence concerning the consequences of those actions. The intuitionist tells us that certain fundamental moral principles are self-evident to all who understand them. And intuitionism, Sidgwick claims, is the method underlying common-sense morality. Finally, the fundamental principle of utilitarianism is that what we ought to do is what will maximize the net amount of pleasure for all sentient beings.

Perhaps the most important conclusion of Sidgwick's book is that the method of intuitionism is swallowed up by utilitarianism. For utilitarianism allows us to explain all the elements of the morality of common sense, elements that Sidgwick discusses at length in his account of intuitionism; and furthermore, the self-evident moral principles at which a reflective intuitionism allows us to arrive are principles from which we can prove the fundamental principle of utilitarianism. This, Sidgwick thinks, eliminates any apparent conflict between these two methods, and it shows that utilitarianism, when properly understood, is consistent with common-sense morality.

But Sidgwick thinks that the relation between utilitarianism and egoistic hedonism remains problematic. The final conclusion of his book is that there is an apparently irreconcilable contradiction in our moral thinking. It seems we have compelling, and perhaps overriding, reasons to do both what is our moral duty and what is in our own interest, but, Sidgwick claims, there is no compelling argument that moral duty and self-interest will always converge. That is, there is no good reason to think that acting morally is always in our self-interest, and this is problematic since both our moral duties and our self-interest place genuine claims on us. Practical thought, then, seems to end up in a fundamental sort of contradiction.

This book is mandatory reading for anyone interested in ethics.

A relatively small, slim square format book of just over 100 pages. A very short foreword by the knowledgeable Lincoln Kirsten is followed by a conversation between Edward Lucie-Smith and Michael Leonard; this then is repeated in French and German. Pages 22 to 101 contain the full colour plates, with the image on the right hand page and the facing page blank apart from the title and basic facts of the picture. It concludes with a very brief chronology.

The paintings cover the whole range of Leonard's output, including portraits, several of his stripped-to-the-waist roofers or scaffolders, candid male nudes, and men or groups in casual settings in a park. It is a fine little book, well produced, if there is a criticism it is simply that one would love to have the very same reproduced on a larger scale; however it is splendid to have his sensitive and honest portrayals available.

Michael Leonard's art is well known to admirers of Figurative Art and this difficult to find book of his paintings justifies his place of importance in the currrent resurgence of representational art. Leonard finds beautiful metaphors in the sanctity of the locker room and allows us a quiet view of young men ending or beginning physical nurturing of the body beautiful. The lighting effects are luminous and the brushwork is fastidious. Much is left to the viewer as to the interpretation of these paintings but Lincoln Kirstein's commentary adds much to the pleasure of this book.

An excellent book, which pays attention to an episode in history, that should not be forgotten. In simple words James Yates makes clear the relationship between his struggle for civil rights in the US and his later contribution to the International Brigades in Spain. Also his courage to go on with his activities after the Worldwar, as his pictures show, is impressive...

This book is one of the greatest books I bought at the time when I was in the US. Pete Seeger wrote about the book: This is a great story, a great read, and has a great lesson to teach young Americans , black and white, of how you can be strongly rooted in your home community and at the same time see a sense of kindship with working people around this whole world. The battle to save the elected Loyalist government of Spain 50 years ago was the first battle in World War II. The Abraham Lincoln Brigade and others may have lost a battle but they didn't lose the war, nor have lost it yet. Carry on! I want to send all my respect to the members of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade, your international solidarity which you showed in the battle against the fascist Franco regime will never be forgotten, we will never forget you bright stars in the darkness.