ebooks The Two American Presidents: A Dual Biography of Abraham Lincoln and Jefferson Davis by Bruce Chadwick in History

Review

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. Five StarsBy josh hysellThis10 of 10 people found the following review helpful. Beware This Book!By David T. WilliamsIt seemed like such a good concept -- parallel bios of the two great antagonists of the Civil War. However; after a promising beginning; this book becomes so wildly inaccurate and in parts so "Oliver Stone-ish" that I personally will submit my copy for recycling rather than allow anyone else to read it. Some errors are errors of detail (the General commanding the Confederate troops on Marye's Heights at Fredericksburg was James Longstreet; not "Stonewall" Jackson). Some are chronological. Chadwick places Jackson's Shenandoah Valley Campaign after the Seven Days' battles; where in reality it was the indispensible prelude. Sometimes the chronology becomes so muddled that events seem to occur twice. The way the text reads; it seems that Union General John Pope was beaten at Second Bull Run twice. And can anyone truly imagine Salmon Chase leading Union forces in the field?I was particularly disturbed by the assertion that Ohio "Peace Democrat" Clement Vallandigham was arrested on President Lincoln's authority. Every other source I've ever seen asserts that General Burnside acted without any authority other than his own; and that he quickly received orders to arrest no other politicians and suppress no more newspapers without consulting Washington first. What evidence did Chadwick find that eluded Allen Nevins; Shelby Foote; and Stephen B. Oates (to name but three)?When Chadwick comes to the Kilpatrick/Dahlgren raid to Richmond; things get very worrisome for anyone who's read much Civil War history (and I have). No one else that I have have read has ever asserted that the raid's purported goal of killing or kidnapping Jefferson Davis and/or other members of his administration was authorized by Abraham Lincoln himself. What evidence has Chadwick unearthed that hundreds if not thousands of other historians had never found? In addition; Chadwick is the only author that I have read that flatly pronounces the papers purportedly found on Ulric Dahlgren's body genuine. All others have at least acknowledged the possibility that they were forgeries. Robert E. Lee cautioned Jefferson Davis not to act on the discovery of the orders; stating that there were good reasons to doubt their authenticity. (For the record; incidently; Judson Kilpatrick's not-too-flattering nickname was "Kill Cavalry"; not "Kill Patrick".)I gave up on this book at page 340. My time is too precious to waste it on conspiritorial pseudo-history. I'll bet yours is ; too.12 of 12 people found the following review helpful. Mediocre Bio of Davis; Mediocre Bio of LincolnBy A CustomerWhere's the Beef?With all of the attention lavished by historians on Abraham Lincoln; and with the growing number of works on Jefferson Davis; it is curious that there have been so few comparative studies of the two men. Aside from Bruce Catton's Two Roads To Fort Sumter (New York: McGraw-Hill; 1963); and a few scattered articles and monographs; no scholar of the Civil War has attempted a comprehensive; systematic comparison of Lincoln and Davis. Bruce Chadwick has attempted to fill this hole with The Two American Presidents.As the title suggests; this is a dual biography; a two-track narrative which switches back and forth between Lincoln's and Davis's stories. These twin narratives are not bad history in the sense of being inaccurate or sloppy. Chadwick wrote competently and with occasional dramatic flair; he made good use of the available primary sources; and he utilized an impressive amount of newspaper research. A casual reader without much prior knowledge of the Civil War could read The Two American Presidents and come away with a basic understanding of each man's life and career.But Chadwick really unearthed nothing new about either man; his book is for the most part merely a pedestrian rehashing of oft-told tales. His story of Lincoln follows the standard arc which one could find in a dozen other biographies: Lincoln the savvy politician and prairie lawyer with the large measure of common sense who is smarter than most everyone around him; and who is dedicated to finding a pragmatic means to the idealistic end of killing slavery and establishing a new birth of freedom. Likewise; Chadwick's Jefferson Davis is not very original: he is the Calhounian planter and Mexican war hero who never questions slavery; a principled yet rigid man who relentlessly pursues Confederate victory but is hobbled by serious character flaws and political ineptitude. Chadwick's narrative is sprightly; but in the end this is still old wine in a new bottle. It is so old; in fact; that I found very little material worthy of substantive criticism; hence the brevity of this review.According to the book's dust jacket; Chadwick argues that "one of several reasons why the North won and the South lost can be found in the drastically different characters of the two presidents." This is perhaps a reasonable--though by no means foregone--conclusion. It is not the "fascinating new perspective" and "startling answers" the book's jacket claims; Davis Potter made this exact argument forty years ago in a widely read essay which Chadwick does not cite (see Potter; "Jefferson Davis and the Political Factors of Confederate Defeat;" in David Donald; ed.; Why the North Won the Civil War [New York: Collier; 1960]).But where does Chadwick draw these conclusions; let alone support them with evidence? I have quoted the book jacket at some length because in 490 pages of text I was unable to locate anything resembling an actual argument. The Two Presidents is a comparative study with no substantive comparative analysis. Chadwick seems to have assumed that the mere placing of a mediocre biography of Davis and a mediocre biography of Lincoln within the same cover somehow constitutes an "argument;" an original contribution. It does not.Chadwick somehow missed the point of his own book. The only value such a study might possess would lie in the new light it shed on either Lincoln and Davis themselves; or on larger subjects -- presidential leadership; for example -- which are illuminated by but transcend the two men's individual stories. Chadwick did neither; and in the end wrote a book which is of little real value to serious scholars of Lincoln; Davis or the Civil War.Reviewed by Brian Dirck; Assistant Professor of History; Anderson University . Published by H-South (September; 2000) Copyright © 2000; H-Net; all rights reserved. This work may be copied for non-profit educational use if proper credit is given to the author and the list. For other permission questions; please contact hbooks@h-net.msu.edu.