You will learn more about the immediate events leading up to the Civil War then you ever did in history class. But instead of a broad, general view of politics and economics, Larson focuses on the men behind the scenes. Featuring the passively frustrating President James Buchanan, his treasonous Secretary of War John Floyd (outsmarted by Unionist yinzers!), recently elected Abraham Lincoln, incestuous planter James Hammond, adamant secessionist Edmund Riffin, no-nonsense abolitionist Capt. Doubleday, and sympathizing but duty-first Major Anderson, the commander at Ft. Sumter. But despite the efforts of Northern compromisers and Unionists, war was inevitable. Problem was, the "petulant" gentlemen of the South all knew it was an awful, outdated institution. But the money was too good. Risking war and the deaths of hundreds of thousands was worth it to preserve their lifestyle. Out of the 169 South Carolina white slavers who decided on succession and the fate of an entire nation, 40% all went to the same college and the decision took eight minutes.

What I love most about this book is that Erik Larson gets right to the point: "The crux of the crisis was in fact slavery. This was obvious to all at the time, if not to [20th century revisionists] who sought to cast the conflict in the bloodless terms of states' rights." The Civil War occurred because a small, incredibly rich, white portion of the population wanted to preserve their "chivalrous" way of life, on the backs of millions of individuals. What's more, Larson quotes Southern planters and politicians directly, so there's no denying it. He cuts the rose-tinted, magnolia blooming, sweet tea drinking atmosphere with a knife and I'm here for it. I especially enjoyed reading of Anderson's rogue night mission to move all the men from Moultrie to Sumter. The tension in that bold move is palatable, and I thought it was particularly well written. Another fantastic work from Mr. Larson! ( )

I learned far more about the Civil War than I ever did in school. Couldn't put the book down. Larson tells the story of the events leading up to the attack on Ft. Sumter which opened the American Civil War.

Focusing on several participants, the book gives the perspective from differing sides. Major Anderson was in charge of the fort for the Union although he was somewhat of a Southern sympathizer. Mary Chestnut, the wife of a prominent planter was definitely the "southern lady" but with some conflicted views of slavery. Edmund Ruffin (who I had never heard of) was a radical Southerner working toward secession. The journey of Abraham Lincoln from Illinois to Washington DC for the inauguration was also so interesting.

Another interesting facet of the book was the Southern idea of chivalry and their "Bible-based" ideas of slavery.

The entire book really is just a lead in to the actual attack on Sumter and all of the maneuverings and postering that went before. It was definitely not a surprise attack.

Great read! ( )

The surrender of Fort Sumter and the start of the Civil War . Fantastic book for history lover. ( )

KIRKUS:

A welcome addition to any Civil War buff’s library.

The bestselling author is back with an intriguing tale from the beginning of the Civil War.

In his latest appealing historical excavation, Larson, author of The Splendid and the Vile, Dead Wake, and other acclaimed books of popular history, examines the run-up to the Civil War during the six months between Lincoln’s November 1860 election and the surrender of Fort Sumter: a dismal period when bumblers, not excluding Lincoln, and fanatics dominated. People will fight for their freedom, but more will fight for their money, a fact that persuaded the Founding Fathers to continue the practice of slavery. Abolition became a major issue in the North early in the 19th century, enraging southerners. At the time, there was a widespread belief that Black men and women were fit for nothing better than being enslaved. All major southern religious traditions agreed, along with scholars, educators, journalists, and scientists. Most northerners agreed but hated that enslaved people worked for nothing; this depressed wages so there was opposition to slaves moving into territories and new states. Powerless before taking office, Lincoln vastly overestimated pro-Union sentiment in the South. He assured northern audiences that matters would calm down, believing (against all evidence) that secessionists were rational and that slavery in existing states was inviolate. Popular history demands a hero, so Larson concentrates on Maj. Robert Anderson, commander of the forts in Charleston harbor. Although he was a slaveowner, he did his duty, defending Fort Sumter until it became impossible and returning to the North to great acclaim. True to his style, Larson includes interesting portraits of obscure peripheral figures that enrich the narrative, including James Hammond, a wealthy but obnoxious planter and senator, and Mary Chesnut, wife of an even wealthier planter who kept an invaluable diary.

A welcome addition to any Civil War buff’s library.

In The Demon of Unrest, Erik Larson gives the history of the months leading up to the 1861attack on Fort Sumter seen as the opening salvo in the United States Civil War. I will admit to knowing only the bare bones of the attack or the war in general so I was excited whe I received an early copy from Netgalley and the publishers. I finished it a while ago but found writing this review difficult because I have mixed feeling about it.

On the plus side, Larson’s writing is clear, factual, well- researched and -documented including contemporaneous documents and letters, while avoiding the dry writing of most academic history, thus making it more interesting and easily accessible to everyone. And I must say, it is very interesting.

However, my problem with it is, as other reviewers have said, he gives us a great deal from the perspective of White slave holders but very little from Black people, whether enslaved or free. He documents some of the injustices and horrors inflicted on enslaved people but also some of the small kindnesses given them as well as showing them aiding in preparations for the attack. But the only actual Black voice we hear is that of Frederick Douglass, responding negatively to a speech by Lincoln which seemed meant to placate the South and this was followed by a more positive response from a Lexington lawyer who saw it as a judicial attempt at reconciliation. Interestingly, if it was, the South perceived it as hostility towards them.

I suspect Larson was trying to give a balanced and unbiased view of what can still be seen as an emotionally charged issue. The January 6th insurrection occurred while he was researching this book and he wondered about parallels. In fairness to Larson, this isn’t meant be one of those dry history tomes which, by the way, can also show biases, but I kind of felt, in his effort to be objective, he seems to give too much weight to the Southern perspective.

But that’s just me and my perspective may be skewed by being a non-American. Overall, despite these criticisms, I did quite enjoy reading this book. As I said, Larson makes history interesting, even fascinating and I found this book impossible to put down.

I received a copy of this book from Netgalley and Crown Publishing in exchange for an honest review ( )