I've enjoyed several of Larson's books and was quick to pick up this one. Since I've spent the last couple of years studying the era between America's Revolution and Civil War, this seemed right up my alley. Unfortunately, it was a meandering narrative that didn't satisfactorily explain how Americans ended up fighting a horrific bloody war or add to the library of Civil War knowledge already available.

I found it extraordinarily off-putting that Larson began with a comparison of the Civil War to January 6, 2021. Forget that this isn't even the worst event that has happened in Washington DC, it certainly cannot compare to a war that killed hundreds of thousands of people and completely changed the social, economic, & political landscape of the country.

Larson tells most of the story through the eyes of Southerners, who seem specifically selected to prop up the charge that all Southerners were vain, immoral, and violent. Clearly, enough of them were that this war occurred, but still, the narrative was odd and didn't include any voices that one might expect, such as that of the enslaved, abolitionists, Southern unionists, or anyone that wasn't a slaveholder. Mary Chestnut's vapid diary adds little to the story, but we get to hear it rather than the testimony of any black American, such as Frederick Douglass or Harriett Jacobs, or even an abolitionist like Charles Sumner (his caning is mentioned but not his ongoing fight for civil rights).

And if the author called Southerners "The Chivalry" one more time . . . .

This volume just can't compare to fantastic works like James McPherson's Battle Cry of Freedom. (I also recommend What Hath God Wrought by Daniel Walker Howe that goes back even further, demonstrating how deep the roots of Civil War issues really were.) I suppose some readers may enjoy some of the minutiae that is Larson's trademark, but I don't think the average reader will gain any greater understanding of the Civil War and the failures that led to it.

Mr. Larson has a gift in telling an historical story that you know how it's going to end, but he allows the drama of it unfold in such a way that you still enjoy the journey. As a long time student of this Era I still found out factual tidbits throughout. Like all of his book his method of shorter chapters allows for the story to unfold.

This was a great book! I very much enjoyed it and I look forward to reading the author’s next work! Thanks to NetGalley for the review copy.

In The Demon of Unrest, Erik Larson chronicles the lead up to the American Civil War through his trademark narrative style that makes nonfiction feel like fiction. He begins the book with Lincoln’s election and, using diaries, letters, and other first person accounts, takes you through all the decisions (and non-decisions) that lead to the shelling of Sumter (or as Lincoln would write: Sumpter) and the start of the Civil War. There is no lack of personal and political drama, making this such a compelling read.

I really, really enjoyed The Demon of Unrest! I am personally a big fan of Erik Larson’s style of writing, and I think he is fantastic at choosing people and events to focus on; this book is no exception. I’m very picky about nonfiction books—I am no longer a student and would love to never pick up another textbook if I can manage it. Never once does Demon read as dry as a textbook; it had me captivated the whole time.

Anyone in close vicinity to me while I was reading Demon was forced to hear a line or two (or five) that I found particularly interesting (martial drama, terrible truths, near-misses, and famous people before they were famous were usually my favorite moments (I’m looking at you, Edgar Allan Poe)). Terrible facts of that time period are mentioned and explained with grace; I think Larson handled all the topics respectfully and while I might have been outraged at the fact itself, never was I upset with Larson’s input.

I recommend The Demon of Unrest to anyone looking to get into nonfiction or wanting to learn more about the lead up to the Civil War. Larson’s writing is really accessible; it’s easy to follow and he often will remind you of why someone is important or if they have already been mentioned (this is really great if you have a hard time remembering names!). I’ve already recommended this to a ton of folks on my bus, so here’s me telling you: read it!

Thank you to Crown Publishing and Netgalley for an advanced copy in exchange for an honest review.

Erik Larson has a talent for making history interesting. The Demon of Unrest is a deep dive into a niche event from history and unloads fascinating facts. Larson brings to life the start of the Civil War, the first shots at Fort Sumter, and President Lincoln’s election.

Thank you NetGalley and Crown Publishing for the advanced digital copy in exchange for an honest review.
#TheDemonofUnrest #NetGalley

Erik Larson takes history and turns it into what reads like page-turning fiction. This is a very interesting examination of the circumstances and events that led up the assault on Fort Sumter that marked the first battle of the American Civil War. Note, this is not a book that examines all of the variables that led to Civil War, but a very focused look at the last months of the failed Buchannan Presidency and the eventual election of Abraham Lincoln which became the final push that led to the secession of South Carolina and other Confederate States.

Larson takes the reader on a timeline that jumps between Washington, DC, Fort Sumter, Montgomery, Alabama, and other locations for the months leading up to and just following the beginning of the Civil War. Aside from the main principals we are introduced to a number of interesting figures lost to history books that played their own role in the time period, like Major Robert Anderson, the young Union commander of Ft. Sumter; Edmund Ruffin, the man credited with firing the first cannon who long advocated secession from the Union; William Seward, Lincoln's Secretary of State who considers himself President and tries to undermine Lincoln early in his Presidency; and Mary Chestnut, the wife of a Senator and a chronicler of daily activities and observations in her diary.

Civil War was inevitable, but was egged on by miscommunication, policy errors, lies, and deceit. Larson gives the reader the full story of Fort Sumter and its pivotal role in history.

My thanks to the author, publisher and NetGalley for the opportunity to review an ARC of this book. I attest my review is original and unbiased.

Erik Larson never misses. Each book he writes transports you to the time period he covers, and this book was no exception.

Once again Larson has done an outstanding job giving us a history lesson, this time of the buildup to the civil war, that is engaging throughout. I will always read whatever he puts out and would definitely recommend all of his work to include this latest effort. Thank you to the publisher for providing me with this drc available through netgalley.

a gripping glimpse of history. I found this tale of civil war to not bore me to death like some historical fiction and non-fiction. Erik Larson is an accomplished writer

Disclaimer: I received an ARC via Netgalley.

Lars0n’s latest details the build up to and attack on Fort Sumter, the start of the American Civil War. Perhaps it is surprising that Larsen has not addressed the American Civil War before. He states in his introduction that he was partially inspired by viewing the January 6th assault on the Capital Building.
Larson does an excellent job of describing the politics and conflict that leads up to the succession of various states as well as the firing on the Fort itself. He captures the conflicting views and desires of the various soldiers in the fort itself. Like most of Larsen’s work the book is gripping at times, if at others perhaps a little overloaded. It is still by and large a good read.
There is a huge hole, issue, something wrong with the book. Part of it is because of Larson’s style. He has always s been the type of non0fction writer to let his subjects hoist themselves with their own petard. In many cases, this is a very effective technique. The hands-off approach allows the reader to reach their own conclusions without them deciding to be contradictory. And letting someone’s own word damn them is far more effective than saying they are bad.
Yet, in some cases it does not work well. As is the case here.
While it is true that the book’s focus is on the lead up to Sumter, it is at best strange that a book dealing with a war fought over slavery does not really include the voices of the enslaved. Yes, the book is focused on those men that pushed or pulled either way. None of those was enslaved. Yet, if you are going to present life on the plantation in discussing the South, why are you by and large, only including the voices of those who owned slaves? Larson doesn’t disguise the fact that slavery was horrible, and there is a section that highlights the selling of a child, but for the most part, the voices speaking about slavery and the viewpoint used to describe are those of white people. Let me be clear, Larson does refer to the beatings and killing of the enslaved population, but there is (or there seems to be) more about how the owners feared their slaves then how the enslaved themselves thought or what they experienced. There are quotes, usually about when someone decided to escape, and reference to the Crofts, Henry Box Brown, and others. The balance is strange.
This strangeness this is compounded when Larsen relates what Mary Chestnut felt when she saw a slave auction. Chestnut was at the wife of a politician who was close to Jefferson Davis, and was the South. She owned people, in short. Her voice is the predominant female one in the book (not the only one, but almost the only one). Larson relates how when Chestnut saw an auction featuring enslaved women she thought about how women in general are treated badly (basically likening marriage to a form of slavery). Larson is no doubt using it to show how Chestnut stopped herself from thinking fully about the morals of what she saw or to show the hypocrisy of Chestnut, yet when I was reading that section, I was wondering why reference and the words of Harriet Jacobs weren’t included here.
It was something I also wondered when at various points when Larson wrote about James Hammond, the man who coined “cotton is king” and whom was a rapist. Larson writes that Hammond took as a mistresses an enslaved woman and her daughter. Later in the book, they are referred to as his lovers. The terms used in both cases is more than a bit problematic to say the least. Undoubtedly the voices of the two enslaved women, Sally and Louisa, have been lost, if they were ever recorded, but again, why not quote Harriet Jacobs so a reader can get a view of enslaved woman and the limited choice, if that is the term, they had. Why not discuss Dr. Annette Gordon-Reeds piece on Sally Hemmings and how to talk how her relationship with Jefferson? Yes, those woman had different experiences but they would give far more context and relevance then using the terms “mistress” and “lover” to describe two women who did not have the option to say no without risking bodily harm or death.
And apparently Hammond sexually assaulted/abused his four nieces. Larson quotes extensively from Hammond about this incident, and Hammond’s thoughts about the can be summed up thusly “those young girls tempted me so much that I, a married godly man, just had to give in”. The voices of the victims are not included, undoubtedly because they have been lost.
The problem with both the lack of enslaved and niece voices is that it – unintentionally I am sure – feeds into the idea/belief/stupidity that many people have of slavery not being that bad or that a woman is really asking for it. I don’t think Larson feels that way, and a quick look at some reviews shows that a number of right leaning people are refusing to read this book because of his liberal tweets (I have no idea about his politics to be honest). But the lack of those voices stands out and weakens the book.

My sincere thanks to NetGalley and Crown Publishers for the ARC. Erik Larson returns with another wonderful, detailed and moving look at a consequential moment in the history of our country. Larson’s prose comes alive, making for an enthralling read. Can’t recommend this enough.

Erik Larson is a wonderful writer and terrific historian. The story was interesting and the writing, excellent as always.

Erik Larson’s latest title, The Demon of Unrest, captures the period of time between Lincoln’s election and the start of the Civil War.

Told over five months in 1860, the story focuses on the battle for Fort Sumter in Charlestown. Larson expertly captures the conflict among soldiers who feel loyalty to the Union yet are sympathetic to the South. As states seceed from the Union, Lincoln’s frustration and powerlessness are captured via personal diaries and correspondence.

Larson captures this period in history expertly while focusing on the critical battle and importance of Fort Sumter. History buffs and Civil War fans will want to pick up this title.

While I thought the idea of this book was interesting, drawing parallels between the onset of the Civil War and Jan 6, I thought the execution was meh. As always, Mr Larson's books are meticulously researched. Usually the narrative flows a little bit more. This was much more of a challenging read compared to some of his past books (The Devil in the White City and The Splendid and the Vile come to mind). I think this is for Civil War junkies only. Definitely not my favorite Larson book.

Thank you to NetGalley and Crown Publishing for the ARC!

I loved this book and although I haven’t read any of his other books before this is definitely going to send me down that rabbit hole. An engaging history of the events leading up to the Civil War, with lots of personality added from diaries and letters. Highly recommend for history lovers or those just interested in learning.

Erik Larson is one of my go-to nonfiction authors; when I see he has a new book out, I'm always interested. This interest began with "The Devil in the White City," which is still my favorite of his. He has a way of making history come alive in a fascinating way. His latest is "The Demon of Unrest: A Saga of Hubris, Heartbreak, and Heroism at the Dawn of the Civil War."

The book covers the months prior to the firing on Ft Sumter, which began the Civil War. During those six months, Lincoln was elected President for the first time and was inaugurated (which happened in March, at that time). Can Larson write a dull book? Sadly (for me at least), this book proves that the answer to that is yes. There was just so much talk of technicalities of various boats and battery, many MANY characters, etc. I kept reading, hoping it would improve, but for me, it really didn't. The writing is good, but I kept thinking, "This is a guys' book." I think Civil War junkies will no doubt enjoy all this minutiae.

Still, I found interesting bits:

The title comes from a letter written at the time by a professor: "When commerce, manufacturers, the mechanic arts disturbed this condition of things, and amassed wealth that could pretend to more lavish luxury than planting, then came in, I fear, this demon of unrest which has been the utmost sole disturber of the land for years past."

This isn't an objective account, and Larson is clearly negative on the South, particularly South Carolina. I can't think residents of that state will be too fond of the book. Larson compares South Carolina to Miss Havisham in "Great Expectations" ("the perfect embodiment of South Carolina ... she retired from the world, stopped her clocks, wore her wedding dress forever, and even left her nuptial feast in place, rotting on the table." Also references to "South Carolina, a state known for erratic judgment ..." and "South Carolina's radical reputation."

It's always interesting (to me, at least) to read about ideas on the origins of the Civil War. School always teaches that it was all about slavery. My husband is convinced it was mainly over states' rights. Larson falls largely on the slavery side, although he talks some about southerners feeling their honor and pride were hurt by the north's condemnation of slavery (and therefore, southerners in general) as fundamentally evil. He also discusses "cotton is king" and the idea that they felt a lack of cotton could bring the North to its knees.

I often think that Abraham Lincoln must have been a bit of an odd character when seen or talked to in person. That's based not just on this book but others I've read on him. Here we read about his "oddly high-pitched laugh" which he exhibited before saying, "Just think of such a sucker as me as President!" Indeed, Secretary of State Seward and others expressed some shock that such an unrefined character as Lincoln became President rather than more expected types, such as them. A speech of Lincoln's also made me cringe with its big federal power tones: "All the power at my disposal will be used to reclaim the public property and places which have fallen; to hold, occupy, and possess these, and all other property and places belonging to the government, and to collect the duties on imports ..."

President Buchanan, who was in power prior to Lincoln, was thrilled to leave the White House, which seems totally understandable given the country's angst at the time. "If you are as happy, my dear sir, on entering the house as I am in leaving it and returning home, you are the happiest man in this country," he told Lincoln as he left. Often in recent months I've wondered who would honestly WANT to be US President now, with our country in such a mess.

I read a lot about cockades and learned what they are: basically the little rosettes you see now usually on ribbons. At the time, apparently wearing a blue one on your hat identified you as a secession supporter.

I was always a little hazy on what actually happened at Fort Sumter (not "Sumpter," as Larson repeatedly tells us Lincoln spelled it). But after reading this book, here are the basics as I understand them: Fort Sumter was a US fort, just a few miles off the coast of Charleston. The US military held the fort, but as hostilities built up, and South Carolina (among other states) voted to secede, South Carolinians were uncomfortable with the US (thereby the north) occupying the fort. There was a lot of back-and-forth with would the North/could the North send in supplies to the troops at the fort, should they leave the fort, etc. Once some South Carolinians fired on the fort in April, a month after Lincoln became president, soldiers at the fort fired back and the Civil War began.

Larson got off to a poor start in my opinion by telling us on page one that he was researching this book on January 6, 2021, which gave him "an eerie feeling that present and past had merged ... I was appalled by the attack ..." etc. Little comments here and there in the book make it clear that he's wanting to equate "good" with the North and today's Democrats, while the digs he gets in at the South are also in his opinion just fine to apply to today's Republicans and especially those rascally Republicans and heaven forbid MAGA voters.

My least-favorite Larson so far; I hope he'll be back on his game with subsequent books.

Thus is the 3rd book by this author I've read , the first 2 was ( The Devil in the White City- which I hated ) and the other one I loved was and is Dead Wake: The Last Crossing of the Lusitania, and just Like Dead Wake: The Last Crossing of the Lusitania, this book came to live with each turn of the page ,showing that Mr. ERIK Larson knows how to bring to life the very history his written about ,not only the places, the time period, but the people as well.

Thank you NetGalley for an ARC of this book in exchange for an honest review!

Erik Larson does it again. I absolutely love his books. Never before have I enjoyed history books so much as when I am reading his books. He turns history into something real that you can connect with and enjoy while learning at the same time. He is the reason why I am able to remember certain historical events, because he makes them so interesting and memorable. You are never reading just facts on a page with a dry commentary, rather Larson gives you actual quotations, stories, and correspondence of historical figures that make the story come alive again.

In other words, if you haven’t yet, pick up this book and all of his other books as well!

This newest book by Larson is about Fort Sumter and the spiral into the Civil War. The book starts at the time right before Lincoln was elected into office and tensions in the South started rising. States start seceding and Fort Sumter is in the midst of the crisis. Most of the book is comprised of direct quotations from the people Larson follows. These quotations come from diaries, letters, memorandums, articles, and other correspondence all written by these various historical figures. Major historical figures that are followed throughout the book include Mary Chestnut, Col. Anderson, Lincoln, William Seward, Edmund Ruffin, and many others. I love that this book was comprised of these historical figure’s direct quotations and direct correspondence.

This book brings alive an area of history that can be widely overlooked. The battles of the Civil War tend to get more attention, but Larson reminds us why Fort Sumter was so important and why the nation progressed to the state of war. I enjoyed this book so much and I will eagerly await the next book Larson writes!

Thank you to NetGalley and Crown Publishing for the eARC.

No one, absolutely no one, writes history like Erik Larson. I have a BS in social studies education and love history and learned so flipping much in these pages.

I have just completed my read of "The Demon of Unrest," written by Erik Larson and just published by Crown Publishing (who graciously provided me with an ARC for this review). Those of you familiar with Erik Larson's canon will not be surprised that this is a tightly written and well-researched examination of the events surrounding the opening shots of the War Between the States as they worked out in Charleston Harbor following the secession of South Carolina from the Union. Of course, it is common knowledge among those that still do the work to know that Fort Sumter was the lightening rod that focused the failing Union's attention as Abraham Lincoln came to the Presidency. This is not a military history, but rather draws its strength from its focus on cultural and political matters relating to the strains upon the Union as the Whigs declined and the Republicans ascended to power. It is a tale of courage and principle on both sides, of men and women torn between long held beliefs, self interest and foolish underestimation of the evolving consensus in the modern world around issues like slavery. It is particularly useful in examining how both sides came to their partisan views of the "other" without any real clue of the historical and cultural forces fueling events amongst their adversaries. If not particularly the kind of thing I find riveting, it is, nonetheless, thought provoking, especially in the troubled times we presently live in. It certainly belongs in all libraries and in the collections of those fascinated by the American Civil War. Reading this, I kept thinking that it was hard to believe each side could so retreat to their own corners without any real understanding of the underlying beliefs of their opponents and former compatriots. Given everything I see on the nightly news, I suppose I ought not to be surprised. The book is both frightening, enlightening, and profoundly saddening. I recommend it for a slow and patient read; it is well worth it, and you will be surprised how many insights it offers into our present difficulties!