Fine picture of an often-maligned woman. A few historial inaccuracies, but well written and enlightening. Follows the same path as the much newer book by Kay duPont, "Loving Mr. Lincoln: The Personal Diaries of Mary Todd Lincoln," which, in fact, Jean Baker endorsed.

As I have learned after reading, and watching many documentries,and books about the Lincoln family.I have learnd one unpleasent thing.Mrs.Lincoln has been horibely treated in history.
I rember a kind of quote in the Lincoln A House Divided special where someone said that she was more intelegent then most men she knew.
Mary was intelegent.She studied politacts and was a Bell in Kentucky.Though she did have ovbius emotional problems and fits of depressions--So did Abraham.However this is often over looked becaouse of his status.

I think this has to be one of my favorite matriels out there about Mary.An excelent read,with informtiove information.
A good sense of what Mary must have been like.Which is something that most books lack about Mrs.Lincoln.This book is a true gem.

Jean Baker's biography of Mary Todd Lincoln is a well written work on an individual whose life was at once extraordinarily blessed and tragically cursed. Born in
Lexington to an upper middle class family with a long history in Kentucky, Mary was given both the traditional lifestyle of the young southern belle and the unusual
opportunity of an education. During a time when most women of her social class were almost invisible to the public world, Mary was better educated, more
outgoing, more inclined to express a personal opinion, and more ambitious than others of her set. To some extent these are the reasons she reached the White
House. They are also responsible for some of her social problems after leaving Washington. In fact, except for the early loss of her husband and children--a
common tragedy for many women of the time--most of Mary Lincoln's troubles were the outcome of her attitudes toward others and her extraordinary self
absorption. Even the loss of close family members merely presented an opportunity for her to assume the role of heroine in her own tragic drama, and she carried
her mourning to extremes rather than give up center stage. Focus became not the sad death of young men at the very beginning of their lives or of a national loss
of a great leader, but Mary Todd Lincoln's grief. When others refused to make her the center of their attention indefinitely, she apparently felt they were
unreasonable, and her outbursts alienated many who might have helped her far more and more readily than they ultimately did. To say that she was a woman with
great psychological and situation problems is an understatement.
Professor Baker tends to put a feminist spin on the events of Mary Lincoln's life, seeing her as a victim of the misogynistic, paternalistic environment of her times
and, as a woman ahead of her time, a prime target for male backlash. To some extent this may be--probably is--true, but not entirely. Certainly there were as
many, if not probably more, women who disliked her, some of them formerly close friends. In defense of the men and women of the mid nineteenth century, the
behavioral expectations of the day simply were what they were and putting their social mores on trial at this late date is not only unjust, it's pointless. Even in our
own society, which tolerates a far greater variance in behavior and where rapid communication allows us to share what's new more globally, there are still
behaviors that raise eyebrows. Like the society of Mary's day, we don't like to have our sense of what's "right" offended. To see this more personally, one has
merely to cross cultural lines, from say western to middle easter for instance, to feel the high dudgeon that the people of Mary's environment may have felt over her
breeches of expected behavior.
One of the figures in the story, most often vilified as the Bad Son, is Robert Lincoln. I had heard before the story of his consigning his mother to a sanitarium. The
book, while it makes of him just as much a villain, also provides enough details so the more critical reader might decern a less sinister view of these events. In his
defense I don't think that Robert Lincoln was quite the conniving, greedy man he is depicted--although I have to admit I've not read a biography of the man. He
certainly was able to provide a clear accounting of his management of his mother's funds. I suspect that he was merely a product of his age. That he was a very
rigid, conservative individual--as lawyers tend to be in any age--with political ambitions of his own can hardly be held against him. He certainly doesn't seem to
have used his mother's income to further his own agenda. From the author's own description of her, Mary Lincoln was self centered, outspoken, and eccentric.
She was also inclined to see others in black and white rather than in shades of gray, either for or against her, a friend to be clutched to her bosom or an enemy to
be driven away with every means available to her. Furthermore her shopping, which became the focus of her insanity trial, apparently was abnormal for the age. In
fact, even in our own time, excessive spending can be seen as a type of addictive or compulsive behavior and can and occasionally does lead to the bankruptcy
that Robert Lincoln feared would be his mother's fate if left to her own devises. Her 64 trunks--and the old Saratogas were not exactly carry-ons--of
possessions, weighing some 4 tons, would suggest that maybe her behavior really was a little out of hand. In his defense is the fact that he was surrounded by a
society that saw his mother's behavior as embarrassing if not outright insane and by advisors who agreed with his point of view and urged him to pursue the
course he did. That he should suborn perjury in an effort to bring his mother's behavior more in line with public expectations and her spending under better control
is tragic perhaps, but not necessarily evil. It might be pointed out that in growing up in the LIncoln household, there appeared to be only two methods of dealing
with mother, either rebel and fight for your own identity, as Robert Lincoln seems to have done, or allow oneself to be totally absorbed by her personality, as the
other sons seem to have done. Robert was never going to be his mother's favorite son. It might be pointed out, that he is also the only one to have survived her.
For those who are more inclined to understand the period itself, one of the more interesting aspects of Professor Baker's work is the clearer picture of the man
Lincoln that arises when he becomes a collateral, almost an incidental, character in the story. The events that lead to his death and ultimate cultural "deification"
are more evident, and his personality becomes more human. Factors in his personal life which may have effected his presidency are certainly much clearer.
Although I don't necessarily agree with some of Professor Baker's assessments, I think the book was very well written. It certainly kept my attention from beginning
to end. It is also very thoroughly researched. I think the chronicle of women's contributions to our world is far too under represented, and I welcome the addition of
this biography in partial remedy of that omission.

Come Retribution is opaque, at times difficult but a wonderfully fresh look at the official role of the CONfederate government in the assasination of Abraham Lincoln. Unlike most works on the Civil War, it is not a re-comilation but a new look at an old subject using new evidence. And the evidence is damning -- the authors, all modern day intelligence experts, argue convincingly that the death of President Lincoln was a runaway operation that was designed to kidnap the president and/or blow up the War department. The authors ability to uncover fresh evidence at so late a date is an indication that modern research and analytical techniques used by the intelligence community have a strong and valuable role in historical reseacrh as well. This book is an absolute must read for anyone interested in the assasination of Lincoln, the Confederate Secret Service or historical detective work. MichShul@aol.com

While not as readable as a novel or even a narrative history, this book is fascinating reading for anyone interested in the subject of the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. While everybody and his brother has been accused of killing John F. Kennedy, few have questioned the "lone gunman" theory that John Wilkes Booth was a madman who acted on his own. Some years back there was an inept attempt to blame a conspiracy involving Union secretary of war Edwin Stanton, but no one seems to have thought to explore the obvious possibility of Confederate involvement--at least not since Stanton himself gave up trying to pin it on Jeff Davis shortly after the event. Now this book presents a sizable body of circumstantial evidence to show that, at the very least, the assassination was a last-minute perversion of a Confederate plot to capture Lincoln and thus bargain for its independence, or at least for its soldiers in Federal prisoner of war camps. The book is well written, and the thesis it presents is convincing. No one who has not read this book really understands the end of the American Civil War

This book, first published in 1971, presents the life and career of Abraham Lincoln through the pages of the newspapers that covered it. This work is, therefore, essentially a biography written with multiple voices and from differing perspectives by the journalists who watched Lincoln's public life. It contains all of the virtues and vices of the reportorial profession. At times the reprinted articles are eloquent and insightful, at others they present gross inaccuracies and exaggerations. All come together to offer a complex portrait of arguably the most significant president of the American republic. Overall, they offer a fascinating representation of Abraham Lincoln and his times.

Editor Herbert Mitgang makes clear that the individual articles reprinted in this collection should never be considered objective accounts of Lincoln's activities. Instead, the newspapers of that era were overtly partisan. Even a relatively small city like Lincoln's Springfield, Illinois, had two newspapers, one ardently supportive of Lincoln and the Republicans, the other rabidly hostile. And both reported the same events in strikingly different ways. Readers see repeatedly in this collection the differing reportage of events in Lincoln's life. For instance, accounts of the Lincoln-Douglas debates are sensationalized toward one side or the other depending on the political allegiance of the newspaper reporting them. Mitgang appropriately notes that these reports "presented history in the rough" (p. xxiv).

While this collection ranges across the life of Abraham Lincoln, well over two-thirds of the work is devoted to his presidential career and the Union's victory in the Civil War against the Confederacy. Almost every major military action is discussed in some detail, but more importantly the role of Lincoln in reshaping the nation with the abolition of slavery receives considered attention. The struggles to maintain a ruling coalition and to manage both the radicals of Lincoln's own party and the peace Democrats enter the discussion. Of course, the assassination of Lincoln and succession of his vice president to the oval office gains attention.

This is a marvelous entrée for students into the primary sources of history. Newspapers have shaped our understanding of political events since the birth of the nation and this collection goes far toward illuminating the career or Abraham Lincoln. The reports and opinions of journalists show a person and a time in both its ambiguity and complexity. Its availability in this paperback reprint provides excellent grist for students.