While it seems like a large chunk of change, this book is worth every penny. Ever since I've purchased it, many of my colleagues (I'm a social scientist at KU) ask to borrow it, but I never let it go. Just about any question I have about qualitative research can be answered, to some degree, with this book. What's more, even in some of the more controversial areas of qualitative research the book points to other readings that may shed light on alternate perspectives.

Just buy the book. I did, and I don't regret it for a moment. It's also nice in that it covers a wide variety of disciplines and contexts -- journalists, sociologists, communicologits, psychologists, and political scientists can all use the book with equal ease. One area, though, that I've heard the book is not as strong toward is anthropology. If you're an anthropologist, you may want to check out Holstein's interviewing methods book.

These knowledgeable and experienced authors have assembled cutting eduge chapters on the new dimensions researchers have available for doing quantitative research. Of special interest to this reader is the chapter on feminist research. A thorough and scholarly look at objective research in the area of gender issues. This should be of especial help to men who are trying to do a good job in writing and researching while examining their own possible biases. This is a "must have" reference!

You know its funny to be writing a review about a book that was written so long ago, but I think this review may help encourage others who haven't already been acquainted with this wonderful book to take a look at it. It offers a very human view of Lincoln before he became the president of the United States. I agree with the fact that it doesn't reveal a lot about the civil war, but you know what, that was the authors intention. William Herndon, Lincoln's Law partner for about 20 years, knew that other people were going to focus on the war years far better than he could (Like John Hay and John Nicolay who worked for Lincoln in the White House) therefore, his focus is to reveal Lincoln as he was as a young man, but mostly during his years living in springfield, illinois. Its really quite entertaining, and at times comical to read how quirky he was back in those days. Sure, Herndon has been criticized about his biography over the past 100 plus years its been out in circulation, particularly his whole take on the Ann Rutledge affair and attitude on Mary Todd Lincoln. Regardless of that, I think he honestly attempts to provide an accurate portrayal of Lincoln without holding back any details. He wants to reveal Lincoln the way he viewed the man through his own eyes--as an ordinary man who had faults like anybody else--who went through tough, turbulent, and dark times--had a sense of humor--had insecurities--but in the end remained an honest to goodness human being who struggled to make his mark in this world. Trust me folks, this is a fascinating read. You will have a difficult time trying to stop reading.

There are, it is said, more books about Lincoln than there are about anybody but Jesus. Every man setting out to write about Lincoln has an idea of him, a shadow to look for Lincoln in and the huge weight of tradition and history on his back while writing. Even Nicolay and Hay, his secretaries, and authors of the voluminous collected papers which are probably the best source on the Presidency, only knew the man in office, once he had enfolded himself, if you will, inside his great ambition. Herndon knew the man. He shared his office with him, a law practise which consisted of Lincoln throwing the case notes and money into his hat before putting it on to his head, and splitting all the money down the middle. Herndon also went around talking to everyone who knew Lincoln while he was alive before they died.

There are flaws to this book. Herndon drank, so Lincoln didn't take him to Washington with him. This book tells you nothing about the war, about Lincoln's policies, or even a great deal about Lincoln's debates with Douglas, say. But. And it is a great but. This is the only book that gives you a smell of the goofy, tall, funny, awkward, galumphing and generally likeable oddball that emerged as the greatest leader this country ever had. This is the only book I would advise an actor to read if he was going to undertake to play Abe Lincoln. All the other books describe a monument. This one describes a man who went on dates, told dirty jokes and had a funny way of laying his legs across the desk and reading upside down. The rest is second hand.

This is an outstanding compilation of thoughtful and provocative essays offered by Judge Frank J. Williams. Anyone with an interest in Lincoln should add this volume to their library. Well written and lucid, Williams provides a highly balanced look at the motivations and actions of the 16th President, with a keen eye to historical accuracy, historiography, historical memory, and balance. Williams, like all good authors and historians recognizes that there will never be a definative word on his subject, but is unafraid to weigh in with his own venture into the fray. As a history teacher, with an abiding interest in Lincoln, I grade this effort a solid A!

As much as the title of this book states that people may be judging Lincoln it hardly gives that negative feel. Frank Williams has put together a very well written book which explores Lincoln's motivations, desires, thoughts and how he managed people. Williams brings us interesting insight into the man where myth sometimes tells the wrong story. Viewpoints on how Lincoln managed Union commanders, political opponents, slavery issues and people is really what this book covers. Williams treats his subject quite fairly showing both sides of the stories in which controvercy over Lincoln's actions have resided. This book was a quick read although very enjoyable. If you are a Civil War fan, you should consider this book as much is written. How Lincoln handled popular generals such as McClellan, Meade, Hooker, Burnside and others was very interesting!

My friend and I read this book while waiting for our food two summers ago, at a Friendly's in Providence Rhode Island. The book gripped us, and to this day we still talk about the story that changed our lives. If we hadn't taken that vacation, and hadn't chosen to eat at Friendly's, today we would be different people. I Love this book and will devote the up comming summer to finding a copy of it. Perhapes I will retrace my steps to Providence and reread the book that now is just a memory. I don't know if the book is still there or if that Friendly's is even still open, but my summer memories will live on as long as I remember the plot of this revolutionary book. Steve,you know it.

Mr. Potts not only looks like Abraham Lincoln but is a confirmed Lincolnphile who shares many other attributes of Mr. Lincoln's with his young neighbor who in turn shares Mr. Potts with his schoolmates for a special program on Lincoln's birthday. A clever story that presents pertinent facts about a beloved president to young children. As an school librarian I enjoy reading this to kindergarten students for Presidents Day.

The "prime goal" of this marvelous book by Gabor Boritt, Professor of Civil War Studies and director of the Civil War Institute at Gettysburg College, "is the examination of [Lincoln's] economic persuasion, of how it broadly manifested itself in his political life, and how it affected American history." For many readers, a book about Lincoln's "economic persuasion" may seem pedantic, if not trivial, but Boritt demonstrates that Lincoln's economic views were central to his political philosophy. Had Lincoln not been an economic nationalist, he almost certainly never would have risen beyond being an unknown, provincial Illinois politician.

As Boritt explains in the preface, Lincoln's "connections with political economy" "may appear to be dreadfully dull to some," but the author cautions that "it is indispensable." Lincoln first came to prominence in rural Illinois in the 1830s as an advocate for "better transportation - 'internal improvements,' as Americans called it." As a member of the Illinois House of Representatives, Lincoln "supported the creation of many, though not all, private, river, canal, turnpike, and railroad companies." At the end of the first chapter, Boritt writes that Lincoln's "political activity was inspired, beyond the hope of personal or party gain, by a vision of endless material progress," which became the "American dream."

Because Lincoln's origins were humble, he often is portrayed as a champion of the common man, but, as Boritt observes, for Lincoln, "banking was a special interest," and, in 1835, he supported a state bank because, according to Boritt, "the Illinois economy needed banking facilities above all to support internal improvements." By 1837, Lincoln was a member of the [Illinois] House Finance Committee, and, according to Boritt, he "made economics the most substantial part of his campaigning, legislative labors, and private studies outside (and not infrequently inside) his legal work." In an 1837 speech defending the state bank, Boritt writes that Lincoln "was giving voice to the prime element of his developing economic persuasion. The fact was that for the man who would rise, for the nations that would rise, banks were necessary." Boritt's assessment is: "Lincoln's involvement with improvements helped him reach convictions which played a crucial role during his presidency." According to Boritt, "the improvement episode helped make Lincoln a lifelong opponent of the localism and sectionalism that proved so destructive in Illinois."

In the mid-1840s, when Lincoln was hoping to be elected to Congress, his "Whiggery was mainly economic oriented," and his acceptance of broad party principles "meant national economic goals." According to Boritt: "Lincoln's thinking...exuded nationalism." In Washington, he "desired large scale federal improvements, federally directed, at federal expense." "But in Congress Lincoln began to shift his attention from specific questions of economics" as a result of the Mexican War, which Lincoln opposed. In Boritt's view: "Lincoln's lack of enthusiasm about expansion may have been shortsighted in economic terms," but, according to Boritt, Lincoln appears to have believed that "[e]conomic development demanded peace."

In the 1850s, according to Boritt, as Lincoln was "pulled...toward Republicanism," he continued to believe "the economics of prosperity, freedom, and this democracy." In several places, Boritt observes that Lincoln believed in the inevitability of material progress. In contrast: "Slavery was a relic of barbarism." In 1856, according to Boritt, Lincoln noted that the "'central idea' of America was equality." To Lincoln, in Boritt's view, "equality" meant "opportunity to get ahead in life." Boritt explains: "Since the central idea of America was economic, the measure of the nation's success had to be economic, too." In this respect, according to Boritt, Lincoln "institutionalized the American Dream - made it perhaps the most central idea of the nation," and slavery had to be extinguished because it "subverted the Dream." According to Boritt: "Lincoln could perceive America only through nationalist eyes....As Lincoln saw it, the nation was to become either free or slave, one or the other."

During the 1850s, according to Boritt, Lincoln became increasingly absorbed with the slavery issue. Once elected president, according to Boritt, "Lincoln's eyes remained set on one foremost goal: stopping slavery extension in the name of the American Dream." According to Boritt: "Lincoln defended the Union on many occasions and in almost as many ways, but by far his most extensive and determined defense was a largely economic defense." In his annual message in 1862, according to Boritt, Lincoln declared that the "United States could not be broken up...because it formed am indivisible economic unit." In Boritt's view, "Lincoln's first important military act was essentially economic: the proclamation of a blockade of Southern ports....The adaption of economic policy to military strategy, thus began a few days after the fall of Fort Sumter, continued to Appomattox." According to Boritt: "Emancipation by itself ran counter to the President's policy of enticing Southerners back into the Union through economic means." Boritt writes: "Lincoln appreciated the need for an economic base for the former slaves." The employment of former slaves liberated by the circumstances of war, Boritt explains, "transformed the slave into a wage-earning free laborer." Nevertheless, in Boritt's view, Lincoln "failed to come to grips fully with the needs of the masses of blacks." In the final chapter, Boritt writes: "For Lincoln, unobstructed upward mobility was the most important ideal America strove for....Mobility was the ideal and slavery its antipode." For Lincoln, in Boritt's view, "the most 'central idea' of the Union war effort was the preservation of man's right to rise.'"

What, ultimately, is the connection between Lincoln's economic and political philosophy? I believe Boritt would say that Lincoln's economic nationalism made him a lifelong opponent of the localism and sectionalism, as well as a strong believer in economic opportunity. In one of this book's key passages, Boritt writes that "slavery was the supreme issue for [Lincoln] because he feared its extension would strangle the American Dream." After reading this book, no reader will doubt that, throughout his public career, Lincoln was a man ahead of his time.

I've read many titles on Lincoln and have come to know the man, his words and his deeds. But now I can say that I understand him. American revisionists have lately found it fashionable and all too easy to knock down our heroes and charge them with crimes from the perspective of the Twentieth Century. Yet, Boritt's insights are a wonderful celebration of a true American hero. And better yet, Boritt makes no apologies for it. Perhaps we needed to wait for this foreign born author to remind us what has been really important about the USA all along. Wrap yourself in the red, white and blue and feel patriotic again. Oh, and by the way, don't let the title scare you. The book is quite an easy read.

(This pertains just to Volume I) We have had three Presidents who conducted a major war: Lincoln, Wilson, and Franklin Roosevelt. Wilson had John J. Pershing; Roosevelt had George C. Marshall. Lincoln had none; his greatest prospect was Robert E. Lee. So the very title of this book conveys a task for Lincoln that had to be done, if the Union were to survive. And so, Professor Williams starts out telling us in no uncertain terms that the beginning of the war showed no generals likely to be able to do the job . . . he completes Volume One with McClellan--who is not the general Lincoln wants. And we are anxious for subsequent volume(s) for Professor Williams takes us to Sam Grant--the general Lincoln finally found. This book moves along, and as it does, we fairly ache with the disappointment Lincoln suffered time and time again.

Excellent analysis of beginning of Civil War and McClellan's rise/beginning of his fall. William's easily readable, yet thorough analysis of the political and military goings-on just prior to the fall of Fort Sumter through Antietam makes one anxious to read the complete set of Lincoln Finds a General. Obviously no fan of McCellan, Kenneth Williams makes an eloquent case against "the redoubtable McC" and gives a clear picture of the difficulties he made for Lincoln by his hesitancy and obtuseness. In this volume, Williams paves the way for other volumes illustrating the further trials of Linclon in his search for a military man who could help him save the nation-one who was not overawed by Bobby Lee. One can imagine his thankfulness and relief when he found Grant: "I can't spare this man--he fights!" As a Civil War buff of 40 years, I was enchanted by this book and have spent over 10 years searching for the complete set--I found it once in an antique book store in Columbia, SC for $350 (first edition set of the complete original volumes) at a time when that seemed a fortune to me. I wish I had gotten that set as I have never seen it again, but I have re-read this little volume so many times that it is greatly worn--proof of its readabiliy and texture. A real treat for any Civil War buff.

This fascinating volume considers how Lincoln has been viewed from the time of his death to the time this work came out. The account of the historical research related to Lincoln's genealogy and his early life is particularly intriguing. It discusses some of the Lincoln literature and indicates what is worth reading. For instance, he downgrades Otto Eisenschiml's sensational Why Was Lincoln Murdered?, which made such a splash when it came out in 1937, and recommends The Lincoln Murder Conspiracies, by William Hanchett as the best book on the assassination and its historiography. This was the best book I read in the year when I read it, a year in which I read 126 books.

Merrill D. Peterson, a renowned Jefferson scholar, enters the field of Lincoln studies with this book on how Lincoln has been remembered, memorialized and celebrated in the years since his death. Peterson examines an interesting variety of sources, including statues and prints made of Lincoln over the years in addition to the numerous biographies written. Among the images examined are the Emancipator, the martyr, and Savior of the Union. Peterson examines the origins of these images and how they have carried through the generations by historians and others.

This book should be a MUST for anyone wanting to learn, or understand Lincoln's role in the Fort Sumter/Civil War situation. John Tilley must have spent years researching this.

What Mr. Tilley does in the book, is describe the pieces to the puzzle; then explain how they all fit together. It's an amazing book.

What most Civil War historians miss is Lincoln's letter of 12 December 1860, ( this rather shows Lincoln's assumption to interfere in governmental affairs, even though he was still a civilian--voted in, but not taken the oath of inauguration 4 March 61--, and questions a belief in undermining the current President Buchanan.)-----From this book you read---->

--> Lincoln had sent to E.B. Washburne [ 12 Dec 1860 ],for secret transmittal to George Winfield Scott, commanding General of the army, this message: ---"Please present my respects to the General, and tell him confidentially, I shall be obliged to him to be as well prepared as he can to either hold or retake the Forts, as the case may require, at and after the inauguration."---

Primary Source: Nicolay and Hay, Lincoln III, page 250 ( see also)
Robert McNutt McElroy, "Jefferson Davis; the Unreal and the Real", I, page 278
( did you notice the word, "secret"!)

This book quotes the O.R., the O.R.N., The Diary of Gideon Wells, "The Genesis of the Civil War" by Crawford, amongst a host of other sources.

Tilley totally debunks the "Starving Garrison" story that was fabricated for the Northern newspapers, to build support for the war. Example---

By Anderson's own figures he had enough provisions on hand to last his garrison, until April 26th. This did not take into consideration, the supplies ( Meat, vegetables, solidified milk, butter, soap, and groceries), that they received from Charleston, after that.

Beauregard even sent cases of Claret and cigars over with his compliments
----"Battles and Leaders", Vol 1, page 82-----

In fact Anderson's garrison were supplied from Charleston, until the first week of April, when the reports came in that Warships where headed towards Fort Sumter.
Anderson's own words refutes the "Starving Garrison" story concocted for the Northern papers.
Anderson stated, in a week they would be starved out anyway. ---meaning they did in fact have food then.

The first chapter of this book reads a little slow, as Tilley seems to 'set a stage', or introduce us to the mystery. ( This could be compared to a mystery novel; except this is factual) Reading the second chapter and beyond, the days leading up to this are put together, from the records, and even many Civil War buffs should learn a few things.

A very nice touch at the end of the book, are several pages taken from High School History books, concerning the Fort Sumter incident. ( I like these quizzes at the end, a shame more books don't have them.) By the end of the book, you'll see the mistakes these High School History books teach. If you don't, then Mr. Tilley, uses the Official Records, and shows us the mistakes.

Probably the best Fort Sumter/Civil War book on the market.

Did you ever wonder why Lincoln never said, "What a minute fellas; let's sit down and talk this thing out."
Read this book and find out.

I am glad to see that this book has been republished after almost half a century. In this book, Tilley goes about showing Lincoln's true role in starting the War Between the States.

It is a known fact that Lincoln's election led the the secession of the Southern States, but this work goes about showing how Lincoln used every device at his disposal to lure the Confederate States into firing the first shots of the war.

This is not a review but a call for help. A market that needs to be met is a fact based but fictional history of the Union blockade of the Confederacy along the lines of C. S. Forrester's Hornblower novels.

The growth of the American Navy as a permanent force on the seas began in the Civil War and the building of the blockading force should provide a rich background to any solid writer of fiction that choses to devote the time to it.

As a wargamer, i bought this book to have detailed information and pictures about ironclads but i got much more. The author not only gives plenty of details for each class of vessels but you also get insider information on how to build an ironclad, the life at sea at the time and a description of every shipyard then in use, some still as it were. For the navy buff and/or wargamer. Lots of pictures.

The series of debates in Illinois between Stephen Douglas and Abraham Lincoln during the 1858 campaign for the U.S. Senate are one of those legendary political encounters of which everyone has heard but few have gone back and actually read. However, since Lincoln never kept any of his papers prior to winning the Presidency, we do not have autograph copies of his Cooper Union or House Divided speeches, let alone his handwritten notes of the great debates. The claim made by Harold Holzer for his edition is that this is the first complete, unexpurgated text of the debates to be published. Holzer notes that what we have relied upon previously for debate transcripts were copies taken down by stenographers for intensely partisan newspapers. Holzer's hypothesis is that the editors and transcribers for these newspapers would improve the remarks by their own candidates while leaving those of his opponent alone. Supporting his idea are the unedited texts of the debate he uncovered. Of course, Holzer provides his own useful additions to the texts of the seven debates in the form of extensive notes (often covering the audience reactions as detailed by various papers). As a two-time winner of the Lincoln/Barondess Award of the Lincoln Round Table and the first Award of Achievement given by the Abraham Lincoln Association for his hundreds of articles and books on Lincoln, Holzer is certainly in a position to make such judgments.

You should be warned that reading these debates will both exhilarate and depress you. These debates lasted three hours and forced the candidates to develop comprehensive proposals and to respond in detail to the attacks of their opponent. The thought of Bore or Gush trying to talk from notes for even fifteen minutes is enough to make you laugh, cry or bang you head against the wall. Reading the Lincoln-Douglas debates, in this or any other edition, will certainly give you more of a feel for the issue of Slavery circa 1858 than you will ever get from a history book from which you may get a few choice quotes (what the back cover would call "volleys"). For those of us who want access to primary documents, who read court decisions rather than let talking heads on the tube tell us what they think things might possibly mean, books like this are a great joy. For those who admire Lincoln, the right man in the right place at the right time at the worst moment in our country's history, the Lincoln in these debates who is speaking extemporaneously from notes rather than reading from a carefully crafted and fine tuned text is arguably the closest we get to the real man.

The Lincoln-Douglas Debates have justly been celebrated in American history as one of the milestones in Abraham Lincoln's rise to the presidency. However, Lincoln's own well-meaning assembling of the received text of these debates used only transcripts from papers friendly to either candidate--transcripts which, Harold Holzer argues, were smoothed over and revised by reporters eager to make "their" candidate look good. Holzer insists that we must go to the transcripts of Lincoln's speeches by the pro-Douglas paper, and vice-versa, to get a true sense of what was said off the cuff by the debaters. His edition portrays vividly not only the high-sounding rhetoric of Douglas and the noble ideals of Lincoln, but also the hesitations and mis-speakings of both men. In this way, the reader gets a better sense of what it was like to be in the crowd listening as history was being made