5 comments about The Gettysburg Gospel: The Lincoln Speech That Nobody Knows.

1. Boritt's 'Gettysburg Gospel' is one of the very few Civil War books that I could not get into. Stylistically, this book is way too haphazard and unorganized to be considered one of the best books in the Lincoln cannon. Boritt falls into the trap that Garry Wills fell into in his "Lincoln at Gettysburg." The two authors try to be over-elegant and verbose because their book itself is about one of the greatest triumphs of the English language rather then a singular event. Boritt (and Wills for that matter) would be better to just write in a plain, inelegant fashion without the grossly excessive verbiage which permeates this book. Wills, in all fairness, can get away with it, but the more academic Boritt has a difficult time indeed. For example, Boritt writes early on in describing the dead on the battlefield: "Others even pulled bodies from shallow graves. A weapon is worth a great deal. Who cares who the dead man was? Who was it? Dead." This kind of useless prose brings the momentum of this book down time and time again.
   
   For Civil War enthusiasts themselves, many already knew that Everett went on for a very long time before Lincoln delivered his address. One of the things that surprised me was the lack of analysis of the address itself. That disappointed me because the book was subtitled as: `The Lincoln Speech Nobody Knows." In order to get a fresh analysis that Wills does not offer in his book, the reader will have to turn to the appendix to get the several versions of the address. Overall, more focus and less sentimentality would have made for a leaner, more coherent account of the making of the address and it's meaning through the last 140 years.



2. The Gettysburg Address was delivered by President Abraham Lincoln on November 19, 1863. The battle had been fought in July but now a National Cemetery was to dedicated honoring the Union dead who had died that the United States might live.
   What a day it was ! A beautiful autumn crisp with the promise of a warm sky sailing serenly over the sight of the bloodiest batlle in American history. A day when the renowned orator Edward Everett spoke for over two hours drawing analogies between Gettysburg and those men who died to preserve Athenian democracy. Everett gave a detailed account of the battle emphasizing the legitimacy of the Union effort. He also spoke with insight on the superiority of the federal government to which the individual states pledged their loyalty.
   And then...after the bands and the songs, the prayers and the cheers were silent the sixteenth President of the United States rose to speak. He had a mild form of smallpox; had lost his son Willie to death in the White House and had a son Tad who was ill back home in Washington DC.
   Lincoln spoke his 272 words concluding with his immortal words, "''that the goverment of the people, by the people and for the people shall not perish from the earth."
   Lincoln drew on a lifetime of study to produce this masterpiece. The Declaration of Independence; the oratory of Webster and Clay, Shakespeare and the Bible all played a role in his crafting of the speech. If the Emancipation Proclamation was prose genius then the Gettysburg Address is poetry sublime in its assertion of indivdual freedom and the right of human beings to breathe free air.
   The speech was neglected, for the most part, by contemporary press accounts. Only in the 1880s when the movement to reconcile NOrth and South picked up steam did it take on an importance in the American heart that has never been usurped, The GA inspired black fighters for Civil Rights as the twentieth century led to a cry for racial equality in our nation. Men like Martin Luther King Jr and Nelson Mandela in South Africa were inspired by Lincoln's words.
   Boritt's book is divided into several sections. The first two hundred pages deal with the account of the night and the day Lincoln spent in Gettysburg in 1863. We learn of the horrific battlefield casualties and see closeup the preparations made and the carrying out of the ceremony on November 19th. Other sections deal with the five authentic copies of the Gettysburg Address; the complete text of Edward Everett's two hour oration that day; an extensive bibliography and notes. Professor Boritt also shows us pictures of the drafts as written in longhand by Lincoln.
   The book is also a fascinating look into how the Gettysburg Address achieved mythic fame since it was first uttered on that November day. In a moving final chapter we read the address in the context of a 9-11 obervance of the attack on the World Trade Center.
   As long as our United States lives we all pray that the Gettysburg Address will be there to inspire us to work for equality and justice for all of our citizens regardless of race, religion or political affiliation.
   Boritt is one of the best scholars on the life of Lincoln and the Civil War era. Anyone who teaches the Civil War in the classroom should make use of this outstanding work of scholarship and love.



3. It truly is amazing that so many words and books can be written about a speech that is but 272 words long. Gabor Boritt's book is an enjoyable and easy read on Lincoln's most famous speech.
   Much of the book deals with the immediate aftermath of the terrible Gettysburg battle with the author painting a vivid picture of the terrible scene which must have greeted the eye on July 4th.
   It is interesting that the famous address did not get immediate general approval. Boritt shows that the speech was almost forgotten until the 1880's.
   As with most Lincoln supporters, the author attempts to show that the speech was not written on the train to Gettysburg and that Lincoln gave the speech considerable thought. The truth is no one knows, but a good argument can be made for the proposition that Lincoln must have given it little thought prior to the event. Who in their right mind is going to travel from Washington to Gettysburg and DECIDE to present an address of only 272 words. The words came from the heart and from years of experience and empathy. Just as Martin Luther King's "I have a dream" speech was somewhat spontaneous (although a very similar speech was presented at Cobo Hall, Detroit some weeks previously), there is strong circumstantial evidence that Lincoln put this speech together at short notice.
   I have no idea why the book is sub-titled "The Lincoln Speech that Nobody Knows," but Boritt does provide a number of slightly different versions of the speech in the appendix. Most of the differences are minor to put it mildly. The author's description of how the speech initially got little response but grew to be appreciated over time to be a work of genius is well developed.
   Paradoxically, the most enjoyable section of the book is the full text of Edward Everett's speech which I read fully for the first time. You can appreciate why Everett was seen as a great orator because of his ability to paint pictures with words although his two hour address can hardly be described as uplifting. Almost all of the speech was taken up with a chronological history of the events at Gettysburg (spoken from memory) and the aging orator failed to properly commend and eulogize the thousands who had given their life on the adjacent battlefield.
   The book has copious appendices, bibliography, notes which provide a rich resource for serious students of Lincoln and Gettysburg. Overall, an enjoyable not too studious read on the topic.



4. I found this an interesting, but possibly flawed book.
   
   The history and detail was fascinating, as was the examination (and inclusion!) of Everett's speech, of which I'd heard, but had never read. The description of Gettysburg immediately after the battle, and in the days surrounding the dedication ceremony was truly a window into another era.
   
   However, as the book continued, and the instances of "Good, God fearing Republicans, struggling to save the country" and "Bad, pro-slavery/appeasement-minded Democrats not caring about the Union" mounted, I felt I was reading a political text that was slanted to support the current national situation, and not a dispassionate historical examination of the events of a century and a half gone. Other reviewers have mentioned this occurance as an interetsing coincidence. Even though I'm a Republican, I was jarred by the tone.
   
   As a result, my enjoyment of the book was lessened, as was my trust of the text and the author's use selected references.
   
   An interesting book, but too interpretive for my tastes. Read it, but have a pinch of salt ready.



5. I remember having to memorize The Gettysburg Address in elementary school as part of my history class. This books contains a lot of documents from eye witnesses who were present several days before the dedication through several days after Lincoln's famous speech.
   
   This book is very educational and a few parts gets a little boring, but overall it is worth the read. I believe all school children should be required to memorize and give the speech in class like I had too. Properly educating children on historical American facts are so important today. We have too many liberals trying to re-write our history.

5 comments about Programming and Customizing the PICAXE Microcontroller (McGraw-Hill Programming and Customizing).

1. I'm not a beginner, I'm not a pro.. I bought this book based on other peoples views, within an online technical forum. They have more experience than me. I have bought many books with an expectation that it was going to be tailor made for me.. i got it wrong often. This will be a great reference book when i get on further on in my studies of microcontrollers and the author clearly knows what he's talking about... but i don't. I got to page 22 and had to go back. I thought it was a bit heavy going. Now i know questions may be raised as to my ability to grasp some concepts, but, as a teacher in a particular subject, i beleive that in any subject that includes a great deal of practical work, you must take baby steps. The author gave examples of each part of the text he was explaining, but it was just more words to get into your head. You know when you read something technical - then you pause for a few seconds and try to digest it...The people who would be interested in this book would probably have some of the hardware already in their possesion and up and running, or at least some experience, to a degree and, as i said earlier, this book will be a great reference manual, but for me, i would have prefferd, "go to your text editor and type in this code" to see what actually happens, right from the start. To sumarise, this is a very good book to take you as far as you would like to go with this type of microcontroller, and the price ( particularly from Amazon, (UK) £8.00GBP less than downtown ) is just fantastic for something that you will use for a long time to come. This review may sound contradictory, but i have never written a review before so, [David Lincoln] dont be too harsh on me !! I look forward to any other comments on my review, or any other reviews.



2. I am new to the PICAXE so I was looking for all the information I could find. The [...] website has quite a bit but I felt like I needed more. I saw the book advertised with glowing reviews and ordered a copy at once. When the book came, I had gotten pretty familiar with the information on the web site and was looking for something more in depth. After looking at the book for quite some time, I still haven't found anything of use that can't be gotten from the web site. Actually, whenever I need information, I go to the web site instead of loking at the book. The picaxe user forum is also helpful. There may soon be other books on the PICAXE and I hope the authors do a better job than was done here.



3. This is probably a good stating place for those who have no electronic or programing experince. I have given this book only a 3 star because most of the material is very basic. One dispointment was the index subject and page number did not match several subjects that I use the index to find. I now use the picaxe web site, it has good examples and is current and up to date with the latest part numbers. I must add that with the web site you have to print out the manual, i.e the reason for buying the book. In electronic everything gets dated pretty fast, as of now there are several new picaxe devices that are not in the book. As with most techincal book it will be good for some, fair for other, and of little value for a few.



4. This book takes you from a complete beginner to an intermediate user of the picaxe. it has projects and explains them very well. I recommend it highly



5. I got worried when the FIRST thing I looked up in the index of this book was BASIC - no mention of the language! The SECOND thing I looked for was a BASIC command reference - not there!!! (So I guess this means I'm going to have to print out the 178 pages of the PDF file on my printer and try to get them bound.)
   
   I'm really not joking when I say that the next thing I looked up was the pinouts for the PICAXE-18X. I wanted to know where the SCL and SCA pins were on an 18X chip. No mention of either in the index so I decided to look up the pinouts for the chip. I found the chip listed on page 335 but unfortunately it was wrong - the chip shown in Figure A-16 was actually a 24-pin chip and bore no relation to the one I was looking for.
   
   These comments are made after just about 10 minutes of owning the book so I'm worried about what I'm going to find next!
   
   My advice is buy with caution. Try to get to see the book before you pay for it and then decide. I'm sure there's lots of things people will find useful contained within this volume but in my own case it as failed me so far.
   
   EXTRA NOTES
   Now that I have had a chance to get to grips with the book I can see that it does have its uses. I think the problem is that it is not for the beginner but it's useful if you can get over the initial step of learning the BASIC commands. Having said that a lot of time is dedicated to some very basic circuits - space which would have been better used for that command reference I wanted at the beginning. In the end I did print it out from the PDF file!
   
   There are quite a few mistakes in the book so be prepared for that but if you're into PICAXE then this is a book you should get.

5 comments about The Adoption Resource Book, 4th edition: 4th Edition.

1. For all those touched by adoption. Dispels the myths.
   I also recommend:
   For Late Discovery Adoptees: "Adoption Forum" by Kasey Hamner
   For anyone touched or interested in a true-life story: "Whose Child?" by Kasey Hamner
   "Primal Wound" by Nancy Verrier



2. This book will forever be intimately associated with the happiest and most important part of my life.



3. Wow, this book is packed with information! It is an excellent starting point for anyone considering adopting.



4. This is one of the books that you can say "Don't judge it by its cover". When you see it at first you could say "This is only for couples" but you will get wrong. It's excellent for couple adoptive parent like for single adoptive parent. It's very detailed, it even mention topics that not many adoption book covers. I highly recommend this to anyone that is looking for adoption either you are single or not.



5. This book provides a solid overview of the adoption process. However, it was written a decade ago, and much of the information is now out-of-date. For people considering international adoption, I'd recommend Dawn Davenport's book, The Complete Book of International Adoption. The two books are similar in content, but Davenport's is current. The Gilman book is still worthwhile, but it wouldn't be my first choice.

5 comments about Lincoln and Chief Justice Taney: Slavery, Secession, and the President's War Powers.

1. Lincoln and Chief Justice Taney was a quick read (about 280 pages), which did not shed much new light on Lincoln or his presidency. The parts on Taney were interesting when you came across them, but the book itself was not balanced. Taney comes across as a "great" and fair Chief Justice untill the Dred Scott decision in 1857, and then he becomes blinded by his 'State's Rights' philosophy. This bias affects most of his post-Dred Scott rulings, and diminishes Taney's status as a potentially great Chief Justice. The book is interesting in that it really details just how far Lincoln stretched his interpretation of the Constitution during the Civil War, but the battles between Taney and Lincoln are limmitted. This book is interesting and good, but not great.



2. Actually, more than enough has now been written about this book in the reviews above. One wishes there had been a more detailed analysis of Taney's pre-Lincoln opinions, a more detailed analysis of his anti-Presidential opinions, and a little less repetition of the well-trod facts of Lincoln's life. But nothwithstanding all this, it was a quick paced easily readable way to become re-acquainted with this too often ignored clash over executive power. And it provides much fodder for discussion of how W is using executive power in our time.....



3. James Simon has been making a career out of writing great books that profile legal/political controversies. He has also written one about the Jefferson/Marshall, and then the Black/Frankfurter, fights. But not to worry. They are entertaining, all; this one is no exception.
   
   The primary concern of this book is to explore the differing visions - on practically all issues - between then president elect Lincoln and then Supreme Court Chief Justice Taney. Lincoln, from Illinois, was a moderate republican who believed in gradual emancipation of slavery and - most importantly here - sweeping presidential war powers combined with the illegality of Southern seccession. Taney, by contrast, was a quiet Baltimorean and democrat who believed in states rights, fidelity to (a more narrow view of the) Constitution, even during times of war, and the states rights to choose whether to condone slavery. Needless to say for those who know even the most cursory history - Lincoln won.
   
   While Simon does treat Taney with a tiny bit of hkostility, he is very careful to give him credit when credit is due. One of the main focuses of the book - the rightfully infamous decision in Dred Scott v Sandford, which saw Taney proclaim that Scott, a black man, could not bring a suit as he was not legally a person - is hard to justify by even the most generous legal mind. And Simon rightfully and flatly treats it to a stinging critique. This, as with several other Tany zingers.
   
   But SImon is also quick to point out that Taney wss first and foremost concerned with civil liberties during war time, against the president's sometimes Orwellian actions, such as his acts to shut down newspapers that did not sympathize with the Union, or his actions - yes, it is true - to arrest a priest who did not pray for the Union. When these are looked at by Simon, Taney comes out with at least some dignity.
   
   This book covers, first, both men's early years before going into the pre-civil war acts like Dred Scott and follows the trajectory of the entire civil war, highlighting the president's actions therein and Taney's (often ignored) responses to them. Legalese - have no fear - is kept to a minimum, and, in fact, the entire book reads like a historical thriller with a bit of courtroom drama.
   
   On a final note, I find this book prescient for today's times, becasue many of the debates that Taney and Lincoln had are debates we ourselves are having in the US today. Whether or not military tributnals can or should supplant judicial courts, whether habeas corpus can be suspended in war time, what it even means to bve at war (the debate then was whether or not you can be at war with your own country men, today it is whether you can be at war with a group not a state). Finally, there is whether the president's war powers give the president virtually unlimited authority to ignore other constitutional provisions. Prescient indeed!
   
   Anyhow, this is a good read for anyone interested in an in-depth study of the Civil WAr period or the legal issues rife therein.



4. It should be widely known that during the greatest crisis that has faced the US, the Civil War, Lincoln suspended the rights of habeas corpus (trial by jury) and essentially bent the Constitution in order to save the Union. In James Simon's book "Lincoln and Chief Justice Taney: Slavery, Secession, and the President's War Powers" he gives us a fairly balanced approach in examining both sides of the issues facing the President and the Supreme Court as it relates to the Constitution and civil liberties. As a law professor Simon examines Justice Taney's rulings and Lincoln's position on civil matters that were affecting the Nation. His book shows how much of an uphill battle Justice Taney had to face when trying to fight the challenges to individual liberties. As the inevitable war approached, Lincoln didn't wait for Congress to return to session. He did all in his power to block any additional states from turning to help the Confederacy. This was especially true in Maryland Justice Taney's home state. Lincoln took the broad approach to Constitutional matters believing that he knew what the Founding Fathers had constitutionally desired for the Nation. Justice Taney maintained a more narrow Jeffersonian state's view. Simon relates Taney's early views expressed in a banking opinion while serving as Andrew Jackson's Attorney General. Reflecting Taney's words Andrew Jackson's states, "The opinion of the Supreme Court Judges has no more authority over Congress than the opinion of congress has over the Judges, and on that point the President is independent of both" Jackson wrote. "The authority of the Supreme Court must not, therefore, be permitted to control Congress or the Executive when acting in their legislative capacities, but to have only such influence as the force of their reasoning may deserve." As Chief Justice during the Lincoln administration, Taney found himself greatly challenged to maintain this opinion. Simon covers the infamous "Dred Scott vs Sanford" opinion that haunted Taney and how it became a catalyst to move Lincoln forward and into the Presidency. Both Taney and Lincoln had respect for the rule of law. They both desired peace. Taney was willing to allow the states to peaceable leave the Union in order to prevent civil war. Simon reveals that Lincoln's goal was to repair the rupture to the constitutional government established by the framers even if that meant civil war.
   
   This is an important read in helping to understand the extraordinary powers assumed by the executive, with the consent of Congress, in times of emergencies and how when the emergency passes should be yielded up. In the epilogue Simon goes over several later Presidents and their use of war powers. He explains how Congress is the best check on the growing assumptions of Presidential war powers. The Supreme Court has been very reluctant to curb the president's powers especially when the Nation's security is at risk.
   
   Simon revealed how much Lincoln "appreciated that the strength of the Union lay not in the force of arms but in the liberties that were guaranteed by the open, and sometimes heated, exchange of ideas"..."He didn't use this authority to trample on the civil liberties that the writ of habeas corpus was meant to protect". Had Lincoln imprisoned and kept imprisoned anyone just because they were unpopular would have meant the failure of the constitution as well as the failure of civilization and hello totalitarianism. Today as we face issue with regards to our own personal liberties, it is important to stay vigilant so that our rights aren't abused beyond the constitutional law. Simon lays open two legal minds in a time of tremendous pressure. Well worth the read to better understand this critical crossroad in US history.



5. This is quite a thin book, but with an engaging writing style. It seems to glass over why Taney made such a seemingly radical decision and why he was able to get 6 others to affirm it. Little treatment of his relationshiop with the Catholic church or even what he thought of blacks as individuals.
   Rather jarring discussion of George W. Bush and Rumsfeld, where he takes the predictable liberal positions, while excusing Lincolns' abuse of arresting a sitting Ohio congressman. Not one word about controversy of whether Taney had been targeted for arrest by Abraham Lincoln.
   
   This book whets your appetite for more and is good for someone who doesn't have the time to read a more detailed study.

3 comments about Lincoln Reconsidered: Essays on the Civil War Era.

1. Lincoln Reconsidered is a collection of provactive essays that probe the multiple depths of Abraham Lincoln--life and mythology. He paints Lincoln's portrait onto the background of the sectional conflict that led to the Civil War. Originally published about 1961, Donald's stories remain fresh and relevant. In fact the reader will encounter the thesis and outline for his recent prize-winning biography of Lincoln. I first encoutered LR in 1962 when I taught Advanced Placement American History and assigned portions of the book to my students. They loved it; you will. Donald is a superlative historian and stylist. Listen to these chapter headings: Getting Right With Lincoln, Reconsideration of Abolitionists, Herndon and Mrs. Lincoln, Folklore Lincoln, An Excess of Democracy. Readers of Donald's Lincoln will want to have this as a companion reference piece. It's rare for an historian's essays to experience such a rich and extended publishing history. Here's a quote from my faded copy of LR, a touch of wisdom for our parlous times: "...Lincoln knew that there were limits rational human activity, and that there was no virtue in irritably seeking to perform the impossible. As President, he could only do his best to handle problems as they arose and have a patient trusdt that popular support for his solutions would be forthcoming. But the ultimate decision was beyond his, or any man's, control. 'Now at the end of three years struggle,' he said, 'the nation's condition is not what either party, or any man, devised, or expected. God alone can claim it.'" Page after page runs like this, and virtually every theme connected to the Civil War gets enough discussion to stimulate and edify.



2. Donald starts off his book as an iconoclast, intent on reversing the apotheosis of Lincoln. Lincoln was not, he asserts, the god among us that many ardent admirers believe. He gives examples of this uncritical adulation and states that Lincoln has been claimed by Mormons, vegetarians, and other disparate groups anxious to claim a popular figure as their own.

   But, as it turns out, Donald's iconoclasm is a bit false. He reexamines Lincoln's more controversial points, and casts his verdict with the purveyors of the Lincoln legend. Did Lincoln imprison thousands of people without charges or trial? He did, but they deserved it. Did Lincoln destroy the Constitution by starting a war without the approval of Congress? Yes, but he had to abrogate the Constitution in order to save it.

   Donald starts out bravely but in the end, cops out in favor of sentimental Lincolnism. I thought it a bit disappointing.




3. "Lincoln Reconsidered" by David Donald ©1961
   
   History has always been an interest for me. This takes a bit of time and expands on it very nicely. It starts out with a nice introdution about Lincoln and his times, the people he knew and worked with, then goes onto the politics and war. It had some anecdotes that you never see anywhere else. It turns out that Linoln was not a rabid emancipationist, but a pratical president who did things as needed to be done. I wondered before why he only freed the slaves in the states in rebellion: it was because he did not want to alienate the slaveholders in Kentucky and Maryland. I am still mystified as to the reason for the war of northern aggression: slavery does not seem to be the all inclusive answer that mythology makes it out to be, and this book shows some altenative reasons, but does not take a stand, after it is only a collection of essays.

5 comments about Abraham Lincoln: Redeemer President (Library of Religious Biography).

1. Eerdmans should stick to theological tomes, rather than embarassing themselves with yet another propaganda piece for the Yankee cause. Guelzo fails to mention how Lincoln trampled upon the Constitution (Illegal arrests, Intimidation of duly elected leaders (e.g. Maryland State Legislature), and making war upon peaceful states which legally withdrew from the voluntary Union). A Government for the people, by the people vanished [Jeffersonian Constitutional Republic replaced with Consolidated Absolutism] with Lincoln's insistence that the Federal government existed before the States. The right of secession in America, beginning with the Declaration of Independence, was taught for decades until Sen. Sumner thundered from the Senate floor that this was a perpetual Union (Lincoln decided to carry this torch at the expense of 600,000 innocents). Lincoln's Emancipation proclamation was none other than a war measure (slaves were being used to build the capital and slaves were only declared free in Confederate held territory)encouraging slaves to revolt: this did not happen. Guelzo also fails to mention that slavery in the South was dying out and that roughly 10% of her people ever owned slaves. Guelzo failed to point out that the Emancipation Proclamation was illegal since it would have to take a Constitutional amendment to change the Constitution. Furthermore, his book fails to point out that the Emancipation had no jurisdiction in the Confederate States of America since the Southern states were no longer a member of the Union. I'm amazed at how people continue to admire a man who waged war on people who decided to follow in the footsteps of their fathers: Revolutionary War Heroes. The South was right, and the Northern propaganda machine is still filling the public mind with lies. If Abraham Lincoln embodies what a Christian is, then I'm not one, and evangelicals fascination with a man who was not converted until after Gettyburg is dangerous. Furthermore, I have no respect for a man who waged war on my native state: North Carolina.



2. Like a typical biography, Redeemer President goes through its subject's life. But unlike most biographies, Redeemer President centers on the maturation of its subject's thinking. Guelzo shows how some of Lincoln's most famous ideas, such as his reliance on "the proposition that all men are created equal," was part of Whig orthodoxy. To trace Lincoln's development takes nothing away from his genius, of course.

   This was one of the most enjoyable biographies I have read on Lincoln. One might begin with Oates' With Malice Toward None for Lincoln's life as a great story. Then go to Donald's Lincoln for a more modern biography -- lots and lots of facts, but with little attempt to see Lincoln as a product of his own time. Both are very well written, but I prefer Guelzo's over either of them.

   If you like Guelzo's book on Lincoln's thought, you'll like A New Birth of Freedom by Harry V. Jaffa, which Guelzo calls "the greatest book on Lincoln's politics for another generation."




3. Biographies of Abraham Lincoln have tended to fall into two broad categories. The first category consists of biographies of the "subjective" Lincoln. These biographies are based largely on the many anecdotes and stories people told about Lincoln's life, typically during the early years in Illinois and concentrate on trying to explore Lincoln as a man (He remains an enigma.)The second category of Lincoln biography is the political. This biography focuses on Lincoln's public actions, typically during or shortly before his Presidency and draws on the lengthy public record available during the Civil War years. This type of biographical approach tends to give short shrift to the personal approach.

   In his "Abraham Lincoln, Redeemer President" Allen Guelzo points out these two approaches to Lincoln studies (p.472) and says that his book is an attempt to combine the personal and public approaches to Lincoln. Professor Guelzo, Dean of Templeton Honors Colledge and Professor of History at Eastern Universtiy, writes a primarily intellectual biography; but he tries to explore the degree to which Lincoln's thought formed his political actions.

   Professor Guelzo devotes a great deal of attention to establishing Lincoln's political identity as a whig -- an admirer of both Henry Clay and Daniel Webster. From his early days in public life, Lincoln was interested in promoting economic opportunity by encouraging the free market. He supported ambitious programs of public works and public education, to develop transportation infrastructure, (canals, roads, and railroads) and to promote the growth of industry and of a middle class. The whig approach emphasized public virtue, public morality, the value of hard work, and a unified United States. Guelzo effectively contrasts Lincoln's Whiggish beliefs with the agrarian beliefs of the Jefferson-Jacksonian democrats with their commitment to a nation of agrarian, self-sufficient yeomen and farmers. (Lincoln's father was such a yeoman, and Lincoln wanted none of it for himself.)

   Professor Guelzo traces the beginnings of Lincoln's opposition to the expansion of slavery, in the early 1850's. to his desire to promote the development of upwardly mobile capitalist workers. He tended to see agrarianism as slavery slightly disguised. Lincoln never lost his whig commitments, according to Professor Guelzo, even after the party disbanded and Lincoln became a leader of the Republican party.

   Professor Guelzo also studies the nature of Lincoln's religious beliefs and the importance Lincoln gave to religous questions. As is the case with Lincoln's economic rebellion against his father, Professor Guelzo finds the beginnings of Lincoln's religious thought in a youthful rebellion against the Calvinism and predestinarian beliefs of his father. Lincoln found he could not believe in the revealed God of the Bible, although he knew the Bible well. He could not accept the doctrine of predestination, but he came close to it in a secular way. During most of his life, Lincoln was a determinist who believed that people had little independent choice in what they did but acted in response to outside factors which they did not control.

   According to Professor Guelzo, Lincoln also tended towards the englightenment of John Locke and towards the utilitarianism of Mill and Bentham. His politics and Presidency, of course, have distincly pragmatic characters. Throughout his life, Lincoln remained outside the fold of organized religion.

   According to Professor Guelzo, Lincoln's thought developed as Lincoln confronted at deepening levels the difficulty of the Civil War. The beginning of this development was the 1858 Lincoln-Douglas debates where Lincoln vigourously attacked the morality of holding slaves. Lincoln's thoughts on providence, for Professor Guelzo, were instrumental in Lincoln's decision to issue the Emancipation Proclamation. Lincoln told his cabinet he had made a promise "to his maker" to issue the Proclamation and that he could not do otherwise. (pp 341-42.) Guelzo continues his treatment of providential themes in Lincoln with his discussion of the Gettysburg Address and the Second Inaugural Address.

   There is also a great deal in the book that discusses Lincoln's handling of the War, the border states, his generals, and the Army. Professor Guelzo's intellectual and religous themes sometimes get lost in these discussions, and we are reminded that Lincoln was a pragmatist, a leader and a consummate politician.

   The picture of Lincoln's religiosity that emerges from Professor Guelzo's study has a distinctly modern flavor. (Professor Guelzo sees it as high Victorian.) Lincoln was a person who sought religous belief but could not find his way to an organized religion of his day. He was not, in his mid and late life, content simply with materialism and skepticism but rather developed his own religious thought based upon a rather loosely defined notion of providence and redemption. As personal as his thought was, it helped shape our nation. Lincoln's life, as Professor Guelzo presents it, seems to be a paradigm of many people today who reject organized religion in favor of a search for what many call spirituality.

   On a political level, Guelzo's account of Lincoln stresses that the United States is and has become a unified Nation and that Americans should see themselves, for all their diversity and differences as part of a unified people. I also see the book as a reminder of the value of hard work and economic effort.

   Professor Guelzo has written a thoughtful, provocative study of Lincoln the man, the thinker, and the President.




4. A breath-taking account of the life of one of America's greatest leaders. Lincoln's though and personality are an inspiration and a challenge to any thoughtful person. This book inspired me to a greater study of American history.



5. This is fine biography traces Lincoln's philosphical and theological development and in so doing helps us understand the secret to Lincoln's greatness, which was his ability to make sense of the Civil War. If you ever wondered where the Gettysburg Address and Lincoln's Second Innaugral came from, this book will show you. This remains one the most interesting and compelling biographies I have ever read.
   
   Raymond R. Roberts Ph.D.

1 comments about Abe Lincoln Grows Up.

1. If you enjoy history and want a clean read that will keep you hooked cover to cover than this is the book for you! I found this children's book a fun read that would be great for adults and kids alike if they are trying to rekindle their innocent, free-spirit days as a child! It takes you from Abe's youth to his adolescent and the history of his aduldhood. What a great read!

5 comments about Sorrow's Anthem (Lincoln Perry).

1. we have seen this book before.
   
   Koryta is a fresh new voice in crime fiction and I do not want to give away the plot here but......
   
   One of the authors biggest influences (in his own words on his website) is Dennis Lehane. The but I refer to above is this book which is a great fun read is very similar yet a little less dark then Lehane's second novel Darkness Take My Hand.
   
   Similar in that new crimes are somehow linked to past crimes...similar in that a tavern owner plays a big role in the story. I felt at times that this was a little too derivative of the Lehane book.
   
   However, taken as a standalone book it is a highly entertaining read and Koryta is now 2 for 2. Perry and Pritchard are an engaging partnership and the contrast between the two detectives makes for good reading. I also like the developing relationship between Perry and Amy a local reporter.
   
   I eagerly await this young authors third novel.



2. The author's debut novel, 'Tonight I Said Goodbye,' is an astonishingly good first novel for anyone, but is particularly impressive in light of the author's young age. Then came 'Sorrow's Anthem.' Sophomore follow-ups can make or break a series, and fortunately for mystery readers Koryta doesn't strike a false note anywhere in this second book. The man is the genuine article, a writer of clean, crisp prose who can deliver a tightly plotted tale of mystery and action. Main character Lincoln Perry is further developed and is getting more interesting. Koryta does for Cleveland what Crais and Connelly do for LA, i.e. makes the place a memorable and image-laden backdrop for the story. I'm heading off to my local bookdealer tomorrow to pick up the next book in this series. I can't wait!



3. I've read both Tonight I Said Goodbye and Sorrow's Anthem and plan on buying a Welcome Grave. As in his first book, if you didn't know the author's age, you would think it written by a seasoned author. I know much is made of Michael Koryta's age, but talent at this young age just blows me away. I get the feel occasionally of Lawrence Block's Matthew Scudder, but L.P. and Joe stand on their own.



4. Sorry, but I do not agree with the other reviews. This book reads like and old detective novel. Totally boring. Macho character doing the impossible.
   I was so bored with it I almost did not finish the book. Unusual for me as I read constantly. Hope this review saves someone the purchase price.



5. P.I. Lincoln Perry is involved in a case which is very near to him when his boyhood friend,Ed is killed in a supposed car accident which involved being run over and then backed up upon by two policemen. Lincoln and his partner, Joe Pritchard, become entangled in a story of local corruption and stand over tactics, by a neighbourhood thug who intends to own the surrounding district and everyone in it. When Lincoln was a young cop, he saw his friend being corrupted by this thug and was personally involved in getting him jailed to break the ties with organised crime. Locals still hold a grudge against Lincoln for his part in Ed's jailing, not knowing the motive behind it, and not knowing that Lincoln was determined to prevent his friend from getting in any deeper with the gangs. It's a fine second novel by Michael Koryta and I look forward to more of his work.

5 comments about Red Victory: A History Of The Russian Civil War, 1918-1921.

1. This is a great look at a bloody moment in Russian history. Fascinating, exciting, and well written, this is how hisotry should be written.



2. this book just doesnt cut it as professional history. It is aimed too much toward general laymen interest of the public. A topic as horrific as the Russian Civil War cannot be dealt with in such a conventional manner. Lincoln tells us what happened as opposed to why. The Whites get almost no attention and most of the work focuses on the Reds. This book is divided into sections 1918, 1919, 1920 ect... but there is almost no chronological order to the work and Lincoln jumps from the October Revolution to Cheka atrocities with no sense of transition. The White administration of territories and the White military unitis along with their regimental level commanders receive not attention at all. This book gives the impression that all Whites were nothing but a motley collection of disgrunteled front commanders from the German war, muderous rascists, and drug addicted psychotics. They were no saints but Trotsky and Lenin were just as bad...if not worse. The book is over long and actually gives more importance Stalin's terror in the late 30s then it does on the apocolyptic war at the front in 1919. The section on the Kronstad uprising should have been cut out altogeather and more focus should have been given to the Tambov peasant rising. Stick with Mawdsley's more academic and convincing work on this terrible tragedy.



3. Lincoln very engagingly takes the reader into the private memoirs of hundreds of principal characters, into the thinking of Lenin and Trotsky and Stalin, and into the changing and complex fabric of Russian life during its Civil War. Every page breathes the idea "revolution" as the cure-all in the Reds' minds for every ill in Russian society, while the Whites seem more bent on democracy or a dictatorship (like the tsarist days), so long as there was some kind of order, during a period when "corruption" was their own festering and ultimately destructive cancer. Politics, the maker of strange bedfellows, and a background as broad and as varied as Russia itself, make for key components in this fascinating examination of political theory and efforts at self-government on the heels of the First World War.



4. This is an immensely informative and enjoyable book. Lincoln is among the better narrative historians although he does interject some analyses as well. The book Red Victory is not only about the Russian Civil War but about the almost insurmountable obstacles...political, economic, and military...faced by Lenin and the Bolsheviks after their seizure of power. The Russian Civil War was a confusing chaotic affair with numerous factions and personalities but Lincoln does a commendable job sorting out the details in a comprehensible manner. As he implies in his text, there are few geunuine heroes in this conflict as each side practiced attrocities as brutal as any in modern day civil wars. The one weakness is more detail should have been provided concerning the military aspects of the actual battles. Otherwise highly recommended.



5. "No nation has ever set side the principles that triumphed in its civil war," writes historian Bruce Lincoln, in words that perhaps were being outpaced by events when this book was published in 1990. On the other hand, the revolution of the Soviet empire may require a civil war as much as the revolution of the tsarist empire did. (2006 update: jury still out on that one)
   Civil war was a surprise to the idealists who turned their backs on the stupid carnage of the war with Germany and the stupid tsar. They recalled 1917 as a year of soaring hope.
   At least in Moscow and Petrograd; life was grim enough in the countryside, as always.
   The civil war did not have to be fought as a class war, perhaps. That was a conscious decision of the Bolsheviks. For the common people, that decision was disastrous. "As the Reds and Whites fought their first battles in the spring of 1918, neither thought simply of victory or defeat. Each planned the other's annihilation," writes Lincoln, who has written seven other books about Russia.
   Annihilation was the fate of ordinary Russians and the subject peoples of the empire. "The tsar had been overthrown and the Civil War won," Lincoln writes, "but the Bolsheviks' domestic security forces continued to be larger than any their imperial predecessors had ever possessed. So did their bureaucracy. In town and country, the living standard of Russia's masses remained far below what it had been in 1917. The general death rate had doubled, and that grim statistic did not take into account some seven million men, women and children who had died from malnutrition and epidemics since the Bolsheviks had taken power."
   The nearly incredible scope of the Revolution and the Civil War has seldom been presented to Americans in a solid, popular history, so "Red Victory" was timely as the Second Revolution was under way in 1990. Lincoln's style has much in common with that of Page Smith in his "People's History of the United States."

1 comments about Coming through the Fire: Surviving Race and Place in America.

1. Eric Lincoln's text is a critical evaluation of racism in America, how began and what it is today. Lincoln takes us into his world; the world of the African American.

   The journey begins in the early part of this century; in Alabama, and focuses us in the tiny town of Athens; not a bad place to grow-up, unless you're Black. Lincoln's writing illuminates the ugly prejudice behavior of whites towards (and, as Lincoln notes, the prejudice of Blacks towards "white trash") Blacks that was predominated the South during the first half of this century. He reports his sobering findings that America was and still is split into two societies:white and Black, separate and unequal. After driving this point home, Eric takes you through the changes, notes improvements, but proclaims that America remains caught in racism and class conflict.

   In an unusual twist regarding blacks and Jews, C. Eric Lincoln does a admirable job showing a symbiotic relationship between the two maligned groups. To Eric the Jews were distant cousins in the fight against racism; cousins with deep financial pockets, legal expertise and limited participation that undergirded the Civil Rights Crusades. He sees the relationship as two minorities trying to gain parity in an intolerant closed-minded society.

   Lincoln's call for blacks to reaffirm, (or even regain), their identity as Africans displaced in America strikes me as a rewarming of Malcom X's ideology. Though Lincoln stays short of Malcom X's call for a return to Africa, I feel that Lincoln has failed to realize that blacks in America are American and a vital part of it pluralism.

   C. Eric Lincoln ends his text in a diatribe of statements, that he fails to back up with either facts or incidences of the massive injustice he reports. For example, he states that the "national focus is on the wanton elimination of the African America Male from meaningful participation in the common ventures of American Life".

   The national focus? Lincoln goes on a tirade against the incarceration of "black men" at a "unconscionable rate" as if they have not broken laws, caused injury or done the crime. He makes no comment on the victims of the lawless; black or white; he just waves the flag of injustice and racism. The destructiveness of self-interest that he writes about is also found in the arena of black-interest.

   Lincoln insists that America remembers that the African minority have had their lives disrupted, their national integrity as African impugned, their culture degraded, their politics corrupted and their freedoms commandeered, taken away or sold off by the white establishment. He goes on to say that too little is being asked, said or done to allay the journey from the "harsh, inflexible conventions" of the past. He states that America, especially white America, is "still in the business of niger making." He then closes with a "No-Fault Reconciliation", whereby we must get on with the task of building the dream, the dream that makes us all American. We must prepare for a new world, a new society that allows us to trust and support each other. We are all in need of God and each other. Lincoln reaches the end of his manuscript and says, "Hey, I am a Professor at Duke University and I've got to end this book on a hopeful text, not the ranting, radical diatribe that I started with, so he comes up with his "no-fault reconciliation".

   Lincoln has done extremely well pointing out both the history and problems of racism in America. His insight into the difficulties then and now for a Black person to cross "the color line" is extremely useful.

   However, he fails to come up with any solutions to how we can work collectively to bring change into our system and culture. He lacks answers for the pressing problems.

   To say the answer is no-fault reconciliation leaves me flat. I also found him critical and short changing the black and white church. For Lincoln religion, (IE Christianity for the most part), was more of the problem that the solution. He felt that the Black church and Black preacher kept the system in place and tended to support the oppression (pg67). I wondered where he would have put the Black minister in his triad of "Good, Bad, and Smart Nigers".

   I felt that the few paragraphs that he gave to Christianity were inadequate, considering the role that the Black and White church played in abolishing slavery and in the civil rights movement.