Customer Reviews

The Road to Disunion: Volume I: Secessionists at Bay, 1776-1854

5 star:		(13)
4 star:		(10)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

For anyone who has been interested in the impact of slavery upon America's soul, Freehling's opus is a must. Yes it is long, yes it is painfully detailed, yes at times it can border on being a polemic (particularly in Freehling's discussion of Thomas Jefferson); however, it is thorough, researched in depth, very informative and highly persuasive. My only recommendation to the author would be to use fewer adjectives and adverbs in describing "the peculiar institution"; his otherwise objective research says it all and bears up well under its own scholarship. What I learned from "Road to Disunion" is that the question of our nation's expansion during the first 80 years of the Union cannot be understood without knowledge of the national debate and the political maneuvering to extend or limit slavery's expansion during this same time period. And Freehling goes beyond the political archives which record how county and state and national assemblies voted on slavery and other tangential issues. He discusses the psychology of slavery itself - the mindset the slave owner foisted upon the slave, and the ensuing tension which resulted when slave and abolitionist did not buy into this mindset. Freehling's work was a challenge to digest (I am no scholar) but I consider myself a better informed citizen with greater appreciation of the shape of America today because of his research of America's past.

With a sharp eye and witty word for the setting, William Freehling delivers a sprawling and most satisfactory account of the antebellum South's queasy lurches towards secession. Contrary to the strained obfuscation of many histories bearing on the Civil War's causes, Freehling effortlessly restores slavery, and the social, cultural and political dilemmas it spawned, to the center of the story where it belongs. The second chapter is pure genius: the disjointed, patchwork nature of the antebellum South is vividly illustrated with an imagined overland journey from New Orleans to Charleston in the 1850s. Freehling describes the frustrating alternative routes one might have wished to take, the constant and comically inconvenient switches between independent railroads with incompatible gauges and timetables, their respective stations often miles apart. With an accomplished historian's power to simultaneously portray minute details and grand themes, the author sinks us into the setting--its pace, its weather, its sights and sounds. Gripped by this elegant evocation, we are then drawn into the book's purpose: an exploration of the uneasy social dynamics of different regions in the Old South, and how they bent and twisted its resulting ideologies and politics. How these, in turn, redounded upon each other and shaped the confrontations and compromises at the national level becomes the sturdy spine of the story, and Freehling never loses his keen appreciation for the place, people and material culture of the period.

Many here have disparaged his writing style, and I understand what they are saying. For instance, try and decode the sentence that begins Chapter 21: "The first plotter Ashbel Smith inflamed Abel P. Upshur by naming was no famous London schemer." Without having read the last sentence of Chapter 20, it seems to defy grammar. Time after time I found that certain sentences made sense only by repeating them with different stresses laid on different words. But after awhile, I found there was a sort of breezy conversational logic to it, and it occurred to me that if Freehling were reading his book aloud we would have no problem with his usage. But, of course, that is no way to write effectively, and I have taken a star off for an otherwise flawless slab of rich historiography.

Freehling's "The road to disunion" is a masterful political history of the secession movement from its origin to the mid-1850s. This is very detailed, richly documented, and draws from original letters and official documents. But this is NOT a dry history - it's also storytelling at its best, and historical figures are characterized richly. This book will not be politically correct in Sons of Confederate Veterans circles. But if you want to find out what really went on in the Missourri compromise, or the annexation of Texas - well, chapters 20-25 are a history of Texas annexation which I wasn't taught in school.

After a long time, in which a combination of increased workload and diversified reading interests have kept me away, it is good to be back to the world of antebellum 19th century America. Meeting Thomas Jefferson, John C. Calhoun, Andrew Jackson and a dozen secondary characters feels a little like coming home. But as the saying goes, you can dip into the same river twice. William W. Freehling's antebellum South is both familiar and foreign. Freehling brings forward a provocative thesis, which throws a bright light on some elements of the period, but also blinds you to some vital aspects.

I have previously read Freehling's brilliant essay collection, The Reintegration of American History: Slavery and the Civil War. That was one of the best books about 19th century America I've ever read. Using cultural history, comparative studies, biography, and even autobiography, Freehling brought a provocative new thesis to the field of 19th century antebellum South.

According to Freehling, the South was torn between two conflicting, contradictory ideologies - Aristocratic Paternalism, the 18th century view that the enlightened rich should govern all others, black and white and female, and Jacksonian 'Herrenvolk Democracy' - the view that America is the republic of the free white male, where the color line separates the master race - the Herrenvolk - from the inferior black folk.

The idea that the clash between these two ideologies, and indeed, the fractions between the various, and very different, elements of the South, is Freehling's key argument. And it illuminates many things:

The clash between Paternalists and Herrenvolk Democrats was most evident during the struggles for control of the legislations of Southern states, particularly Virginia. There, the lines were drawn most sharply between aristocratic slaveholders and slaveless white folks.

Freehling's high concept is also a part of the explanation for episodes such as the Texas annexation and particularly the gag rule. Slavocrats insisted that antislavery petitions to the United States Congress would not only be ignored, but actively rejected, thus 'gagging' opposition to Slavery and making a mockery of the democratic process. The gag rule was designed and led by South Carolina extremists, the most radical faction of the aristocrats.

But the explanation works less well when describing the major sectional conflicts - as one approaches the 1850s, Paternalists and Democrats all but disappear, and the struggle becomes one between Free and Slave states, with the Upper South and the Lower North trapped between them. This is a familiar story, and while Freehling tells it well, he does not really add much to the description.

A major point that is scored is Freehling's description of Slavery's malcontents. There really was, particularly in Texas and in Kentucky, an antislavery undercurrent, and Freehling does a superb job of describing its protagonists and enemies. As long as the North left the South alone, Southern Slaveholders could probably squash such movements, but their existence helps explain Southern fear of the rise of the Republican party - a strong Northern ally that could help Southern fifth columnist destroy the Peculiar institution from within.

But for the most part, Freehling's book fails to meet expectations. The title is more than a little Misleading - The Road to Disunion does not really show a path that led to the irreconcilable conflict. Unlike the events of 1848-1860, when each event called for its successor - the Compromise of 1850 led to the destruction of the Whig party in the lower south, which led to the radicalization of the Southern Democratic Party, and to the Kansas-Nebraska act and so on, the earlier incidents were fairly disjoint. The Virginia Slavery debate, the Nullification crises, the Gag rule - all ended without any real increase in animosity. Nor do we see "secessionists at Bay" - with marginal exceptions, until the late 1840s, few major Southerners were bona fide disunionists. Rather, like John C. Calhoun, they wanted to weaken the Union in order to save it.

For all of its sophistication and scale, Freehling's account feels incomplete. Mainly, I think, because until the middle 1840s, the themes Freehling invokes (sectionalism, slavery, colonialism) were relatively minor elements of political scene, where the major issues were banks, Indian genocide, internal improvements and the fans and enemies of `King Andrew` Jackson.

Ultimately, I think the road to disunion was not paved by Southern extremists. Southerners tried mainly to preserve their way of life against a world that was rapidly changing - Industrial rather then Agricultural, increasingly National rather than Local, and yes, Democratic rather than aristocratic. For all their belligerency, the Slavepower was essentially passive and fearful, lashing out in desperation against a new, modern world where there was place neither for slaves nor for masters.

Although the author often employs difficult sentence structure, this book is a monumental victory in the comprehension of this most difficult topic. Of all the Civil War material I have read, I find this book among the most difficult and rewarding. If you are really interested in probing CW studies, this one is probably for you. If you are a more casual CW reader, you may want to save it for a future time. I am eagerly looking forward to volume II.

The folks here are 100% right about the author's writing style. At times one is forced to reread a sentence to catch the meaning the prose is so obtuse.

I believe Mr. Freehling was attempting to develop a catchy rhythm and a "style" but it never quite gels. At times he takes what would be an easily understood, colloquially worded sentence and inverts it so that it almost seems foreign to an English oriented audience (imagine a prose constantly using wording such as "down he sat" as opposed to "he sat down").

He also has an annoying tendency of attempting to create catch phrases that he uses over an over again even when the situations described don't quite fit with the original usage of the word he coins. The style, mannerisms, and conventions he used in writing this tome slows down the pace, seems forced and detracts from the work. Mr. Freehling would do himself better to just write the narrative in a less "stylized" manner.

However, that being said, those who have said this is a book that shouldn't be missed are also correct. The research the author put into this book is voluminous and comprehensive. He brings quite a few things home well and leads the reader to a much better understanding of just how complicated the slavery issue really was in antebellum America.

His description of the various "Souths" that developed between 1780 and 1853 is fascinating and illuminating. His treatment of the Texas annexation issue was fantastic. With such wonderful research, I cannot wait for Vol. 2, but I hope Mr. Freehling jettisons his muddled writing style before he begins the next installment.

This is a highly recommended work. But don't imagine it is light reading.

Due to the author's difficult style (which I would describe as awkward rather than boring) it took me a couple of years to slog through this book. I found myself constantly setting it aside to read more interesting works. Ultimately, I disciplined myself to finally finish it, and I'm glad I did. Despite Mr. Freehling's dense prose, there's a lot of very insightful analysis here, for anyone willing to overlook the author's stylistic shortcomings.

The first part of the book takes the reader on a tour of the antebellum South, and exposes the many regional differences that made the South difficult to unite. Freehling also describes the attitudes of the Southern slave-holding gentility. "Massa" could be a tyrant with the "darkies", but lenient and overly-indulgent with his own family. He wanted to be feudal lord over all, yet still clung to some of the ideals of Jacksonian democracy. At times, Freehling loses his objectivity and wears his anti-Southern bias on his sleeve, but overall his analysis rings true.

The remainder of the book explores the various controversies, such as the Gag Rule, the Nullification Crisis, the Annexation of Texas, the Wilmot Proviso, and other events that threatened to shatter the fragile Union. One surprising omission from this list is New England's threat to secede during the War of 1812. Although it had nothing to do with slavery and the South, it certainly falls under the topic of disunion. I was disappointed that Freehling didn't even mention it.

"The Road to Disunion" is not a light and easy read by any stretch, but it's packed with information. I would recommend it for any serious student of the Civil War and its causes.

Mr. Freehling states in his preface that he had originally planned on writing about the Southern secession crisis of 1860-61, but he quickly realized that the subject was far too complicated to adequately and thoroughly cover it in such a limited time period. He discovered that, in order to give a complete picture of the road to disunion, he had to begin his study around the mid-1700s. After reading the result of his work, The Road to Disunion, I could understand and appreciate why he had to do so. This remarkable book covers the very complicated and, amazingly, still controversial topic of Southern secession with clarity, thoroughness, and even wit. Mr. Freehling chronicles the political and social history of the South and its place in American history in a way that is highly informative, highly researched, and highly readable.

Mr. Freehling relies heavily on the actual words of the southern political and social elite to paint a detailed and absorbing picture of ! the various crises that incrementally pulled the US apart. He provides the reader with a wealth of information and details on the Gag Rule Controversy, the Missouri Compromise, and the annexation of Texas among others, and his skill as an historian and as a writer make all these events extremely clear and understandable for perhaps the first time. He also gives the reader a richly detailed portrait of the South that cracks, if not shatters, the idea of "a unified South". Mr. Freehling describes the diversity of the region, the differences in commerce, in attitudes, in climate, and ultimately, the people. This absorbing portrait allows the reader to see the South in three dimensions, and makes the accomplishment of bringing most of the south into a southern confederacy through the efforts of southern political leaders such as Robert Barnwell Rhett, Howell Cobb, and John C. Calhoun much more intriguing.

Ultimately, The Road to Disunion accomplishes one major tas! k; it demonstrates that the issue of slavery was THE primar! y factor in the breakup of the Union. Freehling shows that the Civil War was a direct result of a history of Southern political and class arrogance, of a small group of influential people clinging to an antiquated feudal system that enslaved a race of people, and a series of subsequent clashes between ideologies. Great-grandpa Silas may have rightly said he was fighting for his rights or to protect his home and family, but the causes of the conflict in which he fought have much more complicated beginnings. Regardless of Silas' motives, he was by default fighting for the preservation of slavery.

This is one of those must-have books for anyone interested in the origins and causes of America's bloodiest conflict. Author William Freehling focuses not only on the seeds of sectional disunion, between North and South, but places particular emphasis on the disunion within the South itself. It was this political and social reality that long delayed secession and war.

"The Road to Disunion" tells a complicated tale, peopled by larger than life characters (among them, Andrew Jackson, John C. Calhoun, and Henry Clay); it is a story that Freehling takes us through step by step to 1854--through the Missouri Compromise, the Nullification Crisis, the Annexation of Texas, the Compromise of 1850. Each event is one more inexorable step down that terrible road, at the end of which, unbeknownst to those involved, lay national tragedy. And lurking just below the surface at every turn and straightaway was the major divisive issue that remained unresolved at the birth of the United States--slavery. Like Kenneth Stampp ("America in 1857") and most other modern historians, Freehling dismisses the revisionism that dominated the history of the antebellum period for much of the first half of the twentieth century. While tariffs, internal improvements, and other issues certainly contributed to the eventual break between the two halves of the nation, it was the attempts by slaveholders to protect the "peculiar institution" that was the root cause of civil war. By manipulating the democratic process, often through undemocratic means, the "Slave Power", a minority in the greater republic, was able to protect its interests and to expand slavery into new territories. Almost no one comes off smelling like roses in Freehling's account, particularly not the southern wing of the Democratic party and its "doughface" northern allies, who between them bear much of the responsibility for the coming conflagration.

In reading some of the other reviews of Freehling's book, I noticed that many readers found his prose difficult. It does have an odd rhythm to it, I'll admit, but once I was past the first few pages I found my self caught up in the flow of words. In the end, I have probably reread this book on an average of once per year. I look forward to the long-promised Volume 2.

The cut-and-thrust of national and local party politics accurately captured, move-by-move, with insights into how the personal character of the participants, regional and local economic interests, and party ideologies all interacted to melt down the national Whig Party and break our country into two warring sections.

Tremendous primer for anyone interested in how national political parties win elections and shape history, applicable to today's political environment.

Portrays the political conflicts that arose within the nation, and within the region, that attempted to create a free white man's republic coexisting with and supporting private islands of absolute enslaved despotism.

Phenomenal level of historical detail, with fine research to back up major points of analysis.