Biography, abe, Abraham Lincoln in his times. This book has received numerous acolytes, including this years Abraham LincolnInstitute Book award and a linking prize of the society. Its also among the wall street journals top ten books of the year. His previous awardwinning books include, walt with mens america, and john brown, abolitionist. Professor david s. Reynolds is a regular reviewer for the wall street journal. The New York Times book review, and the new york review of. Looks speaking today on lincoln and Popular Culture, we welcome david s. Reynolds to the program. Thanks. Thank you very much, michelle. Great to be here at the 2021 a li symposium to speak on lincoln in Popular Culture. Let me thank the institute for recognizing my book, abe, with this years book award. It means a lot to me to be recognized by this very special group of lincoln aficionados and scholars. My book, a, tells the story of the cross fertilization between lincoln and his surrounding culture. Lincoln was unusually responsive to the spirit of the hour. His responsiveness fostered his practicality and compassion. My book describes the reform movements, the poems, the music, the plays, the popular humor, and so forth, that influenced him and that he borrowed from in his his historic effort to point the nation towards civil rights. Today, i will took a snippet from the book about two figures of Popular Culture that are significant for understanding lincoln. His favorite humourists, nash b, and an athlete actor he admired, though the feeling was hardly mutual, that is John Wilkes Booth. Surprising links between asby and booth that illuminate lincolns racial attitude and help explain the circumstances of the assassination at fords theater. Of all the popular humourists lincoln left to read, by far the most important to him was petroleum with vesuvius asby, the pen name for the ohio with during the civil war, locke, what many pieces in the form of widely reprinted a newspapers and then collected we for pamphlets. In the sketches, we locke used the speaker, the persona of we petroleum v. Nasby, and itll spoken with, drunken lout who impersonated the views of socalled copperheads, or northern democrats calling for peaceful compromise with the south, regardless of what happened with the slavery. Of course, lincoln was very much opposed to we copperheads. Lockes satirical sketches of copperheads were so biting and so popular that commentators credited with locke contributing to the fall of slavery. The massachusetts politician declared that, quote, the crushing of the rebellion can be credited three forces. The army, the navy, and the asby letters. Senator Charles Sumner remarked, unquestionably, the nasty papers were among the influences and agencies by which disloyalty in all its forms was exposed and Public Opinion was assured upon the right side. He went on, its impossible to measure their value against the devices of slavery and its supporters. Each later was like a speech, one of those songs that stirred the people. That was sumner in the New York Herald said of nasby, he was the most quoted man of letters in the country. His oddities were repeated by statesman, shoulders, the clergy, everybody. Among those who repeated them was Abraham Lincoln, who read the nasby letters as they appeared in periodicals and books from 1861 onward. President lincoln enjoyed lockes writing so much that he often share them with others. He committed to memory several of the sketches of nasby, which he recited spontaneously at key moments, when he didnt have one in store in his brain, he pulled out a nasby book from either his pocket or his gerard and read from it. One evening, a typical evening, a group of politicians appeared in the president s office with a pile of official papers for him to consider. He looked at the documents we really, he pushed them aside. He pulled down from his dryer a nasby pamphlet and read one of the sketches allowed. He periodically broke out into an explosive laugh which a witness compared to the nay of a wild horse on his native prairie. [laughs] lincoln enjoyed reading the pamphlet so much that he joked at the end of the reading, im going to write to petroleum v. Nasby to come down here. I intend to tell him, if he will communicate his talent to me, i will swapped places with him. He really had an admiration for nasby. What was it about david locke that made him unique in lincolns eyes . In a word, locke performed crucial cultural work for lincoln and the republican party. He fought political that owes with an intensity and viciousness that lincoln, as a unifying president , avoided. Lockes mission was to expose the racism and fundamental a morality of the copperheads. He caricature democratic attitudes with such satirical force that he served as a one person battering ram against racial prejudice in that era. , by grossly exaggerating copperhead views, locke made them absurdly monstrous. Lincoln said elsewhere that american humor was characterized by grotesqueness, his words. Locke give that in spades, along with a sharp political message that sliced through democrats, the democrats were the conservatives back then. Republicans where the liberals on slavery. Particularly the copperhead democrats. As the detroit tribune remarked, during the war, nasby nasbys penn was mightier than sort. To the enemy it was keen and dreaded. Petroleum vesuvius and nasty his first name, as explosive as his middle name, and as nasty as his surname sounds. To us, its shocking that lincolns favorite humor character used the nword liberally. Coming from petroleum nasby, that word was scathingly ironic. An ugly reflection of the racism locke saw among conservatives of the day. The nasby character exposed the stupidity of lincolns pro slavery enemies. In a ridiculously inept pros, full of misspellings and non sequiturs, nasby, the quintessential copperhead calls for permanent white rule, his motto is, america for white men. Enraged by the increasing number of free blacks in the north, nasby yells, fellow whites arouse, our enemy is on this, our hearts is in danger. He announces that when black people, he used a different word, rule a controlled society, then you will remember this warning, a government controlled by anti slavery republicans will give rise to interracial marriage. Nasby asserts, this alarming amalgamation of the racists must be prohibited. He was way beyond a proud boys, im ahead im afraid, this nasby character. Locke, was the total opposite. He was caricature in people. Black citizenship nasty demands, do you want black people to march up to the polls with you to vote . Do you want their children mixed with yours in schools . And you want them on juries and Holding Office in your township . My god think of it. In his frantic effort to prevent such horse, nasby cause for the reboot revoking of the immensely reinstatement of slavery. Locke castigates famous copperheads by making them nasbys heroes. Nasby sings praise to copperheads fernando woods, samuel parks, franklin pierce. At one point, nasby has a dream of his idea of a future utopia in which black people have been exterminated. Jefferson davis is the emperor. Copperheads our royalty. Nasby is excited to find himself in this dream back. The duke of nasby. I totally opposed to the civil war, nasby, in one sketch, sees president lincoln. I nasby introduces himself to lincoln as a freeborn democrat and tells lincoln, you are a gorilla, a thirst or after blood. He tells lincoln, he will back the war only if the president follows his command to revoke the emancipation proclamation, disarm African American soldiers, and send black back to their side of southern enslavers. Incensed by lincolns unresponsiveness of these request, nasby leaves in a huff, saying, lincoln, guerrilla we. I have done with you petroleum nasby announces his misery when lincoln wins the 64 election and becomes apoplectic when in april, 1865, he saw rounders in reporting lincolns assassination, his cabinet had not been killed in 1862, before the damage to southern slavery had been done. Everything, of course, that came out of nasbys mouth was exactly the opposite of what david russ locke actually felt. Locke and lincoln admired each other immensely. They met a couple times in the 1850s when mr. Locke was an illinois reporting the Lincoln Douglass debates. They had a long, friendly meeting in quincy, illinois, in october, 1850, after the sixth debate with douglas. The two joked and talked politics. Later, locke visited the president , who had written him from the white house. Why dont you come to washington and see me . Is there no place you want . Come on, i will give you any place you ask for, that you are capable of fitting and fit to fill. Although the government appointment did not work out, locke called his meetings with lincoln delightful. All told, locke said, quote, lincoln was the greatest man, in some respects, who ever lived, and in all respects, the most livable. A man whose great work and gave him the heart of every human being throughout the civilized world. Lincolns appreciation of lockes caustic, biting humor reversed and caution lay a radically progressive self. Within lincoln, the political centrist on this tight rope looked a leftist abolitionist who loath racism and wanted dramatic social change. On behalf of black people. Because lockes words as nasby were an exact reverse to his real meeting, we see the future america that locke meant by lincoln envisaged. An integrated nation which people of color were citizens and voters, interracial marriage was permitted. If we Flash Forward to the last point in his life, april 14th, 1865, we find that petroleum nasby played a major role. It was five days after washington was bursting with celebration. Lincoln had relaxed in the afternoon by taking a drive with mary. Neither of them wanted to go to the theater that evening. Lincoln had several who were worried about the potential danger. Lincoln was always close to the public. He felt obliged to go because the newspapers had announced he would attend. Our american cousin that evening, at forest theater. Did lincoln lose his life because petroleum nasby . In some sense, yes. First of all, he was delayed in leaving for the theater for almost an hour, in part because of nasby. In the late afternoon, after coming to the white house from his carriage right, he read aloud several chapters of lockes but nasby papers to to illinois friends. They had come for a visit. The group left, as the president read aloud the words of the whiskey swigging, racist petroleum nasby, with his formations against lincoln, a, grill or. But for the moment, lincoln was too entertained by nasby to think of anything else. They kept sending for him. He promised each time to go. We continued reading the book. Finally, a peremptory order to come at once drew lincoln away. He was kind of delayed for quite a long time. By the time booth had been able to shoot lincoln that evening . We cannot know. But we can say that it was tragically ironic that lincoln was Reading Petroleum nasby only hours before he was shot by a real Life Petroleum nasby, a pro southern lincoln hater with a low opinion of black people, and a penchant for strong liquor. Those southern born, John Wilkes Booth spent most of his time during the war in the north, where most of the acting opportunities were. Though the north made booth a stage star, he was wretched there because of the anti slavery environment. He called slavery one of the greatest blessings god ever bestowed on the feet of a nation. Slavery was just marvelous. Both regretted lincoln smearing this man, his appearance, his pedigree, his los, course, chokes, his anecdotes, his vulgar somewhere to a kind of like nasby saying you guerrilla, you ape. That kind of thing. At a social gathering, booth performed a copperheads song, which lamented boo thought lincoln had brought it about. One of the songs versus went, but there is i dont like to use the nword in public, there isnt an kingdom coming. The king is abraham. It sounded exactly like petroleum nasby. These lines which sounded like nasby, reflected the typical copperhead charge that lincoln was a horrid, socalled, negro loving despot. Anxieties spiked after lincoln won reelection in november 64 because there were no president ial term limits at the time. They came in 1947. It seemed possible lincolns presidency could continue indefinitely. A nightmare for John Wilkes Booth, who plant the deaths of lincoln and others around him. Just as petroleum nasby envisaged killing lincolns cabinet members, along with abe himself, booth, a real life nasby, targeted not just lincoln, but other leaders as well. The plan was finalized on april 14th. He said he would kill lincoln and general at ford theater, with the president. Secretary of state, william stewart, Vice PresidentAndrew Johnson, elsewhere in the city. The new pictures. What was it about booth that drove him to commit the act others only contemplated . After, all assassination plots were common. There were plenty of nasby around who wanted to kill lincoln. Booth alone, among wouldbe assassins, had long been immersed in and identifiable e american style of intense acting. What today might be called exaggerated method acting. The complete identification with the role when plays was a technique he learned from his intense actor father, on the right there, who once became so overwrought as a fellow that he nearly suffocated the does the mona of the evening with a pillow. He had to be pulled away. Another time, in a sword fight scene, he drove his opponent out of the theater and continued the sword fight on the street. Its what i call the american style of acting. Of the three booth children who became prominent actors, edwin, who is in the middle here, john wilkes is on the left, and junior is on the right, only john adopted their fathers tempestuous american style of acting. A boston reviewer said that john had, quote, more of the native fire and fury of the great father and then any in his family. John wilkes booth relished violent stage roles. He made a shakespeares richard somewhat, quote, who loved murder for murders sake alone, as a reviewer said. John wielded his sword so vigorously that once his photo fell off the stage and into the orchestra pit, a month before he assassinated lincoln, while playing an evil due in a tragedy. Booth was so realistic that he tortured a woman on a wheel, so much that a spectator was fully frightened by a, quote, hideous, malevolent distortion of his countenance. The fears glare and ugly role of his eyes, as he gleefully boasted about his masterpiece of cruelty. For John Wilkes Booth, the extreme american acting style led to a merging of stage characters with real life. He often played rebels who rose up against tyrants, and booth didnt just identify with the stage assassins, he became one of them. In his mind, he really was one of them. America itself was now in the stage, lincoln was his targeted tyrant. Assassinating the despots lincoln in a theater would be booths ultimate sensational role. A couple hours before he shot lincoln, he recommended to a hotel clerk that he should go to fords theatre that evening because, as booth said, there will be some splendid acting there tonight. He really felt he was part of a play. He was the american actor. The lincoln assassination was the american acting style to the hilton. Booth himself was david ross is david ross lockes david nasby come to horrible, horrible life. Thank you. Our second distinguished speaker today is h. W. Brands, who holds the jack as plantain senior chair in history at the university of texas at austin. An oregon native, professor brand sold cutlery ever crossed the American West before earning graduate degrees in mathematics and history, and teaching at vanderbilt university, and texas a m university. He writes on American History and politics, with books including the zealot and the instant emancipator. Dreams of elder auto. Areas of the founders. Several of his books have been bestsellers. Two of them, traitor to his class, the privileged life, and radical radical presidency of eleanor roosevelt, and the first american, the life and times of benjamin franklin, or finalist for the pulitzer price. Now, to speak on the zealot and the emancipator, john brown and Abraham Lincoln, we welcome h. W. Brands to the program. Thanks, michelle. Thanks to the american thanks to the Abraham Lincoln institute, for the opportunity to address the audience today. Because i wanted to get at a question that is one that every citizen in a democracy has to deal with at sometime or another. The question is basically this, what does the good person . Do what does a good citizen do when his or her country is involved in something that person considers to be wrong . What does the good person do in the face of evil . Thats a more philosophical, existential way of putting it. I wanted to look at this in the context of slavery. I wanted to look at it viewed from the perspective of john brown and Abraham Lincoln. The crux of the question is, what do you do, as i, say in the face of evil . It presupposes that youve concluded something is evil. I say that this is a question that occurs to every citizen in democracy. I would go beyond that and say it probably occurs to everybody at some time in their lives. What do we do when we see something around us that is wrong . How do we were respond . For people in a democracy, the first thing we can do is vote. We can show up at the polls. We can choose somebody, if we are given a choice, between continuing this thing thats wrong, and trying to do away with it. We can cast a vote. Perhaps, we can do more. Weve seen in the last year that a lot of people who were upset with racial attitudes, with policing, with inequality, have taken to the streets. Protesting, certainly an american tradition that goes back before the American Revolution which grew out of protest and continues until today. The big question concerning john brown and Abraham Lincoln, or at least the one they confronted in common, during their two lives, that overlapped pretty closely, with slavery. They came to conclude, both of them, that slavery was a great evil. Thats only the first part of the question. The part of the question is, what do you do . But its one thing to say slavery is wrong. Then, what do you do about it . Now, this is the question i explore and develop in the book. I will say, also, that because john brown was born in 1800, Abraham Lincoln in 1809, because they lived until 1859 in the case of john brown, 1865, in the case of Abraham Lincoln, their lives covered a period in which attitudes, generally toward slavery changed. Thats very much part of the story. I try to tell the story through the lives of the individuals. I know im trying to cover all of American History during this time. But i do look at attitudes towards slavery and i will say that at the time john brown was born, in 1800, the idea that slavery was wrong, that slavery was fundamentally evil, was, by no means, a majority view in the United States. There were a lot of people who thought it was wrong. But that it was an overriding wrong, that it was the most evil thing confronting american society. That was in 1800. That remained a distinct minority viewpoint. There were some groups, quakers, some methodists, who thought this. But in terms of rising to political question, yes, there were people in, especially in the north, who concluded it was wrong enough that it needed to be done away with in their own states. But for most of those northern states, it was relatively inexpensive decision to make. I should point out, most of the listeners this afternoon, they will be aware that slavery is most definitely legal in every state of the United States in 1796. By 1800, the northern states were well on their way to eliminate it. As i say, it really wasnt a big deal in most of the northern states because there werent very many slaves, and there werent very large economic interests at stake. Its worth noting, as well, that attitudes in the north, lets say the 1780s, thats the time of the writing of the adoption of the constitution. Attitudes in the north regarding slavery didnt differ that much from attitudes in the south. Both parts of the country, there was a belief that slavery was sort of unNecessary Evil. Almost nobody in the south, even in the south, even among slaveholders themselves, looked upon slavery as a good thing. There was John Calhouns assertion that slavery was a positive good. Still a long way in the future. That wouldnt come until the 1830s. Most people, if you look at thomas jefferson, george washington, most of the virginia slave holders, they believed that slavery was a part of life. They thought it was an institution they had inherited. They werent crazy about it. If other things had been equal, they would have been happy enough without it. But there it was. So it was, well, it was one of those things in life that was required, as they cite, to make the southern top economy operate the way they thought this southern economy ought to operate. Northerners in the 1780s had no grave they looked upon it as a Necessary Evil as well. It wasnt so necessary. It was easier to focus on evil. The result was that by, by the time Abraham Lincoln was born in 1809, slavery has become, essentially, a southern institution. Its probably, again, a word of a reminder, that northerners would often take a position that made them sound to the south so they consider themselves more than superior to southerners. And, you know, for obvious reasons, and that would get pretty annoying to southerners. We could point out that you had slaves recently yourself. Get off your high horse. It was a position that would be increasingly possible to take, the farther the north of god from slavery itself. Okay. By the time, to fast forward here, by 1860, opinions had changed a great deal more. By no means, however, where everybody in the north opposed to slavery on moral grounds. 11 of them were opposed to slavery on political grounds, because it serves the interests of the south national politics. There was still a range of opinions on how wrong slavery is. And thats going to condition the answer to the question. What do you do about it . Looking at john brown first. John brown was born in new england, he grew up in ohio. His family was opposed to slavery. He didnt quite know what to make of it. He recalled in late years that there was a moment, a kind of epiphany that occurred to him. He was a boy. He was playing in ohio. He was in a part of ohio where one and countered slaves, even though ohio was a free state and slaves would come and go with their masters. They were working in jobs. John brown could see free workers working in the field, enslaved workers working in the field. As a kid he thought much about the difference between it. He didnt reflect on where their lives were that much different. Until one day, he was playing with this black boy. The two were playing getting along. All of a sudden, this white man comes up to the black vote and starts yelling at the black boy and starts bleeding the back but way around the head. John brown is scratching his own head saying, whats going on here . He realizes, as he recollects, he realized for the first time that this is the difference between my position and this black kids position. That somebody can do this to him and nobody could do this to me, except, possibly my own father. Different kind of thing. John brown began thinking, at least as he recalls that there is something really wrong about slavery here. He gravitated in the direction of many people in ohio. The direction of stronger opposition to slavery go. Not yet an abolitionist exactly. Opposed to slavery, he would like to see it go way. But hes not ready to take up even rhetorical arms against it. Part of it is and that he didnt know exactly what he was doing with himself in life. One of the reasons that john brown wound up as a middle abolitionist was that he never really caught on doing anything else. Its often the case that people find their calling through process of elimination. John brown really didnt have much success as a farmer or as a herder of cattle, or she, various Business Enterprises he had. He was always looking for something to do, something that he could consider really important. He had a second, maybe larger epiphany, in 1837. He was living in hudson, ohio, the hotbed of abolition by this time. I should point out that when were into the 1830s, the Abolitionist Movement is really taking form as this political, cultural, even moral slash religious movement. Abolition has a real following and john brown is hearing a lot more about this. He learns that an abolitionist editor has just been murdered in illinois. John brown concluded, as many people did, as many people who were opposed to slavery, actually in favor of slavery he thought, wait a minute, this is getting out of hand. Here is a man who has been murdered simply for expressing opinions against slavery. And there were all sorts of charges until then. That the slave power was getting a stranglehold on american life. When the slave power could reach out and murder somebody on free soil, this seemed to corroborate those charges, that slavery was getting out of hand. If allowed to persist, it would snuff out the liberties of everybody. Snuff out the lives of people opposed to it. At this point, john brown stands up in his church at hudson, ohio, and says, before the eyes of god, before the eyes of the congregation, i hereby dedicate the rest of my life to undying opposition to slavery. John brown has become an abolitionist. But the question remains so what are you going to do about it . Its one thing to say. You are opposed to slavery. What are you going to do about it . It takes him another 20 years, really, to figure out what that means. He moves his family to upstate new york. They take part in this communal experiment where free black people are living next to free white people. The idea is to demonstrate that the black people can be as productive and successful as white people. John brown falls about the demonstrate the same thing. He is looking for a way to make a future. Then comes the kansas, nebraska ask of 1854, which opened kansas territory. Previously off limits to slavery by virtue of the misery compromise of 1820. He tears of that part of the missouri compromise and opens up that territory to slavery. This really kindled a spark in genre. And it internet energize the Abolitionist Movement because they seem to be further evidence that slavery was expanding. There was a hope among many moderate anti slavery folks and that if slavery could simply be contained, then eventually it would die of a tone weight. It had died of its own weight in the north. With the kansas nebraska ask act, it looked like slavery was breaking out of its region where it has been contained. John brown was taught by his son, a couple of his several sons into going to kansas and taking up arms in the struggle against slavery. Kansas was open to settlement by free settlers and by pro slavery settlers. Each could bring their own property. The folks from the free state would bring their and their slaves. The idea was that under Stephen Douglas is forming a popular sovereignty, when the time came that kansas had enough people to qualify for statehood, they would get together, vote on a constitution, the constitution will say that kansas would be a free state, or a slave state. The rush was on to see who could fill up kansas with either blow pro slavery settlers or anti slavery settlers. John brown takes part in this. When he gets there, he finds that, to put it bluntly, the violent abolitionism appeals to him. It seems to fulfill this itch john brown was trying to scratch for a while. Because he recognizes, discovers, he has a knack for, i wont call it exactly military leadership, but we will call it pair military leadership. People will follow him. He has a magnetism. People will follow him into battle. They will follow him to do some of the most heinous things. John brown following a raid on the Free State Community of lawrence, in which much of the city was destroyed, john brown decides to send a message to the pro slavery he leads a small bands of his followers. And they descend on hamlet, a small, hammer a pro slavery hamlet in the middle the night, john brown and his drag five we, from their beds, hack them to death, brutally murdered. Clearly an act of what we these days we would call terrorism. Some people in those days did that as well. It was a violent message, making a political point. If you produce lay real people come to kansas, this could happen to you. John brown all of a sudden becomes a notorious. Hes notorious, hes wanted for murder in kansas territory. Hes wanted for murder by federal authorities throughout the country. In those days, it was fairly easy to get around in disguise. There really wasnt photography outside the big cities. John brown didnt sit and have his photograph taken. People who are looking for john brown didnt know exactly they changed his name he, traveled under various aliases and disguises. He continued to raise money in support of his anti slavery activities. The fact that he was willing to be responsible for these murders in kansas increased his visibility among the Abolitionist Movement, increased his notoriety and people were willing to give money to john brown without telling him he had changed his strategy but he wasnt gonna go back to kansas, but take them back against slavery to this leave south itself. This gave rise to the raid on Harpers Ferry. I wont go into detail. This is familiar enough. My point is that john brown had in the middle of his life, he died at the age of 59, halfway through his life, he concluded that slavery was the greatest evil facing the country, the United States. The question was what are you gonna do about it . John brown said, im going to take up arms against it. I will wage war against slavery. Slavery so evil that this is a required response of a good man. Abraham lincoln. Abraham lincoln was born in 1809. Hes a little bit younger than john brown. Abraham lincoln was born in kentucky, family moved to indiana and eventually move to illinois. He inherited a dislike for slavery. The dislike for slavery was shared by many working class whites, whites who expected to make a living by the sweat of their brow, in part because it was simply part of making a decent living when you had to compete with enslaved labor. They would under wager undercut your wage skill. There was that. There was a general feeling that slavery was made a community a bad place to live. And so, Abraham Lincolns father took him to indiana. Abraham lincoln move to illinois, as i set. He, Abraham Lincoln himself, had this inherited, or learned, this moderate antipathy to slavery. In his case, the epiphany came as he explained on a trip to new orleans. He was was hired to load a of cargo down to mississippi to new orleans. For the first time, he saw a slave auction. Again, lincoln was familiar with slaves working on docks, working in the fields. He had seen labours doing this and that. They were doing the kind of stuff white workers did as well. And so, all right, they dont have as many freedoms. But it really came home that the evils of slavery, it came home by his own relic collection, when he saw slave auction. For the first time, he understood what the institution was about. These people are property. They are like horses, like pigs, like house. They are examined this, way auctioned off they go. But for people to be sold like property really offended lincolns sense of morality, his sense of fairness. He developed this opposition to slavery. But his opposition to slavery was tempered by his political ambitions. I think it was also tempered by the fact that he was less sure of himself, religiously, for example, then john brown was. John brown was convinced of the almighty. He was opposed to slavery. What the almighty opposed, john brown would oppose. Abraham lincoln had no such firm views regarding religion. At least for arc regarding what god was telling him to do. Like i said, he was a lawyer. He was a lawyer in springfield, illinois. He tried cases. He took up cases sometimes involving the ownership of people and slaves. He became a politician. In illinois, he was it was a free state. The ba militant, anti slavery politician would be, you wont get very far, when he first starts in politics. When he finally comes back into politics in the 1850s, he has ambitions. He wants to be a senator for he wants to be president of the United States eventually. Lincoln concluded that although john brown was right about slavery being wrong, his strategy of dealing with the slavery, his way of dealing with the evil of slavery was counterproductive. It was wrong in itself. Because, in the first place, the raid on Harpers Ferry, which john brown tried to instigate a war, an armed uprising of slaves against their masters, Abraham Lincoln concluded this was wrong both as a short term measure and as a longterm measure. It was wrong, it was counterproductive, in the short term, because it tightens the shackles on slaves, rather than we loosen them. Slaveholders in the south looked at the fact, heres this guy from the north whos trying to foment an uprising. They try to reduce, if not entirely life gets more difficult for enslaved men and women in the south in the wake of john browns rate. In the long term, lincoln was very frustrated at what john brown rate would do. Lincoln, as much as he thought slavery was wrong, if he had to choose between ending slavery, and preserving the constitution, every time he would choose the constitution. Lincoln put the constitution above opposition to slavery because lincoln believed the constitution was the guarantor of freedoms of all of americans. Lose the constitution, lose the human. Nobody will be free in the country. Lincoln believed, with henry clay, his political not exactly mentor his political model, henry clay had believed that the south eventually, light slaveholders in the south would eventually come to the same conclusion as whites in the north. That slavery no longer suited and the evolving economy of the south. On their own, they would come to the conclusion that slavery needed to be done away with. They would do it state by state. And lincoln believed, hoped that this would happen as well. Anything that caused southerners to take alarm in the short term would push back the day when southerners would conclude, on their own, that slavery was wrong for them. Lincoln wants to be president of the United States. He knows that if he scares off people, if they think he is a jon brown, if they think john brown is a republican he goes out of his way to say john brown is not republican. Im not like john brown. Im not an abolitionist. I believe this was the position lincoln took. Lincoln, eventually, of course, was elected president of the United States. To summarize, john brown believed slavery would and as a result of this war at Harpers Ferry. John brown tried to start a war and failed. John brown tried to free slaves as a result of the raid on Harpers Ferry did not free any slaves at all. Abraham lincoln, on the other hand, try to forge a political path instead of violence. He believed anticipation would come by legal means, constitutional means. Abraham lincoln failed to prevent the war. The same word john brown, started but he failed to win the war. He was forced to accept emancipation as a way of preserving the union. There is an irony here. The irony is that john brown, Abraham Lincoln, in essence, what do you do about this evil of slavery . John brown says take the violent route we to get emancipation. Abraham lincoln says, we will take the peaceful route to emancipation. They both wind up in the same place. Abraham lincoln leads the country to the worst war in American History. 600, 000, 700,000 people died. The and is the result john brown wanted and john brown profit site in his raid of dallas in 1850. Not i will stop there. I hope we can pursue all this by discussion and questions. So much, those were wonderful thank you both. Those were wonderful talks. Weve got questions coming in. I want to remind our viewers at home that you can post questions on facebook or twitter and youtube. We will get to read them on the air. I will start, bill, with you, can you talk a little bit, you close your book by talking about Frederick Douglass and his views of lincoln. Can you talk about douglass experience with these two men . How douglas viewed them . First, ill say that as an author of a book on Abraham Lincoln, if Frederick Douglass hadnt existed i wouldve had to invent him or someone like him. Im talking about the parallel lives of john brown and Abraham Lincoln who lived at the same time but never met. They were dealing with the same issue, from different perspectives, different short term goals. Frederick douglass is the unifying character here. He is the one who knew both men. He met john brown before he met Abraham Lincoln, and he much admired john brown. He believed john brown had a sense of the immediacy of the evil of slavery. Frederick douglass, being a former slave himself, having escaped freedom and becoming a notable abolitionist, gravitated toward the emphasis that john brown placed on ending slavery by almost any means. John brown invited Frederick Douglass to take part in the raid on Harpers Ferry, and douglas was thinking if i could get a highprofile abolitionist like Frederick Douglass to come along, this wouldnt happen. Especially a back black man, a man who had been a slave. But douglas says no. Part of the reason douglas says no is that he recognizes that this is probably a suicide mission. Douglass understood, having been a slave himself and having weighed the moment when you are going to go for freedom, recognized that enslaved folks in the vicinity of Harpers Ferry are not just going to follow anybody who seems to have this crack pots keen to start a war. They are going to wave their chances of surviving this war. They are going to say, this isnt going to work. That is exactly what happened. Part of Frederick Douglasss response was, im a writer, not a fighter. The second he knew this wasnt normal. Like every other abolitionist, he had to admire john brown for having the courage of his convictions, for having the courage to take his views to the point of risking and finally living his life for the cause. Abraham lincoln always seemed to slow. Douglas was willing to grant lincoln some leeway for the fact that he was a politician, and politicians have to balance different views. But even after the south seceded and the war began, douglass thought that lincoln was a misunderstanding what this war was about. He really challenged, in his own newspaper, and his speeches, every chance he got, lincoln is prioritizing things. Lincoln made clear that saving the union came first and any action on slavery came second. His famous letter saved the union by freeing the slaves or by not freeing the slave. My job is to save union. Douglas tried to make the point that the only way to save the union was to free the slaves. Eventually lincoln came around to that point of view. It was only at the point that lincoln issued emancipation proclamation that Frederick Douglass could finally say, okay, good going. And then, from there to the end of the war, douglas became a member of lincolns loose outer circle. He was somebody that lincoln would consult with. Somebody that lincoln would try to get to send messages to other folks in the black community. And somebody that, douglas finally concluded that lincoln did more for the freedom of black people than anybody else in American History. But douglas still thought that lincoln was too slow in doing it. I want to ask a followup. You both have written about john brown, so david, i want to bring you in on the john brown question. And your book you write about the meeting that lincoln and douglass had in august of 1864, where they thought about using john brown as a model for a getting word to the slaves to become free. Can you talk a bit about that meeting when douglas and lincoln men met, and what it meant to douglas . This was main shunned, douglas thought that lincoln was too slow and more concerned with the union with slavery, but when he met lincoln in august of 1864 he found that lincoln, on a personal level, had a complete lack of prejudice against African Americans. In fact, he said, he has less prejudice than any white man i have ever met. As much as he admire john brown. At that time lincoln planter this john brown kind of encouragements into the south which Frederick Douglass would play a role in playing leading scouts into the deep south to spread the news of the emancipation proclamation to enslaved people who perhaps didnt know about it. He delaney, a little bit later, way behind blacks black lives matter, super radical, with a kind of similar mansion. What was happening is grant were winning the war anyway so those two were obvious, obviated. Still, the john brown Abraham Lincoln views coming together toward the end of the war certainly did, partly through Frederick Douglass and martin delaney. I love that meeting with delaney, where delaney comes to meet with lincoln in, i think, february of 19 1865 and says we need a black army to go into the south. And of and according to delaneys later reminisces, lincoln says i am been waiting for this idea. So delaney gets commission to major a few weeks later. David, let me ask you about lincolns love of literature and humor. Can you talk about his love of those things as a young man, how they developed, and more of its impact on his later life . He is an example of somebody, and i think it can still apply today, but he had less than one year of school. Just here and there, three months here, three months there. But he was infinitely curious. He didnt have that many books on the frontier, but as he grew up he read as much as he could. He had such a steel trap of a memory that he could read upon a couple of times, he wrote poetry above all, and it would be in his brain. He knew shakespeare by the page. He knew shakespeare by the page and poetry for him really channeled feeling and theme and emotion. Every once in awhile during his presidency he would break out with a poem. At the same time he loved lincoln, above all people range the entire breadth of experience, from the highest realm of culture, shakespeare, and down to the lowest, dirty jokes, and everything in between. Sentimental songs. He loved those. He had an encompassing vision. Its his breadth of vision thats that fed into his compassion. Bill, what about john browns education . Can you tell us about any formal education he had in how his background and how that might have put him to where he went . I actually dont recall. His formal education was quite limited. Perhaps not aslimited as Abraham Lincolns. And he clearly was self educated person. Not to the extent of lincoln, but on the subject of education, one of the thing that interested me was how did john brown ever come up with ideas for engaging in military operations . Because when he led his group, when he led the small abolitionist army in kansas, he engaged in what military tax tactics, maybe didnt rise to the level of strategy, but when he plotted the Harpers Ferry raid, he seems to have read various books on the military. He didnt have practical experience that was necessary to make these things work when confronted with folks that actually knew what they were getting. One of the reason is that the Harpers Ferry raid proved such a fiasco was that brown figured out how to get into Harpers Ferry, which is actually easy if no one knows youre coming and you do it in the middle of the night. But getting out of Harpers Ferry, once the militia had been alerted in the townspeople had come up against him, was nearly impossible. Anyone with military training or informal military education would have realized that Harpers Ferry is not the place to start a war against slavery. But that also raises the question about Harpers Ferry. What exactly did brown think was going to happen as a result of this . And it is clear that by the time he is executed, john brown has concluded that he is worth more to the Abolitionist Movement, to the freedom movement, dead, then alive. And you can almost see that dawning on him in his days in jail and before the court, and all this. But i think, as far as i can tell, when he went into Harpers Ferry, still hoping that this thing would work, thats where being self taught person can have its downfall. I think about how lincoln was checking books out of the library of congress at the beginning and during the war. Same kind of thing. Can either of you speak to this point . At which point did john brown decide to stay in the engine house at Harpers Ferry or not go out as he had originally planned . And what caused him to make that decision. Is that a loaded question . I dont know if it is or not . I think that he was expecting a little more of an explosion among the enslaved people. Some of them did join him, to be sure. Others, in a way, in these white people coming to freely enslaved people, the ones that didnt know about the raid and so forth, he was like a man from mars coming. Like, what are you doing here at midnight . Some of them were befuddled. I think john brown kind of kept waiting. By the time he waited, a local militia had come up, and so forth. He was really kind of trapped. He even told a train had passed by. The train spread the word. Pretty soon robert e. Lee and the troops came and surrounded him. Part of the problem was that brown wasnt quite ruthless enough to do what he was trying to do. If he had been willing to shoot townspeople and kill people who had no dog in this fight, he might have been able to fight his way out. I think he might have realized, when it became clear that there wasnt and this uprising he had expected what he had weapons for hundreds maybe, 1000 people he had specially made but there wasnt this flocking to his banner. He might very well have asked himself, so, what am i going to do for my next act . Should i get out of here . It might have i dont know exactly where it is when he concludes that, okay, im not getting out of here. Once he is surrounded, of course, by the u. S. Marines and one hes not getting out of. There he wouldve been killed. Except the sword he was struck with by the person who broken turned out to be a dress sword rather than the real thing. He lives to speak again, not to fight again. He lives to speak again. Thats right. We got a question from a viewer. The question is, can either speak or comment on what might have been different in reconstruction period and jim crow if lincoln had not been assassinated well . Thats a tough one. My feeling, its counterfactual history. We dont know. On the other hand, we do know that Andrew Johnson was really, he ultimately was a racist who really botched reconstruction. At first, the reconstruction was proAfrican American, and so forth. There was an elevation of African Americans. Andrew johnsons policies, there was a resurgence of conservatism, White Supremacy in the south, that snuffed out this momentary empowerment of African Americans in the south. Im absolutely certain that lincoln would have been much firmer about rights for previously enslaved people then Andrew Johnson was. Im very certain about that. Anyway, thats just my point of view. My take on it, the first thing i will say, if lincoln had lived, his historical reputation would have suffered from having had to deal with reconstruction. Reconstruction was the hardest time in American History to a then president of the United States. Andrew johnson really made things worse. But ulysses grant, what reconstruction did to grants reputation, i think, probably would have happened to lincolns reputation. Grant was pretty much as devoted as lincoln was to rights for freed men, the former slaves. With the problem both president s would have encountered, we his intentions were in the wrong direction. Grant and lincolns intentions were pretty much in the same direction. The first problem lincoln would have encountered was that he would not be, he would not have been able to dictate to congress in the way he did during the war. Secondly, he would certainly, he in congress together, would not have been able to dictate to the south forever as they had been able to do during the war. During the war, you can use the army. During the war, darren, there were times where you dont have to persuade people. You can coerce people. The south was not confused union arms. The real question is how long could lincoln have held . We knew that grant couldnt do it. How long can you keeps troops in the south . In a democracy, how long can you do it by military force . In another way of putting it is, how long will it north continue to insist that the south behave the way the northerners want the south to behave . Eventually, northerners said, you know, weve got other fish to fry. We would rather be doing other things than keeping watch on the south. That point was gonna come sooner or later. I think it wouldve come from lincoln. It might not have lasted a second tour, he certainly would have had a third term. Then there probably wouldve been grant. I think it wouldve wound up the same. Because in a democracy, people get the government they deserve. By the late 18 70s, there was not a mobilized majority of voters in the whole country to say, okay, we are going to enforce, require the south to honor the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the letter. They are willing to let the 14th and 15th go, leave the 13th in place. I think it wouldve turned out pretty much the same. The timing might have been a little bit different. I think youre exactly right about lincolns legacy and being what it is in large measure because of being shot on good friday. T would have beeneaster sermonsl about lincoln. Thats amongst the legacy that wouldve gotten destroyed, to some extent, in the messiness of reconstruction politics. In lincoln situation, historically, Franklin Roosevelt dealt with. I dont think its coincidence that these two president s are considered the two greatest american president s. Lincoln, maybe besides george washington, he was the first. We deal with these great crises. Then through faith or an assassins bullet, they exit the stage before things get really difficult. Franklin roosevelt wouldve had to deal with a breakdown of the grand alliance and the emergence of the cold war. He wouldve had to deal with harry truman really unpopular during the presidency. He wouldve had to deal with the stuff that made eventually unpopular. The scandal, all that other stuff too. Right. Right. Weve got a question asking either of you to talk about the parallels between John Wilkes Booth and john brown, or the connections between them. With brown being something of an inspiration for booth. Brown, of course, booth and being there at the execution of john brown. Can either of you talk about John Wilkes Booth and john brown together . Well, booth was, of course, an actor. He left the stage just to go witness the execution of john brown. He looked that john brown, obviously he detested everything john brown stood for. And booth was a white supremacist and hated abolitionism. But he was really, really struck by the moxie of john brown. John brown was the calmest person there we, the very calmest person them. Eventually, John Wilkes Booth calls john brown the grandest a man of the century. It was ironic that a lot of southerners had much more positive things to say about john brown they both demonized him, but they admired his coolness under pressure. There was a thing about southern honor, so forth. And so, i think John Wilkes Booth tried to be john brown in reverse. To be the grandest man of the century, but in the right cause. What booth was the right cause, john brown died for the wrong cause. John brown wanted to murder, or what he considered the right cause. He wanted to be john brown in reverse, in effect, yeah. Bill, would you add to that . Its striking to me that in some ways, considering what he learned what wilkes booth learned from john brown in the speech john brown gave before the court on his way to being executed that if youve had been willing to take that final step, he certainly could have prepared a speech. He had the stage presence. He really could have done it. And he didnt have what they described as browns moxie. Thats a great comparison. Can you both talk about the role of religion in these two mens lives . And how it brought them to where they ended up . Its a big question, i know. I will try a little bit. This is simply my observation of lincoln, my interpretation. I will start with lincoln. I think lincoln is the more interesting character. I will hear what david has to say in response to this. That is that lincoln seems to me to grow more religious the longer the war lasts. The greater the moral burden of the war. Its almost as though lincoln says, at some level, i cannot bear with the moral burden of this war. I basically have to hand this off to somebody else. In his first inaugural address, lincoln refers to the better angels of human nature. But hes not speaking directly to god or a version of that in the way he is in the second inaugural address, when he basically says, he comes really close to saying, this civil war was gods will. And we needed, the business about every drop of blood drawn by this layers lash must be repaid by a drop of blood drawn by this forward, it may be gods will. Boy thats pretty close to saying this was out of my hands. Dont blame me for this. And god willed it that way. Its a natural kind of response because this is one of those cases where if lincoln had not made the decision that he made in response to southern secession, then things wouldve been very different. Its very rare that a Single Person can be the hinge of faith that way. If lincoln had said, okay, to the south, i dont like it, but im not going to fight it. If he had taken the James Buchanan position, there would not have been a civil war, at least not them. That wouldve been something else. But lincoln had made that decision. He hoped the war would last as long as it did. He hoped not too many people would be killed. He had to look on this and say, i made this decision. All these people died. So, heaven, help me with the responsibility for this. David, let me ask you sort of part of my question i didnt state before. They both came from a calvinist tradition, as i recall. Is that correct . Yeah. John brown in particular came from a calvinist position, believing in predestined asian. John brown really believes that he was predestined, appointed to fight against slavery, to make war against slavery. Lincoln came from a baptist tradition he. Never joined a church, but as bill was saying, increasingly he becomes religious, not Orthodox Christians or anything like that. He never really joins a church. But his rhetoric becomes more and more religious so that by the end he almost sounded, in the second inaugural, which is only about 700 words long, it is full of religious references and quotations from the bible, many mentions of god. There is almost a sense of predestination or something bigger than himself. That is why a few reviewers of the second inaugural said this is lincolns john brown speech. This was his chronicle speech. So there is a kind of fusion, so to speak, in the calvinism of john brown and the whatever deterministically religious view that lincoln has toward the end. Weve got about three or four minutes. Im going to ask one more big question. Hopefully we can fit it in. We often think about lincoln as a political moderate. He is maybe a centrist. He is not a radical. But i think you both, in different ways, are challenging that view of lincoln so can you talk about why we view lincoln as a moderate, and why we might not . Im going to say that i do consider lincoln to be a political moderate. I think lincoln was very attuned to what was politically possible in the stage of his political evolution, and yet each stage of the war. And so, for example, if he had followed Frederick Douglasss advice at the beginning, to say this is a war about slavery, the north would have lost in that wouldve been that. The border straits would have joined the confederates. They wouldve had no choice. The federal government would have had to evacuate washington d. C. And it would have been nearly impossible to gain that back. Lincoln understood he couldnt do that. If he wanted to, if the endgame was to save the union and free the slaves, you have to do it in that order. You cant say, we cant go front and center. After fort sumter, when lincoln requests 44,000 volunteers, what does he asked them to do . To defend the union. If he had called for 75,000 volunteers to free the slaves, he might not have gotten anybody to show up, because people, northerners, would defend the union. Eventually, famously, it became a part of that, but lincoln was careful to understand how is this going to happen . By the way, lincoln believed from the beginning that slavery would be ended in the United States only by constitutional means, which is exactly what happened. It was the 13th amendment that ended slavery. So he is moderation paid off. In my book, i compare him to london because he was austin referred to as blond and and he often referred to himself as but blondin, the type road walker who walked across niagara falls. He didnt want to endanger the war. He said if we lose contracts, were gonna lose everything. If we start losing the border states, were not going to win any anything. He had to maintain this centrist or left centrist point of view, for sure. That brings us right to the mark where we need to be. I want to, again, thank our speakers. I want to commend their books to all of our viewers. Two very large but worthwhile to read books. I highly commendable to you all. I want to thank you both for wonderful talks and for engaging with our audience and their questions. I want to thank the staff at forwards for making this possible. Meme is the movie you know in just a couple of months i will be lea some of you know that i will be leaving my position. I hope you will forgive me if i take this opportunity to wax a little nostalgic around some of the previous visits my guest tonight has paid tonight to the library. Ive had the opportunity to interview quite a few people on this stage, but