No comments about The Leverett Letters: Correspondence of a South Carolina Family, 1851-1868.

4 comments about Inside Lincoln's White House: The Complete Civil War Diary of John Hay.

1. Hay, the young Assistant Presidential Secretary, was like a son to Lincoln. The President, in the diary often affectionately and irreverently referred to as "The Tycoon", relaxed around Hay as around few others, giving the diarist an insight into the character of Lincoln which is almost unique. This alone would make the book worthwhile, but Hay's views on other personalities and events of those dramatic days are also valuable, and engagingly written.
   Hay's diary has been published before, but incomplete and poorly edited. This is the first complete edition, with all the entries restored and with extensive explanatory notes, which are necesary to follow Hay's refernces to obscure persons and events.
   Essential for the Lincoln scholar and highly recommended for anyone's Civil War shelf.

   (The numerical rating above is an ineradicable default setting within the page. This reviewer does nort employ numerical ratings.)




2. My opinion of Hay's diary is very different then the other reviewer. I found it very hard to read, to understand, and to learn from. For a Lincoln scholar it might be useful, For me, a general history reader, I was very disappointed. The language was often bizzare, superficial, and very small. A great many names but no real people! Just names. Flat,flat,very flat. Hay died in Teddy Roosevelt's administration during the canal project as Sec. of State. He must have had a great deal on the ball to be so useful so long. I see nothing of it is his "Civil War Diary".



3. One reviewer found Hay's diary uninteresting, and that is hardly strange. Most diaries I've read are dull because they are most often jottings of information out of the head of an individual. I, too, would have liked more inside information out of John Hay, but he did not write it, so let's not downgrade the book because we didn't get what we would have liked. Burlingame's editing is top-notch, just what you would expect from a quality historian. My two gripes about the book were undoubtedly caused by the publisher's decision, which I recognize from first-hand experience: 1) Why endnotes instead of footnotes? If all the notes listed were sources, endnotes would be fine, but Burlingame's notes are critical and provide a lot of additional information. Constantly turning back to the endnotes breaks up the reading experience. 2) Burlingame maintained the crossed-out words in Hay's diary by using a strike-through font, which is fine except that the publisher used a strike-through so dark that it is hard to read the words underneath. Nonetheless, this is fine work, and I highly recommend it. If nothing else, you will gain knowledge of the enormous number of people with whom Abraham Lincoln had to deal every day.



4. Nicolay and Hay were basically the White House Chief of Staff and Administrative Aid. Fortunately for those of us who are both history and political junkies it doesn't get any better than this. With Hay we have the nation's most unpopular president pursuing a most unpopular war (one that will claim more American casualties than any other), with a critical press and political opponents galore. There is political intrigue, dirty politics, and presidential personal tragedy. In Lincoln we have a president who imprisoned US citizens without trial and without habeas corpus, we have a president who captured foreign nationals (Confederates) from a British ship and imprisoned them in the US, a president who was soundly and rightfully criticized for suspending personal rights, a president who sent troops to arrest an entire state legislature. In Lincoln we have a president called stupid and a baboon.
   
   Hay's Diary takes us inside the White House in these most troubling of times. One sees close parallels to today. It is hard not to read Hay in the light of the current White House and presidential race. Only the names have changed, the issues are very much the same. I could not recommend a better source to obtain some perspective for the current political season.
   
   John Ellingson

1 comments about Abolitionist Politics and the Coming of the Civil War.

1. In the early 1800s, slavery's values were as widely promoted as buying American cars are in today's world. "Abolitionist Politics and the Coming of the Civil War" is a complete and comprehensive examination of America's early years and its politics regarding slavery - and how a few fledgling activists turned America around and against this mindset, beginning a chain of events that freed an entire people. A story of how even the smallest minority can set events in motion, "Abolitionist Politics and the Coming of the Civil War" is highly recommended for both American history and black studies collections alike.

2 comments about Gunner with Stonewall: Reminiscences of William Thomas Poague (Bison Book).

1. Gunner With Stonewall is a typical and valuable first hand account of life in wartime. Filled with intersting atecdotes and personal details, it is closer in perspective to Henry Kyd Douglas' "I Rode With Stonewall" than Foote's or Catton's histories on the same period. This lends and air of timelessness and similarity with WWII- and Vietnam-era first -hand accounts. Written many years after the fact, the book contains some minor innaccuracies ultimately clarified by the Editor. All in all, considering the dirth of books about Confederate Army Artillery, it is a good read that diserves a place on the historian's bookshelf.



2. Poague reminds me of Porter Alexander in his occasionally acerbic tone and his willingness to tell it like he thinks it is with regards to generals and their foibles. Maybe it's an artillery thing. Also like Alexander, he's refreshingly bloodthirsty -- no Gordon-esque blandishments about chivalry here. His account of the death of Federal Gen. Kearny contrasts interestingly with other accounts I've read, and his description of the surrender at Appomattox is particularly evocative.

1 comments about A Soldier to the Last: Maj. Gen. Joseph Wheeler in Blue and Gray.

1. My favorite story about Wheeler is when he was at the Battle of Las Guasimas, the first major engagement of the Spanish-American War he is rumored to have seen the Spaniards running away and to have yelled, 'Come on, we've got the damn Yankees on the run!'
   
   Even Mr. Longacre has to admit that this is just a rumor and it's isn't known if it's true or not. But it's too good a story to let it die. And it is true that of the six ex-Confederate generals appointed to be general officers by President McKinley, Wheeler is the only one to have seen actual combat.
   
   The bulk of this book is on Wheeler's activities during the Civil war where he began as a Second Lieutenant and worked his way up to Major General (when he was 26 years old). He was active in most of the battles of the west from Shiloh to the final surrender to Sherman in the Carolinas campaign after the defeat at Atlanta.
   
   The war in the West has never received the attention paid to Lee and the battles in the East. And Wheeler has been overshadowed by Morgan and Forrest as cavalry leaders in the West. This book is a welcome addition to the literature.

No comments about Memoirs of General W.T. Sherman, both volumes in a single file.

5 comments about Andrew Jackson: The Course of American Democracy, 1833-1845 (Andrew Jackson).

1. Excellent finish to an excellent 3-volume biography; the first volume took us from Jackson's birth through his tenure as governor of Florida; the second took us from there through the end of his first term as president and his successful bid for re-election. This volume takes us from the beginning of his second term to his death.

   As with both previous volumes, the marvellous thing about this book is that Remini provides the reader with sufficient information that it is possible, with nothing more than the information he provides, to disagree with his evaluation of his subject. Clearly, on balance he is much more taken with Andrew Jackson than I am, although there are a few instances in which I actually think that he is too harsh in his judgement. But the marvellous thing is, he gives me sufficient information to make that judgement, an invaluable characteristic in a biographer.

   Anyone interested in reading a detailed, in-depth biography of the first truly populist president (whether one considers that a good or a bad thing to say about the man says a lot about one's personality) and the president who appointed Roger Taney, the chief justice responsible for the Dred Scott Decision, to his post as Justice of the Supreme Court, needs to read all three volumes of this set.




2. Robert Remini completes his biography of Andrew Jackson in an excellent third volume. This biography is very well written and a pleasure to read. Remini is so well versed on his subject and really makes Jackson come to life as one of the major figures in U.S. History. This is as honest account of an individual that I have ever read and have come away with a new found respect for Andrew Jackson.
   Remini does not shy away from Jacksons many faults nor does he make excuses for them and he also shows how tender and loyal Jackson can be to those that were family and friends. Remini makes the case that Jackson was the most influential person in shaping the Presidency and government to the modern democracy it is today and I am inclined to agree with him. Jackson had certain convictions on government and policy and would not bow under pressure and reshaped the role of the Presidency despite pressure from Congress. I would definitely recommend this biography to everyone interested in Andrew Jackson as well as those interest in the evolution of our government.



3. If you have read my reviews of the first two volumes in this biography you already know my opinion of Remini and of his subject. Suffice it to say that if you are serious about learning about American history these volumes are for you. Not only are they an excellent introduction to many of the political and social issues of the era but they also allow the reader to wrestle with our national proclivity toward uncritical hero worship. Our past leaders were every bit as complex, as flawed and as human as our current crop .... What follows is a small portion of what I have learned from Remini's hard and honest labors.
   Jackson's accomplishments were extraordinary by any standards and some of them are quite ironic. He very much believed in states rights yet he probably did more to strengthen and expand the executive part of the federal government than any President until Franklin Roosevelt. Consider the following (all discussed in Remini's volume):
   1. He was the first President to use the pocket veto. He was the first to use the veto power for nonconstitutional reasons. We are so used to our Presidents using the veto because of policy disagreements with legislation that we forget how much of a shift this was in the balance of power as envisioned by the original generation.
   2. He reformed every department of the federal government and greatly expanded the bureaucracy as a result. He eliminated much of the graft that was rampant at the time and (at least, gave the impression of) greatly democratizing the civil service by making it more of a meritocracy. All this inevitably led to more people working for the government. A lot more people.
   3. Jackson changed the relationship of the various Cabinet members to the President. He was the first to fire a Cabinet member because of a disagreement over policy. Up until then Cabinet officers and ambassadors, because their appointments had to be approved by the Senate, were regarded as being accountable more to Congress than to the President.
   This is only a partial list of the ways that Jackson's Presidency changed the stature of the Executive branch of the government.
   Jackson's ideology (as I see it) comes from him trying to work out the tensions between his state's rights philosophy with his military experience, which taught him the necessity of a clear uncontested chain of command with his love of and trust in the people. I will comment on only one portion of that dynamic. Like so many of our leaders, the tensions in Jackson's ideology led him into conspiracy theories. He believed in and trusted the American people to always make the right decisions (the ones he would have made) and almost always credited any electoral reverses to cabals acting to befuddle and delude the populace.
   As a result, he became one of ablest early advocates of putting a good spin on the issues. Early on in his first term he helped to establish a newspaper that served as the official organ of the administration. Altogether, Jackson was a fascinating and maddening character.
   I find myself greatly in the debt of Remini. Jackson has always repulsed me by his blatant racism and his paternalism. Remini has humanized Jackson quite a bit for me. I am more appreciative of Jackson's great accomplishments and I have learned quite a bit of the politics of the time. I will be reading Remini's book on Van Buren next along with Seller's biography of Polk. One of the ways that I evaluate the work of a historian is by how much they increase my interest in further reading on their subject and on the period in question. By this standard, Remini belongs to my first rank of American historians.



4. The final volume in Robert Remini's definitive biography of Andrew Jackson follows the life of the seventh president from the beginning of his second term through the end of his life. In it, we see many of the things that made Jackson one of our most important presidents despite his significant flaws.

   Prior to Jackson's presidency, the executive office was much weaker. The designers of the Constitution, with their fears of strong central figures, had intended Congress to be the most powerful of the supposedly co-equal branches. Jackson, however, viewed himself as the sole representative of the people - the only person elected by a nation, not a region - and through various measures such as an expansion of the use of the veto, was able to shift the balance of power. Although the following presidents would be weaker, the presidency as an office had been redefined.

   As the book begins, Jackson's second term was beginning and he needed to deal with South Carolina and the Nullification Crisis. Essentially successful with this problem, he also dealt with other issues, including his war with the Bank of the United States and bad relations with France. By many measures, his presidency was a success, but there were a number of negatives as well, in particular his treatment of Indians and his disregard of slavery issues. His appointment of Taney to Chief Justice would eventually lead to the Dred Scott decision. Remini finds more positives than negatives with Jackson, but he doesn't disregard the black marks.

   Probably only Washington was as universally adored in his time as Jackson was, and unlike Washington, Jackson was a true man of the people, a populist who courteously met with rich and poor alike. Even after his retirement, his popularity guaranteed his continued political clout, and few Democrats defied his wishes while he was alive.

   The three volumes in this biography are around 1300 pages (plus notes and indexes), but Remini is such a good writer that this is far from a burdensome read. There may be shorter biographies of Jackson, but there aren't better. Remini knows this era well (he also has written excellent biographies of Clay and Webster) and he brings it to life.




5. Few Americans have won the mythical status enjoyed by Andrew Jackson. Often portrayed, in his day and since, as the champion of the common man, Jackson came to Washington as an outsider, the first President born outside the thirteen original states, indeed the first president born neither in Virginia nor Massachusetts. Throughout Jackson historiography, Jackson via his policy of `rotation' in office has been accused of instituting the spoils system in American politics. This criticism highlights how Whig myths have come to permeate the historical writing on this subject.
   
   Starting with James Parton in 1860, anti-Jackson historians have followed this criticism, blaming Jackson for replacing a supposed merit system with a partisanship that corrupted the civil service for generations. Despite further research since Jackson's time, many historians have uncritically repeated these accusations without examining the actual record of appointments during the presidency unhappily described by some as "The Reign of Andrew Jackson".
   
   There have been essentially four cycles of studies into the life and Presidency of Andrew Jackson. The first cycle began soon after the death of Jackson with the "liberal patrician" or "Whig" school, who were generally unfavourable towards the policy of rotation. Most familiar is James Parton's classic The "Life of Andrew Jackson". So critical of rotation was Parton that he stated "this single feature of his administration would suffice to render it deplorable rather than admirable." Other members of the "Whig" school include Sumner, Schouler and Von Holst, all very critical of Jackson's policy of rotation. Parton's biography was the standard source on the Jacksonian era, until the second cycle represented by the Progressive Historians, such as John Spencer Bassett's "The Life of Andrew Jackson (1911), which cast Jackson in somewhat of a different light. Bassett reduces the amount of blame put on Jackson for rotation by suggesting that his democratic views made him oblivious to unintentional dangers from partisan appointments. However, the Progressives shared with the Whigs the view that Jackson had brought a spoils system to national politics and that its effects were negative.
   
   Historians in the third cycle of Jacksonian studies, of which Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr.'s "The Age of Jackson" (1945) served as a pivotal work, shifted attention away from Jackson himself towards larger forces in his era. Historians of the third cycle, such as Hofstadter and Hammond, debated the effects of class and culture in determining party differences while showing little interest in evaluating Jackson's rotation policy, though tending to criticise it briefly. No biographies of Jackson discussed the policy of rotation in depth during the next thirty years.
   
   The appearance of Robert V. Remini's three-volume biography of Jackson marked the start of the fourth cycle of interpretation. Based on modern scholarship, Remini covers all aspects of Jackson's life and career, demonstrating his contribution to the great developments of nineteenth century America, particularly empire, freedom and democracy. By returning to first hand sources, Remini shows that the policy of rotation in office has been exaggerated and misunderstood. However, having set himself the remarkable task of producing a thorough study of the life and Presidency of Jackson, Remini did not have the scope for a detailed re-interpretation and re-evaluation of rotation. Since Remini's work there have been many scholarly works on Jackson, but none offer an in-depth reassessment of rotation as touched upon by Remini.
   
   Remini states that Jackson has received a disproportionate share of the blame for the spoils system and that there is a need to disprove the Whig myths, which have come to permeate the historical writings of historians over the generations. Remini was not the first to stress the need for such a revision; in fact a similar plea was expressed by J.R. Poinsett in the "Oration on the life and character of Andrew Jackson, delivered July 4, 1845" when he stated about Jackson, "His instinctive love of justice... gave a high tone to his government and exalted the honor of his country. His hatred of corruption rendered his administration pure.... I will content myself with expressing my belief that in future time the impartial historian will justify both his motives and his conduct on this trying occasion.
   
   Remini offers the reader a great insight into the pioneering mind of one of America's greatest Presidents.
   
   
   [The above Review is taken in part from 'Andrew Jackson's policy of 'Rotation in Office' by Alexander Rayden. © Copyright 2005 Alexander Rayden, All Rights Reserved].

2 comments about When the Devil Came Down to Dixie: Ben Butler in New Orleans.

1. I have always been fascinated with General Benjamin Butler both because of the story of his ill fated term as military governor of New Orleans during the Civil War and because of his physical image. The photographs always show someone who seems to be a grotesque characature of a human being rather than a real person, somehow appropriate for a man known as 'the Beast of New Orleans'. This book is significant not only for its detailed account of the conflicts and controversy that surrounded Butler during his time in New Orleans, but also for providing enough complementary material to see him as more than an evil abberation. The author does detail the evidence for Butler's depredations - his thefts, corruptions and overzelous application of lethal force - but also provides ample evidence that he was a complex and sometimes thoughtful person as well. In one case, he condemns a man to be hung because he had pulled down the union flag. The man's wife and children go to Butler to plead for his life. He refuses to stop the hanging but promises to be of whatever assistance he can be in the future. Years later the widow approaches him to say that she has been cheated by her lawyer out of her life savings and that she and her children are in jeapordy. Butler finds her a government job and, at his own expense, sees to the children's education. A very complex 'devil' indeed.

   For those who enjoy new light cast upon old oversimplified history, this book is excellent. Well written and with a lot that is new to say, this book represents a chance to actually learn something new rahter than simply revisiting the old story.




2. So General Benjamin "Beast" Butler summed up his time as military governor of New Orleans. Chester Hearn's book is an examination of Butler's six-month tenure in the Crescent City.
   
   Everyone who knows anything about the Civil War knows something about Butler. A political general from Massachusetts, Butler was cross-eyed, huge, bald, loud, arrogant, stubborn, and crooked as a hound dog's hind leg. He was also remarkably inept as a military leader. His arrogant tenure as commandant of Fortress Monroe came close to pushing Maryland into the Confederacy; he lost one of the initial battles of the war, Big Bethel, largely through extraordinary incompetence; he did absolutely nothing in the capture of New Orleans, but took as much credit for it as he could; he evacuated Baton Rouge when scared by the threat of a(nonexisting) Confederate invading force; and he famously allowed his entire Army of the James to be bottled up at Bermuda Hundred during Grant's overland campaign (where he was probably less bother to Grant than he would've been in the field).
   
   But what Butler's primarily known for are two things: declaring runaway slaves "contrabands of war" and brutally ruling New Orleans. His depredations in that city are remarkable. Along with a crew of trusted scoundrels (including especially his brother Andrew Jackson Butler) equally interested in lining their own pockets, Butler stole everything he could get his hands on. He bought commodities such as sugar and cotton at forced low prices and sold them high in the North; he sold salt to Confederates stationed just across Lake Pontrachain; civilians requesting interviews with the general or travel passes routinely paid out the nose for the privilege; under the two Confiscation Acts, houses with all their possessions were swallowed up; and specie at New Orleans bank tended to disappear. Butler was smart, and although there were numerous complaints and several official inquiries, he was never caught. But it's clear he was on the take. When Butler went to New Orleans in May '62, his personal worth was about $150,000. When he left in December '62, he was worth about $3 million.
   
   In addition to being larcenous, his reign in New Orleans was also brutal. He regularly imprisoned at hard labor civilians who angered him, and he notoriously executed a man who defiantly tore down the Stars and Stripes right after the city was captured (but before it surrendered--a legally important point). Although Butler did go out of his way to feed the city's hungry, his motive seems to have been more hatred for the landed aristocracy than the unlanded poor.
   
   Hearn's book is largely derivative. There's little original research (which is okay; not every book can or should be ground-breaking). But a bit more documentation on how Butler's peers reacted to his larceny, as well as some reflection on the state of affairs during the Civil War that gave men such as Butler almost unlimited power, would've been welcome.

No comments about The Soldier's Pen: Firsthand Impressions of the Civil War.

3 comments about Lincoln's Admiral: The Civil War Campaigns of David Farragut.

1. I read this book when it was first published in 1997 and although I had never heard of Admiral David Farragut I had heard "Damn the torpedoes..." from some where (I'm an Australian!). I found this book to be a very easy to read biography of a very interesting man. I have very limited knowledge of naval matters (I was a grunt) but I thoroughly enjoyed this book. It was enjoyable to read and the battle scenes were vivid and easy to follow. I would recommend this book to anybody who has an interest in the American Civil War.



2. I was not sure whether I wanted to read a biography of Farragut after having read Loyall Farragut's biography of his father, but I enjoyed Duffy's book. He does not blindly glorify Farragut's memory, but clearly shows why David Farragut's long career in the Navy and perceptive intellect made him one of the most effective military leaders during the Civil War. Duffy is also one of the few authors/historians to portray Adm. David Dixon Porter in a negative light by shedding light on Porter's attempts to upstage and undermine Farragut's accomplishments via his connections in Washington.



3. James Duffy's biography on Admiral David Farragut proves to be interesting and easy to read. The book basically summarized Farragut's career without going into great details. The book deals more or less with Farragut's military career with few insights to his personal life. The book gives a pretty clear understanding of Farragut's role in the Civil War and the amazing amount of the time he spent on the Mississippi River after capturing New Orleans. His pet project of taking Mobile had to wait two years. The book was also reflective in revealing his relationship he had with his stepbrother, Admiral David Dixon Porter, another famed Union naval leader. The author believes that Porter was quite jealous of Farragut and tried his utmost to undermined him.
   
   If there was a singular weakness, the book doesn't covered much about Farragut's life during the peace time but then, the subtitle of the book is "Civil War Campaigns of David Farragut" so that where the main focus remains.
   
   Overall, I found this book to be pretty well researched, well written and easy to read. Its easy to introduced this book as a nice introductionary book on the career of Farragut and no doubt, helped put him among the great seamen of our nation's history.