I have not bought this book as I would not let one penney fall into Garrison's pocket, but I've perused this volume heavily. I wish that I could have given it 0 stars. The author is an unreconstructed Confederate who, whenever there is a remotely possible sinister way of interpreting Lincoln's actions, prefers to submit that view rather than acknowledge the findings of recognized scholars' research. For example, he claims that Lincoln is responsible for the creation of the "Imperial Presidency", making possible the abuses of Nixon, Vietnam, etc. But he does not show that Lincoln's powers were often balanced by a war conduct committee, that the Presidency went on to lose considerable authority and esteem in the Reconstruction years, and that Lincoln himself acknowledged that, except in the case of national emergencies, as the Civil War was viewed, the President lacked powers to do many things (like the Emancipation Proclamation). Garrison also blames Lincoln for being uncompromising and contends, without proof, that the Confederacy's desire to continue as a separate nation would have faded, if allowed, resulting in reunification. But most scholars acknowledge that the individual states would have sooner seceded even further into smaller nations, and that other states in the Union would have found reason to secede into new confederacies. Thus, as I've said, Garrison's trash has been disproven yet he pretends as though it has not even been noticed by scholars. It is the vitriolic spite of an unenlightened Confederate clinging to the bitterness of ancestors. This book should be relegated to the heap of trash-writing never to be recovered.

Some may find the book ofensive.As Lincoln is one of the greatest American Presidents and heros of all time,but I think to read this book you need to keep an open mind.
Pople I think do not like for when histrorians and such dig through his hstory and prefer to enjoy the egnima that the man we all love is known today.
Having said that I would be weary reading this book if you have not read or done lots of resarch on the man.
I give this book three stars mostly becaouse I knew alot of the information that the book had ,but the point of view the author was giving was intersting.

This book is an excellent addition to anyone's library of books about this critical figure in American history. Unlike some reviewers, I actually bought, and read this book, and bothered to research some of the authors surprising assertions.

It amazes me how hysterical and insulting people will get when faced with facts about something contrary to what they are familiar with. So many Lincoln quotes, for instance, have long been known to be sheer fabrication; mythology, simply untrue and not originating from Lincoln at all. So many assertions about Lincoln's intentions and beliefs have been made that are utterly contrary to what Lincoln himself said and wrote. As with any historical figure, there are people that idolize and create myths, and there are those who are real historians, who actually do their homework. This book is a product of the work of a person in the latter category.

Shocking and contrary to what we were told as school children about Lincoln, the story of the real Lincoln is much more interesting and base than the myth makers would have us believe. Lincoln was, after all, a politician, a Statist, and a Federalist. He declared martial law, took away citizens basic constitutional rights, jailed newspaper reporters and statesmen that disagreed with him, and went against the founding father's explicit intentions as well as the Constitution and Bill of Rights in creating a massive, unrestricted, powerful centralized federal government. Lincoln, as it turns out, was no saint after all. The real story is always grittier and more interesting than the fantasy. If you want a taste of the real Lincoln, and if you are capable of dealing with some unpleasant facts about the man and the legend, read this book, it's a good start.

Disappointing! At first glance this book does have lots potential in terms of simplifying concepts and formulas, but it is loaded with mistakes - not only in the answer sections, but also regarding some of the methods. I applied their "Method for Finding Square Roots" to numbers other than the given examples, and it did not work. This is not a good buy - even if one merely needs a refresher in math.

Nice review of basic math principles, but there are an incredible number of mistakes in the answer section in the back of the book. Really confusing.

This is a helpful math book,it covers a lot of subjects from basic math to some pretty difficult topics.My only problem with it is that there are a bunch of wrong answers in the "answer" section,but it just made me hunt and work that much harder to find the correct answers.I hope they do a revision of this book because I would like to give it as a gift,but not at this time with all the mistakes in it.

This book is really bad. Dry, long, small type, Don't buy it

"The Lincoln/Douglas Debates" is a collection of speeches and debates that two candidates for the U.S. Senate in Illinois, Stephen Douglas and Abraham Lincoln, held in the summer and fall of 1858. This edition is a fantastic anthology of transcribed debates that focused on the issues of slavery, popular government, and popular sovereignty. It is interseting to notice how Lincoln gains in prominence as the debates progress and the extent to which both of these men discuss important moral and constitutional issues in the setting of small towns in Illinois. This text is absolutely essential for understanding the Civil War as well as American history and politics.

The Lincoln Brigade fought ON the side of the Communist Left ( Republicans) and participated in the many attrocities such as executions of the clergy, press,ect. They were funded by Eleanor Roosevelt who was a "closet" Communist,trained and sent to Spain to help send Spain into the Soviet orbit.

Interesting, if for no other reason than to see for yourself the nature of the "true believers" of the Left. We now know that Americans participated in Stalin-inspired Trotskyite hunts within the ranks of the International Brigades. While Merriman almost certainly met his end at a Nationalist firing squad, how many American Reds met their end at Merriman's orders? The writing style of the book was in the nature of a justification of a cause that was morally bankrupt, even in the context of fighting fascism. I recommend the book to anyone who wishes to better understand the mindset of liberal thinking . . .

"American Commander in Spain" is a vivid account of the last years in the life of Robert Merriman. The book was written by his wife, who followed Merriman when he went to fight in the Spanish Civil War. The book will not be helpful to the profesional historian, save perhaps a few anecdotes that could link specific historical characters to specific places during the war. The book is also not a novel and cannot be read as a work with high literary intentions. Rather it is an interesting portrait of a man whose life has the special quality of blending reality and legend. Merriman became fiction when Hemingway, who met him during the war used him as the basis for his character Robert Jordan in "For whom the bell tolls." The work will therefore be of most interest to those readers looking for the sources where Literature drinks from Life and with some emotional attachment to the historical context.

...For when one reads about Robert Merriman it becomes clear that he was an american patriot searching for solutions to get his own country out of the Depression and later trying to stop the rise of Fascism in Europe. That his countrymen were so blind then (and it seems still now) cost them dearly in WWII. The insensitivity shown by these reviewers hurts most those of us who look up to the american volunteers in awe, not for their ideological beliefs, but for their sense of sacrifice and love for freedom. It is a sin against Humanity to see Merriman's death any other way. If there is a God and these other reviewers are ever judged, I only hope that all their sins will be remembered.

Lincoln idoloters will inevitably try to manufacture something to idolize in this tragic, dark, tormented figure whose desperation was so great that Alfted Taylor Bledsoe, who resided at Globe Tavern simultaneously with the Lincolns, whose law office was next to Lincoln, who joined with Lincoln in Whig politican, and who taught Lincoln the use of the broadsword when Lincoln's indiscretion caught him in the Shield's affair, could only bring forth the deepest empathy for his suffering. It was Mrs. Bledsoe who carried for Mrs. Lincoln and Robert Lincoln post-partum. And, it was Dr. Bledsoe whose monumental Was Davis a Traitor (1968) reveals as well an any the shaky and erronous philosophical base of Mr. Lincoln's perversion of the constitutional compact. Lincoln, a despairing infidel, a spiritualist, a rabid story steller and ranconteur, a white supremist and segregationist, but masterful in argument before a jury and, in fact, honest in personal dealings, the type of person who, according to Dr. Bledsoe, did not so much as plant a tree at his dwelling.

I knew this book was coming out months in advanced and looked forward to it,because I consider Abraham Lincoln a great President. Sadly this book not only insults the readers but the President with the little content, 124 pages and really less when when consider that includeds acknowledgements and Notes. The cover price of $30.00 dollars is an absolute rip-off and if the author and the publisher did not realise this then they are incompetent, but I am presuming that they did know this, so that makes them greedy. This book came out for the holidays,so the publisher must be hoping that it is bought as a gift for someone who is hard to shop for, if you do buy this as a gift you have even less respect for the intended recipient than the publisher and the author have for us. Please buy something else as a gift.

I hope you all have a very safe and very Merry Christmas.

Noted Historian Donald, the author of the classic "Lincoln" biography, has adequately captured the kindness and inner beauty of our 16th President and his love of family in this slim, but well-written volume.

The book is divided into two parts, an essay written originally as a speech before former President Bush on Lincoln's domestic life in the White House - how he and the First Lady Mary Todd Lincoln coped with the agony of war and the tragic loss of their son Willie.

The second part of the book comprises all of the known letter correspondence between President Lincoln, and his wife and sons - and vice versa. Here we find that Robert Lincoln clearly was not too thrilled about his father becoming the Republican Presidential nominee in 1860, how Abraham Lincoln clearly fussed and agonized over son's Tad's missing (but eventually found) goat, all the more poignant because of Willie's death, and the tragic fire that claimed Willie's pony (not mentioned in this book). Or how Lincoln seemingly dispassionately mentioned in his correspondence to his wife the loss of Mary Todd Lincoln's Brother-In-Law, the Confederate General Ben Hardin Helm at the battle of Chickamauga.

Donald has given us a beautifully presented and written book, a worthy gift to the Lincoln and Civil War reader - the only reason why I gave it four stars instead of five was that it is too pricey for a non fleshed-out biography, but would definitely be worth the fifth star at a bargain-based price.

It 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) missed?

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. (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.

Where'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.

I am sure people who are interested in the American history of the latter part of the 19th century will find this book useful.

Well, surely this book is for young learners. However, the explanations are such a boring text, in the sense that they not provide detailed logical explanations which should be the basis of them. Moreover, the logical thinking is out of date. Do not expect to find new things here.

This book is subtitled, "A First Undergraduate Course", and that's exactly what it is. Don't expect in-depth technical treatment, but it's a decnt introduction to abstract algebra, covering basic properties of the integers, groups, sets & mappings, rings & fields, polynomials, Euclidean constructions, and some additional material on the integers and coding (from the table of contents). We used it in my undergrad course, and it was one of the simpler courses I've seen. All in all, not a bad way to go if you're just looking to dip your toes in abstract algebra. Look elsewhere for a deeper consideration.

While Ms. Robinson offers a good short bio of Muste in Peace Heroes of Twentieth-Century America, here her writing is worse. Muste was a pacifist who supported many solid causes and some questionable ones, like when he opposed World War II. The biography is written in a less than clear style and jumps around far too much to be really readable.

This out of print text is pretty bad. I am a professor of mathematics, and teaching out of this text is a drag. The organization is dubious, and the examples are shallow. I recommend Gallian's or Fraleigh's text instead.

Supposedly about the scientific intelligence teams that wandered through post-war (just) Germany trying to locate the Reich's scientific secrets...

When I first ordered this book, I assumed that it would be an exciting blend of adventure and science. Ah, no. Rather, the writer spends an inordinate amount of time telling us about himself, Atomic Theory, pre-war Germany, his role in winning the war and so on. As it turns out, he's had a fairly interesting life, so the book isn't a total bust, but I would have liked to have learned more about the grunts in the field and the risks they took.