Lincoln the Man (Hardcover)

~ (Author)

Editorial Reviews

Product Description

A lost classic rediscovered and expanded, with a new introduction, new photographs, and other new materials. Written in 1931 by one of America's most highly respected poets and scholars, this book has been hidden away for over 50 years. From the beautifully written text of this lost book, the true causes of the War Between the States emerge more clearly than ever before. Written by Edgar Lee Masters, the famous author of Spoon River Anthology (who was a native of Illinois), the scholarship in this book was able to withstand the most vicious attacks. In fact, as you will learn from the new introduction, the U.S. Congress actually attempted to ban Lincoln The Man, which was offered to the public only once in a brief first edition. Now the Foundation for American Education has produced a new edition of Lincoln The Man for the first time in over half a century, with a new introduction that puts it all into perspective. Lincoln The Man is both a collector’s item and a book that must be read by anyone who wants to understand the causes of the War and the true nature of Lincoln’s legacy (as well as by readers who admire the unique literary gifts of Edgar Lee Masters). Included in this new edition is a collection of rare photographs and the text of reviews not published since the 1930s, by H.L. Mencken, Andrew Nelson Lytle, and others. “Seldom have I read so brilliant a picture of the decay of the old American spirit.... The writing here is so eloquent as to be genuinely moving.... The American people, North and South, went into the war as citizens of their respective states, they came out as subjects.... And what they thus lost they have never got back.” --H.L. Mencken “An intensely interesting, arresting, challenging, book....” --Claude Bowers “...the Lincoln myth is definitely a bad myth, and Mr. Masters deserves credit for shattering it...” --Andrew Nelson Lytle

Product Details

• Hardcover: 498 pages
• Publisher: The Foundation for American Education (December 1, 1997)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0962384267
• ISBN-13: 978-0962384264
• Product Dimensions: 9.3 x 6.4 x 1.9 inches
• Shipping Weight: 2 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.5 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (8 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #1,225,779 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

28 of 30 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars What's In A Title? "Lincoln-THE MAN", November 18, 1997

By A Customer

Originally published in 1931, this biography was not what people wanted to read about the legendary hero of our hearts.

The bigger-than-life image of Lincoln is brought back to earth by Masters, and though he was severely panned by contemporary critics and public alike for his candid look at the legendary president, there is substantial research and evidence presented from those who intimately knew the much beloved subject.

A definite must-read for the historian, researcher, and biographer.

31 of 39 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Think Clinton is the scummiest Pres.? Well think again!!!, November 4, 1998

By	John Wilharm (Chicago, IL) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

Scully and Moulder rejoice, because this book proves "The Truth is Out There". I strongly recommend this book to anyone who yearns to understand why our country is currently in such terrible shape. You will never refer to Lincoln as "Honest Abe" or "The Great Emancipator" ever again after reading this work. I pray that the history books do not lie to our children and revere Clinton the way they do Lincoln. Hopefully, historians will have the same guts that Masters had in 1931 and tell the real story about Clinton.

4 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars A Contrarian Perspective, January 30, 2009

By	C. Krik - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

I read an older edition of this book, perhaps the first edition if the blurb on this site is correct. I agree with one reviewer who found the incessant and overdetermined animus of Masters a little much to take. However, this book is best read, not as simply objective history, but as a legal brief for the prosecution of Lincoln for crimes of war and, to a lesser extent, of peace. It is not history, but counter-history, and as such it is valuable precisely because so many of us are inclined to dismiss his criticisms out of hand.

One note. Masters is not an ideologist of the "Lost Cause" persuasion, and he certainly was not a romantic of any variety. Although known primarily as a poet (and, indeed, one of America's greatest), his training was in law. This training taught him to see with a cynic's eyes the sophistry and rhetorical obfuscation that often passes for politics; he judged Lincoln as he would have judged any lawyer on the make who argues death and injustice with demagogic piety and sophistic intent. However, I think he falls prey to the tendency to view the assassinated president as a less ambiguous man than he truly was, which is not to say that Lincoln was innocent of the crimes Masters charges him with. And to charge Lincoln with defending oligarchic interests in the North (such as the railroads and the tariff system), while not necessarily inappropriate or even inaccurate, ignores evidence that his counterpart in the Confederacy acted on behalf of similar interests in the South (see, for instance, "Bitterly Divided" by David Williams). War always has a tendency to create tyrants out of any but the best statesmen, which is why the argument over which side actually started the conflict is (still) so contested--because after hostilities were initiated it was of military necessity that great powers would be assumed or asserted by the executives of both federations. Thus it is the scope of Lincoln's ambition which would really convict him--to know whether he had, all along, sought to provoke a smoldering conflict into war in order to fulfill a quest for power unmitigated by higher purpose. This is rather more difficult to determine, but Masters goes further than most in making the case that yes, he did.