What do you think?
Rate this book
Ordeal of the Union #1
Ordeal of the Union, Vol. 1: Fruits of Manifest Destiny, 1847-1852
Classic study of how and why the Civil War came about.
Hardcover
First published January 1, 1947
11 people are currently reading
176 people want to read
About the author
Allan Nevins
490 books27 followersAllan Nevins was an American historian and journalist, renowned for his extensive work on the history of the Civil War and his biographies of such figures as President Grover Cleveland, Hamilton Fish, Henry Ford, and John D. Rockefeller.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
March 12, 2014
Originally published in 1947, this is an excellent example of the type of narrative history that was so popular years ago, even among professional historians who have now largely abandoned sweeping works like this to focus on much narrower topics. It is the first volume in Ordeal of the Union, Nevins' massive history of the United States from the close of the Mexican War in 1847 through the close of the Civil War eighteen years later.
The study would ultimately run to eight volumes, and as the title implies, this book covers the years between the United States victory over Mexico and 1852, ending before Nevins examines the presidential election of that year. In particular, Nevins is concerned here with the fallout of the Mexican War.
As a result of the war, the U.S. acquired a vast amount of territory from Mexico in California and the Southwest. The acquisition of that territory, in turn, reignited a bitter debate over the expansion of slavery. Most southerners insisted that they should have a right to carry their slaves into these new territories, and they hoped that they might create at least some new slave states there. Growing numbers of northerners though, acting from a complex variety of motivations, insisted that these new territories should be closed to slavery and that slavery should, in effect, be contained within its then-existing borders.
Nevins details the debate over these and other issues and then describes the development of the Compromise of 1850, which attempted to resolve the growing division between the two sections. He describes the way in which the Compromise was received in the North and in the South, and then completes the volume with three chapters devoted to the institution of slavery and the challenges that the institution created for Americans, black and white, of both sections. The final chapter describes a United States in 1852 that was ready to step out onto the world stage and take a larger role in world affairs. But would the nation first be able to put its own social and economic affairs in order?
As one would expect, some of Nevins' conclusions and observations have been modified by more recent research. In particular, the chapters on slavery seem dated, which is only natural given that the book is now nearly sixty years old. Still, it's a beautifully written book and, with some exceptions, it holds up very well as a detailed examination of the period in question and as the introduction to the volumes to follow.
The study would ultimately run to eight volumes, and as the title implies, this book covers the years between the United States victory over Mexico and 1852, ending before Nevins examines the presidential election of that year. In particular, Nevins is concerned here with the fallout of the Mexican War.
As a result of the war, the U.S. acquired a vast amount of territory from Mexico in California and the Southwest. The acquisition of that territory, in turn, reignited a bitter debate over the expansion of slavery. Most southerners insisted that they should have a right to carry their slaves into these new territories, and they hoped that they might create at least some new slave states there. Growing numbers of northerners though, acting from a complex variety of motivations, insisted that these new territories should be closed to slavery and that slavery should, in effect, be contained within its then-existing borders.
Nevins details the debate over these and other issues and then describes the development of the Compromise of 1850, which attempted to resolve the growing division between the two sections. He describes the way in which the Compromise was received in the North and in the South, and then completes the volume with three chapters devoted to the institution of slavery and the challenges that the institution created for Americans, black and white, of both sections. The final chapter describes a United States in 1852 that was ready to step out onto the world stage and take a larger role in world affairs. But would the nation first be able to put its own social and economic affairs in order?
As one would expect, some of Nevins' conclusions and observations have been modified by more recent research. In particular, the chapters on slavery seem dated, which is only natural given that the book is now nearly sixty years old. Still, it's a beautifully written book and, with some exceptions, it holds up very well as a detailed examination of the period in question and as the introduction to the volumes to follow.
Currently reading
January 5, 2011Reading my way through the magnificent Nevins' Ordeal of the Union and was struck by this paragraph" “Alongside the dominant traits of individualism, materialism, and optimism ran a fourth characteristic in which Americans took uncritical pride, their democracy. Few men paused to reflect that the four attributes were not wholly harmonious; that even in Jefferson’s day a conflict between equality and liberty had been visible. In both economic and political spheres, individualism and materialism were allying themselves to place fetters on democracy. Admiration of wealth, love of power, and the tradition of free economic enterprise led naturally to the growth of plutocracy” (p 51)
How little has changed, and now we seem to be revisiting South Carolina and the Nullification Crisis of 1832.
How little has changed, and now we seem to be revisiting South Carolina and the Nullification Crisis of 1832.
December 13, 2022
Well, I finally have gotten around to the most acclaimed multi-volume history of the Civil War Era, Allan Nevins' 8-volume epic published between the late 1940s and early 1970s. Intended to go ten volumes, Nevins died before he could publish the two volumes on Reconstruction. I was able to find the full 8-volume set at an affordable price in great condition on line, and am happy to report that the first edition in the series is as good as every notable Civil War historian has said in the footnotes of modern books.
For starters, this book is shockingly easy to read. While not a popular history, for a book written in 1947 the language is easy to parse and kept me engaged throughout. This was a book I had trouble putting down, as Nevins' skill of jumping between topics, eras, and fitting in colorful anecdotes works surprisingly well given his clean writing style and never too complicated vocabulary.
While the title gives a five-year period shortly after the Mexican-American War, this volume tends to jump around thematically, instead giving a broad introduction to American life in the decade preceding the Civil War. To be sure, the political events discussed are largely within the beginning of the 1850s, but the majority of the book is a broad discussion of the massive changes occurring within America, in all areas, after the war with Mexico.
First, we should appreciate the depth of research Nevins underwent for this volume. In an era before digital collections, the amount of traveling among libraries and reading he must have done is staggering. Given the footnotes, which are conveniently located on each page rather than in the back of the book, it seems he read every edition of the New York Tribune and National Intelligencer ever written, as well as dozens of smaller papers and thousands of letters from politicians far and wide. As this research allows for Nevins to diverge onto many different sub-topics, this is commendable.
The principal political issue of this period was what to do about the land acquired (I prefer "taken by force") from Mexico after the war. While slavery had always been a contentious issue, most Northerners were very racist and were content to allow slavery to continue within the South at risk of conflict. The addition of huge amounts of land after the war forced a renewal of sectional tension over whether the state of California and territories covering modern-day New Mexico, Utah, Nevada, Colorado, and Oregon should be closed off to slavery, open to slavery, or left open to the territorial governments. Not surprisingly, this led to plenty of fighting between North and South and even more in-fighting within the regional groups between compromisers and abolitionists in the North, and moderates and fire-eaters (those in favor of secession) in the South.
Nevins is himself a compromiser, a position that has not aged well in the decades since publication. In the preface, he opines that the Civil War was avoidable, a position that I think nobody outside of Lost Cause supporters would agree with in 2022. Throughout the chapters discussing sectional views on the territorial issue, the debates over the Compromise of 1850, and the sectional reactions after the passage of the compromise, Nevins clearly takes the position of men like Henry Clay and Daniel Webster, who were against slavery, but not enough to want to take any real action on it (in essence, the post-Jefferson era Jeffersons). Nevins has nothing but contempt for the abolitionists, a group he places in the same category as fire-breathing secessionists and writes about in an even more negative light because they had the audacity to ... demand that human chattel be liberated immediately without compensating those who used human beings as animals. Obviously, this has not aged well, but in 1947 this may have been a more common position, so in context, it is understandable. Still, it makes for some cringe-worthy passages throughout.
Luckily for us readers, Nevins' description of the struggles within the Zachary Taylor administration and the fight over the Compromise of 1850 manage to avoid any serious bias, and are as illuminating as any record of the Compromise as I have read. Normally, these types of scholarly histories get bogged down in superfluous voting statistics and records on congressional debating, but Nevins is more interested in the why rather than the what. Rather than obsess over what Clay and Webster and John C. Calhoun said on the Senate floor, his intention is to discuss why each of their words were received in different ways among different groups. To date there has yet to be a strong Taylor biography; it is unfortunate that Nevins never wrote one, as his discussion of the infighting within the administration, and Taylor's own evolution from political afterthought to someone drunk on power is extremely well-done. The two chapters discussing the reaction to the compromise from both the north and south are two of the best parts of the book. In sum, the political sections of this volume are very strong, much more so than I expected given when the book was written.
A good portion of this volume, though, is dedicated to a dissection of America as a nation entering the 1850s. This is where the books gets less chronological and more thematic and as a result can be somewhat hard to follow. Many topics are discussed, from literature and publishing, to the drudgery of city life, poverty, and prostitution. Some parts are more interesting than others, but the delightful anecdotes sprinkled throughout give the reader a strong sense of where Americans stood in 1850. Beyond this, Nevins discusses the many reform movements that began to develop more and more as the politicians began to debate slavery more and more at a national stage. As the book continues, Nevins begins to tie these two discussions of America together.
Where this book hits a snag, and the reason I cannot give it 5 stars, is the last 150 or so pages on slavery. Perhaps unsurprisingly, this section has aged very poorly and is difficult to read without wanting to scream at Nevins for his completely illogical conclusions and misplaced sympathies. In a chapter of over 50 pages entitled "The Lot of the Bondsman", Nevins largely spends this time lamenting the lot of the slaveowner, making sure to justify every abuse of power by these owners with anecdotes on some planters that maybe didn't whip their slaves quite as much. While he is certainly no fan of slavery, Nevins goes as far to say that abolition would be more helpful to the white man than to the slave himself, and spends an entire chapter showing pity for slaveowners whose investments in human beings sent them into poverty. Several times he makes clear that he sees black people, at least black people in the 19th century, as the "inferior race" that needed "education" from white people. At one point, he goes into a rant about abolitionists not choosing to take black people out of slavery and house them in the North, which reads like the early inspiration for Tucker Carlson rants about Hispanic immigration.
These chapters are not without their benefits, though. Nevins' thesis on how the real justifications behind slavery lay in terms of race relations are deftly navigated and supported, and his sections on family separations, prosecutions under the fugitive slave act, and the plight of free blacks in both the North and South is heartbreaking (a topic discussed even further in Leon Litwack's terrific North of Slavery: The Negro in the Free States). Given the time period and Nevins' background (born in the 19th century to a religious household), some of this can be forgiven, but it is an unfortunate ending to a terrific start to the series. I eagerly await eating up the remaining seven volumes.
For starters, this book is shockingly easy to read. While not a popular history, for a book written in 1947 the language is easy to parse and kept me engaged throughout. This was a book I had trouble putting down, as Nevins' skill of jumping between topics, eras, and fitting in colorful anecdotes works surprisingly well given his clean writing style and never too complicated vocabulary.
While the title gives a five-year period shortly after the Mexican-American War, this volume tends to jump around thematically, instead giving a broad introduction to American life in the decade preceding the Civil War. To be sure, the political events discussed are largely within the beginning of the 1850s, but the majority of the book is a broad discussion of the massive changes occurring within America, in all areas, after the war with Mexico.
First, we should appreciate the depth of research Nevins underwent for this volume. In an era before digital collections, the amount of traveling among libraries and reading he must have done is staggering. Given the footnotes, which are conveniently located on each page rather than in the back of the book, it seems he read every edition of the New York Tribune and National Intelligencer ever written, as well as dozens of smaller papers and thousands of letters from politicians far and wide. As this research allows for Nevins to diverge onto many different sub-topics, this is commendable.
The principal political issue of this period was what to do about the land acquired (I prefer "taken by force") from Mexico after the war. While slavery had always been a contentious issue, most Northerners were very racist and were content to allow slavery to continue within the South at risk of conflict. The addition of huge amounts of land after the war forced a renewal of sectional tension over whether the state of California and territories covering modern-day New Mexico, Utah, Nevada, Colorado, and Oregon should be closed off to slavery, open to slavery, or left open to the territorial governments. Not surprisingly, this led to plenty of fighting between North and South and even more in-fighting within the regional groups between compromisers and abolitionists in the North, and moderates and fire-eaters (those in favor of secession) in the South.
Nevins is himself a compromiser, a position that has not aged well in the decades since publication. In the preface, he opines that the Civil War was avoidable, a position that I think nobody outside of Lost Cause supporters would agree with in 2022. Throughout the chapters discussing sectional views on the territorial issue, the debates over the Compromise of 1850, and the sectional reactions after the passage of the compromise, Nevins clearly takes the position of men like Henry Clay and Daniel Webster, who were against slavery, but not enough to want to take any real action on it (in essence, the post-Jefferson era Jeffersons). Nevins has nothing but contempt for the abolitionists, a group he places in the same category as fire-breathing secessionists and writes about in an even more negative light because they had the audacity to ... demand that human chattel be liberated immediately without compensating those who used human beings as animals. Obviously, this has not aged well, but in 1947 this may have been a more common position, so in context, it is understandable. Still, it makes for some cringe-worthy passages throughout.
Luckily for us readers, Nevins' description of the struggles within the Zachary Taylor administration and the fight over the Compromise of 1850 manage to avoid any serious bias, and are as illuminating as any record of the Compromise as I have read. Normally, these types of scholarly histories get bogged down in superfluous voting statistics and records on congressional debating, but Nevins is more interested in the why rather than the what. Rather than obsess over what Clay and Webster and John C. Calhoun said on the Senate floor, his intention is to discuss why each of their words were received in different ways among different groups. To date there has yet to be a strong Taylor biography; it is unfortunate that Nevins never wrote one, as his discussion of the infighting within the administration, and Taylor's own evolution from political afterthought to someone drunk on power is extremely well-done. The two chapters discussing the reaction to the compromise from both the north and south are two of the best parts of the book. In sum, the political sections of this volume are very strong, much more so than I expected given when the book was written.
A good portion of this volume, though, is dedicated to a dissection of America as a nation entering the 1850s. This is where the books gets less chronological and more thematic and as a result can be somewhat hard to follow. Many topics are discussed, from literature and publishing, to the drudgery of city life, poverty, and prostitution. Some parts are more interesting than others, but the delightful anecdotes sprinkled throughout give the reader a strong sense of where Americans stood in 1850. Beyond this, Nevins discusses the many reform movements that began to develop more and more as the politicians began to debate slavery more and more at a national stage. As the book continues, Nevins begins to tie these two discussions of America together.
Where this book hits a snag, and the reason I cannot give it 5 stars, is the last 150 or so pages on slavery. Perhaps unsurprisingly, this section has aged very poorly and is difficult to read without wanting to scream at Nevins for his completely illogical conclusions and misplaced sympathies. In a chapter of over 50 pages entitled "The Lot of the Bondsman", Nevins largely spends this time lamenting the lot of the slaveowner, making sure to justify every abuse of power by these owners with anecdotes on some planters that maybe didn't whip their slaves quite as much. While he is certainly no fan of slavery, Nevins goes as far to say that abolition would be more helpful to the white man than to the slave himself, and spends an entire chapter showing pity for slaveowners whose investments in human beings sent them into poverty. Several times he makes clear that he sees black people, at least black people in the 19th century, as the "inferior race" that needed "education" from white people. At one point, he goes into a rant about abolitionists not choosing to take black people out of slavery and house them in the North, which reads like the early inspiration for Tucker Carlson rants about Hispanic immigration.
These chapters are not without their benefits, though. Nevins' thesis on how the real justifications behind slavery lay in terms of race relations are deftly navigated and supported, and his sections on family separations, prosecutions under the fugitive slave act, and the plight of free blacks in both the North and South is heartbreaking (a topic discussed even further in Leon Litwack's terrific North of Slavery: The Negro in the Free States). Given the time period and Nevins' background (born in the 19th century to a religious household), some of this can be forgiven, but it is an unfortunate ending to a terrific start to the series. I eagerly await eating up the remaining seven volumes.
March 8, 2022
No less an authority than James M. McPherson has named Allan Nevins’s eight-volume Ordeal of the Union as the best history of the American Civil War. In this first volume, Nevins begins the story with the Mexican War, which added vast areas of land to the United States. Immediately there was controversy on whether slavery should be permitted to expand into this new territory. The centerpiece of the book is the Compromise of 1850, whose proponents believed they had narrowly avoided civil war and settled the question for good.
Many elements of this book are amazingly good, but I also found a number of things troubling. Chief among them was Nevins’s handling of Black people. He paints a quite unsentimental view of the institution of slavery, yet he tends to show more sympathy for the slave owners than for the enslaved. At one point he suggests that the slave system was worse for white people than for Black people! And then this passage was beyond the pale for me: “Slavery, and still more the general contact of whites and blacks whether inside or outside slavery, were steadily if slowly and unevenly raising the Negro toward the cultural level of the more highly developed race. For in one aspect slavery was a school, a channel of education. From the moment they were landed in America, the Negroes in some fashion, and usually in many, were under the tuition of the dominant race. They learned something of a new, more flexible, and more exacting language, of a nobler religion, of a routine of steady industry, and of complex skills” (page 535). There are so many things wrong here that I can’t enumerate them all.
Less offensively, Nevins also implies in his introduction that both the Civil War and World War II could have been avoided if only the sides had been willing to compromise. There are times when compromise is impossible and immoral. The evils of slavery and the Final Solution are two such cases. But Nevins groups the abolitionists of the period covered by this book with the firebrand advocates of slavery. His heroes are the compromisers, men like Henry Clay and Daniel Webster, who are willing to give in to demand after demand from the Southerners.
Those are my reservations about this book. But I must praise the quality of Nevins’s research and synthesis of vast quantities of material. He has seemingly read every newspaper and gone through every historical figure’s papers and correspondence. The amount of work that went into this tome, let alone the remaining seven volumes of this series, is mind-boggling.
Thanks to this book I now have a much better grasp of the personalities and historical currents of this period. I look forward to the rest of the series but hope that Nevins grows more enlightened as he goes forward.
Many elements of this book are amazingly good, but I also found a number of things troubling. Chief among them was Nevins’s handling of Black people. He paints a quite unsentimental view of the institution of slavery, yet he tends to show more sympathy for the slave owners than for the enslaved. At one point he suggests that the slave system was worse for white people than for Black people! And then this passage was beyond the pale for me: “Slavery, and still more the general contact of whites and blacks whether inside or outside slavery, were steadily if slowly and unevenly raising the Negro toward the cultural level of the more highly developed race. For in one aspect slavery was a school, a channel of education. From the moment they were landed in America, the Negroes in some fashion, and usually in many, were under the tuition of the dominant race. They learned something of a new, more flexible, and more exacting language, of a nobler religion, of a routine of steady industry, and of complex skills” (page 535). There are so many things wrong here that I can’t enumerate them all.
Less offensively, Nevins also implies in his introduction that both the Civil War and World War II could have been avoided if only the sides had been willing to compromise. There are times when compromise is impossible and immoral. The evils of slavery and the Final Solution are two such cases. But Nevins groups the abolitionists of the period covered by this book with the firebrand advocates of slavery. His heroes are the compromisers, men like Henry Clay and Daniel Webster, who are willing to give in to demand after demand from the Southerners.
Those are my reservations about this book. But I must praise the quality of Nevins’s research and synthesis of vast quantities of material. He has seemingly read every newspaper and gone through every historical figure’s papers and correspondence. The amount of work that went into this tome, let alone the remaining seven volumes of this series, is mind-boggling.
Thanks to this book I now have a much better grasp of the personalities and historical currents of this period. I look forward to the rest of the series but hope that Nevins grows more enlightened as he goes forward.
September 21, 2023
The breadth and depth of knowledge that Nevins puts into this volume is truly unbelievable. The coverage is encyclopedic and its mind-boggling that this work was accomplished using mostly primary sources in a time long before the internet. I stopped numerous times while reading to just marvel at the sheer comprehensiveness of the work. The prose can be a little dry at times but that's to be expected with a work of this size and scope and doesn't detract from how incredible of a survey it is
October 4, 2025
Allan Nevins wrote the eight volume Ordeal of the Union over a roughly 30 year period, along with other books and articles. The first volume was published in 1947. The last two volumes were published in 1971, the year of Nevins' death. The series was intended to cover the history of the United States from the aftermath of the Mexican American war in 1847 to the end of the post Civil War reconstruction. Unfortunately, Nevins died before he could complete the series and he was only able to cover up to the end of 1865, the year the Civil War ended.
The first volume, Ordeal of the Union: Fruits of Manifest Destiny, 1847–1852, is for the most part the history of the Compromise of 1850. The Mexican-American War added a huge area to the United States and raised the question of whether to allow slavery in the conquered territories. In 1850, there were heated debates how the issue should be resolved. Pro-slavery advocates in the south seriously considered secession.
The three most influential members in the United States government were Secretary of State Daniel Webster (a former senator from Massachusetts), Senator Henry Clay (from Kentucky, a border state) and Senator John C. Calhoun (of South Carolina). All three were involved in government for decades, and were of advanced age. Calhoun, a Democrat, was the leader of the pro-slavery faction and supported leaving the Union if the expansion of slavery was not permitted. Clay came up with a compromise, Webster supported him. Both were Whigs. Calhoun was implacably opposed. Calhoun died, so his side lost momentum. With Webster's help and President Millard Fillmore's support, Clay's compromise passed, and it was thought that the crisis was averted.
Ordeal of the Union: Fruits of Manifest Destiny, 1847–1852 sets the stage for the seven volumes to follow. While the Compromise of 1850 preserved the union for a time, opposition to the institution of slavery was building beneath the surface, and would grow during the coming decade.
One group in particular was stirring the pot. The Abolitionists were uncompromising in their opposition to slavery. They agitated for immediate emancipation without compensation to slaveowners. Both the Whig and Democratic parties (the Republican Party did not exist yet) viewed the Abolitionists as dangerous radicals. Southerners feared the Abolitionists because they were a threat to their economy and property. The Whig party resented their influence because they made southerners less trusting of the go-along-to-get-along Whigs, making compromise more difficult. Although Whigs opposed the expansion of slavery into the newly acquired territories, they were willing to tolerate slavery where it already existed if it would preserve the union. Originally, the Abolitionists were an unpopular fringe movement, but their influence began to grow during this era. The publication of Harriet Beecher Stowe's novel Uncle Tom's Cabin stoked the controversy.
The Compromise of 1850 is not the only subject covered in this volume. Nevins gives us a portrait of the America of that time. What was America like in the aftermath of the Mexican-American war? What were Americans like? There are a couple of chapters that cover the domestic and political lives of average Americans. There are also several long chapters on slavery. How did slaves live? Was slavery really profitable? What were the attitudes of northerners and southerners toward slaves and free blacks? Nevins discusses all of these subjects at great length.
Ordeal of the Union: Fruits of Manifest Destiny, 1847–1852 is not as easy a read as most popular histories. Since it is part of an eight volume series and covers only a five year period, it goes into great detail in its almost 600 pages. Personally, I like this type of in depth coverage. It speaks well of Nevins writing ability that his book was never tedious. If you like history this book will satisfy. It is essential reading for Civil War aficionados.
The first volume, Ordeal of the Union: Fruits of Manifest Destiny, 1847–1852, is for the most part the history of the Compromise of 1850. The Mexican-American War added a huge area to the United States and raised the question of whether to allow slavery in the conquered territories. In 1850, there were heated debates how the issue should be resolved. Pro-slavery advocates in the south seriously considered secession.
The three most influential members in the United States government were Secretary of State Daniel Webster (a former senator from Massachusetts), Senator Henry Clay (from Kentucky, a border state) and Senator John C. Calhoun (of South Carolina). All three were involved in government for decades, and were of advanced age. Calhoun, a Democrat, was the leader of the pro-slavery faction and supported leaving the Union if the expansion of slavery was not permitted. Clay came up with a compromise, Webster supported him. Both were Whigs. Calhoun was implacably opposed. Calhoun died, so his side lost momentum. With Webster's help and President Millard Fillmore's support, Clay's compromise passed, and it was thought that the crisis was averted.
Ordeal of the Union: Fruits of Manifest Destiny, 1847–1852 sets the stage for the seven volumes to follow. While the Compromise of 1850 preserved the union for a time, opposition to the institution of slavery was building beneath the surface, and would grow during the coming decade.
One group in particular was stirring the pot. The Abolitionists were uncompromising in their opposition to slavery. They agitated for immediate emancipation without compensation to slaveowners. Both the Whig and Democratic parties (the Republican Party did not exist yet) viewed the Abolitionists as dangerous radicals. Southerners feared the Abolitionists because they were a threat to their economy and property. The Whig party resented their influence because they made southerners less trusting of the go-along-to-get-along Whigs, making compromise more difficult. Although Whigs opposed the expansion of slavery into the newly acquired territories, they were willing to tolerate slavery where it already existed if it would preserve the union. Originally, the Abolitionists were an unpopular fringe movement, but their influence began to grow during this era. The publication of Harriet Beecher Stowe's novel Uncle Tom's Cabin stoked the controversy.
The Compromise of 1850 is not the only subject covered in this volume. Nevins gives us a portrait of the America of that time. What was America like in the aftermath of the Mexican-American war? What were Americans like? There are a couple of chapters that cover the domestic and political lives of average Americans. There are also several long chapters on slavery. How did slaves live? Was slavery really profitable? What were the attitudes of northerners and southerners toward slaves and free blacks? Nevins discusses all of these subjects at great length.
Ordeal of the Union: Fruits of Manifest Destiny, 1847–1852 is not as easy a read as most popular histories. Since it is part of an eight volume series and covers only a five year period, it goes into great detail in its almost 600 pages. Personally, I like this type of in depth coverage. It speaks well of Nevins writing ability that his book was never tedious. If you like history this book will satisfy. It is essential reading for Civil War aficionados.
April 17, 2025
The aftermath of a unpopular though very successful war suddenly put two sections of the victors against one another in arguments so serious that it could cause civil war, this is the United States after the Mexican-American War. Ordeal of the Union, Volume One: Fruits of Manifest Destiny, 1847-1852 is the first of Allan Nevins’ eight volume series on the lead up to and of the American Civil War with the focus being on the search for a compromise.
This book featured Nevins revealing to the reader various themes that interact with one another politically, economically, socially, and culturally. Nevins political analysis focused on how weak executives (Polk successful in war but unable to control the fallout of victory, Taylor unable to work with others, and Fillmore an accidental President) and a House of Representatives in chaos demanded the Senate to come up with a compromise to prevent the unraveling the country. Nevins looked how each section of the country—North and South—viewed slavery and treated African Americans along with how the two were economically situated in the early 1850s. Throughout the book, it became clear that many Southerners who preached secession were lying to themselves about the prospects of an independent South and given the 1947 publication date, this was definitely not a “Lost Cause” book. Now that I have brought up when this book came out, there is some word usage that today wouldn’t be used obviously and while it doesn’t need a “trigger warning” one needs to be mindful that different eras had different conventions. Overall, Fruits of Manifest Destiny was a fitting title as Nevins revealed the sweet richness of the new territory acquired from Mexico but the bitterness of the sectional divide that it caused while comparing and contrasting the two sections verbally battling on how to politically and economically organize it.
Ordeal of the Union, Volume One vividly portrays the political tumult of the aftermath of the war with Mexico and Allan Nevins describes it wonderfully while also giving the reader an in-depth overviews of each section of the nation at the beginning of the 1850s.
This book featured Nevins revealing to the reader various themes that interact with one another politically, economically, socially, and culturally. Nevins political analysis focused on how weak executives (Polk successful in war but unable to control the fallout of victory, Taylor unable to work with others, and Fillmore an accidental President) and a House of Representatives in chaos demanded the Senate to come up with a compromise to prevent the unraveling the country. Nevins looked how each section of the country—North and South—viewed slavery and treated African Americans along with how the two were economically situated in the early 1850s. Throughout the book, it became clear that many Southerners who preached secession were lying to themselves about the prospects of an independent South and given the 1947 publication date, this was definitely not a “Lost Cause” book. Now that I have brought up when this book came out, there is some word usage that today wouldn’t be used obviously and while it doesn’t need a “trigger warning” one needs to be mindful that different eras had different conventions. Overall, Fruits of Manifest Destiny was a fitting title as Nevins revealed the sweet richness of the new territory acquired from Mexico but the bitterness of the sectional divide that it caused while comparing and contrasting the two sections verbally battling on how to politically and economically organize it.
Ordeal of the Union, Volume One vividly portrays the political tumult of the aftermath of the war with Mexico and Allan Nevins describes it wonderfully while also giving the reader an in-depth overviews of each section of the nation at the beginning of the 1850s.
May 18, 2018
The first volume of Allan Nevins 8 volume history of the Civil War and the crises that preceded it. This volume is a detailed account of the aftermath of the Mexican War and the debate over whether the resulting new territories would be free or slave. It also has a detailed account of the Compromise of 1850, as well as a discussion of the effects of slavery on the South’s economy and on the slaves.
August 10, 2022
After many years, decided to reread Nevins' 6 volume history of the civil war. This first volume is likely the driest and most difficult to get through. First couple hundred pages deals with antebellum society and what life was like for northeners and southerners alike, rich and poor. Then more into the personalities of various political characters, which is what I like the best
March 19, 2022
Still the best antebellum history.
June 11, 2022
For the book published in 1947, the first volume of "Ordeal of the Union" definitely passed the test of time. Using a vast number of primary sources (newspapers, letters, books of that period) Allan Nevins created a masterpiece which begs you to binge-read it. Of course, some of his conclusions (especially chapters about slavery vs. free labor, South vs. North) may seem outdated and, perhaps, controversial to a modern reader, they still invite you to ponder over how America was slowly drifting toward the Civil War and what could be done to avoid it.
June 25, 2025
Extremely detailed coverage of a crucial time in American history.
January 3, 2026
Ponderous
March 12, 2021
The four volumes in the Ordeal of the Union series make up the classic study of how and why the Civil War came. No one has done a better overview than this. Nevins has written a further four volumes on the war itself, but modern scholarship has surpassed him there. However, the Ordeal books still hold first place for the pre-war period.
Available at Open Library: https://openlibrary.org/works/OL83107...
Available at Open Library: https://openlibrary.org/works/OL83107...
September 5, 2014
Well written and informative.
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews