Killing Lincoln: The Shocking Assassination That Changed America Forever

As someone who has studied Lincoln and books on the assassination since I was about 8 (that would be, sigh, about 50 years), I figured I'd give O'Reilly's book a try, assuming that since he had written it so shortly after some great Lincoln books (Abraham Lincoln: A Life, by Michael Burlingame; Blood on the Moon by Edward Steers) that there must be something unique about it. Unfortunately, I came away not really seeing what the new approach was. While it is supposedly written like a thriller, I find it to be prone to abbreviation and errors as noted by one of the one-star reviewers here (i.e. talking about the Oval Office, which was not built when Lincoln was president, but in 1909 when Taft was president, and a gross misrepresentation of how Mary Surratt was treated -- she NEVER wore a hood while imprisoned, and she was NEVER on the "Montauk", etc.). Throwing in a long-discredited conspiracy theory supposedly linking Secretary of War Edwin Stanton into the mix was completely unnecessary, unless the idea was to give readers already convinced that JFK was assassinated by space aliens something new to obsess over. A list of errors written by the Assistant Superintendent of the Ford's Theatre Historical Site, by no means complete, but enough for the NPS Eastern National bookstore at Ford's Theatre to avoid selling this book, may easily be found on the internet (I will be glad to give you the link if you can't find it). The Theatre gift shop IS selling it, but not the National Park Service store, due to inaccuracies. You will see many reviews here (five-star ones) stating that "this book was not written for historians." Does that mean that lousy research is just fine for the unwashed masses? Wouldn't the casual reader be served much better by reading information, whether or not it's entertaining -- and yes, it's an entertaining and easy read -- that had been verified by research? I just cannot understand the mindset of "it wasn't written for historians, so errors are just fine, as long as it gets people to read about history." Baloney.What O'Reilly has going for him is a built-in audience who went out in droves to buy this book because he talked about it every day on The O'Reilly Factor. I watch him casually, and I figured, "Why not? One more book to add to my Lincoln collection (which is fairly large after fifty years)." As you should be able to see, my purchase of this book is verified at Amazon, and, in fact, I preordered it because the mention on the O'Reilly Factor got my interest. Unfortunately, it won't be up in the top tier of my Lincoln assassination material. It's OK for the casual reader who wants to learn something about the Lincoln assassination. It's too hurried and flies through things that need to be dealt with in a less perfunctory manner, I think. As O'Reilly notes in his show that Abraham Lincoln was the "gold standard" for the Presidency, I will say here that, for the "gold standard" of books written on the Lincoln assassination, no better work can be found than the book "Blood on the Moon," by Edward Steers -- you can see it here at Amazon at  Blood on the Moon: The Assassination of Abraham Lincoln ). If you only have one book on this subject, the Steers book is the book to have. If you just want to be up on the latest O'Reilly books, then get this one. It's not horrible, but it tells the reader nothing new, and oftentimes it tells the reader much LESS than he/she needs to know, and, as noted, sometimes incorrectly.So, in summary, it was just OK, which is why I gave it an average rating. A few minor errors wouldn't have dropped it below four stars, but for a Lincoln researcher it would be considered a young person's primer. For someone seriously interested in the subject, get the Steers book and pass this one by. Just because O'Reilly has a multi-million person audience to whom he can hawk his wares, it doesn't mean it's great work. I hope people are not writing off an honest review because they think I'm picking on O'Reilly. The only POSSIBLE reason that this book took off so fast on the bestseller lists is because it was publicized on the O'Reilly Factor, not because it was so much better than any of the other books written about the Lincoln assassination. There has been much back-and-forth about this for some time. Dishonest people who didn't read the book but hate O'Reilly gave it one-star reviews without ever opening it. O'Reilly fans have an attack of the vapors at anything less than a five-star review. The purpose of this review was to inform, not to express ideology. I stand by this review. If you don't like it, that's fine, but don't attack me simply because you're sticking up for Bill O'Reilly (a futile wish, apparently). Again -- I watch The O'Reilly Factor. I am also a Lincoln scholar. Take this review at face value.

I rarely read the reviews of others before I read the book, however the spread of opinions intrigued me a great deal. I can surmise that some of the one star ratings were from people who had not read the book and wanted to have an opportunity to rant against Bill O'Reilly. I sometimes do that myself when watching the show and we are always happy when Laura Ingraham fills in for him. On the other hand I realize that some of the five star folks may be such big fans that Bill would rate five stars no matter how good or bad the book. I wouldn't feel this way except everyone Bill talks with on Fox News raves about the book. I have read all his books and have in general enjoyed them. I don't consider this his best one, however I enjoyed this one also.Now let me address my major prejudice, not with this book but with Bill's selection of "best president" which he first described in Pinheads and Patriots. Like Bill, I am a former history teacher, though in my case I was for 41 years. I have always loved history enjoyed any material about our presidents. In my personal view George Washington had to be number one as he set the pattern for all presidents in the future. Lincoln himself admits this. At the time he took office George Washington went strictly by the constitution and took great care in how he ran things. Bill selected Lincoln because his service was during the Civil War. Washington did not have a tranquil nation during the Washington presidency, none of the states in the North or South really knew what they had and despite adopting the new constitution there was a feeling in every state that they were equal at the least to the Federal Government, if not superior. Though we did not have political parties by name, there were diverse groups in the Congress and Washington's own cabinet. There was a definite split between Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson who said and wrote many unflattering things about the president. Washington was not a born and bred politician, he was a military man who preferred farming as an occupation. His burden, in my opinion, was considerably greater. I highly recommend that, if readers can make the trip, visit the Mount Vernon home and museum. Lincoln was a politician from his early years as a lawyer and even put together a political handbook on how to get votes when he was in the Whig Party.The book itself is an enjoyable read and I know Bill O'Reilly has said it was mainly written because the whole story of Lincoln's last two weeks has not been taught in schools. I'm afraid he is right in that regard as American History has had a lot left out in the way young people are learning it today. The book is supposed to be written like a novel, however it is more of a docudrama. A lot of description is more textbook like, though that did not bother me. There is a good description of all the major and minor players and pictures are used of many of the main characters. I did learn some new things in regard to John Wilkes Booth, but would have liked more about his brilliant brother Edwin, a much better actor and one who saved the life of one of Lincoln's sons. I was already familiar with much of the material and have visited Ford's Theater twice as well as the house across from it where Lincoln died. The Department of Interior began restoration in the 1950's and being there today, seeing it as it was, and listening to the guides makes it more real than any book or film. The author, really there are two and Martin Dugard deserve due credit (no pun intended for his work, does a job better than most in setting the scenes day by day and hour by hour leading to the assassination. This makes the book worth the five stars despite my first disagreement and the one that follows.My disagreement is with Bill O'Reilly's assertion that had Lincoln lived he would have been able to orchestrate the reconciliation between the North and South. Lincoln, once the war was over, did not have the support of the great majority in Congress for what he hoped to do. Andrew Johnson is depicted as wanting to take a tougher stance than Lincoln, however the Radicals in Congress wanted the South to be punished severely. There is ample evidence that Lincoln would have suffered the same fate as Johnson, maybe even worse with actually being forced out of office. As O'Reilly admits, Lincoln had a lot of people in the North who did not like him and who would do any thing to discredit him. There is an interesting short story, which title and author I cannot recall as it was in the fifties, about a disgraced Abraham Lincoln living in Illinois with his old law practice. He had had rough handling by the Congress and had been put out of office because these lawmakers wanted revenge. Toward the end of the story Lincoln curses Booth for not having been a better shot. As a martyr there was a feeling in the South that they had lost their best friend and the radicals were held back a bit which saved the Johnson presidency. Reconstruction in the South was very harsh, but might have been harsher had Lincoln survived and been a target.A good read over all, however I suspect both sides will be unhappy with what I hope is a fair and balanced approach. I never read comments on reviews, including mine, as after all, reviews are supposed to be one person's opinion.

Killing Lincoln is not a scholarly work, and there are some factual inaccuracies in the story and the facts embellished in certain respects to add entertainment value. However, I feel that these deviations can be regarded as fairly minor in the context of the overall story, which is largely accurate, and I can forgive these blemishes because the authors do such a good job at making the story (which is fascinating) entertaining and accessible.One specific criticism is that the first part of the book is a detailed story of the final battles of the US Civil War, which took place shortly before Lincoln’s assassination. While I think this does help provide some context to the assassination, I feel there should have been less detail on these events and instead more time spent providing colour on the North-South divide and broader issues in the Civil War, which would have provided more of a direct context to the assassination. This same criticism applies to  Killing Jesus  , where the authors devoted a large portion of the book up front to events in the Roman Empire and not enough detail on the direct context of the events related to Jesus. Killing Jesus

Killing Lincoln: The Shocking Assassination that Changed America Forever Thoroughly enjoyed it even knowing that some parts are obviously slightly fictionalized. Otherwise I would probably never have the patience to go through a thick academic tome about the topic. Amazing how innocent those days were in the US, with the President with 1 (one) bodyguard -- and even that one unreliable as he ended up in a pub instead of watching over his boss (and thus allowing him to me assassinated); and the assassin jumping on the stage and then fleeing without anyone stopping him. Killing Lincoln: The Shocking Assassination that Changed America Forever

Very brief overview of the American Civil War but this book is more about a closer,more refined look at Booth's killing of Lincoln.Good book overall,not as deep on the killing but you can get that from other sources.

Brilliant telling of the assassination story! Covers everything!Its so good that I purchased this book gave it to a family member who lost it so I purchased it again!

The best thing about the "Killing" series is the lively pace and tone. It reads like a thriller at points but stays true to the actual history.