What do you think?
Rate this book
Thaddeus Stevens: Civil War Revolutionary, Fighter for Racial Justice
A “powerful” ( The Wall Street Journal ) biography of one of the 19th century’s greatest statesmen, encompassing his decades-long fight against slavery and his postwar struggle to bring racial justice to America.
Thaddeus Stevens was among the first to see the Civil War as an opportunity for a second American revolution—a chance to remake the country as a genuine multiracial democracy. As one of the foremost abolitionists in Congress in the years leading up to the war, he was a leader of the young Republican Party’s radical wing, fighting for anti-slavery and anti-racist policies long before party colleagues like Abraham Lincoln endorsed them. These policies—including welcoming black men into the Union’s armies—would prove crucial to the Union war effort.
During the Reconstruction era that followed, Stevens demanded equal civil and political rights for Black Americans—rights eventually embodied in the 14th and 15th amendments. But while Stevens in many ways pushed his party—and America—towards equality, he also championed ideas too radical for his fellow Congressmen ever to support, such as confiscating large slaveholders’ estates and dividing the land among those who had been enslaved.
In Thaddeus Stevens , acclaimed historian Bruce Levine has written a “vital” ( The Guardian ), “compelling” (James McPherson) biography of one of the most visionary statesmen of the 19th century and a forgotten champion for racial justice in America.
Thaddeus Stevens was among the first to see the Civil War as an opportunity for a second American revolution—a chance to remake the country as a genuine multiracial democracy. As one of the foremost abolitionists in Congress in the years leading up to the war, he was a leader of the young Republican Party’s radical wing, fighting for anti-slavery and anti-racist policies long before party colleagues like Abraham Lincoln endorsed them. These policies—including welcoming black men into the Union’s armies—would prove crucial to the Union war effort.
During the Reconstruction era that followed, Stevens demanded equal civil and political rights for Black Americans—rights eventually embodied in the 14th and 15th amendments. But while Stevens in many ways pushed his party—and America—towards equality, he also championed ideas too radical for his fellow Congressmen ever to support, such as confiscating large slaveholders’ estates and dividing the land among those who had been enslaved.
In Thaddeus Stevens , acclaimed historian Bruce Levine has written a “vital” ( The Guardian ), “compelling” (James McPherson) biography of one of the most visionary statesmen of the 19th century and a forgotten champion for racial justice in America.
336 pages, Paperback
Published March 1, 2022
61 people are currently reading
835 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 91 reviews
November 5, 2021
Throughout life I had it drilled into my head, when writing something don't tell people that something is important, show them that it is important. Don't tell the reader that a particular person was great, let the reader come to that realization on their own. If the subject upon which you write merits the adulations, then it should be clear without your having to spell it out.
That being said, I know that Thaddeus Stevens was one of the most important political figures of the Civil War era because Bruce Levine told me it was so.
Don't get me wrong, this is an excellent overview of the Civil War and the issue of racial justice, but it is a miserable biography of the title subject. I suspect that most people picking up a book on Stevens know the basics---they are looking to learn more about the legend.
I wanted to read this book because Thaddeus Stevens is one of the most important political figures of this Era. His footprint can be found just about everywhere. He was one of the leaders of the Radical Republicans, a prominent figure of the abolitionist coalition of senators, and surprisingly a person who fervently wanted to defend Jefferson Davis against treason.
Stevens had many political friends and allies.
Unfortunately, I do not feel as if this book delved into any of that.
When I read a biography---which I had assumed this was because the primary title is "Thaddeus Stevens"--- I expect to learn about the title character. I expect garner insights on the man and what motivated him.
Instead, I encountered a decent history of the era with a smattering of Stevens quotes and views.
Did Stevens have a family? It wasn't that important.
Did Stevens have any particular senators he looked up to? Couldn't be that important.
Who were his political allies? Who did he piss off? What compromises did he make? What do we know about Stevens from his private correspondence that we don't know from his oration from the floor of the Senate? How did others view him? What did they say about him behind his back? What did their letters tell us about this giant of a man? What did Stevens do when he saw his cause was lost? What did he do when he was frustrated? What did he do when his side emerged victorious?
I do not know.
Those topics did not make it into the book.
This book was an introduction to racial justice through the Civil War with Stevens quotes serving as the backbone. At one point I was literally cringing as the author made several statements and asked if Stevens "might" have been one of those people to hold the view? They were basic enough questions that I felt the author should have known the subject well enough to know.
This might have been a 3-4 star book---if it didn't purport to be a biography.
Don't tell me that Stevens was a "Civil War Revolutionary, Fighter for Racial Justice"---show me.
That being said, I know that Thaddeus Stevens was one of the most important political figures of the Civil War era because Bruce Levine told me it was so.
Don't get me wrong, this is an excellent overview of the Civil War and the issue of racial justice, but it is a miserable biography of the title subject. I suspect that most people picking up a book on Stevens know the basics---they are looking to learn more about the legend.
I wanted to read this book because Thaddeus Stevens is one of the most important political figures of this Era. His footprint can be found just about everywhere. He was one of the leaders of the Radical Republicans, a prominent figure of the abolitionist coalition of senators, and surprisingly a person who fervently wanted to defend Jefferson Davis against treason.
Stevens had many political friends and allies.
Unfortunately, I do not feel as if this book delved into any of that.
When I read a biography---which I had assumed this was because the primary title is "Thaddeus Stevens"--- I expect to learn about the title character. I expect garner insights on the man and what motivated him.
Instead, I encountered a decent history of the era with a smattering of Stevens quotes and views.
Did Stevens have a family? It wasn't that important.
Did Stevens have any particular senators he looked up to? Couldn't be that important.
Who were his political allies? Who did he piss off? What compromises did he make? What do we know about Stevens from his private correspondence that we don't know from his oration from the floor of the Senate? How did others view him? What did they say about him behind his back? What did their letters tell us about this giant of a man? What did Stevens do when he saw his cause was lost? What did he do when he was frustrated? What did he do when his side emerged victorious?
I do not know.
Those topics did not make it into the book.
This book was an introduction to racial justice through the Civil War with Stevens quotes serving as the backbone. At one point I was literally cringing as the author made several statements and asked if Stevens "might" have been one of those people to hold the view? They were basic enough questions that I felt the author should have known the subject well enough to know.
This might have been a 3-4 star book---if it didn't purport to be a biography.
Don't tell me that Stevens was a "Civil War Revolutionary, Fighter for Racial Justice"---show me.
December 22, 2021
This biography is quite short (309 pages) but the most satisfying of Stevens I have read. The others did not seem to capture Stevens fully. While acknowledging some misteps in his journey (his brief alliance with nativists and colonialism), Levine is able to appreciate Steven's growth and courage in pursing goals that should guide the country. He was no follower. He did not wait for public approval, he shaped it. "It was in thus educating people and party up to his views that Stevens did his greatest work in national politics" wrote a journalist quoted by Levine. (p.240).
I have been a great admirer of Stevens for many years despite the destain that has been heaped on him by some. He believed in equality and he fought for it, reaching his apex during the "reign" of Radical Republicans during Reconstruction. This historian, in my view, has finally written a biography worthy of the great leader.
I have been a great admirer of Stevens for many years despite the destain that has been heaped on him by some. He believed in equality and he fought for it, reaching his apex during the "reign" of Radical Republicans during Reconstruction. This historian, in my view, has finally written a biography worthy of the great leader.
July 4, 2021
This biography of one of the most important congressional representatives in our history was entertaining and informative. It is light on details about his personal adult life but perhaps because there is not much information out there about it. It was a detailed review of the legislation in which he was involved and the history of the times. It was a very thoughtful analysis of the various competing interests and influences affecting the Civil War and slavery. This book is an important up to date contribution to history of the period.
August 26, 2021
Lincoln gets most of the credit for "freeing the slaves" by History, ...however this author shares that Stevens was on the forefront of abolition, emancipation and equality...not just for african american slaves but native americans and Chinese immigrants on the West coast. Could not help but imagine Tommy Lee Jones portrayal in the movie "Lincoln" as i read the book. Am glad this book exists for a not well known important figure in our nation's hope for "life, liberty and pursuit of happiness"... for all americans, not just white male land owners.
March 8, 2021
Today we find ourselves living in an America where the Republican Party seems to stand for voter suppression (see Pennsylvania, Arizona, and Georgia state legislature just to name a few) as they try and place as many obstacles in the path of African-Americans who would like to exercise their franchise. The strategy is clear – they fear they cannot win elections without making it difficult for minorities to vote and reminds this writer of the Jim Crow era and harkens back to the post-Civil War period, particularly after the election of 1876 as southern politicians began to reassert control of their region and try and undo the gains brought forth by the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments for African-Americans. The post-Civil War southern leaders worked to undo the life’s work of Pennsylvania Congressman Thaddeus Stevens who fought against slavery and tried to uplift the lives of those freed from bondage. Stevens, an athame to the south is the subject of a new biography by Bruce Levine, THADDEUS STEVENS: CIVIL REVOLUTIONARY, FIGHTER FOR RACIAL JUSTICE.
At a time when the Black Lives Matter movement is confronted by white supremacy and voter suppression it is important to examine the life of Thaddeus Stevens whose ideals and hopes for racial harmony and justice have still not come to fruition almost 150 years later. Many historians and films have denigrated Stevens as a vindictive persecutor of the helpless and defeated south. It took the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s and a new generation of historians and film makers to reconsider Stevens’ role following the Civil War and Reconstruction. Levine stresses Stevens’ vision for an egalitarian radical revolution following the war – confiscating the estates of large southern landholders and divide them among former slaves. Further he would come to despise President Andrew Johnson who tried to assist the southern elite to recoup their political power and once again place former slaves under the thumb of the previous system where they were supplicants to a southern system that could not function without them.
Levine focuses on Stevens’ role as a public figure, his fight against chattel slavery and racial discrimination, the key part he played influencing union actions during the Civil War, and his important role in the post-war struggle to produce racial democracy for the nation at large. Stevens was raised in Vermont in a strict Baptist home though he would later have little use for religion. Despite this he was knowledgeable when it came to scripture and he viewed secession and war as “predetermined” and inevitable. This went along with his dark view of human nature and can be seen in his commentary throughout his life and the relationships he engendered.
Stevens was a firm believer in industrial development as an engine of human progress and that the government must actively and deliberately stimulate the development of capitalism, especially its commercial and manufacturing sectors as a strong supporter of Henry Clay’s American System. Second, he believed that the government must take positive steps to ensure that all had an equal chance to partake in prosperity as part of system that rested on “free labor.”
Levine’s narrative is less a biography of Stevens’ complete life, but more of an intellectual journey that reflected the evolution of his ideas and positions taken in regard to slavery, tariffs, and other issues of the day. The narrative presents Stevens’ life in the context of the world in which he thrived. Apart from Stevens’ life, Levine’s analysis mirrors many historians who have written about the history of the period. Nothing is really new, events and movements do not change, nor the actions of certain important individuals. What is important is Levine’s portrayal of Stevens’ life as he integrates and relied on his subject’s own words and attitudes in speeches before the Pennsylvania state legislature, the House of Representatives, and the memories of those who he conversed with. His intellectual evolution regarding slavery is a key component of the book as in his younger years he may have been “soft” on abolitionism. However, following Texas’ application for statehood and the results of the Mexican War Stevens realized as did others who would become Radical Republicans that if the south could not expand slavery into new territories then the erosion of its soil would foster the end of what Kenneth Stamp called the “peculiar institution.” The key was to prevent any new territories acquired from Mexico from becoming slave states which would harden people’s positions regarding slavery.
Levine takes the reader through all the major events that led to the Civil War, the war itself, and the post-war period. Levine leads the reader through the rise of the Whig Party, his early participation in the antislavery movement, his part in the founding of the Republican Party, with its opposition to slavery. He also tracks the machinations of wartime rivalries and the struggle to enact legislation after the war, in addition to the role he played in the impeachment process against Andrew Johnson. Since the book itself is not overly long I would have hoped the author would have delved more into these areas focusing on analysis of great events as he perceived them, particularly Stevens’ relationship with President James Buchanan. Once the war broke out Levine is correct that Stevens did not see the war as a short one, but a bloody one that would drag on for years. For Stevens success in war also included a frontal attack on slavery and a major alteration of southern society and economy. He was the first to favor the confiscation of slaves, demanded legal freedom for those confiscated, called for a wide emancipation for all slaves living in the rebellious states, and the abolition of slavery throughout the United States. This would mean a radical transformation of southern society, in effect, as Eric Foner states, a second American Revolution.
According to Levine Stevens success was based on his iron will, great courage both moral and physical, his refusal to bend to the opposition even in the face of physical threats, his mastery of the parliamentary system, his shrewdness, quick wit, and sharp tongue. Stevens was a believer in the ideas put forth in the Declaration of Independence and despite what the founders wrote into the Constitution regarding slavery he was adamant in his support of the document. He shaped the 14th amendment as his life ended which provided due process and equal protection under the law for all. It is a shame that the legislative victories he achieved would quickly fall by the wayside following his death.
Historian Fergus M. Bordewich argues that Levine has written a concise and powerful biography of a man the author truly admires as Stevens sought to create an America free of prejudice, which was based on merit in which blacks and whites together would be freed of oppression, inequality, and degradation. Stevens’ reputation has improved since the 1960s and reflects that even John F. Kennedy’s praise for Andrew Johnson and his description of Stevens as “the crippled fanatical personification of the extremes of the Radical Republican Movement” in his book co-authored with Theodore Sorenson, PROFILES IN COURAGE was totally wrong. Stevens pushed for Reconstruction as hard as he could and if others had not grown tired of it and reverted to previous attitudes perhaps, we would not suffer from the racial bifurcation that infects American society today.
At a time when the Black Lives Matter movement is confronted by white supremacy and voter suppression it is important to examine the life of Thaddeus Stevens whose ideals and hopes for racial harmony and justice have still not come to fruition almost 150 years later. Many historians and films have denigrated Stevens as a vindictive persecutor of the helpless and defeated south. It took the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s and a new generation of historians and film makers to reconsider Stevens’ role following the Civil War and Reconstruction. Levine stresses Stevens’ vision for an egalitarian radical revolution following the war – confiscating the estates of large southern landholders and divide them among former slaves. Further he would come to despise President Andrew Johnson who tried to assist the southern elite to recoup their political power and once again place former slaves under the thumb of the previous system where they were supplicants to a southern system that could not function without them.
Levine focuses on Stevens’ role as a public figure, his fight against chattel slavery and racial discrimination, the key part he played influencing union actions during the Civil War, and his important role in the post-war struggle to produce racial democracy for the nation at large. Stevens was raised in Vermont in a strict Baptist home though he would later have little use for religion. Despite this he was knowledgeable when it came to scripture and he viewed secession and war as “predetermined” and inevitable. This went along with his dark view of human nature and can be seen in his commentary throughout his life and the relationships he engendered.
Stevens was a firm believer in industrial development as an engine of human progress and that the government must actively and deliberately stimulate the development of capitalism, especially its commercial and manufacturing sectors as a strong supporter of Henry Clay’s American System. Second, he believed that the government must take positive steps to ensure that all had an equal chance to partake in prosperity as part of system that rested on “free labor.”
Levine’s narrative is less a biography of Stevens’ complete life, but more of an intellectual journey that reflected the evolution of his ideas and positions taken in regard to slavery, tariffs, and other issues of the day. The narrative presents Stevens’ life in the context of the world in which he thrived. Apart from Stevens’ life, Levine’s analysis mirrors many historians who have written about the history of the period. Nothing is really new, events and movements do not change, nor the actions of certain important individuals. What is important is Levine’s portrayal of Stevens’ life as he integrates and relied on his subject’s own words and attitudes in speeches before the Pennsylvania state legislature, the House of Representatives, and the memories of those who he conversed with. His intellectual evolution regarding slavery is a key component of the book as in his younger years he may have been “soft” on abolitionism. However, following Texas’ application for statehood and the results of the Mexican War Stevens realized as did others who would become Radical Republicans that if the south could not expand slavery into new territories then the erosion of its soil would foster the end of what Kenneth Stamp called the “peculiar institution.” The key was to prevent any new territories acquired from Mexico from becoming slave states which would harden people’s positions regarding slavery.
Levine takes the reader through all the major events that led to the Civil War, the war itself, and the post-war period. Levine leads the reader through the rise of the Whig Party, his early participation in the antislavery movement, his part in the founding of the Republican Party, with its opposition to slavery. He also tracks the machinations of wartime rivalries and the struggle to enact legislation after the war, in addition to the role he played in the impeachment process against Andrew Johnson. Since the book itself is not overly long I would have hoped the author would have delved more into these areas focusing on analysis of great events as he perceived them, particularly Stevens’ relationship with President James Buchanan. Once the war broke out Levine is correct that Stevens did not see the war as a short one, but a bloody one that would drag on for years. For Stevens success in war also included a frontal attack on slavery and a major alteration of southern society and economy. He was the first to favor the confiscation of slaves, demanded legal freedom for those confiscated, called for a wide emancipation for all slaves living in the rebellious states, and the abolition of slavery throughout the United States. This would mean a radical transformation of southern society, in effect, as Eric Foner states, a second American Revolution.
According to Levine Stevens success was based on his iron will, great courage both moral and physical, his refusal to bend to the opposition even in the face of physical threats, his mastery of the parliamentary system, his shrewdness, quick wit, and sharp tongue. Stevens was a believer in the ideas put forth in the Declaration of Independence and despite what the founders wrote into the Constitution regarding slavery he was adamant in his support of the document. He shaped the 14th amendment as his life ended which provided due process and equal protection under the law for all. It is a shame that the legislative victories he achieved would quickly fall by the wayside following his death.
Historian Fergus M. Bordewich argues that Levine has written a concise and powerful biography of a man the author truly admires as Stevens sought to create an America free of prejudice, which was based on merit in which blacks and whites together would be freed of oppression, inequality, and degradation. Stevens’ reputation has improved since the 1960s and reflects that even John F. Kennedy’s praise for Andrew Johnson and his description of Stevens as “the crippled fanatical personification of the extremes of the Radical Republican Movement” in his book co-authored with Theodore Sorenson, PROFILES IN COURAGE was totally wrong. Stevens pushed for Reconstruction as hard as he could and if others had not grown tired of it and reverted to previous attitudes perhaps, we would not suffer from the racial bifurcation that infects American society today.
April 14, 2023
I absolutely adore the movie "Lincoln" with Daniel Day Lewis and Abraham Lincoln has been one of my major historical heroes since I can remember. But while Tommy Lee Jones turned in a masterful performance as Stevens, the movie did not get him quite right. While I think it was valid to note that many opponents of slavery had to offer distasteful deals to get the less noble to do the right thing, the notion that Thaddeus Stevens was somehow an unrealistic dreamer who had to bullied into hedging his bets in order to get his amendment passed doesn't sit well. This book goes a long ways towards evening the picture. Stevens was far from perfect--he did vacillate in younger days on the rights of freed people and unlike Lincoln, he even endorsed the anti-immigrant Know-Nothing Party in the 1840s. However, he defended runaway slaves pro bono, paid spies to keep an eye on slave catchers and relentlessly pushed his party and his government to embrace the need for radical change. He saw that Reconstruction needed to include confiscation of rebel property and redistribution to the former slaves who had done all the work on it anyway. Sadly, the US failed to act on this, choosing to trust the former slave owners to do right by the freed people. This didn't work out well and Reconstruction eventually went down in flames. But what IS is not always RIGHT and this biography of Stevens shows how a radical fighting for justice can often push the needle on important issues. We need to have such a leader today. The book is engaging and very thorough on his career. I would wish that it humanized him more by sharing details from his private life, away from the public sphere. The rumors at the time that he was in a common law marriage with a black woman (or even indeed just a few peeks into what his personal life was like) would have balanced it well. But all in all, a great book about a man who has been too often forgotten.
August 3, 2021
This biography starts with an anecdote that sets the stage for the book's reappraisal of Thaddeus Stevens. During the Civil War during the South's raid into Pennsylvania that ended in Gettysburg, Rebel General Jubal Early detoured and looted Caledonia Iron Works, which was owned by Stevens. Early commented that he wished that Stevens had been there so that he could have hanged him there, divide his bones and send to the different states. That hatred of Stevens by Slave holding states continued during Reconstruction and lasted long after Stevens died as Southern apologists initially won the battle of history books, unfairly casting Stevens as an evil man. The biography corrects the record by accurately citing Stevens' actual speeches, letters and descriptions of him by his contemporaries.
Stevens earned enmity because of his outspoken and effective opposition to slavery, as a Congressman and as a lawyer who defended those who helped escaped slaves. During the Civil War, Stevens pushed to make the Civil War about ending slavery and not simply reuniting the United States, during Reconstruction, Stevens fought for true racial justice and opportunity for the newly freed slaves in the South. History and Biography often includes the "What if" question. Here I found myself asking what if Stevens had been successful in his effort to take small portions of the huge plantations owned by wealthy slave owners and distribute it to the slaves that made the plantations prosperous.
Stevens was ahead of his time, history has proven that his ideals of racial justice and true economic opportunity for all were the right ideals. This biography does an excellent job of setting the record straight
Stevens earned enmity because of his outspoken and effective opposition to slavery, as a Congressman and as a lawyer who defended those who helped escaped slaves. During the Civil War, Stevens pushed to make the Civil War about ending slavery and not simply reuniting the United States, during Reconstruction, Stevens fought for true racial justice and opportunity for the newly freed slaves in the South. History and Biography often includes the "What if" question. Here I found myself asking what if Stevens had been successful in his effort to take small portions of the huge plantations owned by wealthy slave owners and distribute it to the slaves that made the plantations prosperous.
Stevens was ahead of his time, history has proven that his ideals of racial justice and true economic opportunity for all were the right ideals. This biography does an excellent job of setting the record straight
November 25, 2024
These days most people don't know Thaddeus Stevens, yet before, during, and after the Civil War he was more influential than Abraham Lincoln in influencing anti-racist policies eventually adopted by the government. He pushed Lincoln to an anti-slavery stance and Stevens led the way for the trio of federal civil rights amendments enacted during Reconstruction.
Levine does a good job providing insightful views of Southern attitudes toward Reconstruction. Unsurprisingly, Stevens was the most hated congressman while the Confederacy existed. Yet as early as the 1830s, Stevens understood the fruitlessness of trying to compromise with slaveholders. He advocated for nothing short of full freedom and equal rights for Blacks.
The intractable attitude Southern slaveholders had became more entrenched during the 1830s as a result of the rise of the abolition movement. In Congress, Stevens quickly developed a reputation as a fearless, witty, sharp-t0ngued, uncompromising abolitionist. He was no longer a young man (age 69) when the Civil War broke yet, yet the conflict seemed to rejuvenate him, setting the stage for his biggest influence. More than a year before Lincoln, Stevens called for the freedom of all slaves. Stevens was an early advocated for arming Black soldiers in the Union Army and he was instrumental in blocking former Confederates from immediately gaining their old seats in the U.S. Congress.
While aging and infirm, Stevens pushed for the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments against racist President Andrew Johnson. But his foes included moderate Republicans, who comprised a bigger portion of Congress than Radical Republicans like himself. Most of Congress was obsessed with unity, getting back to normalcy as soon as possible. That resulted in shortchanging the rights of Blacks for nearly a century.
Levine does a good job providing insightful views of Southern attitudes toward Reconstruction. Unsurprisingly, Stevens was the most hated congressman while the Confederacy existed. Yet as early as the 1830s, Stevens understood the fruitlessness of trying to compromise with slaveholders. He advocated for nothing short of full freedom and equal rights for Blacks.
The intractable attitude Southern slaveholders had became more entrenched during the 1830s as a result of the rise of the abolition movement. In Congress, Stevens quickly developed a reputation as a fearless, witty, sharp-t0ngued, uncompromising abolitionist. He was no longer a young man (age 69) when the Civil War broke yet, yet the conflict seemed to rejuvenate him, setting the stage for his biggest influence. More than a year before Lincoln, Stevens called for the freedom of all slaves. Stevens was an early advocated for arming Black soldiers in the Union Army and he was instrumental in blocking former Confederates from immediately gaining their old seats in the U.S. Congress.
While aging and infirm, Stevens pushed for the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments against racist President Andrew Johnson. But his foes included moderate Republicans, who comprised a bigger portion of Congress than Radical Republicans like himself. Most of Congress was obsessed with unity, getting back to normalcy as soon as possible. That resulted in shortchanging the rights of Blacks for nearly a century.
February 21, 2022
"Thaddeus Stevens" is not a deep, in-depth history about Stevens' personal and family life. Instead, it is a history of his political life and beliefs, which is what I was more interested in anyway. Stevens was a remarkable man, especially considering the time period he lived in. He was staunchly anti-slavery, fighting for equal rights for Black Americans, and supported public education, women's rights, Native American rights, and the rights of immigrants (in particular the large Chinese population in California), among other issues. He reminds me of Bernie Saunders, fighting for what he knew was correct and needed, despite what his colleagues and others thought and supported. He, more than Lincoln and some others, showed that the Civil War was about slavery, and pushed the passing of the 13th amendment abolishing slavery. He spent his entire life doing everything he could to end slavery and promote rights for the black freedmen. He was the leader in Congress to impeach the terrible president Andrew Johnson (passed in the House, lost by one vote in the Senate).
And a quote that could be taken out of today's headlines, author Bruce Levine says Thaddeus Stevens came to recognize "...extreme economic inequality as a threat to democracy". In 1865, Stevens himself said "It is impossible that any practical equality of rights can exist where a few thousand men monopolize the whole landed property". Hmm...
At 300 pages, a short book, but very interesting and very appropriate in these troubled times.
And a quote that could be taken out of today's headlines, author Bruce Levine says Thaddeus Stevens came to recognize "...extreme economic inequality as a threat to democracy". In 1865, Stevens himself said "It is impossible that any practical equality of rights can exist where a few thousand men monopolize the whole landed property". Hmm...
At 300 pages, a short book, but very interesting and very appropriate in these troubled times.
January 19, 2023
If you’re looking for a true biography or Stevens then this book doesn’t quite fit that definition. However, if you’re interested in Stevens as a social revolutionist and his journey in politics that took him from the floundering Whig party to playing a leading role in the formation of the “radical” Republicans and always being present to drag, push, and pull other more moderate Republicans to do things that he knew was just and right… then this is for you. I thoroughly enjoyed learning about more of the political (Congressional) movements just before, during, and after the Civil War and this book does a superb job of offering that information. Thaddeus Stevens played a much larger role in EVERYTHING during this time period than I had ever given him credit for when teaching these units in APUSH… I will have to adapt.
*favorite fun fact I learned from this book, New York politician Roscoe Conkling (best known later in his career as a stalwart during the Gilded Age Republican Party split) was a body builder and bare knuckle boxer. That will be fun to interject into class.
*favorite fun fact I learned from this book, New York politician Roscoe Conkling (best known later in his career as a stalwart during the Gilded Age Republican Party split) was a body builder and bare knuckle boxer. That will be fun to interject into class.
January 25, 2024
Thaddeus Stevens was one of the most influential leaders in America during the 1840's, 50's, and 60's whose contributions to the promotion of civil rights have been somewhat forgotten. During his early career Stevens fought for public education for all in his native Pennsylvania. He was involved in the Underground Railroad, fought for abolition of slavery before he was elected to the House of Representatives. As a leading Republican member of the House during the Civil War, he was outspoken in his advocacy of emancipation and allowing blacks to fight for the Union. After the war, Stevens was a champion for the passage of the 13th and14th amendments as well as a proponent of black suffrage. Thaddeus Stevens was widely recognized during his lifetime for his outstanding contributions to the betterment of our society. Bruce Levine's book does a great job of bringing the accomplishments of a great American to light.
July 7, 2024
An extremely readable and well done biography about one of the fathers of the 'Second American Revolution'. The focus is very much on the political struggles and beliefs of Stevens so don't expect too much focus on his personal life ( unless it's directly related to the political). I also think a certain familiarity with the antebellum political conflicts about slavery is recommended as I feel the author kinda expects you're familiar with it. That being said Levine is able to write a compelling portrait of a man who was ahead of his time on so many things and the book doesn't fail to make me a bit emotional.
November 1, 2021
From acclaimed Civil War author Bruce Levine comes this moving biography of a true Civil War pioneer. The author tells the story of Stevens' rough early life and the events that led him to follow the path he took as a civil rights innovator during and just after our nation's greatest conflict. I found the book to be very captivating, both from an intellectual standpoint and as an excellent biography. A very worthy effort.
December 20, 2023
Quick but scholarly read on Stevens’ life.
I think he had the clearest vision of anyone in government throughout Civil War and Reconstruction, compared to Lincoln and other moderates slowly feeling their way forward in a darkened room. He certainly understood more about the political economy of the South, and what economic changes would be needed to make permanent the equality of the races. Sadly, most did not see or it—or simply did not care.
I think he had the clearest vision of anyone in government throughout Civil War and Reconstruction, compared to Lincoln and other moderates slowly feeling their way forward in a darkened room. He certainly understood more about the political economy of the South, and what economic changes would be needed to make permanent the equality of the races. Sadly, most did not see or it—or simply did not care.
May 16, 2021
This is a fine biography of a much-maligned and often ignored leader in the fight to end slavery and make the United States actually follow through on the promises of the Declaration of Independence. Mr. Leivine presents a full-throated man, warts and all, placing him in the antebellum milieu and showing his willingness to be an early adapter of ideology, programs, and methods to achieve his goals. Stevens is a man who should be remembered and lauded, and this book is a major step to doing that. Well done
November 1, 2022
Thaddeus Stevens
By Bruce Levine
Stevens was an American statesman who staked out his abolitionist position early and stuck to it. I had always wanted to know more about him, and other leaders of his time.
Mr. Levine did an excellent job detailing Mr. Stevens’ life and his passionate actions for America.
It is good to learn about politicians who act for the good of the people and not for party politics.
By Bruce Levine
Stevens was an American statesman who staked out his abolitionist position early and stuck to it. I had always wanted to know more about him, and other leaders of his time.
Mr. Levine did an excellent job detailing Mr. Stevens’ life and his passionate actions for America.
It is good to learn about politicians who act for the good of the people and not for party politics.
December 14, 2023
Didn't learn much about Stevens as a person. Levine's book did tell me Steven's was 69 at the start of the Civil War. That's lot of years and I learned little about Steven's life over that time. I didn't know Stevens was born in Vermont and the first chapter covering his early life sparked an interest in learning more about the State and its history. Otherwise it was pretty much childhood to War with little about the years between.
September 10, 2021
Stevens seems (to me) to be an under-known, under-appreciated figure in American history, perhaps because of the unfulfilled promise of Reconstruction. Levine's biography is a helpful introduction to his life. I suspect we could use a few more like Stevens in our current day.
September 2, 2025
Love any opportunity to learn more about Thaddeus Stevens.
April 24, 2022
The Radical Republicans have long been unfairly maligned for taking an uncompromising position against slavery and for civil rights in the Civil War and Reconstruction period. It's wonderful to see historians take a new look at them. This biography of Thaddeus Stevens, one of the foremost opponents of slavery in Congress, provides a concise and readable account of his political career, from his early advocacy for free public education to the creation of the Republican party to his final deathbed calls for civil rights for freedmen.
This is the rare book that would have been better if longer. While it was a good explanation of what Stevens did and advocated for, I didn't get a good sense for the man himself. What was it that caused him to see clearly when most people did not? How did he stand strong when so many would compromise to preserve peace?
This is the rare book that would have been better if longer. While it was a good explanation of what Stevens did and advocated for, I didn't get a good sense for the man himself. What was it that caused him to see clearly when most people did not? How did he stand strong when so many would compromise to preserve peace?
March 24, 2022
A pretty interesting book about an important political figure that lived through the antebellum period, civil war, and early reconstruction. I first learned of Thaddeus Stevens from the film Lincoln where Tommy Lee Jones portrayed him (somewhat unfairly, the film suggested that Thaddeus was romantically involved with his housekeeper, a mixed race woman. The author notes that while that is certainly possible, there was no evidence to suggest that to be true. In my view that suggestion by the film without evidence did Thaddeus a disfavor, almost implying that it is impossible for people to care about justice or good causes unless their own interests are directly implicated. The fact that film focused on the true fact that he wore a wig also seemed a bit strange).
Thaddeus (named after the Polish-Lithuanian noble who came to help us in our revolution), was mostly known for his role as a radical republican. Thaddeus was raised in vermont (which grow out of disputes with various other states that ultimately resulted in small landowners prevailing) and was educated by his baptist mother, and a classical greek/roman college education at Dartmouth on the importance of the independent yeoman farmer participating in republican governance (for this reason he supported black suffrage in the antebellum north but was at first hesitant about granting freed slaves the vote) and fearing demagogues. Thaddeus started out as a typical Whig that supported government improvements to encourage industrial growth and limitation of slavery to where it had already existed. His political career was a microcosm for the impact of slavery on the implosion of national politics. At first, he refused to join new parties dedicated solely to freesoilism (which by being a powerful third party became kingmakers and put Salmon and Sumner into the senate) because he was convinced that he would be able to accomplish more good as part of the more established Whig party. Then, while both the Whigs and the Democrats struggled with the issue of freesoilism (accelerated by the territorial gains from the Mexican American war), the Whig party imploded over the slavery issue, and Thaddeus tried to navigate the ensuing confusing mess of anti-masonic (he agreed with their fear of secret societies) and nativist parties (he never strongly spoke out in favor of nativism but had dealings with those parties as they were powerful in his home state of Pennsylvania, he later objective to anti-immigration policies against the chinese). Eventually, Thaddeus became a committed republican even though he had opposed slavery as a moral principle for some time. At that point Thaddeus encouraged the federal government not to bow to southern threats over the slavery issue, and fought against the "gag" rule then in Congress.
One thing I learned from this book was really how much the southern planter class aggressively pushed the nation towards war. The republicans were committed to limiting slavery from the federal territories, from DC, and limiting the interstate exchange of slavery hoping that would eventually cause the extinction of slavery where it was entrenched. Very few republicans had pushed for abolition of slavery in the south, partially because they did not think the federal government had the power to do so. And on the eve of war, there were serious proposals to protect slavery by constitutional amendment or reinstating the missouri compromise line to ward off disunion. The north also tread carefully initially in the war, hoping that the rebels were a minority of the south and that loyal southerners would help end the conflict early. And how strange it was for Buchanan (who probably had southern sympathies) to claim that secession was illegal but so was federal force over it. Overall the book also does a great job explaining the complicated politics of the period, including the impact of slavery on national politics, the various competing attempts (including the various compromises shepherded by Henry Clay) to resolve the slavery issue to avoid war, how to treat slaves seized from the south during the war, and the various different reconstruction proposals (that often split on how to deal with ex-rebels, i.e. bar them from office and creating state constitutions, freed slaves). Reading the book, the reader gets a real sense of the uncertainties, split opinion, and how difficult it can be to act justly but also practically that is often missing from cookie cutter histories. We forget the disagreements between complex coalitions of interests and ideologies or even between coalitions which agree on the ends but disagree on the means.
In many ways Thaddeus was ahead of his time. He supported freesoilism, emancipation, and granting civil and political rights to freed slaves consistently and early before others came around to his view. He also envisioned that the south's plantation system would be broken, and the planter class that had started the civil war would have their estates split up and given to former slaves (this was ultimately defeated by a republican fear redistribution). He often spoke his mind even when he was in the minority, and he was known for being principled. In many ways, Thaddeus is an attractive historical figure because he seems so modern, his views on racial equality and a vision for a multi-racial society that was politically equal is the vision of America that many would recognize today. He supported public education and there is evidence that he participated in the underground railroad. On the other hand, he was not perfect, in addition to his early flirtation with nativism, Thaddeus would compromise on issues such as readmitting Tennessee despite it not completely complying with the standards (partially because Thaddeus was worried about republicans losing elections). He flirted and eventually rejected the idea of recolonization of slaves in Africa. Thaddeus was involved and supported almost every major civil war and reconstruction measure and prosecuted the impeachment of Johnson, once it was revealed that he was much more friendly towards the south than previously known.
Thaddeus also had some interesting legal views. For example, he believed that the take care clause allowed Lincoln to emancipate southern slaves for the war effort, but even that if there was no constitutional authority, under natural law principles such as the safety of the people is the supreme law, and the laws of nations as described by Vattel Lincoln would have such authority. Thaddeus, in contrast to Lincoln who never recognized the confederacy as sovereign but simply in a state of insurrection, thought that the admission of west Virginia (the constitution bans the dismemberment of a state without its consent, the west virginia unionists asserted that they were the legitimate state legislature and gave themselves permission to separate the state, which Lincoln adopted) was justified not by the constitution but by the laws of war. I wonder if such thinking was prevalent at the time, or unique to Thaddeus.
Thaddeus also had some great lines that still ring true today. He had an iron wit (once a political opponent refused to yield the way, saying that he did not yield to shunks, to which Thaddeus responded that he did, and stepped aside and that some men were so flat that they could not even be squished by a shoe). He said that he would not reject the good because it was not perfect and leave it for better men in the future to come closer to perfect (in regards to the lack of explicit suffrage in the 14th). His grave stone reads that he chose that cemetery because it was racially integrated, holding to the truth that all men are created equal before his creator.
Thaddeus (named after the Polish-Lithuanian noble who came to help us in our revolution), was mostly known for his role as a radical republican. Thaddeus was raised in vermont (which grow out of disputes with various other states that ultimately resulted in small landowners prevailing) and was educated by his baptist mother, and a classical greek/roman college education at Dartmouth on the importance of the independent yeoman farmer participating in republican governance (for this reason he supported black suffrage in the antebellum north but was at first hesitant about granting freed slaves the vote) and fearing demagogues. Thaddeus started out as a typical Whig that supported government improvements to encourage industrial growth and limitation of slavery to where it had already existed. His political career was a microcosm for the impact of slavery on the implosion of national politics. At first, he refused to join new parties dedicated solely to freesoilism (which by being a powerful third party became kingmakers and put Salmon and Sumner into the senate) because he was convinced that he would be able to accomplish more good as part of the more established Whig party. Then, while both the Whigs and the Democrats struggled with the issue of freesoilism (accelerated by the territorial gains from the Mexican American war), the Whig party imploded over the slavery issue, and Thaddeus tried to navigate the ensuing confusing mess of anti-masonic (he agreed with their fear of secret societies) and nativist parties (he never strongly spoke out in favor of nativism but had dealings with those parties as they were powerful in his home state of Pennsylvania, he later objective to anti-immigration policies against the chinese). Eventually, Thaddeus became a committed republican even though he had opposed slavery as a moral principle for some time. At that point Thaddeus encouraged the federal government not to bow to southern threats over the slavery issue, and fought against the "gag" rule then in Congress.
One thing I learned from this book was really how much the southern planter class aggressively pushed the nation towards war. The republicans were committed to limiting slavery from the federal territories, from DC, and limiting the interstate exchange of slavery hoping that would eventually cause the extinction of slavery where it was entrenched. Very few republicans had pushed for abolition of slavery in the south, partially because they did not think the federal government had the power to do so. And on the eve of war, there were serious proposals to protect slavery by constitutional amendment or reinstating the missouri compromise line to ward off disunion. The north also tread carefully initially in the war, hoping that the rebels were a minority of the south and that loyal southerners would help end the conflict early. And how strange it was for Buchanan (who probably had southern sympathies) to claim that secession was illegal but so was federal force over it. Overall the book also does a great job explaining the complicated politics of the period, including the impact of slavery on national politics, the various competing attempts (including the various compromises shepherded by Henry Clay) to resolve the slavery issue to avoid war, how to treat slaves seized from the south during the war, and the various different reconstruction proposals (that often split on how to deal with ex-rebels, i.e. bar them from office and creating state constitutions, freed slaves). Reading the book, the reader gets a real sense of the uncertainties, split opinion, and how difficult it can be to act justly but also practically that is often missing from cookie cutter histories. We forget the disagreements between complex coalitions of interests and ideologies or even between coalitions which agree on the ends but disagree on the means.
In many ways Thaddeus was ahead of his time. He supported freesoilism, emancipation, and granting civil and political rights to freed slaves consistently and early before others came around to his view. He also envisioned that the south's plantation system would be broken, and the planter class that had started the civil war would have their estates split up and given to former slaves (this was ultimately defeated by a republican fear redistribution). He often spoke his mind even when he was in the minority, and he was known for being principled. In many ways, Thaddeus is an attractive historical figure because he seems so modern, his views on racial equality and a vision for a multi-racial society that was politically equal is the vision of America that many would recognize today. He supported public education and there is evidence that he participated in the underground railroad. On the other hand, he was not perfect, in addition to his early flirtation with nativism, Thaddeus would compromise on issues such as readmitting Tennessee despite it not completely complying with the standards (partially because Thaddeus was worried about republicans losing elections). He flirted and eventually rejected the idea of recolonization of slaves in Africa. Thaddeus was involved and supported almost every major civil war and reconstruction measure and prosecuted the impeachment of Johnson, once it was revealed that he was much more friendly towards the south than previously known.
Thaddeus also had some interesting legal views. For example, he believed that the take care clause allowed Lincoln to emancipate southern slaves for the war effort, but even that if there was no constitutional authority, under natural law principles such as the safety of the people is the supreme law, and the laws of nations as described by Vattel Lincoln would have such authority. Thaddeus, in contrast to Lincoln who never recognized the confederacy as sovereign but simply in a state of insurrection, thought that the admission of west Virginia (the constitution bans the dismemberment of a state without its consent, the west virginia unionists asserted that they were the legitimate state legislature and gave themselves permission to separate the state, which Lincoln adopted) was justified not by the constitution but by the laws of war. I wonder if such thinking was prevalent at the time, or unique to Thaddeus.
Thaddeus also had some great lines that still ring true today. He had an iron wit (once a political opponent refused to yield the way, saying that he did not yield to shunks, to which Thaddeus responded that he did, and stepped aside and that some men were so flat that they could not even be squished by a shoe). He said that he would not reject the good because it was not perfect and leave it for better men in the future to come closer to perfect (in regards to the lack of explicit suffrage in the 14th). His grave stone reads that he chose that cemetery because it was racially integrated, holding to the truth that all men are created equal before his creator.
March 25, 2021
This book has some strengths. Levine knows the era well. He respects and admires Stevens without being afraid to critique him. Don't read the book expecting an actual biography. It's more like a narrative of various legislative and executive goals, laws, and disagreements from roughly 1850 to 1868, with Stevens' writings and speeches dispersed throughout. Either that or Stevens had absolutely no life outside the House chamber, which can't be true. Any personality is entirely missing. That is unfortunate, because Stevens was a remarkable man, and a more well-rounded portrait is richly deserved.
I'm not sure Levine's use of language is quite fair either. In short, to be "progressive" is always to be right, while to be "conservative" is always to be wrong. Those weren't even the terms in use in that era, yet the author insists on using them again and again. I can't help but think . . . well, do I even need to say it.
I'm not sure Levine's use of language is quite fair either. In short, to be "progressive" is always to be right, while to be "conservative" is always to be wrong. Those weren't even the terms in use in that era, yet the author insists on using them again and again. I can't help but think . . . well, do I even need to say it.
May 28, 2021
Thaddeus Stevens was a strong supporter for abolition and later equal rights for the freed slaves. This book details his life and how he evolved into the strong advocate for the freedmen. I felt the best part of this book was how the Congress and the Northern people gradually moved through the various stages of granting freedom to the slaves. This is not as well known of a story as Lincoln signing the Emancipation Proclamation. Instead, it was a step-by-step process from the beginning of the Civil War where Congress expanded the numbers of slaves to be freed according to the needs of the war. Stevens worked diligently to move this process along and was always at the forefront. While he pushed for more freedom, he also knew politically what was possible and was willing to compromise. It seems like a fair book that shows all sides of this man
June 14, 2021
The main substantive criticism of this book is that it tells you almost nothing about Stevens as a person a focuses almost exclusively on his public facing life. But I don’t mind this Law & Order type of bio.
April 4, 2021
Strong political biography of Stevens. Given his long legislative career, it is not surprising that much of the focus is on specific legislative and behind the scenes work to advance legislation. But more attention to Stevens personal life would have helped to round out the picture a bit more. But strongly recommend this accessible biography of an underrated and misunderstood architect of America's second Revolution and champion of civil rights.
March 26, 2021
Recently, I watched all seven seasons of "The West Wing" on HBO Max.
Several positive references were made about Thaddeus Stevens.
This prompted me to seek out a biography of this politician.
Wow. Thaddeus Stevens deserves a public monument in Washington, D.C., in my opinion.
I am very glad that I read this biography.
I learned so much about a man that I came to admire and respect greatly.
Several positive references were made about Thaddeus Stevens.
This prompted me to seek out a biography of this politician.
Wow. Thaddeus Stevens deserves a public monument in Washington, D.C., in my opinion.
I am very glad that I read this biography.
I learned so much about a man that I came to admire and respect greatly.
June 6, 2021
In school I was taught that incrementalism was necessary to abolish slavery and reconstitute the union in the South because of “the times” and because “standards were different then.”
I’d have preferred learning what a badass Thaddeus Stevens was.
I’d have preferred learning what a badass Thaddeus Stevens was.
April 25, 2021
The Story of a Determined Anti-Slavery Congressman
Please visit I. David’s blog at https://www.goodreads.com/author/show...
In light of the thousands of books that have been written about the Civil War it is hard to believe that there can be a new book with an unexplored viewpoint. But Bruce Levine’s Thaddeus Stevens: Civil War Revolutionary, Fighter for Racial Justice, which describes the efforts of one relentless Congressman to end slavery and to grant full rights of citizenship to the former slaves, is just such a book.
Thaddeus Stevens was a Congressman from Lancaster County, Pennsylvania during the years leading up to, and during, the Civil War. While Levine describes him as a very stubborn, principled person he also shows that he was a shrewd politician who knew how to pick and win his important battles.
At the time that Stevens was first elected to Congress most Americans, even in those in the North, considered African Americans to be inferior to white Americans and not capable of exercising the rights of citizenship. The early Congressional battles over slavery involved the question of extension of slavery into the territories and the new states. Levine deftly incorporates quotes from Stevens’ speeches in Congress to demonstrate the evolution of his position on slavery during those early battles. He shows that, by the time the Civil War started, Stevens was in a small minority seeking to end slavery everywhere in the United States.
When War broke out most Northerners did not go to war to eliminate slavery. They went to war to preserve the Union. And during the first years of the War, many of the most liberal Northerners, including Abraham Lincoln, sought to appease the seceded Southern states, and to encourage them to rejoin the Union, by crafting some type of plan to gradually terminate slavery or to resettle the former slaves in Africa.
The Northerners seeking to appease the South abandoned those efforts only when they saw how successful the South was during the first years of the War. While most of Stevens’ fellow Congressmen were not, initially, anxious to take action to free the slaves, they were anxious to win the War. And Levine explains how Stevens advanced his antislavery position by strategically tying it to the War issue. Over the initial objections of his colleagues he was able to show that emancipating the slaves would weaken the South’s war effort and that permitting African Americans to enlist in the Union Army would strengthen the Union’s war effort.
Levine explains that, even after they lost the War, Southerners were not ready to change the status of African Americans living in their midst. In fact, they planned to return the African Americans to their pre-war subservient status, using a name other than slavery. And the North, which was tired of the War by the time it was over and was unwilling to enforce the rights of the former slaves, pretty much looked the other way. But Stevens did everything that he could stiffen the North’s resolve.
Stevens saw that reconstruction, as implemented by Andrew Johnson, was likely to undermine everything that the North had achieved for African Americans during the War. So his last great achievement before he died was passage of the 14th and 15th Amendments that amended the Constitution to grant to African Americans all rights of citizenship.
Levine has written a valuable addition to the extensive existing library of Civil War books. His is a rare history book in that it both transmits historical events and builds, in the reader, true feelings of contempt for Stevens’ fellow Congressmen who remain indifferent to the plight of the slaves. I give this book four stars and recommend it for everyone.
Please visit I. David’s blog at https://www.goodreads.com/author/show...
In light of the thousands of books that have been written about the Civil War it is hard to believe that there can be a new book with an unexplored viewpoint. But Bruce Levine’s Thaddeus Stevens: Civil War Revolutionary, Fighter for Racial Justice, which describes the efforts of one relentless Congressman to end slavery and to grant full rights of citizenship to the former slaves, is just such a book.
Thaddeus Stevens was a Congressman from Lancaster County, Pennsylvania during the years leading up to, and during, the Civil War. While Levine describes him as a very stubborn, principled person he also shows that he was a shrewd politician who knew how to pick and win his important battles.
At the time that Stevens was first elected to Congress most Americans, even in those in the North, considered African Americans to be inferior to white Americans and not capable of exercising the rights of citizenship. The early Congressional battles over slavery involved the question of extension of slavery into the territories and the new states. Levine deftly incorporates quotes from Stevens’ speeches in Congress to demonstrate the evolution of his position on slavery during those early battles. He shows that, by the time the Civil War started, Stevens was in a small minority seeking to end slavery everywhere in the United States.
When War broke out most Northerners did not go to war to eliminate slavery. They went to war to preserve the Union. And during the first years of the War, many of the most liberal Northerners, including Abraham Lincoln, sought to appease the seceded Southern states, and to encourage them to rejoin the Union, by crafting some type of plan to gradually terminate slavery or to resettle the former slaves in Africa.
The Northerners seeking to appease the South abandoned those efforts only when they saw how successful the South was during the first years of the War. While most of Stevens’ fellow Congressmen were not, initially, anxious to take action to free the slaves, they were anxious to win the War. And Levine explains how Stevens advanced his antislavery position by strategically tying it to the War issue. Over the initial objections of his colleagues he was able to show that emancipating the slaves would weaken the South’s war effort and that permitting African Americans to enlist in the Union Army would strengthen the Union’s war effort.
Levine explains that, even after they lost the War, Southerners were not ready to change the status of African Americans living in their midst. In fact, they planned to return the African Americans to their pre-war subservient status, using a name other than slavery. And the North, which was tired of the War by the time it was over and was unwilling to enforce the rights of the former slaves, pretty much looked the other way. But Stevens did everything that he could stiffen the North’s resolve.
Stevens saw that reconstruction, as implemented by Andrew Johnson, was likely to undermine everything that the North had achieved for African Americans during the War. So his last great achievement before he died was passage of the 14th and 15th Amendments that amended the Constitution to grant to African Americans all rights of citizenship.
Levine has written a valuable addition to the extensive existing library of Civil War books. His is a rare history book in that it both transmits historical events and builds, in the reader, true feelings of contempt for Stevens’ fellow Congressmen who remain indifferent to the plight of the slaves. I give this book four stars and recommend it for everyone.
July 9, 2025
Excellent book! This is a model of how to write a reasonably sized and yet compelling biography of a significant historical figure. Levine shows how Stevens was always one step ahead of more moderate figures in the Republican Party like Lincoln when it came to attacking slavery and expanding/defending the rights of black people. He was a pivotal figure in shaping the Republican Party, pressing for making the Civil War against slavery a war against slavery, and in creating an aggressive, even revolutionary approach to Reconstruction that valued racial equality.
Stevens' anti-slavery position seemed to be shaped by his devotion to republican ideology, particularly the Vermont version he grew up with. This was the classic New England ideal of small independent farmers participating in localized democratic government but also being willing to sacrifice for the greater good. Stevens obviously saw slavery as a moral abomination, but he also resented the hyper-concentration of wealth it created in the South and the excessive control enslavers had over national politics. There was a sort of masculine rejection by him and other people who eventually became Republicans of the South's ever-growing demands on the rest of the country: the gag rule, the violation of the MIssouri Compromise, the annexation of Texas, Kansas-Nebraska, and eventually the post-Dred Scott concept that slave property was inviolable and recognized in the Constitution. Eventually, many people like Stevens became fed up with the Slave Power's arrogance and inimical behavior, which contributed to the formation of the Republican Party.
Stevens was a classic radical Republican who pressed for an aggressive war against Confederate slavery, in contrast to Lincoln's more conciliatory approach in the first half of the war. Eventually, Lincoln was pulled by events and his own calculations toward the Confiscation Acts, teh employment of black soldiers, the Emancipation Proclamation, and a total war against the Southern way of life, including slavery. Stevens then led the charge for radical Reconstruction, helping Congress arrest control of this process from the lenient President Johnson and driving for stronger reforms that would enshrine black equality and institutionalize the Republican Party in the South. Sadly, he died in 1868 in the middle of Reconstruction, marking a generational shift in the REpublica Party away from its radical edge and more towards its reconciliationist, pro-business faction that eventually wrapped up Reconstruction.
I really admire how Levine tells this story: there's enough on Stevens' upbringing and relationships to give you a sense of who he was, but the focus is on his political life and ideas. He captures a heroic figure in American politics who deserves to be celebrated today.
Stevens' anti-slavery position seemed to be shaped by his devotion to republican ideology, particularly the Vermont version he grew up with. This was the classic New England ideal of small independent farmers participating in localized democratic government but also being willing to sacrifice for the greater good. Stevens obviously saw slavery as a moral abomination, but he also resented the hyper-concentration of wealth it created in the South and the excessive control enslavers had over national politics. There was a sort of masculine rejection by him and other people who eventually became Republicans of the South's ever-growing demands on the rest of the country: the gag rule, the violation of the MIssouri Compromise, the annexation of Texas, Kansas-Nebraska, and eventually the post-Dred Scott concept that slave property was inviolable and recognized in the Constitution. Eventually, many people like Stevens became fed up with the Slave Power's arrogance and inimical behavior, which contributed to the formation of the Republican Party.
Stevens was a classic radical Republican who pressed for an aggressive war against Confederate slavery, in contrast to Lincoln's more conciliatory approach in the first half of the war. Eventually, Lincoln was pulled by events and his own calculations toward the Confiscation Acts, teh employment of black soldiers, the Emancipation Proclamation, and a total war against the Southern way of life, including slavery. Stevens then led the charge for radical Reconstruction, helping Congress arrest control of this process from the lenient President Johnson and driving for stronger reforms that would enshrine black equality and institutionalize the Republican Party in the South. Sadly, he died in 1868 in the middle of Reconstruction, marking a generational shift in the REpublica Party away from its radical edge and more towards its reconciliationist, pro-business faction that eventually wrapped up Reconstruction.
I really admire how Levine tells this story: there's enough on Stevens' upbringing and relationships to give you a sense of who he was, but the focus is on his political life and ideas. He captures a heroic figure in American politics who deserves to be celebrated today.
February 14, 2024
Huge disappointment. Many years ago I made note that there wasn’t a good full-length biography of Thaddeus Stevens. At the time I suspected that the reason one hadn’t been written was there wasn’t enough remaining primary source material on Stevens to write such a biography. After reading this book, I assume my guess was correct.
There is barely any Thaddeus Stevens in this book. It’s a political history of the mid-nineteenth century, mainly focused on the largest issues of slavery’s legality, re-hashing material extremely familiar to any Civil War buff, with very occasionally a sentence thrown in about what Stevens thought of the event in question. It easily could have been an article, there’s so little Thaddeus Stevens in the book.
Other than a tiny bit about Thaddeus Stevens’ early family life at the beginning, you will learn absolutely nothing about his personal life. At the end of this book you will have no idea who his friends were, why he never married, what his relationship with his family was after he left home. The housekeeper who was rumored to be his common-law wife (the rumor was started as an effort to tarnish Stevens since his housekeeper was mixed race) appears nowhere in the book after a sentence in the introduction, so the reader has no chance to decide for themselves if there was any friendship between Stevens and his housekeeper. As someone highly versed in the generic history covered in this book, I found it irritating to keep receiving information I already knew and not learn anything new about the very interesting Thaddeus Stevens!
(Examples of topics re-hashed in this book: Dredd Scott decision, John Brown’s raid on Harper’s Ferry, various attempts at appeasing the slave power such as the Missouri Compromise, General Sherman’s land grant to ex-slaves and that land being taken away from them… all familiar territory to people interested in this time period. Perhaps if you are new to these topics you will find this book more interesting.)
There is barely any Thaddeus Stevens in this book. It’s a political history of the mid-nineteenth century, mainly focused on the largest issues of slavery’s legality, re-hashing material extremely familiar to any Civil War buff, with very occasionally a sentence thrown in about what Stevens thought of the event in question. It easily could have been an article, there’s so little Thaddeus Stevens in the book.
Other than a tiny bit about Thaddeus Stevens’ early family life at the beginning, you will learn absolutely nothing about his personal life. At the end of this book you will have no idea who his friends were, why he never married, what his relationship with his family was after he left home. The housekeeper who was rumored to be his common-law wife (the rumor was started as an effort to tarnish Stevens since his housekeeper was mixed race) appears nowhere in the book after a sentence in the introduction, so the reader has no chance to decide for themselves if there was any friendship between Stevens and his housekeeper. As someone highly versed in the generic history covered in this book, I found it irritating to keep receiving information I already knew and not learn anything new about the very interesting Thaddeus Stevens!
(Examples of topics re-hashed in this book: Dredd Scott decision, John Brown’s raid on Harper’s Ferry, various attempts at appeasing the slave power such as the Missouri Compromise, General Sherman’s land grant to ex-slaves and that land being taken away from them… all familiar territory to people interested in this time period. Perhaps if you are new to these topics you will find this book more interesting.)
Displaying 1 - 30 of 91 reviews