What do you think?
Rate this book
American Brutus: John Wilkes Booth and the Lincoln Conspiracies
It is a tale as familiar as our history A deranged actor, John Wilkes Booth, killed Abraham Lincoln in Ford’s Theatre, escaped on foot, and eluded capture for twelve days until he met his fiery end in a Virginia tobacco barn. In the national hysteria that followed, eight others were arrested and tried; four of those were executed, four imprisoned. Therein lie all the classic elements of a great thriller. But the untold tale is even more fascinating.
Now, in American Brutus , Michael W. Kauffman, one of the foremost Lincoln assassination authorities, takes familiar history to a deeper level, offering an unprecedented, authoritative account of the Lincoln murder conspiracy. Working from a staggering array of archival sources and new research, Kauffman sheds new light on the background and motives of John Wilkes Booth, the mechanics of his plot to topple the Union government, and the trials and fates of the conspirators.
Piece by piece, Kauffman explains and corrects common misperceptions and analyzes the political motivation behind Booth’s plan to unseat Lincoln, in whom the assassin saw a treacherous autocrat, “an American Caesar.” In preparing his study, Kauffman spared no effort getting at the He even lived in Booth’s house, and re-created key parts of Booth’s escape. Thanks to Kauffman’s discoveries, readers will have a new understanding of this defining event in our nation’s history, and they will come to see how public sentiment about Booth at the time of the assassination and ever since has made an accurate account of his actions and motives next to impossible–until now.
In nearly 140 years there has been an overwhelming body of literature on the Lincoln assassination, much of it incomplete and oftentimes contradictory. In American Brutus , Kauffman finally makes sense of an incident whose causes and effects reverberate to this day. Provocative, absorbing, utterly cogent, at times controversial, this will become the definitive text on a watershed event in American history.
Now, in American Brutus , Michael W. Kauffman, one of the foremost Lincoln assassination authorities, takes familiar history to a deeper level, offering an unprecedented, authoritative account of the Lincoln murder conspiracy. Working from a staggering array of archival sources and new research, Kauffman sheds new light on the background and motives of John Wilkes Booth, the mechanics of his plot to topple the Union government, and the trials and fates of the conspirators.
Piece by piece, Kauffman explains and corrects common misperceptions and analyzes the political motivation behind Booth’s plan to unseat Lincoln, in whom the assassin saw a treacherous autocrat, “an American Caesar.” In preparing his study, Kauffman spared no effort getting at the He even lived in Booth’s house, and re-created key parts of Booth’s escape. Thanks to Kauffman’s discoveries, readers will have a new understanding of this defining event in our nation’s history, and they will come to see how public sentiment about Booth at the time of the assassination and ever since has made an accurate account of his actions and motives next to impossible–until now.
In nearly 140 years there has been an overwhelming body of literature on the Lincoln assassination, much of it incomplete and oftentimes contradictory. In American Brutus , Kauffman finally makes sense of an incident whose causes and effects reverberate to this day. Provocative, absorbing, utterly cogent, at times controversial, this will become the definitive text on a watershed event in American history.
544 pages, Paperback
First published November 2, 2004
152 people are currently reading
4182 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 165 reviews
November 16, 2020
“On stage, [the character of] Augusta Mountchessington realized she’d been wasting her time with her American cousin. She left the room in disgust, and her mother turned to Asa. ‘I am aware, Mr. Trenchard, you are not used to the manners of good society, and that, alone, will excuse the impertinence of which you have been guilty.’ She stormed off stage right, away from the president’s box. Now alone on the stage, Trenchard said, half to himself, ‘Don’t know the manners of good society, eh? Wal, I guess I know enough to turn you inside out, old gal – you sockdologizing old man-trap!’ The actor Harry Hawk had turned to follow the lady off stage when he was startled by a loud pop. Spinning around, he saw a commotion up in the president’s box. A man in black made a quick jerking movement, then stepped out of the shadows, his face glowing eerily from the stage lights below. The man stood there, wrapped in a veil of smoke, and hissed out the words ‘Sic semper tyrannis!’ Then he suddenly vaulted over the balustrade and dropped to the stage more than twelve feet below. Landing slightly off balance, he rose to his full height, then raised a gleaming dagger triumphantly over his head…”
- Michael W. Kauffman, American Brutus: John Wilkes Booth and the Lincoln Conspiracies
There have been four successful assassinations of American presidents in the history of the United States. Three of those executive murders were the work of lone gunmen, acting from a variety of reasons and delusions.
The fourth, however, was the result of a relatively vast conspiracy, potentially with connections to a foreign power, that was meant to be part of a coup d’état, decapitating the American government at a stroke.
That, of course, was the shooting of Abraham Lincoln on April 14, 1865, resulting in his death the following day.
Even as John Wilkes Booth was fleeing the stage of his infamous crime – which took place at Ford’s Theater, during a presentation of Our American Cousin – another accomplice was attacking Secretary of State William Seward at his home, where he was already recovering from grievous injuries suffered in a carriage accident. Meanwhile, another conspirator was supposed to take out Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s vice president. Numerous other plotters were involved in planning the attack – originally meant to be an abduction – while others stashed weapons, provided horses, and directed the assailants as they tried to escape Washington, D.C. Some of the men involved might have had associations with the Confederate States of America, though there is no direct evidence that it was ever ordered by Jefferson Davis or anyone in his chain of command.
Unraveling any crime is difficult, especially once the case has gone cold, and even more so when that case took place in the middle of the nineteenth century. In American Brutus, Michael Kauffman admirably succeeds in following all the bread crumbs, untangling many knots, and coming to reasoned conclusions about one of the two most fateful gunshots in the vast span of human history (the other being fired by Gavrilo Princip in Sarajevo, in June 1914).
American Brutus is an exceptionally good book, thorough and engagingly written. It combines a brief yet effective biography of Booth, the famed actor turned murderer, with a recounting of Booth’s crime, the lingering death of Lincoln in the Petersen House, the widespread manhunt for Booth and his compatriots, and the military tribunal that sentenced and executed four conspirators, including a woman.
While the narrative is occasionally breakneck – especially Booth’s wild attempt to escape, and his ultimate death at the hands of an American cavalryman who’d once cut off his own testicles with a pair of scissors – Kauffman also plays the role of historical detective. He sifts through the evidence, he weighs the credibility, and he gives a very sound version of events, including his assessment of the culpability of the various members of the conspiracy, many of whom were never indicted.
American Brutus is marked by incredibly in-depth research, which is thoroughly demonstrated in the annotated endnotes. When you peruse the notes, you get a strong indication of just how deep Kauffman went to get his story. He not only hunted through all the archives, but he followed Booth’s trail of escape, and he talked to the ancestors of some of the individuals caught up in events, such as the descendants of Dr. Samuel Mudd (who went to prison after setting Booth’s broken leg). By taking this extra step, Kauffman is able to capture bits of insight through family lore that he could not find by simply sifting through the documents in a library collection. The extent to which Kauffman threw himself into this project is made clear when he offhandedly mentions that he served as a pallbearer when conspirator Lewis Powell’s remains were reinterred, after his skull was discovered at the Smithsonian Institution, and tested by the FBI. This is clearly a work of passion, and it shows.
Despite being neck-deep in the subject matter, Kauffman is not a partisan. He does a really good job of coming to nuanced conclusions regarding the aftermath of the assassination. The military tribunal that convicted Lewis Powell, David Herold, Mary Surratt, and George Atzerodt has been criticized since the moment of its inception. That criticism has only increased over the years, and grew especially heightened around the time this book was first published in 2004, at a time when America was utilizing numerous questionable methods to deal with suspected terrorists.
According to Kauffman, the tribunal was clearly unfair as compared to a modern criminal trial. Yet, as he astutely points out, much of that unfairness was a function of the rules of criminal evidence in 1865, which were heavily tilted in favor of the prosecution. There were no Miranda warnings, meaning that none of the defendants were advised to keep their mouths shut. Furthermore, the Gideon v. Wainwright rule regarding the requirement that all defendants have counsel was still 98 years in the future. These harsh realities would have been in play regardless of whether the defendants were tried before a military commission or in federal court.
Moreover, as Kauffman explains, procedural niceties aside, there is very little support for the suggestion that the defendants were actually innocent. Even Mary Surratt, whose case became a minor modern cause célèbre (Robert Redford made a movie about her), appears to have played an active role in the conspiracy, though it is possible she thought Booth was still going to kidnap the president – as originally intended – rather than put a .44 caliber ball into the back of his head at close range. Similarly, Dr. Mudd, who strenuously denied being part of the conspiracy, actually met with Booth before the assassination, and was conspicuously slow in advising federal troopers that the assassin had been in his house for medical treatment.
My only problem with American Brutus is in the way it is structured.
The tale begins at Ford’s Theater, with Our American Cousin already playing out on stage. From there, Kauffman devotes the first four chapters to the assassination and the immediate aftermath. In Chapter Five, however, before ever getting to Booth’s ride for freedom, Kauffman circles back to give us his life story. From there, we move forward chronologically, through events that happened both before and after Ford’s Theater. To break it down further, Chapters 1 through 4 are focused solely on April 14-15, 1865; starting in Chapter 5, we jump back in time to cover the period between 1838 and 1865; by Chapter 11 we are closing in on where the book started; Chapter 12 gives another perspective of what happened at Ford's Theater; and the following chapters rejoin the initial timeline on April 16, 1865.
This layout definitely works to hook you early on (Lincoln is shot by page 7), I found it needlessly confusing, as crucial parts of the story (such as when Booth broke his leg) are not resolved until long after the question is raised. It also resulted in some overlap, such as two different assassination scenes in two different parts of the book.
This is only a minor quibble, though I felt it kept American Brutus from achieving the full force of its effect.
While Kauffman deals with just about every question pertaining to John Wilkes Booth’s sad and sadistic expression of rage, he steers well clear of the one that haunts me most: What might have happened had Abraham Lincoln decided to just spend a quiet evening at home?
On the one hand, it is obvious that Lincoln would have handled Reconstruction better than Andrew Johnson. Indeed, it is nearly impossible for anyone to have done worse. Though Lincoln’s reputation likely would have taken even more hits, as he tried to reconcile the irreconcilable with regards to the reverberations of slavery, his deep wisdom, vast empathy, and evolving vision of equality would have been much welcomed.
On the other hand, Lincoln’s shooting on Good Friday – the day when Christians commemorate the Crucifixion of Jesus – turned him into a secular martyr. Suddenly, one of the most hated presidents in history became one of the most beloved. Secretary of War Stanton claimed to have said, as Lincoln gasped his final breath, “Now he belongs to the ages.” Whether or not he said it at the time, or only later, is beside the point, because the statement is sublime truth. Upon Lincoln’s passing, at the apotheosis of his life, he transmogrified into a symbol of all that was good and righteous in the United States. Death, as they say, paid for all his sins, and he became a national lodestar that we look to till this very day.
In studying the often tragic and consistently shameful post-Civil War years, I have often wondered whether Lincoln the Man – pragmatic, calculating, good-intentioned – could have changed things to any great effect, or if Lincoln the Symbol – sitting eternally on his massive chair on the Mall, a reminder to strive to be touched by “the better angels of our nature” – was the best we could have hoped for.
- Michael W. Kauffman, American Brutus: John Wilkes Booth and the Lincoln Conspiracies
There have been four successful assassinations of American presidents in the history of the United States. Three of those executive murders were the work of lone gunmen, acting from a variety of reasons and delusions.
The fourth, however, was the result of a relatively vast conspiracy, potentially with connections to a foreign power, that was meant to be part of a coup d’état, decapitating the American government at a stroke.
That, of course, was the shooting of Abraham Lincoln on April 14, 1865, resulting in his death the following day.
Even as John Wilkes Booth was fleeing the stage of his infamous crime – which took place at Ford’s Theater, during a presentation of Our American Cousin – another accomplice was attacking Secretary of State William Seward at his home, where he was already recovering from grievous injuries suffered in a carriage accident. Meanwhile, another conspirator was supposed to take out Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s vice president. Numerous other plotters were involved in planning the attack – originally meant to be an abduction – while others stashed weapons, provided horses, and directed the assailants as they tried to escape Washington, D.C. Some of the men involved might have had associations with the Confederate States of America, though there is no direct evidence that it was ever ordered by Jefferson Davis or anyone in his chain of command.
Unraveling any crime is difficult, especially once the case has gone cold, and even more so when that case took place in the middle of the nineteenth century. In American Brutus, Michael Kauffman admirably succeeds in following all the bread crumbs, untangling many knots, and coming to reasoned conclusions about one of the two most fateful gunshots in the vast span of human history (the other being fired by Gavrilo Princip in Sarajevo, in June 1914).
American Brutus is an exceptionally good book, thorough and engagingly written. It combines a brief yet effective biography of Booth, the famed actor turned murderer, with a recounting of Booth’s crime, the lingering death of Lincoln in the Petersen House, the widespread manhunt for Booth and his compatriots, and the military tribunal that sentenced and executed four conspirators, including a woman.
While the narrative is occasionally breakneck – especially Booth’s wild attempt to escape, and his ultimate death at the hands of an American cavalryman who’d once cut off his own testicles with a pair of scissors – Kauffman also plays the role of historical detective. He sifts through the evidence, he weighs the credibility, and he gives a very sound version of events, including his assessment of the culpability of the various members of the conspiracy, many of whom were never indicted.
American Brutus is marked by incredibly in-depth research, which is thoroughly demonstrated in the annotated endnotes. When you peruse the notes, you get a strong indication of just how deep Kauffman went to get his story. He not only hunted through all the archives, but he followed Booth’s trail of escape, and he talked to the ancestors of some of the individuals caught up in events, such as the descendants of Dr. Samuel Mudd (who went to prison after setting Booth’s broken leg). By taking this extra step, Kauffman is able to capture bits of insight through family lore that he could not find by simply sifting through the documents in a library collection. The extent to which Kauffman threw himself into this project is made clear when he offhandedly mentions that he served as a pallbearer when conspirator Lewis Powell’s remains were reinterred, after his skull was discovered at the Smithsonian Institution, and tested by the FBI. This is clearly a work of passion, and it shows.
Despite being neck-deep in the subject matter, Kauffman is not a partisan. He does a really good job of coming to nuanced conclusions regarding the aftermath of the assassination. The military tribunal that convicted Lewis Powell, David Herold, Mary Surratt, and George Atzerodt has been criticized since the moment of its inception. That criticism has only increased over the years, and grew especially heightened around the time this book was first published in 2004, at a time when America was utilizing numerous questionable methods to deal with suspected terrorists.
According to Kauffman, the tribunal was clearly unfair as compared to a modern criminal trial. Yet, as he astutely points out, much of that unfairness was a function of the rules of criminal evidence in 1865, which were heavily tilted in favor of the prosecution. There were no Miranda warnings, meaning that none of the defendants were advised to keep their mouths shut. Furthermore, the Gideon v. Wainwright rule regarding the requirement that all defendants have counsel was still 98 years in the future. These harsh realities would have been in play regardless of whether the defendants were tried before a military commission or in federal court.
Moreover, as Kauffman explains, procedural niceties aside, there is very little support for the suggestion that the defendants were actually innocent. Even Mary Surratt, whose case became a minor modern cause célèbre (Robert Redford made a movie about her), appears to have played an active role in the conspiracy, though it is possible she thought Booth was still going to kidnap the president – as originally intended – rather than put a .44 caliber ball into the back of his head at close range. Similarly, Dr. Mudd, who strenuously denied being part of the conspiracy, actually met with Booth before the assassination, and was conspicuously slow in advising federal troopers that the assassin had been in his house for medical treatment.
My only problem with American Brutus is in the way it is structured.
The tale begins at Ford’s Theater, with Our American Cousin already playing out on stage. From there, Kauffman devotes the first four chapters to the assassination and the immediate aftermath. In Chapter Five, however, before ever getting to Booth’s ride for freedom, Kauffman circles back to give us his life story. From there, we move forward chronologically, through events that happened both before and after Ford’s Theater. To break it down further, Chapters 1 through 4 are focused solely on April 14-15, 1865; starting in Chapter 5, we jump back in time to cover the period between 1838 and 1865; by Chapter 11 we are closing in on where the book started; Chapter 12 gives another perspective of what happened at Ford's Theater; and the following chapters rejoin the initial timeline on April 16, 1865.
This layout definitely works to hook you early on (Lincoln is shot by page 7), I found it needlessly confusing, as crucial parts of the story (such as when Booth broke his leg) are not resolved until long after the question is raised. It also resulted in some overlap, such as two different assassination scenes in two different parts of the book.
This is only a minor quibble, though I felt it kept American Brutus from achieving the full force of its effect.
While Kauffman deals with just about every question pertaining to John Wilkes Booth’s sad and sadistic expression of rage, he steers well clear of the one that haunts me most: What might have happened had Abraham Lincoln decided to just spend a quiet evening at home?
On the one hand, it is obvious that Lincoln would have handled Reconstruction better than Andrew Johnson. Indeed, it is nearly impossible for anyone to have done worse. Though Lincoln’s reputation likely would have taken even more hits, as he tried to reconcile the irreconcilable with regards to the reverberations of slavery, his deep wisdom, vast empathy, and evolving vision of equality would have been much welcomed.
On the other hand, Lincoln’s shooting on Good Friday – the day when Christians commemorate the Crucifixion of Jesus – turned him into a secular martyr. Suddenly, one of the most hated presidents in history became one of the most beloved. Secretary of War Stanton claimed to have said, as Lincoln gasped his final breath, “Now he belongs to the ages.” Whether or not he said it at the time, or only later, is beside the point, because the statement is sublime truth. Upon Lincoln’s passing, at the apotheosis of his life, he transmogrified into a symbol of all that was good and righteous in the United States. Death, as they say, paid for all his sins, and he became a national lodestar that we look to till this very day.
In studying the often tragic and consistently shameful post-Civil War years, I have often wondered whether Lincoln the Man – pragmatic, calculating, good-intentioned – could have changed things to any great effect, or if Lincoln the Symbol – sitting eternally on his massive chair on the Mall, a reminder to strive to be touched by “the better angels of our nature” – was the best we could have hoped for.
August 22, 2012
"American Brutus" might cause to stop dead in their tracks any history writers planning explorations of similar territory. "How am I going to top that?" they'd ask. Answer: You very likely never could. Michael Kauffman's exploration of John Wilkes Booth and his conspiracies and the assassination of Abraham Lincoln seems to cover it all.
Shame on me for judging a book I haven't read yet (but own), but James Swanson's "Manhunt," which came four years after Kauffman's book, seems to be the mainstream alternative to "American Brutus." The volume of reviews for Swanson's book here and its lack of footnotes tag it as mass-audience history. The truth is, I don't see how it or any other work could surpass Kauffman's book, which has several revelations. For completeness and detail, "American Brutus" is amazing. It is extraordinarily detailed; I hesitate to use the word "exhaustive" because it implies, well, exhaustion — it's instead endlessly fascinating for those interested in delving deeply into the death of America's 16th president and the man who dramatically carried it out.
Kauffman's 2004 book contains astonishing research, and the author in fact uncovered a few details overlooked by others, and a thorough analysis of the events leads us down some fascinating roads. Kauffman suggests that Booth did not break his leg in the leap from the president's theater box after shooting him, but later, when his horse fell on him in the escape.
"American Brutus" (4.5 stars, rounded up for thoroughness) starts with the assassination itself, but that is just the beginning, of course. What we get is an almost minute-by-minute chronicling of authorities' reaction and search, the viewpoints of the many witnesses, and the onion-peeling of Booth's several plots. Kauffman presents not a static, Booth-as-villain portrayal of the killer, but a nuanced, revealing look at the evolution of a charismatic Marylander with Southern sympathies who, in effect, turns his back on his own succeessful life to follow his dark beliefs. Kauffman gives emphasis to just how clever Booth was in incriminating others and ensuring the fealty of the other conspirators. Well aware of the laws of the times, Booth realized how easy it would be to surreptitiously involve others in his plot, making them unable to speak against him, even if they were not an active part of it, without implicating themselves. The most well-known of these moves was Booth's note to Vice President Andrew Johnson that implied a relationship, but Kauffman digs much deeper. In detailed description, we see the movements of Booth and those in his web: David Herold, Lewis Powell, Mary Surratt and George Atzerodt (to name those who died for their involvement), but also of people who may not have had a working knowledge of what exactly Booth was up to. The plural of the subtitle — "conspiracies" — is deliberate. Booth's machinations, stretching over most of a year, initially yielded a plot to kidnap Lincoln, transport him to the Southern capital and use him as currency to free Rebel prisoners. And the assassination plot itself, of course, could have been far, far worse. A vicious attack on Secretary of State William Seward could easily have ended in his death, and the planned slayings of Johnson and Gen. Ulysses Grant never came off.
It's astonishing to us today to think how little protection the president had in the 19th century. The White House was a public building then; ordinary citizens could visit anytime they wanted. Lincoln had virtually no security at Ford's Theater, and traveled to the country almost completely unprotected. Booth's plot to kidnap him in the country, though foiled, would have been relatively easy.
I love the way Kauffman starts with the assassination and the (sometimes chicken-with-its-head-cut-off) actions of the shocked authorities in its aftermath, and the gradual death of Lincoln, then turns to a short biography of Booth that goes chronologically until we're back in Ford's Theater much later as the foul deed is done. Kauffman's research meticulously follows Booth in his travels as the plots slowly take shape. Booth was one of the most famous actors in America, who at one point was making $25,000 to $30,000 a year — in the 1860s — but squandered most of his money in his dogged plotting.
Then, of course, it's the manhunt, the trials, the aftermath, what happened to the entire "cast" in the years that followed the central event of their lives. Included in this wrapping up is the fascinating detail that Booth's brother Edwin, also an actor, was nearly shot on stage in 1879.
The book also excellently captures the social, political and legal climate of the times. Instead of just a blow-by-blow of the trials, Kauffman explains just how different American law was in the 1860s, how stacked against the defendants things were, especially in the trial before a military commission that the plotters faced.
"American Brutus" drags a little in the trial section, and maybe a wee bit during the manhunt for Booth, but it's never less than interesting. I also came away with an imperfect understanding of Ford Theater's layout, particularly the president's box; but that's a quibble. Along the way are astonishing little details that make you shake your head in wonder. John Mathews, who worked at Ford's Theater, stayed across the street at the Petersen house; he came home to find Booth stretched on his bed, the same bed in which Lincoln, hustled across the street after the shooting, soon would die. That Kauffman reveals this last bit of holy-shit information in parenthetical form gives you an idea of the ordinary wonders of this story.
Yes, "American Brutus" is the definitive story of Booth and the Lincoln assassination.
Shame on me for judging a book I haven't read yet (but own), but James Swanson's "Manhunt," which came four years after Kauffman's book, seems to be the mainstream alternative to "American Brutus." The volume of reviews for Swanson's book here and its lack of footnotes tag it as mass-audience history. The truth is, I don't see how it or any other work could surpass Kauffman's book, which has several revelations. For completeness and detail, "American Brutus" is amazing. It is extraordinarily detailed; I hesitate to use the word "exhaustive" because it implies, well, exhaustion — it's instead endlessly fascinating for those interested in delving deeply into the death of America's 16th president and the man who dramatically carried it out.
Kauffman's 2004 book contains astonishing research, and the author in fact uncovered a few details overlooked by others, and a thorough analysis of the events leads us down some fascinating roads. Kauffman suggests that Booth did not break his leg in the leap from the president's theater box after shooting him, but later, when his horse fell on him in the escape.
"American Brutus" (4.5 stars, rounded up for thoroughness) starts with the assassination itself, but that is just the beginning, of course. What we get is an almost minute-by-minute chronicling of authorities' reaction and search, the viewpoints of the many witnesses, and the onion-peeling of Booth's several plots. Kauffman presents not a static, Booth-as-villain portrayal of the killer, but a nuanced, revealing look at the evolution of a charismatic Marylander with Southern sympathies who, in effect, turns his back on his own succeessful life to follow his dark beliefs. Kauffman gives emphasis to just how clever Booth was in incriminating others and ensuring the fealty of the other conspirators. Well aware of the laws of the times, Booth realized how easy it would be to surreptitiously involve others in his plot, making them unable to speak against him, even if they were not an active part of it, without implicating themselves. The most well-known of these moves was Booth's note to Vice President Andrew Johnson that implied a relationship, but Kauffman digs much deeper. In detailed description, we see the movements of Booth and those in his web: David Herold, Lewis Powell, Mary Surratt and George Atzerodt (to name those who died for their involvement), but also of people who may not have had a working knowledge of what exactly Booth was up to. The plural of the subtitle — "conspiracies" — is deliberate. Booth's machinations, stretching over most of a year, initially yielded a plot to kidnap Lincoln, transport him to the Southern capital and use him as currency to free Rebel prisoners. And the assassination plot itself, of course, could have been far, far worse. A vicious attack on Secretary of State William Seward could easily have ended in his death, and the planned slayings of Johnson and Gen. Ulysses Grant never came off.
It's astonishing to us today to think how little protection the president had in the 19th century. The White House was a public building then; ordinary citizens could visit anytime they wanted. Lincoln had virtually no security at Ford's Theater, and traveled to the country almost completely unprotected. Booth's plot to kidnap him in the country, though foiled, would have been relatively easy.
I love the way Kauffman starts with the assassination and the (sometimes chicken-with-its-head-cut-off) actions of the shocked authorities in its aftermath, and the gradual death of Lincoln, then turns to a short biography of Booth that goes chronologically until we're back in Ford's Theater much later as the foul deed is done. Kauffman's research meticulously follows Booth in his travels as the plots slowly take shape. Booth was one of the most famous actors in America, who at one point was making $25,000 to $30,000 a year — in the 1860s — but squandered most of his money in his dogged plotting.
Then, of course, it's the manhunt, the trials, the aftermath, what happened to the entire "cast" in the years that followed the central event of their lives. Included in this wrapping up is the fascinating detail that Booth's brother Edwin, also an actor, was nearly shot on stage in 1879.
The book also excellently captures the social, political and legal climate of the times. Instead of just a blow-by-blow of the trials, Kauffman explains just how different American law was in the 1860s, how stacked against the defendants things were, especially in the trial before a military commission that the plotters faced.
"American Brutus" drags a little in the trial section, and maybe a wee bit during the manhunt for Booth, but it's never less than interesting. I also came away with an imperfect understanding of Ford Theater's layout, particularly the president's box; but that's a quibble. Along the way are astonishing little details that make you shake your head in wonder. John Mathews, who worked at Ford's Theater, stayed across the street at the Petersen house; he came home to find Booth stretched on his bed, the same bed in which Lincoln, hustled across the street after the shooting, soon would die. That Kauffman reveals this last bit of holy-shit information in parenthetical form gives you an idea of the ordinary wonders of this story.
Yes, "American Brutus" is the definitive story of Booth and the Lincoln assassination.
April 1, 2022
Michael W. Kauffman's American Brutus offers a probing, insightful reconstruction of the assassination of Abraham Lincoln and the conspirators involved. Kauffman's book chides the conspiracy theories that have tied Lincoln's to a plot by Radical Republicans, Confederate agents or even more shadowy figures, many of which revolve around the idea that the conspirators weren't capable of managing such a wide-ranging coup themselves. Instead, John Wilkes Booth was a perfectly capable mastermind: a talented actor both professionally and in his private life, he easily manipulated a small cabal of malcontents and Southern sympathizers to do his bidding, using his own guile, connections and sense of drama to carry off America's first presidential assassination. Kauffman ably reconstructs the assassination itself, along with the ancillary attack on William Seward by Lewis Payne, noting how much of it came down to a combination of luck and Booth's own skillful grasp of the element of surprise; melodramatic touches like Booth's leaping onto the stage were sure to disarm his audience, despite dozens of men, many of them carrying firearms, being present at the scene. He's also quite good at sketching Booth's experience as an actor, far more successful and respected than is sometimes supposed, his rivalry with brothers Edwin and Junius and his political evolution from conventional conservative to murderous fanatic. The book's sketches of Booth's co-conspirators (Payne, Herold, Atzerodt, the Surratts, etc.) are less thorough, though Kauffman shows that many of those tried were either railroaded or convicted on scant evidence by a government seeking revenge. Some readers might prefer James L. Swanson's Manhunt for its crisp, reportorial recreation of the murder and its aftermath, but Kauffman's is the better book for offering insights into how the conspiracy operated, the mindset of the men involved and how it further traumatized a war-torn country in ways too numerous to calculate.
August 14, 2007
I picked up this book after reading a review of "Manhunt" which said that it wasn't as good as "American Brutus". I never did read "Manhunt" but "American Brutus" is a very interesting history, covering not only the assassination, but also giving a thorough biography of Booth as well as covering the post-assasination trials of the conspirators. There is an interesting stucture to the book. The first part (IIRC) covers the lead up to the assasination from the viewpoint of Booth. The next section covers a history of Booth and the other conspirators. Then there is a section that follows the immediate activities from the assasination through the events of the manhunt, but told from the point of view of the Federal officials. I may have a section swapped into the wrong place but the basic point is that the story doesn't constantly jump back and forth between the conspirators to the Federals. The book is a bit hard to follow at times because of all the characters and the fact that at times they are assuming aliases, but overall it's a facinating look not just at the bare facts of the assasination, but also delves into the Booth family, Washington politics and the attempt afterwards for many of the participants to color their own versions of the facts to emphasis their roles or cover up their blunders. The author takes great pains to identify his sources and the value (or lack thereof) he places on them, making the book interesting in yet another aspect, that being how a historian tries to change bare and conflicting facts into a cohesive narrative.
May 11, 2011
I've read quite a few books about Lincoln but almost all of those books (obviously) end with his death, so I've never really known much about John Wilkes Booth. He was an actor; he killed Lincoln in Ford's theatre; he was treated for a broken leg by Dr Mudd; and he was shot dead in a barn. That's pretty much the sum of it. So this book was a real revelation to me, not just about Booth himself but about how many other people were involved in the conspiracy.
I had always assumed Booth was a Southern sympathiser driven to assassinate Lincoln by the defeat of the South in the Civil War. I never knew, for example, that Booth and his fellow plotters planned originally only to capture Lincoln, but once the war ended Booth decided to kill him. I never knew that plans were laid to kill Vice-President Johnson and Secretary of State Seward too. I never knew the number of people Booth drew into his plan, knowing that under the law of the day accomplices to a crime could not testify against one another. Booth deliberately incriminated a great number of mostly innocent people as an insurance policy, including Vice-President Johnson himself.
This is a fascinating read, and the sheer volume of research required to write it is very evident. Unlike the JFK assassination, for example, where the truth has been lost amidst the avalanche of evidence and counter-evidence, plots and conspiracy theories, the truth about who killed Lincoln has never been in doubt. But the details of how and why and who else was involved has been ignored and dismissed over the years, probably because there was so little doubt that the man ultimately responsible was apprehended and killed.
I had always assumed Booth was a Southern sympathiser driven to assassinate Lincoln by the defeat of the South in the Civil War. I never knew, for example, that Booth and his fellow plotters planned originally only to capture Lincoln, but once the war ended Booth decided to kill him. I never knew that plans were laid to kill Vice-President Johnson and Secretary of State Seward too. I never knew the number of people Booth drew into his plan, knowing that under the law of the day accomplices to a crime could not testify against one another. Booth deliberately incriminated a great number of mostly innocent people as an insurance policy, including Vice-President Johnson himself.
This is a fascinating read, and the sheer volume of research required to write it is very evident. Unlike the JFK assassination, for example, where the truth has been lost amidst the avalanche of evidence and counter-evidence, plots and conspiracy theories, the truth about who killed Lincoln has never been in doubt. But the details of how and why and who else was involved has been ignored and dismissed over the years, probably because there was so little doubt that the man ultimately responsible was apprehended and killed.
January 15, 2012
Michael Kauffman provides a very detailed look at the Lincoln assassination and all of the members involved from the planning to their manhunt and the results that followed. Don't let the title fool you. This is far more than just a biography of John Wilkes Booth. Kaufmann pulls along voluminous sources of primary information to explore the build up of the conspiracy from the debates about whether or not to kidnap the president and finally the plan to kill him at Ford's Theater. The author pieces together much of the planning information and provides a clear flow of events from the Stuart boarding house to the plans laid at Ford's Theater on the famed night. From Booth's time as an actor on the stage to his struggling loyalties to the South the stage was set for the assassination. The book also tracks the other facets of the attacks on Seward and the planned attacks on other government members that ended in failure.
The second half of the book focuses on the escape of the assailants and the efforts of Stanton's war department to bring them to justice. As the fugitives fled in all directions (and some not even leaving DC) the war department sent orders to all troops to block roads and deploy cavalry. Amazingly John Wilkes Booth and his compatriots still escape the city. As they flee to what they hope will be a sympathetic South they find that southerners have turned against them and are horrified by his actions. As detectives are brought in from all over the country and one of the largest investigations in American history is launched hundreds of people are swept up for questioning and many will be held as material witnesses to the crime. Booth is shot and killed at a farm near Orange VA but his co-conspirator is caught with him and brought to trial along with many others including Mary Stuart who will become the first female to be executed by the Federal Government. Kauffman also spends time covering the military tribunals that tried the conspirators and condemned four of them to death and several others to imprisonment on a remote island in the Gulf of Mexico.
Overall this is an extremely well written book that is filled with detail on the assassination efforts of the conspirators and their manhunt. It is gripping and holds the readers interest while providing a host of details. Easily the best book to start with on the assassination and well worth an addition to any Civil War Library.
The second half of the book focuses on the escape of the assailants and the efforts of Stanton's war department to bring them to justice. As the fugitives fled in all directions (and some not even leaving DC) the war department sent orders to all troops to block roads and deploy cavalry. Amazingly John Wilkes Booth and his compatriots still escape the city. As they flee to what they hope will be a sympathetic South they find that southerners have turned against them and are horrified by his actions. As detectives are brought in from all over the country and one of the largest investigations in American history is launched hundreds of people are swept up for questioning and many will be held as material witnesses to the crime. Booth is shot and killed at a farm near Orange VA but his co-conspirator is caught with him and brought to trial along with many others including Mary Stuart who will become the first female to be executed by the Federal Government. Kauffman also spends time covering the military tribunals that tried the conspirators and condemned four of them to death and several others to imprisonment on a remote island in the Gulf of Mexico.
Overall this is an extremely well written book that is filled with detail on the assassination efforts of the conspirators and their manhunt. It is gripping and holds the readers interest while providing a host of details. Easily the best book to start with on the assassination and well worth an addition to any Civil War Library.
April 18, 2018
The impression this book left me with is that the author, Michael W. Kauffman has to be somewhat obsessed with the Lincoln Assassination. His apparent level of detailed knowledge of people, events, timelines, past experts, explanations, and information sources is incredible. Also, he presents some very interesting and unique takes on certain fact and events, disputing a number of supposedly established facts/expanations (i.e. Booth's broken leg was not from the jump to the stage but a riding accident.) For that, he deserves 4 or 5 stars.
But... the problems with the book are the incredible detail, the lack of a main theme, repetition, and its ultimate length. I was drowning trying to keep things straight, wondering why there were so many bunny trails, and why he needed to follow multiple story lines. This included Booth's biography, plotting the act, the conspiracy, Lincolns elaborate funeral odyssey, the conspirators' trial, and a coda in which numerous people involved in the story had the rest of their lives summarized. The book was too long by half, badly needing editing. Alternatively, it should have been broken up into two or even three books - the conspiracy, Booth's story, and the trial/government incompetence.
Ultimately, I give the book 2.5 or 3 stars. There are better written books on this subject.
But... the problems with the book are the incredible detail, the lack of a main theme, repetition, and its ultimate length. I was drowning trying to keep things straight, wondering why there were so many bunny trails, and why he needed to follow multiple story lines. This included Booth's biography, plotting the act, the conspiracy, Lincolns elaborate funeral odyssey, the conspirators' trial, and a coda in which numerous people involved in the story had the rest of their lives summarized. The book was too long by half, badly needing editing. Alternatively, it should have been broken up into two or even three books - the conspiracy, Booth's story, and the trial/government incompetence.
Ultimately, I give the book 2.5 or 3 stars. There are better written books on this subject.
April 29, 2012
This book is not, as I expected, a biography of John Wilkes Booth, but a thorough account of the Lincoln assassination with an extensive backstory on Booth.
The assassination, and the conspiracy behind it, have fascinated us for years, but too many of the books about it are poorly researched and rely on the author's personal biases for facts. This has resulted in a great deal of misinformation becoming accepted as truth. The author of American Brutus has been careful to use primary sources for his decisions on what actually happened, and when a "fact" is in doubt, he analyzes the evidence to come to a conclusion. But the narrative is anything but dry. Kauffman writes vividly and puts the reader right on the scene. He gives us a much fuller picture of Booth than most histories do--someone who was not a monster, a lunatic, or a pawn of other interests, but a warm and sensitive man who became consumed by his passion for the Confederacy and hatred of Lincoln. I would have liked more information about his stage career, but all in all this book is wonderfully enlightening. I must add, though, that the publisher's choice of photograph for the jacket is very odd, since (as Kauffman explains) it was considered by those who knew him to be a poor likeness.
The assassination, and the conspiracy behind it, have fascinated us for years, but too many of the books about it are poorly researched and rely on the author's personal biases for facts. This has resulted in a great deal of misinformation becoming accepted as truth. The author of American Brutus has been careful to use primary sources for his decisions on what actually happened, and when a "fact" is in doubt, he analyzes the evidence to come to a conclusion. But the narrative is anything but dry. Kauffman writes vividly and puts the reader right on the scene. He gives us a much fuller picture of Booth than most histories do--someone who was not a monster, a lunatic, or a pawn of other interests, but a warm and sensitive man who became consumed by his passion for the Confederacy and hatred of Lincoln. I would have liked more information about his stage career, but all in all this book is wonderfully enlightening. I must add, though, that the publisher's choice of photograph for the jacket is very odd, since (as Kauffman explains) it was considered by those who knew him to be a poor likeness.
October 2, 2018
Extremely thorough look at a very sad time in American history. I found this book to be riveting in parts and dry and over-detailed in other parts. There were a LOT of people involved in the conspiracy, the chase, and the trial afterwards, and I found it a struggle to keep everyone straight (maybe a list of people in the front of the book would have been helpful). If you want to get a full understanding of Booth and the assassination of Lincoln, this would probably be your best choice - Michael Kauffman leaves NO stone unturned! It is a evocative, sad, and enlightening book - I was left with a lot to ponder over.
November 27, 2022
This book was an amazing overview of the plot to kidnap (and later kill) Lincoln and its aftermath. It's clear that the author is well-versed with the material and presented it in such an interesting way that it almost read like a novel to me.
I know some people think that the author is overly detailed. I personally love books like this that are drowning in details, but I know that not everyone shares that love. And I do think that this book might be a tad overwhelming to anyone who doesn't come into it with a basic knowledge of the plot and its players, because the author throws the reader into the middle of the action from the beginning. There is some backtracking to explain who people are and why they're important later, but there are a LOT of names at the beginning. (I think this kind of adds to the feel of confusion that permeated the assassination.)
I have aphantasia, which means that I cannot see mental pictures in my head when I read or recall things. When I read, I'm driven by emotions the people (or, in case of fiction, the characters) are feeling. The author did such a good job at that that I could literally feel my own heartbeat speed up a bit when he described Booth stepping into the box at the theater to kill Lincoln. And when he described what Booth likely saw, I could see it flash just for a second in my own mind - that made it even more chilling for me.
I plan on reading this again in a year or two, because I'm sure I didn't absorb everything that I could have the first time through.
I know some people think that the author is overly detailed. I personally love books like this that are drowning in details, but I know that not everyone shares that love. And I do think that this book might be a tad overwhelming to anyone who doesn't come into it with a basic knowledge of the plot and its players, because the author throws the reader into the middle of the action from the beginning. There is some backtracking to explain who people are and why they're important later, but there are a LOT of names at the beginning. (I think this kind of adds to the feel of confusion that permeated the assassination.)
I have aphantasia, which means that I cannot see mental pictures in my head when I read or recall things. When I read, I'm driven by emotions the people (or, in case of fiction, the characters) are feeling. The author did such a good job at that that I could literally feel my own heartbeat speed up a bit when he described Booth stepping into the box at the theater to kill Lincoln. And when he described what Booth likely saw, I could see it flash just for a second in my own mind - that made it even more chilling for me.
I plan on reading this again in a year or two, because I'm sure I didn't absorb everything that I could have the first time through.
January 7, 2017
This is an excellent and thought-provoking book, not a biography of John Wilkes Booth so much as it is a dissection of Lincoln's assassination: everything that can be reconstructed about the events that led up to it and the events that followed. Kauffman works intensively with primary sources, collating and correlating affidavits and testimony and letters and diaries and memoirs, talking carefully about discrepancies and contradictions, talking about the primary sources that did exist but are now lost, talking about why people said the things they did.
I learned a great deal about John Wilkes Booth, the most important thing being that Booth was a liar. Nothing he said and nothing he wrote is remotely trustworthy. He lied to everyone around him and I'm pretty sure he spent most of his life lying to himself. Kauffman is particularly interested in the way that Booth implicated innocent people in his plotting. For example, he took one friend out riding around Washington, loudly pointing out what good escape routes would be. The friend didn't realize until much later that Booth was making it look like they were discussing a plot against Lincoln. Booth did this routinely to people whom he felt were a threat to him, giving himself blackmail material against them should they discover his plans. That more than anything, that premeditated and carefully executed cruelty, makes me unable to feel any charity towards John Wilkes Booth.
Kauffman talks a lot about tyrannicide, which is what Booth thought he was doing, pointing out that a lot of pro-Confederate newspapers in both North and South were talking about Marcus Junius Brutus and William Tell, about the justified killing of out-of-control tyrants. (And given the way Lincoln's administration was dancing a vigorous can-can on the US Constitution and given the fact that many people--not just John Wilkes Booth--thought that Lincoln had had the 1864 election rigged, so that there was no legal way to get him out of office, although it's in stark contrast to the way Lincoln is now viewed, I can see how Booth came to think of him as a tyrant and to think of murdering him as tyrannicide, not something more base.) The most incisive sentence in this book, to me, is: "The irony was inescapable: Booth had hoped to kill Lincoln on the Ides and highlight his resemblance to Caesar; but instead, he shot him on Good Friday, and the world compared him to Christ" (251). This, in a beautiful nutshell, both explains Booth's lofty sense of self-importance and the way that his plan crashed down around his ears.
There's also a certain poetic justice to it. Booth seems to have been a man without any sense of irony whatsoever. The best example is one that also gets used in Manhunt: The 12-Day Chase for Lincoln's Killer, where Booth, writing to his mother, describes himself as a slave because he had to work in the North. Any white American male who was capable, as Booth was capable in the 1860s, of making $30,000 a year ($421,348.16 today if you adjust for inflation) . . . the mere comparison is ludicrous. But Booth is absolutely serious; that is genuinely how wronged and oppressed he felt he was.
That lack of irony also explains one of the things that I find most interesting about Booth and his evolving scheme. He started out with a plan to kidnap Lincoln--this was in the days before the Secret Service or any sense that the President needed to be guarded (murdering the President of the United States wasn't even made a federal crime until 1965) and Lincoln was known for riding out of town completely by himself, so the idea itself was not inherently implausible, and Booth was not the only one who came up with it--but that plan metamorphosed as he failed to carry it out and the Confederate position became worse and worse. He went from kidnapping the President in an isolated place out in the country to kidnapping the President in a theater. (He had an elaborate scheme about who would lift Lincoln down from the box to the stage which is blackly hilarious; Lincoln was 6'4", and even though he was 56, they discovered at his autopsy that he still had the upper body of a powerful athlete--I would like to have seen Booth and Surratt and Powell trying it.) And then, after Appomattox, his plan metamorphosed again, from kidnap to murder. But, and this is the interesting thing to me, why a theater? It seems, as Booth's co-conspirators argued vehemently, the worst possible location for a kidnapping; even for murder, it's highly counterintuitive, although Booth made it work. But why would a professional actor from a family of professional actors, who had played theaters across the US and had theatrical friends everywhere, choose his professional home as the perfect place for assassination/tyrannicide?
There are two different ways to answer that question. One is to point out that Booth, being both a professional actor and an inveterate liar, and being also a person with an vastly inflated sense of his own importance, someone who essentially saw himself as being on stage in front of a rapt audience all the time, inevitably thought about his plot as a play. After all, he remembered to declare Sic semper tyrannis as he jumped from the box to the stage--and Kauffman notes that Booth , in actual performance of actual plays, liked to make dramatic entrances, and was in fact known for jumping down to the stage from as much as 12 feet. And on the run in Maryland, he was most interested in discovering--and most crushed by--popular opinion about what he'd done. Moreover, he understood instinctively how to use the theater to his advantage. It let him creep up behind Lincoln without anyone (including his victim) noticing, and the detectives who later made the cast of Our American Cousin perform the play again--and that has to have been the worst experience of any of their professional lives, performing a comedy in an empty theater while everyone involved is mentally counting down to the gunshot--proved that Booth picked his moment with precision to ensure that the stage would be clear for him to cross. And that--a clear escape route--is something that he could only have guaranteed by committing murder during a play. Only during the performance of a play can you predict exactly where the people involved are going to be at the moment of your choice. In that light, his choice seems so self-evident that you may be wondering why I even think it's worth commenting on.
But then there's the other side. Booth knew he was destroying himself in destroying Lincoln; he wanted public adulation (much as he claimed he didn't care at all), but he knew the government would hunt him down. So again why would he choose, deliberately and with intense premeditation, to commit the most destructive act of his life, both against his victim and against himself, in a theater, when he, his father, and two of his brothers were all famous actors--probably the most famous and adulated actors of their day? The Freudian line is tempting here, since Booth was assassinating the pre-eminent patriarch of the United States, a stern and unyielding father to the rebellious South, a father who Booth believed was playing favorites, cossetting the North and punishing the South. It is also obviously a blow against Booth's own (deceased) father, though Kauffman doesn't go into enough detail for me to make a strong case that Booth resented Junius Brutus Booth (although Junius Brutus did try to keep his sons from following him into acting as a career, with notably poor success). John Wilkes Booth did however most certainly resent his brother Edwin, who was a staunch supporter of the Union and even more successful an actor than John Wilkes himself. And if you think of Lincoln's assassination as a play, with John Wilkes Booth as both director and leading man in the ultimate performance of his career . . . to me, that kind of self-immolation, using the tools of his own trade to destroy himself, talks about a kind of self-hatred that goes well beyond Freud. And Booth, being as he was almost completely un-self-aware, I don't think ever recognized or even could have recognized the impulse to self-destruction underlying the moment when he put his .44 caliber Deringer against Lincoln's skull and fired.
(The only grim and bitterly cold comfort I can find is that Lincoln would never have known what happened to him. The bullet that tore through his brain didn't kill him instantly, but he was brain-dead from the moment Booth fired. I only hope he was enjoying the play.)
American Brutus isn't only about John Wilkes Booth. It's also about Abraham Lincoln and Edwin Stanton and William Seward, about Lewis Powell and George Atzerodt and John Surratt. Kauffman traces out the long domino paths of cause-and-effect from the assassination of Lincoln and the near assassination of William Seward, the terrible damage Booth caused, all the people ensnared in his webs who fell with him when he fell. It's a book that I've been thinking about a lot since I finished it, which is maybe the highest praise I can offer.
I learned a great deal about John Wilkes Booth, the most important thing being that Booth was a liar. Nothing he said and nothing he wrote is remotely trustworthy. He lied to everyone around him and I'm pretty sure he spent most of his life lying to himself. Kauffman is particularly interested in the way that Booth implicated innocent people in his plotting. For example, he took one friend out riding around Washington, loudly pointing out what good escape routes would be. The friend didn't realize until much later that Booth was making it look like they were discussing a plot against Lincoln. Booth did this routinely to people whom he felt were a threat to him, giving himself blackmail material against them should they discover his plans. That more than anything, that premeditated and carefully executed cruelty, makes me unable to feel any charity towards John Wilkes Booth.
Kauffman talks a lot about tyrannicide, which is what Booth thought he was doing, pointing out that a lot of pro-Confederate newspapers in both North and South were talking about Marcus Junius Brutus and William Tell, about the justified killing of out-of-control tyrants. (And given the way Lincoln's administration was dancing a vigorous can-can on the US Constitution and given the fact that many people--not just John Wilkes Booth--thought that Lincoln had had the 1864 election rigged, so that there was no legal way to get him out of office, although it's in stark contrast to the way Lincoln is now viewed, I can see how Booth came to think of him as a tyrant and to think of murdering him as tyrannicide, not something more base.) The most incisive sentence in this book, to me, is: "The irony was inescapable: Booth had hoped to kill Lincoln on the Ides and highlight his resemblance to Caesar; but instead, he shot him on Good Friday, and the world compared him to Christ" (251). This, in a beautiful nutshell, both explains Booth's lofty sense of self-importance and the way that his plan crashed down around his ears.
There's also a certain poetic justice to it. Booth seems to have been a man without any sense of irony whatsoever. The best example is one that also gets used in Manhunt: The 12-Day Chase for Lincoln's Killer, where Booth, writing to his mother, describes himself as a slave because he had to work in the North. Any white American male who was capable, as Booth was capable in the 1860s, of making $30,000 a year ($421,348.16 today if you adjust for inflation) . . . the mere comparison is ludicrous. But Booth is absolutely serious; that is genuinely how wronged and oppressed he felt he was.
That lack of irony also explains one of the things that I find most interesting about Booth and his evolving scheme. He started out with a plan to kidnap Lincoln--this was in the days before the Secret Service or any sense that the President needed to be guarded (murdering the President of the United States wasn't even made a federal crime until 1965) and Lincoln was known for riding out of town completely by himself, so the idea itself was not inherently implausible, and Booth was not the only one who came up with it--but that plan metamorphosed as he failed to carry it out and the Confederate position became worse and worse. He went from kidnapping the President in an isolated place out in the country to kidnapping the President in a theater. (He had an elaborate scheme about who would lift Lincoln down from the box to the stage which is blackly hilarious; Lincoln was 6'4", and even though he was 56, they discovered at his autopsy that he still had the upper body of a powerful athlete--I would like to have seen Booth and Surratt and Powell trying it.) And then, after Appomattox, his plan metamorphosed again, from kidnap to murder. But, and this is the interesting thing to me, why a theater? It seems, as Booth's co-conspirators argued vehemently, the worst possible location for a kidnapping; even for murder, it's highly counterintuitive, although Booth made it work. But why would a professional actor from a family of professional actors, who had played theaters across the US and had theatrical friends everywhere, choose his professional home as the perfect place for assassination/tyrannicide?
There are two different ways to answer that question. One is to point out that Booth, being both a professional actor and an inveterate liar, and being also a person with an vastly inflated sense of his own importance, someone who essentially saw himself as being on stage in front of a rapt audience all the time, inevitably thought about his plot as a play. After all, he remembered to declare Sic semper tyrannis as he jumped from the box to the stage--and Kauffman notes that Booth , in actual performance of actual plays, liked to make dramatic entrances, and was in fact known for jumping down to the stage from as much as 12 feet. And on the run in Maryland, he was most interested in discovering--and most crushed by--popular opinion about what he'd done. Moreover, he understood instinctively how to use the theater to his advantage. It let him creep up behind Lincoln without anyone (including his victim) noticing, and the detectives who later made the cast of Our American Cousin perform the play again--and that has to have been the worst experience of any of their professional lives, performing a comedy in an empty theater while everyone involved is mentally counting down to the gunshot--proved that Booth picked his moment with precision to ensure that the stage would be clear for him to cross. And that--a clear escape route--is something that he could only have guaranteed by committing murder during a play. Only during the performance of a play can you predict exactly where the people involved are going to be at the moment of your choice. In that light, his choice seems so self-evident that you may be wondering why I even think it's worth commenting on.
But then there's the other side. Booth knew he was destroying himself in destroying Lincoln; he wanted public adulation (much as he claimed he didn't care at all), but he knew the government would hunt him down. So again why would he choose, deliberately and with intense premeditation, to commit the most destructive act of his life, both against his victim and against himself, in a theater, when he, his father, and two of his brothers were all famous actors--probably the most famous and adulated actors of their day? The Freudian line is tempting here, since Booth was assassinating the pre-eminent patriarch of the United States, a stern and unyielding father to the rebellious South, a father who Booth believed was playing favorites, cossetting the North and punishing the South. It is also obviously a blow against Booth's own (deceased) father, though Kauffman doesn't go into enough detail for me to make a strong case that Booth resented Junius Brutus Booth (although Junius Brutus did try to keep his sons from following him into acting as a career, with notably poor success). John Wilkes Booth did however most certainly resent his brother Edwin, who was a staunch supporter of the Union and even more successful an actor than John Wilkes himself. And if you think of Lincoln's assassination as a play, with John Wilkes Booth as both director and leading man in the ultimate performance of his career . . . to me, that kind of self-immolation, using the tools of his own trade to destroy himself, talks about a kind of self-hatred that goes well beyond Freud. And Booth, being as he was almost completely un-self-aware, I don't think ever recognized or even could have recognized the impulse to self-destruction underlying the moment when he put his .44 caliber Deringer against Lincoln's skull and fired.
(The only grim and bitterly cold comfort I can find is that Lincoln would never have known what happened to him. The bullet that tore through his brain didn't kill him instantly, but he was brain-dead from the moment Booth fired. I only hope he was enjoying the play.)
American Brutus isn't only about John Wilkes Booth. It's also about Abraham Lincoln and Edwin Stanton and William Seward, about Lewis Powell and George Atzerodt and John Surratt. Kauffman traces out the long domino paths of cause-and-effect from the assassination of Lincoln and the near assassination of William Seward, the terrible damage Booth caused, all the people ensnared in his webs who fell with him when he fell. It's a book that I've been thinking about a lot since I finished it, which is maybe the highest praise I can offer.
November 20, 2021
A complete, insightful history of pretty much everything related to Booth and his conspiracy.
Kauffman vividly describes what happened at Ford’s Theater. He effectively uses eyewitness accounts and disputes some parts of the story, such as Booth breaking his leg. He provides great portraits of the other conspirators, of the attempt on Seward, how the conspirators were identified, how quickly souvenir hunters swamped the theater, how the military tribunals went down, and how quickly Lincoln’s reputation changed following his death. He also includes some interesting side stories like how the actors restaged the play for investigators and how Booth’s girlfriend committed suicide
Kauffman also describes the conspirators’ flight south and their mistaken assumption that southerners would welcome their action; Booth in particular viewed himself as a heroic Brutus figure and was outraged at the Southern reaction. Kauffman also argues that Booth never intended to kidnap Lincoln, and dismisses his supposed connections to the Confederacy. Nor, he argues, was Booth insane.
The narrative is readable but a bit cluttered and hackneyed at times. Some of the detail seems either cumbersome or scanty at times. A few parts don’t make much sense. At one point Kauffman suggests that Booth tried to implicate his brother Edwin, but doesn’t explain how. For some reason he offers two accounts of the assassination (one at the beginning and one at the middle), and doesn’t explain the discrepancies. Also, Kauffman often states that Booth freely talked about his plans in order to incriminate his co-conspirators and make it harder for them to back out or run to the authorities, but this seemed a bit speculative. He writes that Mudd did not recognize Booth when the actor requested medical assistance, then describes a meeting between the two in December. He also writes that Booth and Surratt met by coincidence.
Still, a well-written, well-researched and engaging work.
Kauffman vividly describes what happened at Ford’s Theater. He effectively uses eyewitness accounts and disputes some parts of the story, such as Booth breaking his leg. He provides great portraits of the other conspirators, of the attempt on Seward, how the conspirators were identified, how quickly souvenir hunters swamped the theater, how the military tribunals went down, and how quickly Lincoln’s reputation changed following his death. He also includes some interesting side stories like how the actors restaged the play for investigators and how Booth’s girlfriend committed suicide
Kauffman also describes the conspirators’ flight south and their mistaken assumption that southerners would welcome their action; Booth in particular viewed himself as a heroic Brutus figure and was outraged at the Southern reaction. Kauffman also argues that Booth never intended to kidnap Lincoln, and dismisses his supposed connections to the Confederacy. Nor, he argues, was Booth insane.
The narrative is readable but a bit cluttered and hackneyed at times. Some of the detail seems either cumbersome or scanty at times. A few parts don’t make much sense. At one point Kauffman suggests that Booth tried to implicate his brother Edwin, but doesn’t explain how. For some reason he offers two accounts of the assassination (one at the beginning and one at the middle), and doesn’t explain the discrepancies. Also, Kauffman often states that Booth freely talked about his plans in order to incriminate his co-conspirators and make it harder for them to back out or run to the authorities, but this seemed a bit speculative. He writes that Mudd did not recognize Booth when the actor requested medical assistance, then describes a meeting between the two in December. He also writes that Booth and Surratt met by coincidence.
Still, a well-written, well-researched and engaging work.
June 2, 2017
I've been taking my time delving into this history, and am deeply thankful I didn't have to live through it. We talk about divisiveness this year, but our nation, as it stands today, doesn't hold a candle to the deep anger, nationalism and political divides of the 19th century. Deep in our heart of hearts, we like to think everyone above a certain state line was an abolitionist, but that simply wasn't the case. People considered Lincoln and Seward's tenacity on the subject to be the cause of the war, not because these people were considering ethics or principle, but because they felt the administration was rocking the boat - the question of the day seems to have been, "Why fix what isn't broken," entirely ignoring slavery's evils in favor of maintaining peace and blaming Lincoln for warmongering. But in the end, I wonder whether Booth could be bothered to take any of the above into account - he appeared to prefer going down in history as a hero rather than making any ideological claims about preserving peace or taking revenge. Though those last murmured words, "Useless. Useless," leave us forever wondering.
The technical achievements of the author are worth comment. His research was incredibly intense and meticulous. He created a sortable data set from all available documentation, which brings to light certain events in certain order that put various individuals in entirely new lights. It effectively knocks several popular conspiracy theories into a cocked hat and certainly lowered my sympathies for Mrs. Surratt. Kauffman also effectively portrays Booth as a master of manipulation, a consummate schemer who managed to catch far too many in his web.
One last note: a few of the descriptions are not for the faint of heart. The scene at Seward's house is pure nightmare fuel.
The technical achievements of the author are worth comment. His research was incredibly intense and meticulous. He created a sortable data set from all available documentation, which brings to light certain events in certain order that put various individuals in entirely new lights. It effectively knocks several popular conspiracy theories into a cocked hat and certainly lowered my sympathies for Mrs. Surratt. Kauffman also effectively portrays Booth as a master of manipulation, a consummate schemer who managed to catch far too many in his web.
One last note: a few of the descriptions are not for the faint of heart. The scene at Seward's house is pure nightmare fuel.
July 7, 2011
Fascinating glimpse into the motivations behind one of the most famous assassinations in American history. John Wilkes Booth's theatrical upbringing, wanna-be-heroic nature, and Southern sympathies combined convinced his ego that he was going to be the American Brutus. A hero to a newly-revitalized South who would laud him as a prince. Honestly surprised and confused by the blame laid on him immediately after the shooting, his ill-fated escape became nothing like the triumphant procession into a grateful south that he'd envisioned.
Kauffman does a fine job presenting the mind-set of this idealistic and deluded man, raised in a culture of Classical deeds and epic events. And how, in the falling south, he saw the last chance for a life of grace and style. But the tragedy of errors that follows his actions dooms him to the epitaph of villain on both sides of the war.
It's a well-researched and highly readable book for anyone who is interested in the Lincoln assassination. No real surprises, but one or two unusual insights into Booth's character.
Kauffman does a fine job presenting the mind-set of this idealistic and deluded man, raised in a culture of Classical deeds and epic events. And how, in the falling south, he saw the last chance for a life of grace and style. But the tragedy of errors that follows his actions dooms him to the epitaph of villain on both sides of the war.
It's a well-researched and highly readable book for anyone who is interested in the Lincoln assassination. No real surprises, but one or two unusual insights into Booth's character.
January 19, 2008
Wonderfully readable study of John Wilkes Booth -- both his history and the last three weeks of his life.
One interesting thing is that Kauffman believes Booth did not break his ankle leaping to the stage. Kauffman believes there is strong circumstantial evidence that Booth injured his ankle when his horse fell.
This is one of those books where you will want to keep a marker in the footnote section at the end of the book. Often there is further information equally fascinating.
One interesting thing is that Kauffman believes Booth did not break his ankle leaping to the stage. Kauffman believes there is strong circumstantial evidence that Booth injured his ankle when his horse fell.
This is one of those books where you will want to keep a marker in the footnote section at the end of the book. Often there is further information equally fascinating.
Read
June 2, 2008I surrendered to my boredom and retired this book unfinished, something I rarely do. Slow moving, surprisingly lacking in drama, and a bizarre and tiresome focus on the minutia surrounding Lincoln's assasination, I gave this up.
There are too many books on my to-read shelf to plod through a mediocre book. 'Tis a shame.
There are too many books on my to-read shelf to plod through a mediocre book. 'Tis a shame.
July 6, 2011
It is amazing that Kauffman can create such an exhaustive work from an event that happened 150 years ago. Great research.
June 6, 2024
It’s not that I thought that this book was bad, per se, but it was not written in a style I found engaging. In my opinion, you could cut 25% of the book and retain the same information and story.
June 24, 2018
It recently came to my attention that most everything I knew about the Lincoln assassination was wrong. Oh I had the main details down pat, but I had always had the impression it was, largely, a poorly planned crime of impulse by an emotionally distraught actor and that many of those convicted were railroaded due to the outrage over the assassination.
Now this wasn't a storyline I had gleaned from questionable sources. It was one I had read in various history books and even the freshman-level American history class I took. But I recently discovered this was all wrong and was instead pointed toward this book, the only one on the topic written by a historian that specializes in the Lincoln assassination. Seems like the only thing I knew that was actually right was how horrific the scene of the attack on William Seward and his family and staff was.
Kauffman is a wonderful researcher who clearly has a handle on his sources. (In his introduction, he talks extensively about the in-depth classification method he used to keep track of all the primary sources. My inner librarian and historian was so impressed.) Kauffman is also even-handed in his treatment of numerous controversial figures, ranging from Booth to Secretary of War Edwin Stanton. But even better, he is a superb writer who has a knack for pacing, generating suspense even when you know how stuff is going to play out, and breaking down convoluted and confusing events.
And, boy, is this story convoluted. As Kauffman explains, John Wilkes Booth actually displayed a substantial amount of premeditation and wove a web of innuendo, implied blackmail, and deception that played on the legal standards of the time to convince people to do his bidding. Most conspiracies are propelled by silence, but Booth intentionally made as much of his planning as public as possible while also sending as many confusing mixed signals as possible.
At times, it almost seemed like there was something of Hamlet in Booth's plotting in making the scheme far more complicated and, well, actorly than was strictly necessary. Acting was, of course, a significant facet of Booth's life since it was his and his family's profession. As such, the book's title is an apt one. Booth's idolization of Brutus's assassination of Caesar was one that loomed large in his mind since his adolescence. Curiously, as well-educated and well-read as he was, it never once occurred to him that most people don't praise Brutus for his actions and instead regard him as a traitor and murderer. So, Booth spent the last days of his life on the run, distraught and confused why nobody was praising his imitation of Brutus, seemingly unaware that, well, nobody really praised Brutus on the stage or in real life.
I sort of connect everything to Jim Jones now after reading Jeff Guinn's book, and there is something about Booth's ease with manipulation that reminds me of Jones. Actually, Kauffman reminds me a bit of Guinn, which is a huge compliment from me.
My favorite part of the book ended up being the discussion of the trial, in which he elaborated quite a bit on how very different the legal system was then. It sheds a lot more light on the proceedings. Having read the book, I now concur with Kauffman that certain elements of the trial were certainly unfair, but a lot of what strikes us that way now would not have been deemed problematic in the 1860s in any courtroom.
There are so many facts packed into this book that, at some point, I would like to reread it. Until then, I'll probably just pester people with random weird facts I learned from it about 19th century courtroom procedure, Civil War-era Maryland, and more. . . .
Now this wasn't a storyline I had gleaned from questionable sources. It was one I had read in various history books and even the freshman-level American history class I took. But I recently discovered this was all wrong and was instead pointed toward this book, the only one on the topic written by a historian that specializes in the Lincoln assassination. Seems like the only thing I knew that was actually right was how horrific the scene of the attack on William Seward and his family and staff was.
Kauffman is a wonderful researcher who clearly has a handle on his sources. (In his introduction, he talks extensively about the in-depth classification method he used to keep track of all the primary sources. My inner librarian and historian was so impressed.) Kauffman is also even-handed in his treatment of numerous controversial figures, ranging from Booth to Secretary of War Edwin Stanton. But even better, he is a superb writer who has a knack for pacing, generating suspense even when you know how stuff is going to play out, and breaking down convoluted and confusing events.
And, boy, is this story convoluted. As Kauffman explains, John Wilkes Booth actually displayed a substantial amount of premeditation and wove a web of innuendo, implied blackmail, and deception that played on the legal standards of the time to convince people to do his bidding. Most conspiracies are propelled by silence, but Booth intentionally made as much of his planning as public as possible while also sending as many confusing mixed signals as possible.
At times, it almost seemed like there was something of Hamlet in Booth's plotting in making the scheme far more complicated and, well, actorly than was strictly necessary. Acting was, of course, a significant facet of Booth's life since it was his and his family's profession. As such, the book's title is an apt one. Booth's idolization of Brutus's assassination of Caesar was one that loomed large in his mind since his adolescence. Curiously, as well-educated and well-read as he was, it never once occurred to him that most people don't praise Brutus for his actions and instead regard him as a traitor and murderer. So, Booth spent the last days of his life on the run, distraught and confused why nobody was praising his imitation of Brutus, seemingly unaware that, well, nobody really praised Brutus on the stage or in real life.
I sort of connect everything to Jim Jones now after reading Jeff Guinn's book, and there is something about Booth's ease with manipulation that reminds me of Jones. Actually, Kauffman reminds me a bit of Guinn, which is a huge compliment from me.
My favorite part of the book ended up being the discussion of the trial, in which he elaborated quite a bit on how very different the legal system was then. It sheds a lot more light on the proceedings. Having read the book, I now concur with Kauffman that certain elements of the trial were certainly unfair, but a lot of what strikes us that way now would not have been deemed problematic in the 1860s in any courtroom.
There are so many facts packed into this book that, at some point, I would like to reread it. Until then, I'll probably just pester people with random weird facts I learned from it about 19th century courtroom procedure, Civil War-era Maryland, and more. . . .
March 4, 2022
Enthralling from start to finish, but then I have an intense interest in this period of American history.
July 15, 2025
DEEEEP dive into Booth and all the other players but so worth it. This guy did his homework and then some.
February 22, 2017
Can't wait to visit Ford's theatre. This was such an interesting history of Lincoln and Booth.
March 6, 2016
Everything about this book is right up my alley. It's well-written and researched, about a historical character I had much interest in, during my favorite period in American history. But I didn't finish it. I don't know why.
It is a good book. Really, truly, it is. It's the perfect kind of non-fiction: it addresses a topic in popular imagination (the assassination of Abraham Lincoln by the coward John Wilkes Booth), in a way that illuminates which parts of the tale are true and which are urban legend. It's as educational as it is interesting, and Michael Kauffman does a phenomenal job of keeping the reader engaged throughout.
But for some reason, about a third of the way through, I set the book down. I did other stuff. I resisted picking it back up for weeks. I read a bunch of Wikipedia articles about John Wilkes Booth instead, and when I finally did pick American Brutus back up, I put it right back down after less than a page. I have no earthly idea why. Perhaps the sum is less than its parts?
This is a good book. Honest! It's well worth reading if you're interested. But there's something about it, man. I don't know. I just couldn't finish it.
It is a good book. Really, truly, it is. It's the perfect kind of non-fiction: it addresses a topic in popular imagination (the assassination of Abraham Lincoln by the coward John Wilkes Booth), in a way that illuminates which parts of the tale are true and which are urban legend. It's as educational as it is interesting, and Michael Kauffman does a phenomenal job of keeping the reader engaged throughout.
But for some reason, about a third of the way through, I set the book down. I did other stuff. I resisted picking it back up for weeks. I read a bunch of Wikipedia articles about John Wilkes Booth instead, and when I finally did pick American Brutus back up, I put it right back down after less than a page. I have no earthly idea why. Perhaps the sum is less than its parts?
This is a good book. Honest! It's well worth reading if you're interested. But there's something about it, man. I don't know. I just couldn't finish it.
May 24, 2011
There are questions that never will be answered about the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. But Michael Kauffman has done an admirable job of answering many and refuting some of the myths which have grown up about the subject.
He paints detailed word portraits of the many players, both major and minor, and vividly depicts the events leading up to the murderous attack on Lincoln, Seward and assorted innocent bystanders, the hunt for the conspirators, the shooting of Booth, the trial and hanging of other principals and the aftermath. The coda, which provides information on what happened later to some principals, was equally interesting.
I bought this book when it first came out and honestly can’t say why it took so long to get to it. With the anniversary of the Civil War upon us now it’s a timely reminder of the closing days of that tragic conflict and the wounds still not fully healed.
It’s exhausting just to read through the bibliography of Kauffman’s research, but his prose is lively and the narrative stirring and interesting.
He paints detailed word portraits of the many players, both major and minor, and vividly depicts the events leading up to the murderous attack on Lincoln, Seward and assorted innocent bystanders, the hunt for the conspirators, the shooting of Booth, the trial and hanging of other principals and the aftermath. The coda, which provides information on what happened later to some principals, was equally interesting.
I bought this book when it first came out and honestly can’t say why it took so long to get to it. With the anniversary of the Civil War upon us now it’s a timely reminder of the closing days of that tragic conflict and the wounds still not fully healed.
It’s exhausting just to read through the bibliography of Kauffman’s research, but his prose is lively and the narrative stirring and interesting.
May 2, 2008
Kauffman's American Brutus is really the leading account of the plot to assinate Abraham Lincoln. Having only been given a cursory understanding of Lincoln's assination as a student, I was surprised to learn that the assination of Lincoln was part of a much broader conspiracy to bring down the Federal Government. The book explores the details of the plot in excruciating detail, and offers a window into the minds of both the plotters, and their would be victims.
One of the defining themes revolved around Booth's belief that he would be heralded as a hero for his actions, and the internal struggle after the fact when a majority of Americans from both the Union and the Confederacy were outraged by booth's brutality.
This book is a must read for anyone interested in American History. The History Channel is running a 2 hour program that follows the chronological format laid out in the book. For best results, read the book, and then watch the show.
One of the defining themes revolved around Booth's belief that he would be heralded as a hero for his actions, and the internal struggle after the fact when a majority of Americans from both the Union and the Confederacy were outraged by booth's brutality.
This book is a must read for anyone interested in American History. The History Channel is running a 2 hour program that follows the chronological format laid out in the book. For best results, read the book, and then watch the show.
Read
February 5, 2009Calling Kauffman's research 'comprehensive' or 'exhaustive' would be an understatement; the author appears to know more about the conspiracy surrounding Lincoln's assassination than anyone else alive today. That knowledge, combined with his computer-generated timeline, allowed him to write what The New York Times describes as "a forensically precise" account. But this is no dry, scholarly volume. Kauffman's storytelling skill engages readers even though most already know the basics of the case; his ability to build suspense and weave in surprising new revelations keeps them turning the pages. That's undoubtedly why American Brutus wound up on many reviewers' best-books lists for 2004, and why historians will likely debate its conclusions for many years to come.
This is an excerpt from a review published in Bookmarks magazine.
December 20, 2020
A captivating and richly detailed account of one of America’s darkest events, American Brutus does an excellent job of immersing the reader in Booth’s plot to strike a truly devastating blow against the Union as the Confederacy was gasping for its last breaths. From the Presidential Box in Ford’s Theater to the barn on Garret’s Farm, Kauffman takes the reader along with Booth and Herold on their escape South into Virginia. Kauffman also does an excellent job of retracing the U.S. government’s quest for justice as they staged the largest manhunt in U.S. history, beginning in the back room of the Petersen House on the night of the assassination, and culminating with the trial of the conspirators in Washington DC from May to July 1865. This is a must read for anyone, historian or not, who wants to gain an in-depth understanding of Lincoln’s tragic assassination and the many individuals who played key roles within one of American history’s greatest dramas.
January 1, 2012
This is the story of the assassination of Abraham Lincoln by John Wilkes Booth. It is told in excruciating detail, the beginnings of the plot, the murder itself, Booth's escape and capture, and the trial of the co-conspirators. The narrative is lively and compelling. It gives a good picture of why Booth did what he did. He was a classically trained actor with an overdeveloped sense of drama and a deep loyalty to the south. He was also very savvy about implicating others in his plot to keep their silence. Much of the action occurs in southern Maryland, an area that was officially part of the union but sympathized with the south. This is where the escape occurred and also where much of the plot was hatched.
The narration was also lively and interesting.
The narration was also lively and interesting.
July 6, 2009
Detailed documentation of Booth. Included lots of details overlooked by other authors about activities and events surrounding the Lincoln assassination, kidnapping plot, and follow-up of participating conspirators and indirect-participants. It presents a theory that Booth didn’t break his leg in the theater jump, but instead on the horseback escape ride. The book has some slow parts in the middle, but a good start and finish. The book targets advanced-intermediate Lincoln assassinatin fans.
March 15, 2011
Michael W. Kaufmann has done a lot of due diligency in his research and it clearly shows in the finished work. He is meticulous and methodical, which only enhances the feeling that one were there with Booth and the conspirators. He is also dutiful in separating out fact from fiction. This was one of the best reads on the subject because of the depth of research that went into the work. I recommend this to anyone who is serious about taking on this subject.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 165 reviews