After Lincoln: How the North Won the Civil War and Lost the Peace

by A.J. Langguth

A brilliant evocation of the post-Civil War era by the acclaimed author of Patriots and Union 1812 . After Lincoln tells the story of the Reconstruction, which set back black Americans and isolated the South for a century.

With Lincoln’s assassination, his “team of rivals,” in Doris Kearns Goodwin’s phrase, was left adrift. President Andrew Johnson, a former slave owner from Tennessee, was challenged by Northern Congressmen, Radical Republicans led by Thaddeus Stephens and Charles Sumner, who wanted to punish the defeated South. When Johnson’s policies placated the rebels at the expense of the black freed men, radicals in the House impeached him for trying to fire Secretary of War Edwin Stanton. Johnson was saved from removal by one vote in the Senate trial, presided over by Salmon Chase. Even William Seward, Lincoln’s closest ally in his cabinet, seemed to waver.

By the 1868 election, united Republicans nominated Ulysses Grant, Lincoln's winning Union general. The night of his victory, Grant lamented to his wife, “I’m afraid I’m elected.” His attempts to reconcile Southerners with the Union and to quash the rising Ku Klux Klan were undercut by post-war greed and corruption during his two terms.

Reconstruction died unofficially in 1887 when Republican Rutherford Hayes joined with the Democrats in a deal that removed the last federal troops from South Carolina and Louisiana. In 1964, President Lyndon Johnson signed a bill with protections first proposed in 1872 by the Radical Senator from Massachusetts, Charles Sumner.

Genres: History, Civil War, Nonfiction, Politics, American History, Presidents, Biography

464 pages, Hardcover

First published September 1, 2014

About the author

A.J. "Jack" Langguth was a Professor at the School of Journalism at the University of Southern California and an American author and journalist. In addition to his non-fiction work, he is the author of several dark, satirical novels. A graduate of Harvard College, Langguth was South East Asian correspondent and Saigon bureau chief for "The New York Times" during the Vietnam war. He was awarded a John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation Fellowship in 1975, and received the The Freedom Forum Award, honoring the nation's top journalism educators, in 2001.
A nonfiction study of the Reconstruction Era, is scheduled to be published in 2013.

Reviews

[Tony · Rating 3 out of 5]

Way back when I used to work, I was sitting in my boss' office, entertaining him with my droll wit, when a colleague came in and regaled us with a story about an argument he had recently had with his spouse. I forget what the argument was about, something stupid I'm sure, but our narrator swelled up and said after telling his wife what an idiot she was, he hurled her golf clubs off the deck of their house onto the ground below. With that, he swelled up even more. Ex.Clam.Ation.Point!

We paused.

And....(because sometimes I do not have a filter)....I said...."I suppose it was just then, Bobby, when your wife said, 'I never realized how wrong I was until I saw you throw my golf clubs off the deck. Now, I finally realize how wrong I was, and I will never be as stupid as that again.'"

I saw a light register in his eyes.

_____ _____ _____ _____

Like Yasser Arafat, Theodore Roosevelt and Henry Kissinger, Barack Obama has a Nobel Peace Prize. Obama has ordered bombings into Syria. This makes us (me) feel good. He may hit some ISIS terrorists. He will miss some. Those he misses will not say, "I never realized how wrong I was until you blew up my village. I will never be as stupid as my dead uncle. God Bless America!"

_____ _____ _____ _____ _____

So, too, the Civil War. General Longstreet was a quick exception. But not Lee, not Nathan Bedford Forest (the first Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan), not the entire South.

_____ _____ _____ _____ _____

I think our author had a narrower focus. But this is what this book made me think about. How countries mobilize and send troops into battle, and win strategic victories, and make us feel plenty good....but does that solve anything? Oh, but there are Good Wars, you say. We stopped Hitler! And yes, we did. But did we stop the hatred of Jews?

We had to have that Civil War! And yes, I think that's true. Yet Race is the great issue in America today.

_____ _____ _____ _____ _____

Oh, the book.

It's history lite, and nothing wrong with that. I knew that going in. There are places he is just wrong (the culpability of those accused in the Lincoln assassination, for example); and places where he lets his politics show, such as the abbreviated* ending where he fast-forwards history and damns Eisenhower, selectively, and praises Kennedy, selectively.

_____ _____ _____ _____ _____

And to you who would bomb us, listen, it's just not us who are the assholes, who don't fucking get it. Blow yourselves up, taking as many of us as you can with you. Make your point. No one -- no one -- here will say, "Gee, Bobby, until you killed all those innocent people in Paris, I never knew how wrong I was!"

_____ _____ _____ _____ _____

*Abbreviated, perhaps, because Langguth passed away shortly after getting this book to his publisher and before publication. More time may have helped the conclusion, but would not have eliminated the errors.

[Louise · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've been waiting a long time for a readable book on this topic. A. J. Langguth makes the complex epic of Reconstruction painfully clear.

This history is given through biographical sketches that are both entertaining and pertinent. You see how and why the newly elevated President Andrew Johnson was all too quick to grant pardons to some of the most rabid secessionists. Because former plantation owners quickly regained their property there was no land for the 40 acre promise. As political leaders gained back their power, you see, through the Salmon Chase biography why simple justice, such as a treason trial for Jefferson Davis was not possible. With Nathan Bedford Forrest as the template, you see why it was impossible to protect the lives of Blacks and northern sympathizers in the South.

Besides the ultimate showdown of the impeachment of Andrew Johnson, there were plenty of hard fought skirmishes. Through the biographies of Thaddeus Stevens, Charles Sumner, Pinckney Pinchback, Edwin Stanton and others you see the attempts to right the wrong situation and how difficult it was. There are sagas that would be comic if the stakes were not so high such as the Democrats' attempt to remove the Secretary of War. With all the chaos, you see what an achievement it was for Union General Oliver Otis Howard, Commissioner of the Freemen's Bureau, to produce a few successes most notably the founding of Howard University. The Johnson impeachment itself was rife with all that was both wrong and idiosyncratic about the period.

Despite his good intentions, President Grant was distracted by scandal. His Supreme Court appointee, Mott Waite had a tin ear on issues of race. Rutherford Hayes (or his supporters) ended reconstruction in exchange for his presidency after a deadlocked election. It seems to have ended with an exhausted whimper.

The most disappointing portrait in the impeachment process is that of William Seward. His recent biographer, Walter Stahr, in (Seward: Lincoln's Indispensable Man) gives little information on his role in the impeachment trial presenting Seward as the ultimate loyalist to Lincoln, and somewhat of a company man converting that loyalty to the new administration, and possibly helping others to benefit from it.

I was glad to see this book on library shelf. Earlier this year I read Lincoln's Boys: John Hay, John Nicolay, and the War for Lincoln's Image which covers the topic of the North losing what we might call today "spin".

I had not heard of Langguth but plan to read more from him in the future.

[Martin Marchiori-Wong · Rating 2 out of 5]

I was disappointed by this rote history, which is mostly comprised of cursory biographies of public figures from the Reconstruction era, rather than more comprehensive analyses of how these public figures' policy and political decisions failed Black Americans.

Still, I resonated with one of the book's primary themes: prioritizing the reconciliation of conflicts above all else, may fail to properly address the sources of these conflicts, e.g. an emphasis on restoring "unity" versus punishing white supremacists in the aftermath of the American Civil War.

[Charlie Simmons · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really liked this book and thought it to be an easily understandable and accessible history of reconstruction. The way it’s formatted, being divided into chapters of biographies and historical vignettes, is effective and helps the flow of the book. I can see how some readers might struggle to put together all the different chapters but, I thought it was pretty eye opening to just how bad reconstruction was.

[Donna · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book offered a somewhat in depth look at some the American leaders that came along after Lincoln's death. This book covered their stand on what the rights were of the African Americans after slavery was abolished.

I enjoyed the focus on the major players. It is interesting though, how some of the quotes they used and the thoughts they had referring to civil rights would not go over well today. So I guess in that respect progress has been made. But the majority of the people with power and money were bullies in a way and they didn't want to share their American dream and the things that they enjoyed. They were more about protecting their way of life and wanted to squash any possible threats to their way of life. So in that way, no progress has been made...you can see that clearly in our world today in our world.

This book had an interesting approach to the subject mentioned. But this was not a compelling read by any means. So 3 stars.

[Scott Lundy · Rating 3 out of 5]

I received this book as part of Goodreads' Giveaways.

Overall, this book served as an excellent primer to the Reconstruction era. Mr. Langguth writes in a clear, easy to understand way. After Lincoln added much to my understanding of the political complexities facing this country post-civil war.

My only complaint is how the book is structured. Rather than tell the story in a linear, chronological fashion, Mr. Langguth instead focuses each chapter on a central character from this time period. These mini-biographies were interesting and helpful, however I did not like how the story jumped around in time.

I agree with other reviewers who have stated that this book would be excellent for anyone interested in learning about Reconstruction.

[Ietrio · Rating 1 out of 5]

The title is very misleading. This is a collection of articles about some of the political influencers around the time of the Civil War. There is not much about "how" or "lost" and almost everything about how the politicians' state of happiness or their relationship with their father.

[Gary · Rating 2 out of 5]

As several other reviewers have noted, this is an awkwardly put together book. Each section focuses on a particular historical person, and does a fairly standard biography of that figure. However, slapping them together the way it's done in this text makes it read as a reset every chapter. Further, much of the information gets repeated as those figures interact with one another. It reads very much like several short, Cliffs Notes-style individual biographies slapped together into a single volume, which would be all well and good except:

I don't think it satisfies the question put forth by the title in any way.

The theme of those individual biographies might be that these people were the movers and shakers in the period of Reconstruction and that which follows, but this text is much more document than documentary. The facts are presented, but with little sense of how they interact and what interpretation does get made is often hesitant and sometimes lacking. History is facts interpreted and presented informatively, and where that happens in this text the reader gets little sense of how the the "North Lost the Peace" at all. Readers would probably be better off with a single biography of Grant or Johnson in which the figures described in this text (and whose childhood experiences, college anecdotes, etc. are not really as relevant) would be given their due significance.

[Adam · Rating 3 out of 5]

Of the 20 chapters in A.J. Langguth's After Lincoln, a history of the United States' failed attempts at reunification and peace following the Civil War, nineteen of them are concerned with the events of just over two decades: 1865-1887. These eventful twenty-two years saw the assassination of Abraham Lincoln--the moment that serves as this book's opening scene and, by intimation, the catalyst for what comes later--the elevation of Andrew Johnson to the presidency, the elections of Ulysses S. Grant and Rutherford B. Hayes, as well as the first black politicians in the nation's history, insurrection in every Southern state, the disenfranchisement of black voters, the rise of the Ku Klux Klan, lynchings, revolts, mobs, and the widespread murder of former slaves, their supporters and defenders, and their descendants. In the process, Langguth also offers us a wealth of backstories and foreshadowings that break through the timeline's constraints, but overall this is the story of a generation in which the opportunity to correct centuries of oppression and genocide was squandered in a single generation, thereby enshrining such horrors for centuries to come.

Only by the twentieth chapter--the final chapter--does Langguth take everything he's presented and connect it to our modern world...or at least as close to our modern world as he feels necessary. In this case, that means ending his history of Reconstruction with the 1964 Civil Rights Act, a monumental piece of legislation that Langguth seems to imply marks the end of the tortured history of America's shameful, post-war racial history. Which is the problem with After Lincoln, the fourth and final volume in the author's series. Langguth, who himself covered the Civil Rights Movement as a reporter, seems to bestow the Civil Rights Bill with the qualities that Lyndon Johnson himself emphasized in advocating for its passage: "Let us close the spring of racial poison," Johnson said and Langguth quotes, continuing, "Let us pray for wise and understanding hearts. Let us lay aside irrelevant differences and make our nation whole." These words were and continue to remain noble words, unquestionably, and Johnson pushed these ideals and their enforcement more than any other president since Lincoln, even though his own history on issues related to civil rights were often questionable.*

And yet, exactly fifty years later, we know with certainty that our nation did not come together and become one again. In many respects, we remain a country divided--millions of people standing on separate shores looking for unity in the opposing reflections but finding strangers. It's easy to point to events from this year and claim that we have not come as far as we should have or thought we had--since 1865, 1887, 1964--a claim that is hard to quantify, no matter who you are. It's also easy to see the events from this year and say, with misplaced confidence, that at least it's not as bad as it once was: no more lynchings, no more laws against interracial marriage, no violent protests over the integration of schools. However, by making these statements, we are looking to excuse ourselves from responsibility. According to the former, we are only aware of our lack of progress when tragic events force us to reexamine how we treat one another and approach issues of race; unarmed black men and children are shot and killed, protests erupt, and only then are we able to assess the level of progress we've made. On any other day, when the news is not dominated by similar stories, we can dismiss our responsibility as people and citizens to consider such possibilities. The latter implies that any sort of progress, regardless of its breadth or depth, excuses whatever problems remain to be solved. But lesser violence is still violence, and lesser hatred is still hatred. We see what crimes are no longer committed rather than which crimes remain, and we refuse to believe that what we've consigned to the dust-bins of history have any relation to what occurs in the broad sunlight of our own backyards, even when it's clear that one is our inheritance from the other.

In reading a book like After Lincoln, it's easy to choose a particular person or group of people and lay the blame for our current problems at their footsteps. Andrew Johnson is perhaps the best example of this inclination. He was an undeniable racist and an unabashed drunkard who based much of his decisions on satisfying his own sense of inferiority and need for acceptance and validation, and his decisions undoubtedly allowed for much of the atrocities that followed. But in focusing on Johnson--or Ulysses Grant, or John Wilkes Booth, or Gideon Welles--we absolve the millions of people who came before us, experienced racism and racial violence--as perpetrators, apologists, bystanders, armchair advocates, what have you--and did nothing to fight back. In fact, Langguth's book is full of those who can be seen as accomplices to the crimes and missteps of Reconstruction, but there are comparatively few men and women--Amos Akerman and Benjamin Bristow at the federal level, thousands of unnamed women who taught in black schools at the local level--who we can look to as genuine heroes. Unfortunately, in the history of the United States after the Civil War, it's the perpetrators who dominate its pages, as their fingerprints are all over the problems we face today, alongside the fingerprints of previous generations whose poisoned ideologies remain with us, haunting us in different forms but with the same goal. And regardless of the form, the severity, the excuse, hatred is hatred, and its history is far from over. Its final volume has yet to be written.


*A.J. Langguth passed away on September 1 of this year, just over two weeks before After Lincoln was published, and in his "Acknowledgements" he mentions being in hospital and then restricted to home. It's possible--and I'd like to believe this--that this final book of Langguth's was rushed, and that, had there been more time, he would have written a stronger closing chapter.


This review was originally published at There Will Be Books Galore.

[Chris Linzey · Rating 4 out of 5]

I enjoyed this book. Langguth tells the story of Reconstruction by highlighting biographies of people/events during the time. Each chapter is a new short bio, but the overall thread stays connected and characters appear in each other's bios. It is an interesting was of approaching history. Worth the read for any history/Civil War buff.

[NET7 · Rating 5 out of 5]

In Iraq, we won the war clearly, but failed to win in the peacetime to secure and ensure a free and democratic Iraq for its people, particularly its minorities. In the Civil War, the Union had won the war, but Southern traitors, and in fighting in the capitol among those who should have held a united front, prevented and ultimately led to the failure of Reconstruction. The impact of Lincoln's assassination had extreme ramifications for the direction of this nation. While no Radical Republican, he would have ensured that the Union did not lose to the peace and would have ensured the federal government put its full weight on the Southern states to ensure that they did not win in peace what they lost in war, white Anglo-Saxon supremacy. This here in lies Lincoln's biggest, and for the history of the nation one of its most tragic, mistakes, his decision in the 1864 election to have Andrew Johnson as his Vice President. Andrew Johnson becoming the President was the worst thing that could have happened to the nation, as he sabotaged the Reconstruction efforts of the Radical Republicans. His failure to be impeached, only a single vote saved him from that fate, had deep repercussions on this nation's history. I finished this book about two weeks ago.

[Heather · Rating 2 out of 5]

There was a lot of interesting stuff in this book, but I hated the format. The first half of the book was a biography of one person after another, which created disorienting shifts in time periods without a lot to show how the people were related. When I got to the second half, when the author connected all the historical figures and made the point of the book, I was too irritated to care much.

[Larry · Rating 1 out of 5]

The title of this book is basically false advertising. Chapters on figures of the age, no matter how important or interesting, does not constitute explaining the great tragedy of Reconstruction, i.e. the "failed peace". For someone not steeped in the history of the era the book might be a decent read. Not for me.

[Jan Lynch · Rating 4 out of 5]

Libraries are essential for me. I become fascinated with a particular subject or author and use the library as an almost-unlimited supplier of books. And while I recognize that many find digital books to be satisfying, they don't work for me. My retention of information is better with a hard copy, and my ability to search for information or find a name or quote is better hard copy than Kindle. In any case, this book was in the last group I checked out before my local library shuttered due to coronavirus. Looking to the future, though I realize that this consideration is minor, I hope that borrowing books is still possible in our new normal.

But onto my real focus. In painful, clear detail, A.J. Langguth describes how Reconstruction failed in the wake of Southern resistance. He details how attempts at Reconstruction were repeatedly undermined, and how the KKK and Jim Crow moved into power. The rights promised in Declaration of Independence, the hope of emancipation, the joy of freedom, and the promise of equality under the law gave way to pressure for states' rights and to the narrative of the "Lost Cause." This view became popularized in the novel The Clansmen, which was adapted into an influential film The Birth of a Nation. For those my age, a familiar example of "Lost Cause" would be Gone with the Wind. Though it might be tempting to lay blame for the failure of Reconstruction on former Confederates, as is perhaps always the case, they were more than abetted by their Northern counterparts who, having fought a war, felt that their contribution was finished. The stomach to continue to work toward equality, prosperity, and opportunity for freedmen was not much of a priority for the North, and the pull toward complacency and restoration of balance, even a destructive balance, won out.

Chapters are organized chronologically and center around important events or individuals of the era. Charles Sumner, William Henry Seward, Jefferson Davis, Andrew Johnson, Salmon Chase, Nathan Bedford Forrest, Horace Greeley and many others provide an ever-interesting cast of characters, particularly because the more one reads about these figures, the more one can see the evolution of their views and actions over time. These men changed unevenly, their positions evolving for reasons of political expediency or for morality. Some moved ever toward justice, some just slid. One example among limitless--Salmon Chase began his political career as an ardent abolitionist, but ended it as a states' rights apologist on the Supreme Court whose decisions were destructive to the civil rights of the very people he once wanted to free. As a Pennsylvanian, I need to shout out Thaddeus Stevens who remains one of my heroes, and by the way, didn't sell out, dedicating himself to the rights of former slaves up until his death.

The first nineteen chapters detail events between April 14, 1865 (Lincoln's assassination), through Grant's presidency. Chapter 20 covers the presidency of Rutherford B. Hayes, beginning in 1877, through to the passage of the Civil Rights Act, signed by Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964. As might be imagined, the first nineteen chapters flow with a satisfying amount of detail, while chapter twenty feels abbreviated and rushed. It might have been better had the book ended with the conclusion of Grant's presidency. Still, on the whole, recommended reading for anyone interested in the post Civil War era.

[Robert Mckay · Rating 2 out of 5]

I've given this book two stars solely because it covers a portion of history which I've never looked at much before. But it's just not that good.

For one thing, the author has a clear pro-northern bias, and thus excludes anything that makes the Confederate States of America look good, or which makes the United States and its rulers look bad. There is so much material on these points that the author doesn't want you to know about; he has a propaganda mission to fulfill, and by gum he's not going to let contradictory evidence get in the way.

For another thing, though this book purports to be about "how the north won the 'Civil War'* and lost the peace," that never really comes into the text. Instead, we get chapters about various figures in Reconstruction - short biographies, and accounts of their political actions, and here and there the occasional hurling of mud at anything southern. Langguth labors mightily to make it appear that every single white southerner was a vicious bigot, lynching and whipping blacks and Republicans - and never lets us know that what we would call Jim Crow laws had been rampant in the north long before the war ever began. He somehow fails to notice that until the carpetbaggers invaded the south after the war, whites and blacks had lived and worked and played alongside each other for decades upon decades, without the sort of violence that ensued upon northerners shoving Yankee attitudes down southerners' throats. He seems to have missed the plethora of historical records showing that Abraham Lincoln was a much a bigot as any member of the Ku Klux Klan, and didn't want to free the slaves in order to give them equal rights, but rather to ship them entirely out of the United States - anywhere, as long as whites didn't have to associate with them.

It's really hard to credit anything a historian has to say about anything when he so widely misses such obvious facts. But Langguth does miss these facts, and he does fail to carry out the promise of the title, and I would recommend you avoid his book.

*The War of Northern Aggression wasn't a civil war. No one was trying to overthrow the government of the United States. No one was trying to conquer the United States. The southern states, having left the United States and formed their own government, just wanted to go on their way without disturbance. That isn't a civil war.

[Jim Vander Maas · Rating 3 out of 5]

A who's who of reconstruction with each chapter organized around a person who was key to the task of reuniting the country after the Civil War. This made it an interesting human story but made it harder to follow with the shifting back and forth in time. For someone like me who hasn't gone over this since high school it was hard to keep track of everything. It did win my vote for Andrew Johnson as being the worse president in United States history. One of Uncle Abe's worse decisions was to make him the vice president. After over 600,000 died in the civil war, Johnson's policies basically returned the south to what it was previous to the war. Although slaves were freed they were under the control of former slave owners through "black code" laws and the violence of the Ku-Klux Klan. Grant at least dissipated the Klan for a short time but his administration was rife with corruption. The book also covers the strange election of Rutherford Hayes, the founding of Howard University and the attempted impeachment of Johnson. The division in our country now seems tame compared to this era.

[Mariah Oleszkowicz · Rating 3 out of 5]

There is so much that happens all over the country in the 15 years between the start of the Civil War and the start of Jim Crow. It seems impossible to fit everything in one book. This book does a good job of linking people, places, and policies. It's at least given me greater understanding of the vitriol and misinformation and unintended consequences of decisions. One thing that is made painfully obvious is that the South did seceed for "state's rights" (that claim came much later). Langguth has showed me where to turn to learn more information and whose biographies I want to read more of.

I didn't realize that the KKK was formed in 1868 in Tennessee and that hundreds of black people were killed in just the first couple years it was formed. And no one suffered consequences. In at least one instance, an entire town was killed (after they surrendered). The more I learn, the more disgusted I become at our country. But there were some people who were unrelenting in their honesty and integrity and stayed firm to the idea of equality.

[Brett Van Gaasbeek · Rating 4 out of 5]

Langguth does a quality job of breaking down the Reconstruction Era by discussing individuals that were vital to the time period. Through his backstories of people like Revels, Seward and Grant (among many others), he tells the story of the failure of Reconstruction through the humans who were there. It was interesting to read the specific details of the lives of lesser discussed historical figures, like Horace Greeley and Rutherford B. Hayes, in order to gain a better understanding of the time. It does drag at times, but this volume is one of the better books dealing with the Reconstruction era.

[Benjamin Dueholm · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is an episodic, character-based synopsis of the history of Reconstruction. It offers some vivid, well-rendered portraits of the easily-overlooked people who dominated the era, but by organizing around characters it leaves the major themes implicit and the deeper history mostly untouched. By concluding its epilogue with the 1964 Civil Rights Act it misses a big part of the import of the era. If you want to dip into the history of Reconstruction or find some people or topics to learn more about, it's a serviceable introduction.

[Denton Holland · Rating 4 out of 5]

So, is Donald Trump one of a kind? Nope, we’ve seen his act before...Guy named Andrew Johnson. Is “dark” money a new thing in American politics? Nope again. In fact, the astronomical (today’s dollars) sums thrown around during the Reconstruction Era make today’s look rather tame. The list goes on re-enforcing , I suppose, the notion we are what we’ve always been - an oligarchy masquerading as a republic. The cast may change, but the roles remain the same. So, there really is nothing new under the sun.

[Thee Book Dragon · Rating 4 out of 5]

After Lincoln by A. J. Langguth
An interesting look on the events that transpired after Lincoln was assassinated. The book picks key players of legislations that were to come and the offsets that nearly negated all that was fought for during the Civil War. Interestingly enough, it also made apparent how long it took for these laws and right actually took to take affect and even to this day we are still feeling it’s effects.

[Margaret Wilber · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was such an informative book! It covered so much ground but managed to carry several topics without a lot of confusion. It was horrifying to read about all the crimes committed against Blacks in this nation, especially considering that the same problems are still here. It was also discouraging to learn about how we wasted so many opportunities to correct the inequality and set this country on the right track.

[Andy · Rating 4 out of 5]

A well written (if oddly structured) book that outlines the people behind the Reconstruction era and it's many failures that lead to Jim Crowe, the KKK and "Southern Pride" that is the foundation of the racism that is still present in America today.

[Danilo DiPietro · Rating 5 out of 5]

Covers the vital period in our history from the Civil War through Reconstruction and the beginnings of Jim Crow. Her choice of some well and other lesser known historical figures to tell her story was very effective.

[Joe · Rating 3 out of 5]

I found this to be a difficult book to read … lot of jumping around about the multitude of characters … lots of characters, lots of time, lots of events. I am not sure how I would have presented it. I learned a lot. It was interesting but not profound. Three stars seems right!

[RK Byers · Rating 4 out of 5]

at times, read almost like a whodunit with perfectly placed personalities acting in amazingly chronological order.

[Bryn D · Rating 2 out of 5]

Disappointing and oddly structured, I struggled to finish.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very readable - well-written and entertaining.

[Ray Stadt · Rating 3 out of 5]

For a book with such a bold title, it is mostly a thorough retelling of the history. I expected there to be a more clear thesis and argument to the structure, and came away disappointed.

[Nancy · Rating 3 out of 5]

After Lincoln: How the North Won the Civil War and Lost the Peace / A. J. Langguth. Disappointing in terms of a coherent history of Reconstruction, somewhat entertaining in terms of anecdotes about government figures of the time. Mischaracterized, for sure.