State
William H. Seward (1861–1865):
• Seward: Lincoln's Indispensable Man (2012) by Walter Stahr.
• William Henry Seward: Lincoln's Right Hand (1991) by John Taylor.
• Seward: Lincoln's Indispensable Man (2012) by Walter Stahr.
• William Henry Seward: Lincoln's Right Hand (1991) by John Taylor.
Attorney General
Edward Bates (1861–1864):
• Lincoln’s Conservative Advisor: Attorney General Edward Bates (2024) by Mark Neels.
James Speed (1864–1865):
None
• Lincoln’s Conservative Advisor: Attorney General Edward Bates (2024) by Mark Neels.
James Speed (1864–1865):
None
Navy
Gideon Welles (1861–1865):
• Gideon Welles: Lincoln's Secretary of the Navy (1973) by John Niven.
• Gideon Welles: Lincoln's Secretary of the Navy (1973) by John Niven.
War
Simon Cameron (1861–1862):
• Amiable Scoundrel: Simon Cameron, Lincoln's Scandalous Secretary of War (2016) by Paul Kahan [site review].
Edwin M. Stanton (1862–1865):
• Stanton: Lincoln's War Secretary (2017) by Walter Stahr.
• Lincoln's Autocrat: The Life of Edwin Stanton (2015) by William Marvel.
• Amiable Scoundrel: Simon Cameron, Lincoln's Scandalous Secretary of War (2016) by Paul Kahan [site review].
Edwin M. Stanton (1862–1865):
• Stanton: Lincoln's War Secretary (2017) by Walter Stahr.
• Lincoln's Autocrat: The Life of Edwin Stanton (2015) by William Marvel.
Postmaster General
Montgomery Blair (1861–1864):
None
William Dennison (1864–1865):
None
None
William Dennison (1864–1865):
None
Treasury
Salmon P. Chase (1861–1864):
• Salmon P. Chase: Lincoln's Vital Rival (2022) by Walter Stahr.
• Salmon P. Chase: A Biography (1995) by John Niven.
• Salmon P. Chase: A Life in Politics (1987) by Frederick Blue.
William P. Fessenden (1864–1865):
• Civil War Senator: William Pitt Fessenden and the Fight to Save the American Republic (2011) by Robert Cook.
Hugh McCulloch (1865)
• Hugh McCulloch: Father of Modern Banking (2004) by Susan Lee Guckenberg.
• Salmon P. Chase: Lincoln's Vital Rival (2022) by Walter Stahr.
• Salmon P. Chase: A Biography (1995) by John Niven.
• Salmon P. Chase: A Life in Politics (1987) by Frederick Blue.
William P. Fessenden (1864–1865):
• Civil War Senator: William Pitt Fessenden and the Fight to Save the American Republic (2011) by Robert Cook.
Hugh McCulloch (1865)
• Hugh McCulloch: Father of Modern Banking (2004) by Susan Lee Guckenberg.
Interior
Caleb B. Smith (1861–1863):
None
John P. Usher (1863–1865):
A short biography was published in 1960, but none since then
James Harlan (1865): - Appointed by Johnson after Lincoln's assassination
None
It's expected that the cabinet biggies would have multiple treatments, and it still surprises me that it's been half a century since the last Welles biography. Blair is another notable omission.
None
John P. Usher (1863–1865):
A short biography was published in 1960, but none since then
James Harlan (1865): - Appointed by Johnson after Lincoln's assassination
None
Thanks for the post. Drew, a question. When it comes to historical figures (major/secondary) do you think there should be new biographies every twenty-thirty years on the subject? Can one book do a subject for good like the biography say on Bushrod Johnson? Should reinterpretations be attempted only when a new cache of material is found? I really like reading on Lincoln for example just not all ten thousand or whatever it is now.
ReplyDeleteHi Chris,
DeleteGood question. I think you have to take it on a case by case basis, but I think the scenario is much more appropriate to the major figures whose lives and public careers were filled with the most historically consequential actions open to varied interpretation.
New source caches certainly play a role (for example, in the recent Hood reconsiderations), but you can also get more than sufficiently valid and varied interpretations from the same body of research. The Stanton bios from Stahr and Marvel are a good example of that, with both having presumably the same opportunities and access to the same sources yet each author came up with in many ways a different portrait of the man and his times.
Thanks. I agree with that. Having both Stanton books you are absolutely correct on that front. I'm glad in reinterpreting Grant's presidency in modern times for example Grant has been treated much less as some sort of total incompent and nuance has emerged.
Delete