Book Review: ‘April 1861' captures drama that occurred before Civil War's first shots
In '1861: The Lost Peace,' Winik covers the lead-up to the first shots being fired at
Fort Sumter.
The political intrigue leading up to 1861 rivals the battlefield action readers come to expect from many Civil War histories.
The overarching story is a familiar but important one for students of history: how a lowly Illinois congressman rose to power to lead a nation through its great divide over slavery and saved the American Experiment.
Winik chronicles Abraham Lincoln's evolution as a politician and as someone who 'was careful never to step too far ahead of prevailing opinion.'
But '1861' is one of the few Civil War histories where Lincoln isn't the most compelling figure. That title goes to a cast of characters, familiar ones such as abolitionist John Brown and lesser known figures such as Kentucky Sen. John J. Crittenden.
The book also portrays the waiting game that Major Robert Anderson faced as he commanded Fort Sumter and faced uncertainty as Lincoln took office.
Winik has a taut yet dramatic writing style that makes the book a compelling read even for those well-versed on the history leading up to the Civil War's outbreak.
Winik writes that the 'ultimate fate of nations is often measured and swayed not by large events, but by tiny ones,' and '1861' illustrates that point throughout its pages.
___
AP book reviews:
https://apnews.com/hub/book-reviews
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Mail-in voting is nothing new, just ask Civil War soldiers
'We cannot have free government without elections,' President Abraham Lincoln reflected outside the White House on Nov. 10, 1864. 'And if the rebellion could force us to forego or postpone a national election it might fairly claim to have already conquered and ruined us.' By the fall of 1864, the United States had been engulfed in a civil war for nearly 44 months, with 'the bones of thousands of Northern boys [lying] in Southern graves or decayed unburied in the thickets and swamps of Dixie,' writes historian Gerald Swick. For Lincoln — and for the Union — the outcome of the 1864 presidential election hung in the balance. If voters rejected Lincoln, the war to save the Union would almost certainly be lost. According to Swick, Peace Democrats, Lincoln's chief political opposition, wanted an end to hostilities immediately, under almost any circumstances. With so many men out on the field of battle, the incumbent president feared that many Union soldiers would not be able to cast their vote — and in his favor. For Lincoln, the election was to be won by bullets and ballots, with a string of Union victories that fall — David Farragut damning the torpedoes at Mobile Bay and William T. Sherman conquering the Southern city of Atlanta — helping to quell the Democrats' calls for an early peace By November 1864, as men physically lined up in the North to vote for Lincoln or the former Union general, George B. McClellan, a novel way to accommodate a soldier's right to vote was sweeping the battlefield. There was some precedent for absentee voting. During the War of 1812, Pennsylvania and then New Jersey changed their legislation to allow for mail-in voting for their soldiers at war. On Oct. 1, 1864, Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton published General Orders No. 265 outlining the procedures for Army voting. The order's purpose was to 'secure a fair distribution' of election material and prevent fraud and intimidation at the front and further invited 'civilian inspectors of each political party' to visit the various brigade headquarters throughout the Army 'to see that the elections are fairly conducted.' During the war, 19 Union states changed their laws to allow their soldiers to vote absentee. Other states permitted soldiers to vote by proxy, while others created polling sites in camps and hospitals under on-site inspection by appointed clerks or state officials. (In many states, however, the laws only referred to organizations within the Army: companies, regiments and brigades. Thus, many new voting laws did not apply to members of the Navy, according to the National Park Service.) Each state devised its own methods for absentee voting procedures, with Connecticut, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia mailing proxy votes, ballots or tally sheets. Pennsylvania officials prepared mailing materials for conveying the votes gathered at the front, while Ohio produced envelopes for both the state and national elections, according to the National Postal Museum. Ohioan qualified military absentee voters cast 12% of all the military ballots, with a majority voting for the reelection of Lincoln. By the end of Election Day on Nov. 8, 1864, of the 40,247 Union soldiers who voted, 30,503 voted for Lincoln, approximately 75.8% of the Union citizen-soldiers, according to the American Battlefield Trust. Lincoln carried all but three states (Kentucky, Delaware and New Jersey) with a 90% margin in the Electoral College, 212–21. Since then, states have offered, to varying degrees, the option of absentee voting. During the Second World War, the Soldier Voting Act of 1942 permitted 3.2 million absentee ballots to be cast during the conflict. The act was amended in 1944 and expired at war's end. Presently, the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act allows for roughly three-quarters of the 1.3 million active-duty troops to be eligible to vote absentee, according to the Federal Voting Assistance Program.
Politico
27 minutes ago
- Politico
Gabbard revokes security clearances of 37 former intelligence officials
The move comes as her office has placed escalating scrutiny on Obama administration officials involved in a review of Russian election interference. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard arrives at a White House event on Thursday, August 7. | Mark Schiefelbein/AP Photo By Jacob Wendler 08/19/2025 04:52 PM EDT Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard revoked the security clearances of 37 former intelligence officials, the Trump administration's latest move against Obama-era officials whom the White House accuses of undermining the Trump administration. In a memo she posted Tuesday on social media, Gabbard directed the heads of several national security agencies to immediately revoke the clearances of the officials, at the direction of the president, alleging they politicized or weaponized intelligence for personal or partisan gain. 'All personnel are reminded that holding a clearance is a privilege, not a right, and this privilege is contingent upon continued adherence to the principles and responsibilities of our profession,' Gabbard wrote in the memo. 'Any betrayal of these standards compromises not only our mission, but also the safety and security of the American people.'
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Federal judge blocks parts of Mississippi ban on DEI in public schools
JACKSON, Miss. (AP) — A federal judge has blocked portions of Mississippi's ban on diversity, equity and inclusion practices in public schools from being enforced while a lawsuit against it is underway. The provisions blocked by U.S. District Judge Henry Wingate on Monday seek to prohibit public schools from discussing a list of 'divisive concepts' related to race, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation and national origin. They would also prevent public schools from maintaining programs, courses or offices that promote DEI or endorse 'divisive concepts,' and ban diversity training requirements. The preliminary injunction does not block other portions of the law, including those that prevent schools from giving preferential treatment based on race, sex, color or national origin and that penalize students or staff for their refusal to embrace DEI concepts. The law, which took effect in April, aims to prevent public schools from 'engaging in discriminatory practices' by banning DEI offices, trainings and programs. Any school in violation of the act could lose state funding. A group of teachers, parents and students is suing the state, arguing that the law violates their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. Wingate wrote in his ruling that he finds the law to be at odds with the First Amendment and the public interest of the state. 'It is unconstitutionally vague, fails to treat speech in a viewpoint-neutral manner, and carries with it serious risks of terrible consequences with respect to the chilling of expression and academic freedom,' he wrote. Wingate also granted the plaintiff's request to add class action claims to the lawsuit, meaning the injunction will apply to teachers, professors and students across the state. The plaintiff's lawyers sought the addition after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in June limited the ability of federal judges to grant sweeping injunctions. Jarvis Dortch, the executive director of the ACLU of Mississippi, which is helping litigate the case, said he was thankful for Wingate's stance. 'The Court sees the law for what it plainly is — an attempt to stop the proper exchange of ideas within the classroom," Dortch said in a statement. Wingate's ruling follows a temporary restraining order he granted to the plaintiffs in July. At an Aug. 5 hearing, lawyers representing the plaintiffs argued the law is too confusing, leaving parents, teachers and students wondering what they can and cannot say and whether they could face consequences as a result of their speech. Cliff Johnson, a professor at the University of Mississippi Law School and Mississippi director of the MacArthur Justice Center, testified that he and his students often discuss what could be considered 'divisive topics.' Johnson said he did not believe the law would allow him to teach about the First, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments; the court case that paved the way for the internment of Japanese citizens during WWII; portions of the Civil Rights Act; or the murders of Emmett Till and the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. 'I think I'm in a very difficult position. I can teach my class as usual and run the serious risk of being disciplined, or I could abandon something that's very important to me,' Johnson testified. 'I feel a bit paralyzed.' The Mississippi Attorney General's Office argued that public employees do not have First Amendment rights. 'They are speaking for the government and the government has every right to tell them what they need to say on its behalf,' said Lisa Reppeto, an attorney at the state attorney general's office. She added that the First Amendment does not give students the right to dictate what their school does or does not say. Reppeto also said the consequences of the law are aimed at the schools — not students or teachers — and that the plaintiffs' 'argument is not consistent with what is in the statute.' Solve the daily Crossword
