Rating: 
Summary: Idiosyncratic, to say the least
Review: Agreeing fully with most of the positive reviews of this book, I can't help but comment on William Freehling's prose style. It is idiosyncratic in the extreme. He pursues his theses tirelessly and with dramatic verve, but he relies on an authorial voice that I can only describe as Professorial Ironic. He tends to rely heavily on headlines and labels to pin-point the heady mix of differing political positions available to the actors in this history. The effect is most akin to what I can only imagine is a lecture given by Prof Freehling to his grad students. I can't say I got used to it, despite reading the whole volume. The only other thing to add, is that he puts his case so thoroughly, of a disunited political and cultural South, that it's hard to imagine how the South every got its collective act together to secede at all.
Rating: 
Summary: Ideas 10.0, writing style 3.9
Review: 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.
Rating:
Summary: Ideas 10.0, writing style 3.9
Review: 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.
Rating:
Summary: Good Social History of Pre-Civil War South
Review: Despite dreadful prose and a clear anti-southern bias that at times borders on hyperbole, Freehling does provide a well researched social and political history of the pre-Civil War south.Freehling concentrates much of his effort on the social history of the south and shows how the United States was fractured not just north and south, but within the south as well. The social and political divisions between the upper and lower south and then further divisions within these sections are well detailed and illuminating. Freehling does a good job on the political front as well, but is stronger on the social aspects. Several things are clear after reading Freehling and other pre-Civil War accounts of US politics and society. First, slavery was the root cause of the Civil War. I'm amazed historians continue to cling to the supposed notion that southerners were fighting over states rights. States rights was the political ideology that cloaked their tenacious fight to save slavery. And while there is no doubt they were states rightists, there was no issues that they were truly willing to go to war for (including tariffs where the political rhetoric gets pretty hot.) Secondly, Southern society was frighteningly dysfunctional. Even had there been no civil war Southern society would have eventually withered away - but exactly how and to what consequence is unclear. It's unlikely such a schizophrenic society could last in perpetuity without imploding - slowly but surely. Fascinating reading. Educational. But you'll have to slog through some pretty tepid prose and stick with it.
Rating: 
Summary: Rough Road!
Review: For a long awaited, monumental study of the South's road to disunion, you had best keep waiting. This is one tough read. There is good history here but this author is very complicated and has a hard time saying just what is on his mind. Was the story really this complex? Yes, it really was. But is it necessary to make a complex series of events murky and unclear? I don't think so. Freehling is a good historian but this is a far cry from his finest effort.
Rating:
Summary: Essential reading to understand slavery's impact on America
Review: 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.
Rating:
Summary: Detailed political history.
Review: 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.
Rating: 
Summary: Interesting (though tedious) read overall
Review: I found the book intriguing and generally enjoyed it. The style is as noted a bit tedious and professorial, but the subject matter made the wading worth it. Only one real complaint I have about the book - which I offer only partially tongue in cheek: Is Mr. Freehling aware that there are two Carolinas? Has he ever heard of North Carolina? Of all of the states in the south, there is essentially no mention of any of the similar (and at times dissimilar) political wrangling and complexities in this state. North Carolina has something like four to five sentences in passing in the entire book! Even the "tour of the south" skips from Charleston to Richmond. Coupled with the author's infuriating habit of referring to "Carolina" when he only means South Carolina, this was a real disappointment. I didn't expect the volume to spend inordinate time on other states like NC, it is true that Virginia and South Carolina are the more interesting and complex situations, and clearly his interest is in border states - but I did expect some analysis of other southern states. This was a glaring gap to me. Professor Freehling, in your next effort - try "Palmetto State" or something to denote recognition that when you speak about South Carolina, you are not talking about the very different state to the north. Perhaps you could even bone up a bit on the Old North State...
Rating:
Summary: Much fascinating material
Review: I think all will have to agree that Freehling does not have a fluid prose style, and is hard to read. That being said, after the first hundred pages or so of this book the subject matter takes over and makes this a good read. There is no bibliography as such, but the footnoting is well done and much good comment on sources is found therein. I agree with other reviewers: anyone who can read this book and still claim that slavery was not THE reason for secession has a different reasoning process than I have. If one wants an easier more felicitous account of the road to the Civil War I would recommend the classic study by David M. Potter: The Impending Crisis 1848-1861. It of course covers more than this book. Do I understand correctly that Freehling's Volume II: Secessionists Triumphant, 1854-1861 has not yet been published? I e-mailed the author and he advised that Volume II will be out shortly. I will surely read it when I can, since the period it covers in our history is one of consuming interest to any devotee of US history.
Rating: 
Summary: Yawn
Review: I think I would have had more fun being gagged with a wooden spoon. Or eating the book.....might have gone down better. In all honesty thought, I fell asleep after the first three pages the first time, and in the past year haven't even reached page 20.
| 
