Customer Reviews:
Chittums predictions are coming true.......2007-03-26
One look at what's happening with our porous southwestern border, the throng of illegals streaming across it, and our ineffectual government's refusal to seal and protect it makes this important analysis a must read for those who know the score concerning the looming national disaster that the evening news refuses to cover.
Very Good Book.......2007-02-26
Chittum talks about phases of Civil War II: 1. Tribalization, or the undermining of the concept of citizenship. 2. The creeping loss of democracy to private, governmental institutions and international bodies. 3. Gradually falling wages. 4. The slow decay of infrastructure in our cities and the abandonment by Americans and their replacement by minorities wedded to welfare and affirmative action. 5. Growing legal and illegal immigration to transform America into a typical Third World country. 6. Massive drive for gun control to cripple military potential from the working class. 7. Cooperation of the mass media to dumb down the population.
Near the end of the book he makes projections that you can see happening right now:
1.Shrinking hourly wage. 2. More immigrants than Americans. 3. Foreigners hold most Federal Debt. 4. Twenty million Third World slums on our borders known as `colonias'. 5. Manufacturing jobs moved out of the USA making it impossible for us to make or sell anything to the world. 6. Republican and Democratic politicians refusing to deal with the immigration crisis. Worse, both parties aid and abet it. 7. Growing power of advocates of Aztlan or the reconquest of California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas by Mexico.
Buy This Book. Your Life May Depend Upon It........2007-02-01
I moved cross country because of this book. I spent months doing my own research, trying to refute the claims by this author and couldn't. Multicultural nations are filled with animosity, fear, distrust and ultimately do not survive. Even the liberal Harvard researcher Robert Putnam (author of "Bowling Alone") reluctantly admitted that people "hunker down" in diverse neighborhoods and don't trust either people who look like them and amazingly, people who do look like them. According to Putnam, Los Angeles had the lowest levels of trust of any city, while Chittum stated that Los Angeles would be ground zero for the coming civil war. Putnam was so distressed by his findings that he said "we must create a new us." Only an intellectual could come up with something so foolish.
The best part of the book is that he provides a geographical map of where the new nations are likely to be. He even maps out the white enclave areas in Texas, Georgia etc. and shows you the lack of viability and logistical problems of remaining in these spots.
The checklist will make a believer out of you. Some of these trends were somewhat apparent in 1996, but the vast majority were not. This man either had a crystal ball, or he knows what he's talking about. I gladly paid over $50 for this book, but now you can buy it for much less, so what are you waiting for? I literally have hundreds of books in my personal library, but if I were only allowed to keep one, it would be Civil War II.
A glimpse of the present and the future.......2007-01-30
Great book!! The chapter titled Civil War Checklist is especially disturbing because many things he mentions have already come to pass.
The breakup of America is inevitable. The chaos and bloodshed will make the Balkans and our first civil war look like some sort of game.
Dont buy this book unless you are ready for some startleing revelation's.......2007-01-10
This book written about ten year's ago is unfolding like the daily newspaper.SO many truths that are being shown so many lies being unvealed for people who are ready for a life changeing reality check here it is if this dont get you you motivated nothing will.
Book Description
It has always been understood that the 1848 discovery of gold in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada influenced the battle over the admission of California to the Union. But now, in this revelatory study, award-winning historian Leonard L. Richards makes clear the links between the Gold Rush and many of the regional crises in the lead-up to the Civil War.
Richards explains how Southerners envisioned California as a new market for slaves and saw themselves importing their own slaves to dig for gold, only to be frustrated by California’s passage of a state constitution that prohibited slavery. Still, they schemed to tie California to the South with a southern-routed transcontinental railroad and worked to split off the southern half as a separate slave state. We see how the Gold Rush influenced the squabbling over the Gadsden Purchase, the Kansas-Nebraska Act, the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, and various attempts to take Cuba and Nicaragua. We meet David Broderick, a renegade New York Democrat who became a force in San Francisco politics in 1849, and his archrival William Gwin, a major Mississippi slaveholder and politician who arrived in California with the intent of making it a slave state and himself one of its first senators. Richards recounts the Washington battles involving Taylor, Clay, Calhoun, Douglas, Davis, Webster, Fillmore, and others, as well as the fiery California political battles, feuds, duels, and perhaps outright murder as the state came shockingly close to being divided in two.
When war did break out efforts were made to push California to secede, but there was little general enthusiasm for secession, and many prominent Southerners went off to join the Confederate Army. And with the South out of the Union, the Pacific Railroad Act passed, insuring a comfortably northern route.
Customer Reviews:
Good try.......2007-07-31
I think that the authro had an interesting hypothesis and did attack the Civil War from an interesting perspective. But, the bottom line is that California was never really threatened to become a slave state or leave the Union at the time of the Civil War. I think it was a real stretch to suggest that those hypotheses were any more than very unlikely and really didn't even come close to happening. I believe that the vote was over 80% in favor of "free state" status.
A Close Run Thing: California, CSA.......2007-04-07
A Close Run Thing: California, CSA
The California Gold Rush and the Coming of the Civil War, Richards, Leonard L., Knopf Publishing, 304 pp., illus., maps, 2007.
Gold Rush! California, like Kansas in the 1850s, was caught between pro- and anti-slavery settlers. To migrating Southerners, the labor-intensive mines in the Sierra Nevada Mountains begged for slave labor. Southern slave holders, who did not migrate to California, viewed Californaia as a new market for slaves. The Mexican state of California became the U.S. state of California through intense political maneuvering, timely military presence, and impassioned hypocritical rhetoric. A 'free state' (wage labor as opposed to slave labor) California narrowly missed being divided, north to south, wage labor and slave labor.
Conversely, Northern migrants envisioned the building of ports which in turn would lead to extensive participation in the China trade. The struggle for California statehood, the divisions within the Democratic Party, the contentious spirit of the American (Know Nothing) Party, the demise of the Whig Party, and the explosive growth of the Republican Party is subperbly described by the author. Slanders, duels, law suits, graft, were a frequent occurrence. In an era when voters received paper ballots at home and then went to the polls, party organization was essential.
The author offers telling details within in the mural of the political, social and economic panorama of California. Richards opens the story with the murder of an Irish Catholic Democratic U.S. Senator and ends the book with the unmourned death of one of the conspirators 20 years later. In the middle of the work, Richards reveals that the senator predicted his own death within a next few months. Seamlessly moving from the Sierra Nevada goldfields to San Fransico, from Panama and to the halls of Congress, and then back again, Professor Richards tells a story of gold and railroads, Mexicans and Anglos, miners and politicians, frontier women and ballroom damsels.
Refreshingly, Richards draws his conclusions hestitantly. He offers no platitudes nor does he reveal an agenda. The reader draws his own conclusions and meanings regarding the Slave Power Conspiracy, Stephen Douglas' quest for a railroad for the West, James Buchanan's activism and paralysis, and John Fremont's reputation and his actual accomplishments. This reader realized how close California was to becoming North California and South California. How may have the Civil War turned out if the North had not received almost $3 million dollars a month during the Civil War from the California gold fields? How may have the war turned out if gold had been king and cotton had been queen of the South?
California's Unknown Political History Between the Gold Rush and the Civil War.......2007-03-15
Most books about the American Civil War ignore the West. At best they will take up the 1862 Confederate invasion of New Mexico, and perhaps mention that a handful of Confederate troops made it as far west as Tucson.
Otherwise, aside from the Union occupation of New Orleans, Grant's actions in Tennessee and Mississippi, and Sherman's March to the Sea, most books on the conflict concentrate on Lee's campaigns in Virginia and his two invasions of the North. Books about the approach of the war take up the issues of slavery and States' Rights in the context of the politics in the East and the repercussions of the Kansas-Nebraska Act. The West is not usually discussed. Yet, California's gold helped finance the Union victory, and Californians were deeply involved in the politics that led to the conflict.
Leonard L. Richards, professor of history at the University of Massachusetts, tries to redress this imbalance. In this new book he takes up the politics of California, from the entrance of John C. Frémont on the eve of the Mexican War, through the Gold Rush and California's admission as a state, to the 1860 election that led to the war.
Many Northern Californians today often wonder why the state couldn't have been divided into two? The more ecologically-minded north could manage its own water, and the thirsty south would have had to limit its unbridled growth. Richards tells us how the state almost did become divided, several times in fact. The closest division came was in 1858 when the California legislature passed an act to separate the state, creating a Territory of Colorado south of the vicinity of San Luis Obispo. Richards says this was because of a desire among the Mexicans of the south for more self-determination, but they would have never succeeded without the votes of the pro-Southern Democrats in the north who hoped to create a slave state in southern California.
The southern part of the state voted three to one in a referendum in support of the plan, but the US Congress, faced with the approaching Civil War, ignored the proposal. Considering the great interest among many in Congress and the Buchanan Administration in the vain attempt to create a pro-slavery Kansas, their negligence of a much more possible new slave state in southern California is surprising, but by 1858 the Republicans were in the ascendancy and the Democrats were fragmenting.
Against the background of the national debate, Richards describes the local politics in California, a free state dominated by pro-slavery Southerners, highlighted by a famous duel between the pro-slavery Chief Justice of the California Supreme Court and an anti-slavery US Senator. The several plans to create a transcontinental railroad are also described against the background of the slavery issue and the Kansas statehood debate.
My only wish is that the Epilogue, a concise summary of California and California soldiers during the Civil War, should instead have been expanded into several chapters. The book is called "...the Coming of the Civil War" and that's what it is. But when there are so few books that discuss California during the war, it would have been nice if Richards could have written more.
Not the California History You Learned in School..........2007-02-22
This was an extremely interesting book that discusses a time period (between the Gold Rush and the outbreak of the Civil War) in California history that has been downplayed.
The book opens with a 1859 dual in San Francisco between David Broderick, California's US Senator, and David Terry, a former Chief Justice of the California Supreme Court over slavery-related politics in which Broderick was mortally wounded. It then moves back in time to the discovery of Gold in the Mother Lode and the increasing value of California to the nation. From that point, Richards then demonstrates how political and social tensions became so fierce in California in the 1850's.
The book provides an nice overview of the history of the Gold Rush and then illustrates the surpising number of cross-influences between California and the growing sectional conflict in the nation. It discusses in some detail early California politics in the 1850's and how much it was affected by activist pro-slavery and abolitionist forces. As an example, I was quite surprised the number of times that they proposed dividing California in two - a free Northern half and a pro-slave Southern half. In fact, a proposal to do just that was approved by both the California Assembly and Senate and signed by the Governor in the late 1850's. Only James Buchanan's relcutance to push it forward to avoid antagonizing an increasingly polarized congress stopped it for good.
This is a great book for people interested in California history or people interested in the build up to the Civil War on a national stage. Readers interested in both topics will be especially delighted.
Book Description
How partisan politics lead to the Civil War
What brought about the Civil War? Leading historian Michael F. Holt convincingly offers a disturbingly contemporary answer: partisan politics. In this brilliant and succinct book, Holt distills a lifetime of scholarship to demonstrate that secession and war did not arise from two irreconcilable economies any more than from moral objections to slavery. Short-sighted politicians were to blame. Rarely looking beyond the next election, the two dominant political parties used the emotionally charged and largely chimerical issue of slavery's extension westward to pursue reelection and settle political scores, all the while inexorably dragging the nation towards disunion.
Despite the majority opinion (held in both the North and South) that slavery could never flourish in the areas that sparked the most contention from 1845 to 1861-the Mexican Cession, Oregon, and Kansas-politicians in Washington, especially members of Congress, realized the partisan value of the issue and acted on short-term political calculations with minimal regard for sectional comity. War was the result.
Including select speeches by Lincoln and others, The Fate of Their Country openly challenges us to rethink a seminal moment in America's history.
Customer Reviews:
This book sucks........2007-09-20
Holt, from page one, takes a special interest in noting the failures of the northern "Republicans", but yet refers to the pro-slavery politicians in the south as "Southerners"---who were really Democrats! It was the Democrats who embraced the slavery issue, wanting its inclusion in the new territories in order to gain power in the Senate. The Democrats showed their true colors by not embracing the right thing to do, that is, to denounce slavery. Lincoln did everything he could do to preserve the Union, even if it meant allowing an amendment that would prevent the government from infinging on the Southerners (Democrats) right to have slaves. Don't waste your time reading this trash.
A young Historians outlook..........2006-08-02
Michael F. Holt makes a great argument on past historical events leading up to the Civil War. He states clearly in the preface that he is writing this book to reach a wider audience. (And from the other reviews I can see he did!)
It is a resource book containing thoughts he previously used in his books on the Whigs and the 1850's, but if you're an American History teacher or professor this book could be used in the classroom. It is a great addition to my library and would easily work in an academic setting to hit on all the major "coming of events" before the War.
The only probably I have with this book is that Mr. Holt portrays John C. Calhoun as a radical. While me might have been in the 1830's by the Mexican War and the Compromise of 1850 Calhoun predicted the future of our Contry and in his address to Congress in 1850 urged for compromise over disunion.
I still would recommend this book to anyone who wanted some straight answers to the Antibellum period of United States history.
Clarifies the reasons for the war.......2006-07-02
I have been visiting Civil War battlefields for over 20 years. The more I learned about the war, the more I wondered how it had ever happened. Michael Holt's book discusses the issues that rocked the country during the 1850's. But it also discusses how these issues affected the thinking of ordinary people in the North and the South. It helped me understand why the events from John Brown's raid to the firing on Ft. Sumter aroused such anger in the country.
A Story of Politicians and the Affect of their Actions.......2005-09-20
This short book by Michael Holt is the story of politics in America leading up to the Civil War. On the one hand, Holt makes a convincing argument that political leaders between 1820 and 1860 often acted out of raw political ambition rather than what was best for the country. In calculating the risk of taking certain actions Democrats, Whigs, and nascent Republicans took into account how their decisions would most affect their own political fortunes.
While principle sometimes played a part, this can be seen in Calhoun's staunch support for slavery no matter what and Republican's anti-Southern stance in 1858 and 1680, in too many instances all that mattered was how issues can be leveraged to gain the most support for you in the next election.
This is not a new idea in Civil War histories, but Holt makes an impressive case for it in just over 100 pages. The other theses of the book, the danger of sectionalism and the need to compromise, are also portrayed well. However, it is the danger of putting one's personal interests above the national that is the main lesson of this book. I don't believe another civil war is in any way imminent, but it would be wonderful if today's politicians would relearn that lesson. This book would be a great place for them to start.
partisan politics at its peak.......2005-03-14
Holt describes the dark period leading up to the civil war brilliantly, with new ideas instead of the normal canned answers. He uses support from the great thinkers and leaders of the time including president Abraham Lincoln. Holt continues his famed career of historical insights with this amazingly insightful story of one of the most important topics in our nations history.
Book Description
"In recent years a highly industrious school of historians has begun asking whether the war should have been fought at all and whether it was perhaps not more the fault of the North than of the South. Seeking to revise earlier judgments they have become known as the revisionists, and one of the most gifted and studious of them all is Avery Craven, whose The Coming of the Civil War . . . is one of the landmarks of revisionist literature."—Bruce Catton, American Heritage
". . . those who would examine the democratic process during a period of progressive breakdown, in order to understand the dangers it embodies within itself, will find The Coming of the Civil War a classic analysis."—Louis D. Rubin, Jr., Sewanee Review
"The book has always been recognized, even by its most severe critics, as a work of consummate scholarship."—T. Harry Williams, Baton Rouge Morning Advocate
Customer Reviews:
Is History Politically Correct?.......2007-09-29
MANY HISTORIANS SEEM TO RELEGATE AVERY CRAVEN TODAY TO A POSITION OF PRESENT IRRELEVANCE. TODAY'S READERS MAY NOT FIND HIS IDEAS "POLITICALLY CORRECT" BUT THE QUESTION REMAINS SHOULD HISTORY BE POLITICALLY CORRECT?
CRAVEN IS A GREAT HISTORIAN WHO WILL NOT BE LIKED BY ANY PERSON DEEPLY IMBEDDED IN THE RADICALISM OF EITHER SIDE OF THE MASON AND DIXON LINE. HIS PERSONAL PACIFICISM KEEPS HIM FROM SEEING THIS WAR AS AN IRRESISTABLE CONFLICT. IT MAY BE A GOOD TIME FOR US TO LOOK AT ANY WAR AND ASK IF IT IS IRRESSTIBLE. YOU MAY NOT LIKE THIS BOOK BUT IT WILL HOPEFULLY MAKE YOU THINK WHICH IS THE PURPOSE OF HISTORY.
A PREVIOUS REVIEWER HAS STATED THAT FOR HIM THE BORING PART OF THE CIVIL WAR BEGINS AT FT. SUMPTER. I FULLY AGREE. THIS BOOK GIVES A FRESH LIGHT ON THE MOST INTERESTING PERIOD OF AMERICAN HISTORY--THE ANTEBELLUM PERIOD. A GREAT BOOK WELL WORTH READING. sIMPLY LOOK AT THE TABLE OF CONTENTS.
Civil War as rabble-rousing run amok.......2003-01-22
This book is interesting in that it not only examines the key political issues of the antebellum period but also delves into the culture of the time, especially that of South. But the author's views are tilted toward those of the antebellum South. He goes to great length in describing the Southern plantation system with its incorporation of slave labor and compares it somewhat favorably with the industrialization and the "so-called" free labor of the North. In addition, the exaggerated Southern claims of social superiority seem to strike a chord with the author.
A great deal of the book is consumed with describing the reactions and views of leading spokesmen and of various publications in the North and the South concerning major antebellum political developments. The question of the Mexican Cession and the Wilmot Proviso in 1846 moved the question of slavery squarely into the political system resulting in the formation of the Free Soil Party and talk of secession in the South. The Compromise of 1850 quieted some voices, but only until the next expansion of slavery.
Interestingly, of all of the political crises of the mid-1850s where slavery was front and center, that is, the Kansas-Nebraska bill, the bleeding Kansas crisis, and the Dred Scott decision, the author claims that the Southern response was relatively moderate compared to the extremists of the North. Yet that moderation seemed to have evaporated with the John Brown raid at Harpers Ferry. And the Southern reaction to Lincoln's election the next year was beyond shrill and ultimately self-destructive.
I think it is fairly obvious that this author regards the Civil War as occurring as a result of emotionalism and opportunism run amok. And despite the fact that the South was unwilling to honor the untainted election of a President and failed to comprehend that all of the conservative candidates together far outpolled the Republican, I believe that the author holds that Northern forces largely provoked the Southern secession and then were unwilling to accept that fact by offering some kind of compromise.
This author fails to grasp, or at least state, that slavery and its ramifications were the great moral issues of the day. Of course, tremendous emotionalism was evoked by the issues. And those issues could not be simply managed or downplayed in the Second American Party system. Slavery was conceptually wrong for America and produced an unsustainable divide between two sections of the country. Emotionalism may have obscured that fact then and now, but it is superficial as an explanation for the Civil War.
Fascinating antebellum history.......2000-11-29
To me, the dullest part of the Civil War began at Fort Sumter. The greatest deficiency of Ken Burns' celebrated documentary (enough to make it almost useless)is that he spent almost no time on the causes. I have always found the political maneuvering between North and South, between the two great parties(and within them as well), the occasions when secession and war almost happened, and the dramatic compromises that held off disaster to be essential for understanding the war and why it was fought the way it was. The political battles over the Kansas-Nebraska Act and the Lecompton Constitution are more interesting to me than the dramas of Antietam, Chancellorsville or Gettysburg.
Avery Craven was one of the so-called "revisionist" school of American historians, those academics who asserted that there was blame for the war on both sides, that condemned radical abolitionists and Southern fire-eaters equally. Although he may not have intended it, Professor Craven makes an even more interesting assertion. There were not two sides in this affair but three. The West(what would now be the Middle West)was a region with its own economic interests. And this region, for the most part, wouldn't have gotten all that worked up about slavery if its farmers could have gotten their goods to market. But Southern political ineptitude and indifference to Western interests alienated that region from the South and probably cost the South the war.
All in all, an excellent history of the antebellum United States. Whether you agree with Professor Craven's ideas or not, this book is well worth your time.
Product Description
Three Volume set includes: The Coming Fury, Terrible Swift Sword, and Never Call Retreat. A journalist and public official before becoming editor of American Heritage magazine, Bruce Catton won both the Pulitzer Prize and the National Book Award for his Civil War history A Stillness at Appomattox. As for this monumental Civil War trilogy, first published in the 1960s, historian Henry Steel Commager appraised: "better than any other history of our Civil War it combines narrative vigor, literary grace, freshness of view and independence of judgment, and a kind of catholic spirit which embraces the whole vast tumultuous scene." The first volume opens with the Democratic Party's Charleston convention in 1860 and the split that resulted in two Democratic candidates, followed by the Republican Convention and Lincoln's victory. The country first drifted and then was swept into war, even as Lincoln and Jefferson Davis were declaring that a peaceful solution could be found. The second volume shows how the Union and Confederacy slowly reconciled themselves to an all-out war, and how the statures of Lee, Grant, Sherman, Jefferson Davis, and many others emerged. McClellan's character is impaled here in extracts from his arrogant letters. In the final volume, Lincoln remains resolute in the belief that a house divided against itself cannot stand, while Jefferson Davis struggles valiantly for political and economic stability. Catton traces the most bitter years of the war here, from the fighting at Fredericksburg to the surrender at Appomattox and the end of the Confederacy, and the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. Each book includes a section of color maps, and the three volumes are contained in a blue and red box.
Customer Reviews:
Superb history and human portrait.......2007-02-11
An exhaustively researched and deeply engrossing narrative, Catton not only tells us *what* happened, but breathes life into the people living in the crucible of the Civil War. What the war meant to the people who lived it and afterwards forms a valuable part of the narrative. Attention is given to attitudes of a vanished generation that people of Catton's age still knew at first and second-hand; such context forms a key part in understanding the war's impact on people at the time and its subsequent place in the American psyche. As the war recedes further into "history", the more important it becomes to see the humans swept up in it. This Catton does, with a deft literary skill that sweeps the reader along just as thoroughly.
The whole series is an independent work, but it does gain a synergistic benefit from reading his other works such as "This Hallowed Ground" (still the best single volume on the war in my opinion) and the Army of the Potomac trilogy. If the War interests you, its Centenniel History is an indispensible read.
Rediscover a Great Historian.......2006-07-19
For those of us whose interest in the Civil War was ignited by the Ken Burns documentary, most naturally gravitated to Shelby Foote's wonderful 3 part Narrative History of the Civil War. Foote's masterpiece will always be at or near the top of anyone's list of great Civil War reading, but for some wanting a different approach, and looking for a slightly shorter and more accessible format, look no further than these three splendid paperback books from Bruce Catton.
While Foote's 3 part history takes approximately 3,000 pages to provide a detailed glimpse of all the major players and battles, Catton here tells the story in 3 books of about 450 pages each. Sacrifices are made, of course, and in some instances you are left wanting a little more detail, but overall Catton tells the story lyrically and with a great knack for tying up loose ends. His themes and arguments always make perfect sense, and while the writing is not as chock-full of historical detail as someone like James MacPherson, you won't feel as if you are reading a watered-down version of the conflict.
Catton begins the first volume, The Coming Fury, with a fascinating look at the 1860 presidential election, with its two Democratic nominees (Stephen Dougles and John Breckenridge) hopelessly splitting the party and eliminating any chance of defeating Lincoln, the nominee of the new Republican party. Catton spends a great deal of time on the splintering of the Democrats, the various conventions preceding the 1860 election, and the fevered calls for war emanating from the South as opposition to the Fugitive Slave law and expansion of the country called into question the slavery issue, and the extent to which slavery would be permitted in new territories and states. The first book then proceeds to a very detailed account of the Charleston/Fort Sumter mess, and concludes with the First Bull Run.
The pacing of the books was a bit odd, since the first 300 or so pages was so full of detail, you come to expect a much longer work, and a more thorough description of some key battles like Chancellorsville and Gettysburg. My only complaint here is that after spending so many pages on the political upheaval and precursors to war, I sometimes felt that not enough time was spent on several of the major campaigns and battles of the war. However most readers have plenty at their disposal if they want to dwell upon any specific campaign, such as MacPherson's excellent "Crossroads of Freedom" book about Antietam. Catton does cover every significant engagement, and does a great job of keeping his narrative and thematic focus intact while shifting to the battles in Mississippi, Tennessee and Louisiana. The author always discussed the choices and problems presented to the military and political leaders at each step of the struggle, and has a master's touch of fitting each battle into the context of the global struggle.
The final book in the trilogy, Never Call Retreat, was my favorite of the three. Catton does a wonderful job exploring the psyche of the South after some crushing defeats, and their desperate hope of Lincoln losing reelection to McClellan in 1864, followed by their slimmer hope of taking the battle back to Northern soil in the hopes that enough of the nation would simply tire of the war after 3-4 years of bloodshed. The logistical problems facing Robert Lee at the end as he moved his army around Virginia, desperately trying to feed the men, was unforgettable. Catton's last chapter, discussing the symmetry of how the story of the Civil War began and ended with sensational acts of madmen (John Brown and John Wilkes Booth) was a moving and effective coda. I put down the last volume very glad that I picked up this set, I think reading these books is time very well-spent for casual fans of history and true Civil War buffs alike.
Insightful, poetic, humorous and valid overview of the Civil War........2006-06-15
It is curious that Bruce Catton is in many ways today regarded as a forgotten historian. The author of a series of powerful narratives on not only the Civil War but the legends of that conflict, in particular Abraham Lincoln and Ulysses S. Grant, Catton in the 1950s and 60s really brought this country's most tragic war home to a new generation of Americans.
The series that begins with "The Coming Fury," originally published in 1961, and ends with "Never Call Retreat" in 1965, was an elegantly written exploration of all aspects of the war, not just its many and complex military engagements, but the social, economic and political ramifications of what some die-hards still call the War Between the States.
"Mr. Yancey could usually be found at the Charleston Hotel, where the anti-Douglas forces were gathering, and a Northerner who went around to have a look at him reported that he was unexpectedly quiet and mild-mannered, as bland and as smooth as Fernando Wood, the silky Democratic boss from New York City, but radiating a general air of sincerity that Wood never had," Catton begins in the opening paragraph of the first book.
Silky indeed.
For some reason recent Civil War scholars have tended to rely much more frequently on Allen Nevins' ponderous "Ordeal of the Union" series, which also was hailed as a major work revealing the wonders of the era to the post-World War II generation. But Nevins' work is full of errors, he cites footnotes for sources that are nonexistent, and litters his manuscript with endless potshots at people he thinks we should not like: Franklin Pierce is a "charming, pliable, vacillating executive," James Buchanan was controlled by a "timidity, pliability and self-seeking in his character,"; Stephen Douglas "suffered from his head-long impetuosity."
Almost anyone from the South, or more accurately, someone who is not a Radical Republican, suffers greatly in Nevins' series. The author, a New Yorker, writing more than 80 years after the conclusion of the Civil War, was a sore winner, demonstrating a repeated need to point out the moral superiority of the North and the depravity of the Confederacy.
Is that really the historian's purpose?
As a source that is much better written, less self-conscious, and more objective, I recommend the Catton books, a stellar reminder of why good history well-written is so much fun.
Classic.......2005-09-06
This is a classic set of books that all civil war buffs should have. The set provides a great background to the war. The writing is detailed and informative without being so detailed to bury the read.
The Centennial History of the Civil War.......2005-06-11
Phoenix Press has done the reader a great service by issuing this attractive and inexpensive boxed paperback edition of Bruce Catton's classic three volume history of the Civil War.
Begun in 1958 and released between 1961 and 1965, the three books, THE COMING FURY, TERRIBLE SWIFT SWORD and NEVER CALL RETREAT take the reader from the fractured Democratic Convention of 1860 to the assassination of President Lincoln.
Catton's books are unique for their almost lyrical readability. Catton's knowledge of his subject is exhaustive and his writing style is passionate. Drawing the reader along, Catton makes it possible to finish the three thick books in virtually three sittings.
Catton's thesis is that the South began the war at a decided material disadvantage and he demonstrates how, even as early as First Manassas, the die was cast for a probable Confederate defeat, tempered only by the Union's initial unwillingness to see the war for what it was, a shattering epochal contest.
The South's uncertain sense of nationhood is illuminated in its adoption of national symbols: At the Montgomery Convention, several delegates wanted to name the Confederacy the "United States of America"; Confederate generals squabbled over rank based on their West Point (i.e., Union) rankings; the South's national holiday was Washington's Birthday, it was established on Jeffersonian principles, and its Stars and Bars was confusingly similar to the Stars and Stripes, so much so as to lead to tragedies in battle. Imagine George Washington dedicating the American Revolution to Queen Elizabeth the First as a counterpoint.
Against this, Catton posits the unsure steps of the North, at first all but willing to let the "wayward sisters depart in peace," then battling the "armed combinations," then fighting for Union; and finally, dedicating the war to ensuring that "government of the people, by the people shall not vanish from the earth."
Thanks to Catton, THE CIVIL WAR becomes a living, breathing and evolving experience, not just a history.
Customer Reviews:
Superb Americana.......2000-06-19
The author focuses his attention on Sumner's pre-Civil War years when his influence on behalf of the Union and the antislavery cause reached its zenith.
David Donald is renowned for his meticulous research and well written books. He used diaries, manuscripts, scrapbooks, family histories, letters, newspaper files, and valued secondary sources to flesh out his subject. Donald spent ten years on this book and during that time had to absorb the arcane knowledge of the 19th century in such subjects as medicine, law, politics, etc. His scholarship is impeccable. Though forty years have elapsed since the original publication of this book it still satisfies both the casual and serious reader.
If a theme can be assigned to this very good book, it would be, "Sumner was a man who wouldn't compromise his principles no matter the cost." Sumner believed, "...to sanction the enslaving of a single human being was an act which cannot be called small, unless the whole moral law which it overturns or ignores is small." He was convinced that the appeasement of slave holders was impossible; that the various compromises enacted by the Senate were abdications of Northern principle in order to placate the South and to forestall an inevitable constitutional crisis. Sumner pointed out that supporters of the Compromise of 1850 were in fact extreme sectionalists, while antislavery agitators were the true nationalists.
The author points out that slavery was the one great issue beginning in the late 1840s and continuing through the Civil War. Sumner battled the "peculiar institution" for years and made the abolition of slavery paramount. He became the chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, a post which he made more important than that of any Ambassador and more influential than that of the Secretary of State of the United States. By 1851, Sumner was one of the most powerful men on the North American continent and was known throughout Europe.
When first viewing slaves Sumner said, "They appear to be nothing more than moving masses of flesh, unendowed with anything of intelligence above the brutes." This book clearly illustrates why his opinion changed and why this complex man fought the lonely fight to remove all legal barriers that sustained racial discrimination. Sumner believed such discrimination fostered racial inferiority and was psychologically harmful to Blacks. He believed the pledge in the Declaration of Independence for universal equality was as much a part of the public law of the land as the Constitution.
In this regard, Sumner continually excoriated the public to reform slavery and eventually influenced hundreds of thousands of Northern voters. When read today, his fiery speeches seem ponderous and stilted. Further, Sumner often used illogical reasoning and had a tendency to extend a principle to its utmost limits - he could be irritating and obtuse at time. Regardless, he was a powerful spokesman for the antislavery movement and his speeches solidified Northern opinion in the "great crusade."
In reading this book, its clear Sumner was insensitive to the power of his words. He really didn't care as he had a remarkable power of rationalization and convinced himself that expediency and justice coincided where the abolition of slavery was concerned. The author hasn't overlooked the part that fortuitous circumstances played in the selection of Sumner as one of the most powerful and enduring forces in the pre-Civil War government. (He led the Radical Republicans during the Civil War) While the borderline between myth and history is often blurred, the author proves that the myth in Sumner's life more often than not matched the real Charles Sumner.
Sumner's involvement in the slavery issue seems compulsive to 21st century readers but it was an outgrowth of his life and times. The humanity of a society can be measured by the quality of its compassion and its ability to feel the anguish of others. In contrast, the inability to feel the lash that strikes another's back is the most destructive trait a society can possess.
Sumner's moral compassion wouldn't allow him to act otherwise when it came to slavery. Sumner believed the issue was simple: Slavery was evil, stamp it out!
This is superb Americana.
Book Description
Joshua Chamberlain, great-great grandson of an acclaimed Civil War hero, competes in his first 26.2 miler, the venerable Marine Corps Marathon in Washington D.C.
Josh "zones out" during this classic physical test of endurance, allowing him to contemplate a gilded boyhood, stellar basketball career, and the elusive love of his life: the enchanting Autumn Andrews. Along the route, "The Colonel," a Medal of Honor winner at Gettysburg, manages to instill his own influence, enlightening Josh as to the real reason he's running the race.
This yellow brick road adventure takes the reader on a delightful romp through the nation's capital, to the strategic heights of Little Round Top, and to the sun-kissed virgin beaches of a beguiling little corner of northern Michigan rich with the values and characters that can only be found in small-town America.
Josh's spirited search for his past, present and future, affirms that in the long run, there's no place like home.
Customer Reviews:
An excellent novel........2007-06-14
This is a wonderful story that ties in all of the author's interests. I teach hs/jh social studies and I was looking to add another book to my classroom library that young boys might like to read. This book really surprised me. I've already recommended it to my cross country runners and will be recommending to our school librarian too.
Enjoyable trek through history.......2003-06-09
My brother advised me to read this book as he knows the author via sports. As I love to read, I was happy to oblige him just to see what he was talking about. I was pleasantly surprised to find a book that captured my interest from the first page! The author's style is easy to read and well done, and his sense of humor and detail appreciated by me. The story of the past and present Joshua Chamberlains blended together well and I was entranced.
Maybe I loved this book because I'm from a small town in Upper Michigan, and my dad was a Civil War buff and took us to battlefields and made history come alive with his stories.
Maybe I liked it because my brother was a basketball star and our small town team went to the state finals in the late 60's against those Detroit teams and won!
Maybe I liked it because I have run 10ks and walked a marathon and know what that's like.
Maybe I liked it because I read a lot and can recognize a good author and tale when I read it.
Maybe I have told a lot of others about it because I feel it's a "sleeper" and a good read!
Thank you Tim V for a great tale and enjoyable read!
Surprised but pleased in the end........2002-03-28
This book caught my attention being a marathon runner and a Civil War buff. Having both together seemed too good to be true. Not entirely what I expected but certainly not a disappointment either. I found myself focusing more on the non-running aspects of the book, but was still acutely aware of Mr. Wagoner's description of the marathon that were unique and descriptive. A smart, smooth use of multiple times enabled me to correlate the main characters life with his progression through the marathon which I found very clever. Surprisingly so, this book made me feel like a teenager again. I'm not a love story type of guy, but I would highly recommend this book. Made me feel good about people again.
I made a mistake and I'm glad I did..........2001-05-04
I was searching for the Eagles "Long Run" CD and came across this. I bought it and I'm glad I did. Good book.
Great for runners, Civil War buffs, a great read.......2000-05-03
I loved this book. It would be a great story for anyone who is interested in the Civil War or running. I'm not interested in either but I still really enjoyed the story. It was very well written.
Book Description
Winner of the Pulitzer Prize and the National Book Award! A thrilling, page-turning piece of writing that describes the forces conspiring to tear apart the United States--with the disintegrating political processes and rising tempers finally erupting at Bull Run. "...a major work by a major writer, a superb re-creation of the twelve crucial months that opened the Civil War."--The New York Times.
Customer Reviews:
Engaging and Insightful History of the Civil War.......2006-10-15
This first volume is written in a compeling style and is well researched. Catton makes the political manuevering come alive and deftly explains key facets of the war's basis and beginning. I am just beginning volume two, and based on how good the first is, I am looking forward to it.
Another reviewer labeled Catton as the poet of history, and I could not agree more. Highly recommended.
The Civil War as Dramatic Human Tragedy.......2006-06-16
"The Coming Fury" is the first volume of Bruce Catton's centennial history of the Civil War. First published in 1961, some of its details are inevitably dated. Later historians have advanced different interpretations of some events. However, Catton's trilogy on the Civil War endures as a classic on the basis of his superb narrative, history as dramatic literature. Catton's gift is to capture the individuals at the center of events both in their essential, even prosaic humanity and as part of the seemingly relentless and tragic march of larger events.
"The Coming Fury" documents the onset of the Civil War, beginning with the Democratic Convention in Charlestown, South Carolina in April 1860 and ending with the First Battle of Bull Run in July 1861. In that relatively short span of time, the ability of the United States to maintain the unhappy national political compromise over the divisive issue of slavery rapidly eroded into open warfare. Catton adroitly captures the stumbling efforts of different leaders to defer or avoid the horror of civil war while attempting to resolve what had become an unresolvable political issue. His account of the dilemma of Major Robert Anderson, trapped at Fort Sumpter in Charlestown by men who had lately been his fellow citizens, is especially poignant. Anderson is trapped also between the Union and Confederate Governments, each pursuing its own political goals through the fate of Anderson's small garrison, now the last symbol of Federal authority in South Carolina. The shelling of Fort Sumpter will trigger open warfare, culminating in this volume with First Bull Run, where a Union loss will put paid to the notion of a quick end to the war.
This book is highly recommended to students of the Civil War and to the interested reader seeking an enthralling account of the beginning of that war.
A Tale of Two Books (In Three Volumes).......2005-10-06
The first of this three volume series takes us from the 1860 Democratic National Convention to Bull Run and is an absolute treasure. It is simply the most precise and informative narrative of this period I've read. After reading this you will understand how we got from a bunch of swelled-up aristocrats to a shooting war and you'll see how sad and pathetic the whole affair really was. You'll ask yourself a dozen times while reading why didn't somebody stop this madness?
The other two volumes provide a readable but brief history of the war. But as historical literature often does the story bogs down in dates and names and places and provides an accurate but rather generic list of events for the remainder of the war. For those wanting a get in and get out quickly version of the Civil War this is it.
For those wanting more detail and have the time I recommend Shelby Foote's trilogy. For those wanting a primer of the events leading up to the Democratic National Convention I recommend "Jefferson Davis, The Man and His Hour" by William C. Davis. Not in itself a great book but it does provide interesting insight into the politics, pride and stupidity in the years leading up to our country's darkest hour.
Excellent Book For Anyone Who Wants To Know Why The War Came.......2005-09-27
For anyone, like I once was, who needs an education on the causes of the Civil War, this book is indespensable. Growing up in the South, I was taught in public schools that slavery had very little to do with the Civil War. Catton not only obliterates this theory, he goes in to much detail about the various conflicts and rivalries (including slavery) which caused an unbridgeable chasm between North and South in the decade leading up to the firing upon Fort Sumter in April, 1861. He clearly demonstrates why these differences in philosophy would erupt into war, which in retrospect was probably the only way America could ever be united in our collective belief system, which we now take for granted. I would recommend this book (and Catton's entire Civil War Trilogy series for that matter) to both casual reader and Civil War buff alike. In fact, it should be required reading for ALL americans.
Superb Political Narrative.......2005-04-28
Author/Historian Bruce Catton (1899-1978) lays the groundwork for why the U.S. Civil War came about in 1861, and then also describes the early months of that horrid conflict.
The narrative starts on the eve of the 1860 Democratic Convention, when Southern firebrands blocked the nomination of moderate Stephen Douglas of Illinois - causing the party to split between North and South. As the author shows, extremists on all sides were too often in control, and this worked to prevent the nation's political system from finding workable compromises. The author describes the pressures behind secession, and shows how slavery was the one bone of contention between North and South that proved most resistant to compromise.
Catton also shows the political maneuvering (north and south) that occurred in the weeks after Lincoln's inauguration prior to Fort Sumter - the new President now realizing that it would probably take war to restore the fractured union. Readers also get a solid look at the political maneuvering in the first months of the war on up through the Battle of Bull Run (Manassas). We also see Lincoln's skillful (if heavy-handed) moves to keep the vital Border States in the Union.
"The Coming Fury" is the author's most political and least military volume on the Civil War. Like his other narratives, it's an informative and superbly readable work.
Book Description
A New Birth of Freedom is the culmination of over a half a century of study and reflection by one of America's foremost scholars of American politics, Harry V. Jaffa. This long-awaited sequel to Crisis of the House Divided, first published in 1959, continues Jaffa's piercing examination of the political thought of Abraham Lincoln and the themes of self-government, equality, and statesmanship. Whereas Crisis of the House Divided focused on the famous senate campaign debates between Lincoln and Stephen Douglas, this volume expands and deepens Jaffa's analysis of American political thought, and gives special attention to Lincoln's refutation of the arguments of John C. Calhoun-the intellectual champion of the Confederacy.
Customer Reviews:
Deep but boring.......2006-12-22
I would love to say that A New Birth of Freedom is a delightful read, but I cannot. It is too boring to permit that conclusion. Jaffa seems to improvise from random, grandiose thoughts as they pop into his head, thoughts worth finding but ones you have to dig laboriously with a large spade to find. After a while, you just wear out. I admit that I could not divine enough concentration to finish reading this book. Do NOT, however, believe any statements you read in other reviews here about Jaffa's work being fiction. I suspect that critic (and there may be more to come) is a follower of Thomas J. DiLorenzo, a man who hates all things Lincolnian. Unfortunately, DiLorenzo writes with attention-capturing clarity that makes his pseudo-logical books highly accessible to the general public. I say "unfortunate" because, to paraphrase something Lincoln never said, DiLorenzo has used his writing skill to fool some of the people all of the time. Harry Jaffa does not try to fool anyone, but his writing will not fascinate them either. Having read the transcript of his debate with Thomas DiLorenzo, I know that Jaffa is capable of creating cogent, fascinating arguments, but he fails to do that in his writing or, by the time he does, your brain may be too exhausted to care.
More Lincoln Fiction.......2006-03-20
Harry Jaffas latest book on Lincoln is a work of fiction, confusion and silliness. Jaffa's cause is to defend Lincolns thought and actions in prosecuting his war on the South. This is a formidable task since the self-taught Lincoln would have flunked an elementary civics exam of his own day. The notions of state sovereignty, federalism, delegated powers, usurpation of powers etc. escaped him.
Lincoln justified his war on the South by advocating a preposterous fiction. The fiction was that a "union" was forged on July 4, 1776 by the Continental Congress which created a new nation by declaring independence for the former British colonies. He claimed this "union" won independece for the former colonies, gave them the legal status they enjoyed and created them as states. He denied, therefore, that the states were ever sovereign (or really states at all!)or that they had any independence or liberty outside the union. He did this so he could equate secession with treason and wage war on his fellow Americans. His thinking was deeply flawed and would have been rejected by the Founding Fathers as well as his unjustified war.
The Declaration of Independence contradicts Lincoln and Jaffa. The members of the Continental Congress were representatives of the several colonies which decided individually to seek independence from Britain. Several states had already declared independence before July 4th and govern themselves. South Carolina March on 15, Rhode Island on May 4, Delaware on June 15, Virginia on June 29, New Jersey on July 2. The delegates at the Continental Congress had no authority from the people of their states to form a national government, and, as delegates, they could not tell their respective colonies or states what to do. The Declaration speaks of no new nation or national government. It speaks of thirteen independent states. The fact that these states "united" to fight the British does not diminish their status as independent states since weaker states often band together to fight the stronger nations. That these states were independent sovereigns is attested to in the 2nd Article of the Aticles of Confederation (which formed the United States of America as a CONFEDERACY!). It reads: "Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence..." The mythical "union" of Lincolns imagination which was over and above the states was unknown to the Founding Fathers since none of them recognized a higher political authority than that of a state. This is proved by the fact that only those states which ratified the constitution would belong to the union ( nine states being needed to bring into being the new union). So, the union was a creation of the states and at the service of the states, not as Lincoln's mendacious logic would have it. This is elementary American history and the attempt by Lincoln and Jaffa to obfuscate this fact reveals their ignorance or dishonesty. Jaffa tries to defend this obvious fiction by saying the individual state sovereignty refered to wasn't real since "none of the states had ever attempted individually to make war, conclude peace, or enter into alliances."(pg.256) This is false since the Articles of Confederation was just the sort of alliance the Declaration of Independence regarded as the right of any independent state. He tries again by saying that the states stood in the same relation to the federal government as counties to state government.(pg 205,256) This is silly since counties are subdivisions of a state not independent sovereigns. It was the states which created the federal gov't not the federal gov't creating states. He also makes the strange claim that Madison didn't say that the states which formed the Articles of Confederation were independent sovereigns (pg 190). Anyone who reads Federalist #39 and 40 will see this isn't true.
I don't believe Jaffa's book will be much help to those who want an accurate account of American history. Where he is not dishonest he is confused about his subject matter. He doesn't understand the correct notions of state sovereignty, federalism, or delegated powers. But who can be surprised about that..... neither did his mentor Lincoln!
When Jaffa ventures out on his own he makes up his own facts. Slavery is opposed to natural law! No, the great natural law philosophers don't think so. The Civil War was about the morality of slavery! No, it was about secession, and Lincoln said so. Lincoln believed in equality for blacks! No, he was a white supremicist who wanted the slaves freed so they could be shipped back to Africa. Secession is unconstitutional! No, the power to prevent secession was not delegated to the federal government, so the right to secede remained with the states. Lincoln was a great thinker in the same league as Socrates! No, he was a power hungry demagogue who didn't even understand American political thought. Lincoln ushered in a new birth of freedom! No,Lincoln destroyed the sovereignty of the states and enslaved their people to the decisions of federal officials. Thanks Abe!
Key work that clarifies the American purpose.......2004-08-06
"A New Birth of Freedom" is Professor Harry V. Jaffa's promised sequel to his "Crisis of the House Divided", written in 1958 to counter the prevailing but wrong headed notions of academics about the meaning of the Lincoln-Douglas debates.
In "Crisis", Professor Jaffa sets forth the basis of the argument that in 1858 served to deny Senator Douglas the Presidency in 1860 by taking from him any moral standing by focusing the nation to confront the issue of slavery.
In "Birth", we see Abraham Lincoln's philosophy arrayed against that of Alexander Stephens, Jefferson Davis and ultimately, John C. Calhoun. We further see that Lincoln's belief that "All men are created equal" is the heir of Thomas Jefferson, John Locke, and Aristotle whereas Calhoun's theories rest uncertainly on Jean-Jacques Rousseau and are close cousins to Kant, Hegel, and Marx and the school of historical determinism and Darwinism.
Professor Jaffa carefully explains the undergirding theory of the American experiment: that "All men are created equal" is the premise of the American Revolution and not just an empty slogan. That this should be necessary is a sad commentary on the large numbers of political scientists who find more common ground with Karl Marx than with Thomas Jefferson.
While "Birth" has a degree of redundancy with "Crisis", this can easily be overlooked as one was written over 40 years after the other.
Brilliant Book, Difficult Read.......2004-07-30
A brilliant book on Lincoln's political thought. Not an easy read, though. Jaffa carefully parses Lincoln's words and deeds with an analytical philosopher's thoroughness. The style is rather dense and meaty and makes for tough going at times, but the intellectual rewards are worth the effort. Jaffa's diptych (Crisis of House Divided, New Birth of Freedom) is the strongest argument yet made for Lincoln as leader.
More Lincoln lies & myths.......2004-07-27
This book is one of the biggest liberal lies concerning Lincoln that I have ever read. It is a waste of time & money. If anyone reads this trash than they should get "The Real Lincoln" by Thomas Dilorenzo. His book will give you a more truthful description of Lincoln, and the reason we have big government violating the Constitution to this very day. The only freedom gained from the Lincoln administration is the freedom of Federal Government to walk all over the rights of the states, and the people.
Books:
- Commanding the Army of the Potomac (Modern War Studies)
- Companion to Contemporary Black British Culture (Encyclopedias of Contemporary Culture)
- Federalizing the Muse: United States Arts Policy and the National Endowment for the Arts, 1965-1980
- From Normandy to the Ruhr: With the 116th Panzer Division in WWII
- Gateway to Texas: History of Red River County
- General James Longstreet: The Confederacy's Most Controversial Soldier : A Biography
- Geometry Workbook For Dummies (For Dummies (Math & Science))
- Germany's Panther Tank the Quest for Combat Supremacy: Development - Modifications - Rare Variants - Characteristics - Combat Accounts (Schiffer Military/Aviation History)
- Gettysburg 1863: High Tide of the Confederacy (Praeger Illustrated Military History)
- Great Maps of the Civil War: Pivotal Battles and Campaigns Featuring 32 Removable Maps (Museum in a Book, 2)
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- GRAND SLAM, THE: BOBBY JONES, AMERICA, AND THE STORY OF GOLF
- Basenjis
- The Radiance of the King
- The Speed of Trust: The One Thing that Changes Everything
- What Got You Here Won't Get You There: How Successful People Become Even More Successful
- An Introduction to Systems Biology: Design Principles of Biological Circuits
- A Seal Called Andre: The Two World of a Maine Harbor Seal
- An introduction to political economy,
- The Office Worker's Game of Up-From-Under
- The OSHA Handbook: The Guidelines For Compliance In Health
General
| 19th Century
| United States
| Americas
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Domestic Enemies: The Reconquista
Patriots: Surviving the Coming Collapse: A Novel of the Turbulent Near Future (Expanded and Updated 33 Chapter Edition)
THE THIRD REVOLUTION
A Well Regulated Militia...
Boston's Gun Bible
