The Road to Disunion: Volume II: Secessionists Triumphant, 1854-1861

This book is not for everyone -- particularly not for those who want an entertaining story like what Shelby Foote turns out. Even worse is the pap fed to people from the likes of Ken Burns where it is thought that everything can be reduced to a sound bite. Well, it can't. I suppose that history can be made entertaining with a dumbed-down popular writing style, but the purpose of historical presentations and analysis like this one is to inform and provide analyses for consideration and discussion. On that basis this work should be given 10 stars. There are a number of points that author Freehling makes that will probably come as a surprise to readers who have not studied the run-up to the Civil War. First and foremost is that secession was not inevitable, although it certainly was likely. And the issue driving the sections apart was slavery. The clock was ticking against slavery, as the border states were seeing slavery disappear for various reasons (and they stayed in the Union), the Upper South was seeing a decline in slavery under an influx of northerners and immigrants who were either against slavery or competed against it, and only the cotton-belt states (the seven that initially seceded) contained sufficiently widespread political will to secede to retain slavery -- or more to the point, retain property rights and their investments in slaves. Even then, as the author points out at great length, the people in those states were hardly united. On the other hand, Southerners did not want to be told what to do, especially by Northerners. They had lost power on the national level (as depicted by the author), and politically they were being consigned to the dustbin. Whereas formerly they had been able to induce Northern Democrats to carry their political water, that was coming to an end. There was a very great fear of isolation, and the series of events that brought South Carolina to secede are extremely well covered by the author. Nonetheless, as the author points out, the pillars of secession were South Carolina and Mississippi, and without Alabama and particularly Georgia, their secessionist state was not viable. The story as to how these states muddled through and overcame "Cooperative" sentiment, reads like a not so comic comedy of errors and special circumstances. As always, people, minor events and circumstances make a very great impact. These people, events and circumstances are what this book is all about. I suppose one can argue about the author's stress on various people and events, and also his analyses. But that is after the fact -- without learning about these people and events, there can be no discussion or criticism. And there is a great deal to learn here. If one wishes to be entertained, watch sports on TV. If one wants to learn history, read Freehling. One way or another, slavery was going to come to an end in modern times, and except for slavery in the Muslim world that continues to the present d

I have read both volumes of Professor Freehling's "Road to Disunion" and this review is intended to apply to both volumes. I consider his work to be of the highest scholarship, impeccably researched, and very informative. Unfortunately, Professor Freehling's writing style seems to indicate that his work was prepared more for the perusal of his fellow Ph.D's than for the reading public. It is lamentable for those having an interest in this period of our history that he did not take a cue from writers and historians of this era such as Shelby Foote, Douglas Southall Freeman, Carl Sandburg, Allan Nevins, and Bruce Catton whose works are highly informative but at the same time very readable, flowing, actually entertaining. One has to actually experience Professor Freehling's sentences and paragraphs to appreciate the difficulty of grasping some of them. He seems never to have met a suffix--and few prefixes--which he did not like. Social and political factions, groups, and sub-groups are inevitably named and labelled resulting in an exponential proliferation of nouns such as Secessionists, Unionists, Dis-unionists, Separatists, Cooperationists, Abolitionists, Borderites, Paternalists, Egalitarianists, Nativists, ex-Whigs, anti-slavery Democrats, Calhounism, Van Burenites, etc., ad infinitum. More than a few casual readers will likely find that a glossary, however sophomoric it might seem to Professor Freehling, would be helpful. I found myself reading many sentences two, three, even four times before feeling satisfied that I had grasped the intended meaning. Several entire paragraphs, after being subjected to similar scrutiny, were simply abandoned as I moved on through the work, resigned that, if I should ever be able to digest them, it simply would not be worth the effort. On a substantive note, Professor Freehling, especially in Volume II, appears to conclude that the proponents of slavery, in their efforts to defend and protect their "peculiar institution" infringed and trampled upon the "Republicanism" of other whites, and tended thereby even to enslave such whites. He seems to offer this conclusion as an explanation for the fervor which opponents of slavery brought to the struggle against it. The primary example offered of such infringement of "Republican" rights is that for a number of years, the Democratic Party was controlled by a minority centered in the lower south, and that through the Democratic Party, then the major party in the nation, this southern minority in effect exercised control over a nationwide majority, thereby infringing upon the "Republican" right of majority rule. Other more concrete examples of infringement of "rights" were southern efforts to "gag" and censor abolitionist communication designed to agitate and incite resistance to slavery in the south, and actual violence offered to those inclined to go in person among slaves and non-slaveholding whites for such purposes. Southerners felt justified in such action by th

I was a big fan of Freehling's first volume, but I believe the second volume is even better than its predecessor. Perhaps this is because Freehling devotes so many pages to a shorter time period so you get a fuller picture of what was going on. Or perhaps it is because of the fact that Freehling did so much research and uncovered interesting stories that had previously been skipped over. Whatever the reason, if you are interested in the causes of the Civil War or 19th century American history, pick this up. Freehling's writing style is unique, but I didn't find it detrimental at all.

Seventeen years ago Freehling's Road to Disunion Vol. I was published and we Freehling fans have been impatient for this book to come out. It has been along wait but worth it. Professor Freehling has outdone himself on Road II. If there is a problem with this book it is that you can't afford to "skip" a paragraph because you think you know all about the subject. You find a fact, a thought, or a conclusion you never thought of before. Thid book is surely the crowning jewel in Wm. Freehling's bejeweled crown. Thank you, Dr. Freehling. Barrie W. Bracken, Researcher

If you like Freehings Road to disunion volume I: Secessionists at bay, then you wan't be sorry getting volume II. It is written in the same style and with great analysis. You can just pick this up where you left part one. Just like volume I had many topics and events that have not been included in other antebellum histoybooks, this volume offers a lot of fresh insights about the storming 1850:s that other books miss. This book must be considered, if not the best general history of the south during theese years, one of the top 3 best. If you are interested in the pre civil war era...don't miss this book!!