More handpicked essays just for you.
Life and contributions of Abraham Lincoln
Biography of abraham lincoln and their achivements
Essay on Abraham Lincoln life
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Abraham Lincoln is often viewed as one of the great heroes of American history, due in no small part to his issuing of the Emancipation Proclamation in 1862, amidst the chaotic, intense rivalry of the Civil War - the battle between North and South, between freedom and slavery. However, prior to the Civil War, Lincoln had given a speech proclaiming that he, in fact, had never been in favor of equalizing whites and African-Americans. Seemingly contradictorily and inexplicably, he had then elected to free all slaves in United States territories. Yet, there exist several viable explanations for Lincoln’s course of actions. Namely, he had harbored moral arguments, and a general character, against slavery, he had primarily aimed to accomplish the implicit goals of the Republican party on which he sided, and he had established an “official duty”, which could only have been accomplished via the abolition of slavery. Clearly, despite having taken a remarkably contrasting viewpoint from the perception of the public, Lincoln had considered other factors as well, which …show more content…
His self-proclaimed “official duty” as the President of the United States had in fact been to save the Union at all costs, whether it result in the saving or terminating of slavery, or even an intermediary outcome. Moreover, the Proclamation’s primary purpose had also been to settle the widespread, treacherous slave rebellion occurring at the time of the Civil War. Were Lincoln to have refrained from issuing the Proclamation, slaves would have effected an unmanageable insurrection, and the nation would doubtless have collapsed into an unrecoverable state of ruin in all aspects. As such, Lincoln’s decision to issue the Emancipation Proclamation had been further justified, and his modern heroic standing is even more
The American Civil War not only proved to be the country’s deadliest war but also precipitated one of the greatest constitutional crises in the history of the United States. President Lincoln is revered by many Americans today as a man of great moral principle who was responsible for both preventing the Union’s dissolution as well as helping to trigger the movement to abolish slavery. In retrospect, modern historians find it difficult to question the legitimacy of Lincoln’s actions as President. A more precise review of President Lincoln’s actions during the Civil War, however, reveals that many, if not the majority, of his actions were far from legitimate on constitutional and legal grounds. Moreover, his true political motives reveal his
James Oakes gave a brilliant and unique perspective to a relationship between two well known historical figures of their time. Abraham Lincoln is a well-admired president for the United States because as Americans culture teaches that he was an honest and well-respected man. He heard about a young African American man, who had high aspirations for his life and the blossoming United States. This man’s name was Frederick Douglass. James Oakes demonstrates how both Douglass and Lincoln worked towards the abolishment of slavery and effectively producing better outcomes within antislavery politics.
Abraham Lincoln’s original views on slavery were formed through the way he was raised and the American customs of the period. Throughout Lincoln’s influential years, slavery was a recognized and a legal institution in the United States of America. Even though Lincoln began his career by declaring that he was “anti-slavery,” he was not likely to agree to instant emancipation. However, although Lincoln did not begin as a radical anti-slavery Republican, he eventually issued his Emancipation Proclamation, which freed all slaves and in his last speech, even recommended extending voting to blacks. Although Lincoln’s feeling about blacks and slavery was quite constant over time, the evidence found between his debate with Stephen A. Douglas and his Gettysburg Address, proves that his political position and actions towards slavery have changed profoundly.
Lincoln was a very smart lawyer and politician. During his “House Divided” speech he asked the question, “Can we, as a nation, continue together permanently, forever, half slave, and half free?" When he first asked this question, America was slowly gaining the knowledge and realizing that as a nation, it could not possibly exist as half-slave and half-free. It was either one way or the other. “Slavery was unconstitutional and immoral, but not simply on a practical level.” (Greenfield, 2009) Slave states and free states had significantly different and incompatible interests. In 1858, when Lincoln made his “House Divided” speech, he made people think about this question with views if what the end result in America must be.
As a child in elementary and high school, I was taught that President Abraham Lincoln was the reason that African slaves were freed from slavery. My teachers did not provide much more information than that. For an African American student, I should have received further historical information than that about my ancestors. Unfortunately, I did not have the opportunity or desire to research slavery on my own until college. And with my eagerness and thirst for more answers concerning my African American history, I set out to console my spirit, knowledge, and self-awareness of my ancestors’ history. I received the answers that my brain, mind, and soul need. Although Abraham Lincoln signed the 13th Amendment of the United States Constitution, courageous African American slaves were the real heroes and motivation of the movement.
The drive to end slavery in the United States was a long one, from being debated in the writing of the Declaration of Independence, to exposure of its ills in literature, from rebellions of slaves, to the efforts of people like Harriet Tubman to transport escaping slaves along the Underground Railroad. Abolitionists had urged President Abraham Lincoln to free the slaves in the Confederate states from the very outset of the Civil War. By mid-1862, Lincoln had become increasingly convinced of the moral imperative to end slavery, but he hesitated (History.com). As commander-in-chief of the Union Army, he had military objectives to consider (History.com). On one hand, emancipation might
. .’, concludes James Oakes’ book with the aftermath of the Civil War and Lincoln’s assassination. Oakes discussed the respect Douglass gathered for Lincoln over the years and the affect his assassination had on both himself and America as a whole. Oakes even brushed over Douglass’ relationship with Andrew Johnson, the president succeeding Lincoln. Analyzing his experience with the new president, it was safe to say that Andrew Johnson had no consideration as to what Douglass and Lincoln previously fought for. Johnson did not have the same political skills as Lincoln did, and he did not retain the same view for America that Lincoln did. It was obvious that Douglass held Lincoln at a higher standard than Andrew Johnson, stating that he was a “progressive man, a humane man, an honorable man, and at heart an anti-slavery man” (p. 269). Oakes even gave his own stance on Andrew Jackson, “It was a legacy that Andrew Johnson could ever match. When all of Lincoln’s attributes were taken into consideration - his ascent from the obscurity to greatness, his congenial temperament, his moral courage - it was easy for Douglass to imagine how much better things would be ‘had Mr. Lincoln been living today’.” (p. 262). It is hard to imagine the pre-war Douglass to have said something like that as opposed to an older, much more reserved Douglass. With the abolishment of slavery, so came much discrimination. Without
Abraham Lincoln deserves the accolade “The Great Emancipator”. The title “Great Emancipator” has been the subject of many controversies. Some people have argued that the slaves themselves are the central story in the achievement of their own freedom. Others demonstrate that emancipation could result from both a slave’s own extraordinary heroism and the liberating actions of the Union forces. However, my stance is to agree that Abraham Lincoln deserves to be regarded as “The Great Emancipator” for his actions during and following the Civil War.
...h the Confederacy. Even if the goal of the Emancipation Proclamation was to win the war, it was also a moral value because at the end of the war, Lincoln supported the 13th amendment, which ended slavery in the USA. Looking at different sources such as Eric Foner’s “emancipation proclamation” and McPherson James’s “how president Lincoln issued the emancipation proclamation” , it is clear that opinions differed regarding the purpose of the emancipation proclamation, but both of them argued that it was both a military tactic but had also a moral value behind it.
During the Abraham Lincoln’s short time as president, he managed not only to save a nation deeply divided and at war with itself, but to solidify the United States of America as a nation dedicated to the progress of civil rights. Years after his death, he was awarded the title of ‘The Great Emancipator.’ In this paper, I will examine many different aspects of Lincoln’s presidency in order to come to a conclusion: whether this title bestowed unto Lincoln was deserved, or not. In order to fully understand Lincoln, it is necessary to understand the motives that drove this man to action. While some of his intentions may not have been for the welfare of slaves, but for the preservation of the Union, the actions still stand. Abraham Lincoln, though motivated by his devotion to his nation, made the first blows against the institution of slavery and rightfully earned his title of ‘The Great Emancipator.’
Contrary to what today’s society believes about Lincoln, he was not a popular man with the South at this time. The South wanted to expand towards the West, but Lincoln created a geographical containment rule keeping slavery in the states it currently resided in. Despite his trying to rationalize with the South, Lincoln actually believed something different ”Lincoln claimed that he, like the Founding Fathers, saw slavery in the Old South as a regrettable reality whose expansion could and should be arrested, thereby putting it on the long and gradual road ”ultimate extinction” (216). He believed it to be “evil” thus “implying that free southerners were evil for defending it”(275). Lincoln wanted to wipe out slavery for good, and the South could sense his secret motives.
Then, once the Civil War began, he was merely trying to preserve what was left of an unstable union. The true “Emancipators” of slavery lie in the grass roots people of that time, the abolitionists, Frederick Douglas, and the slaves themselves. The slaves earned their freedom. Lincoln was merely a man who let the events of his era determine his policy. “I claim not to have controlled events but confess plainly that events controlled me.”
There is no doubt that Abraham Lincoln is widely regarded as one of the great American presidents. The general public, when asked about Lincoln, will often tell the tale of a great man. Holding their head high, they will embark on the journey of a benevolent leader, praising the man who envisioned a new America: a great country of racial equality, and the pillar of human liberty. There are some, however, who have quite the opposite view.
As stated in the Declaration of Independence, he first believed that all negroes had the right to have natural rights. He declared this in the first Lincoln-Douglas Debate that “he is much entitled to these as the white men.”1 Here, Lincoln emphasized his stance that even a negro is entitled to their natural rights. However, prior to this, Lincoln stated that he has no lawful right or inclination to end slavery and “introduce political and social inequality between the white and the black races.”2 Abraham Lincoln did not even have any intention of ending slavery. He just wanted the public to know that the negroes deserved natural rights and nothing more. He was never in favor of making them voters or jurors in court, or letting them hold office, or marry white people.3 How can one say that he is the “Great Emancipator” when he did not want to give the negroes any more rights? Looking at them as minorities, he still did not want to try and to give them any freedom. He does not view them as equals in society, nor did he have strong feelings to support the negroes at all. Attacking their race, he still calls the white race superior to the negroes. If Lincoln never supported the equal rights of negroes, he cannot be the great emancipator. Showing indifference to the negroes, he was also reluctant to interfere with the state’s rights and wanted to
Presidents have been elected or 227 years, each one of them making some sort of impact on the country, the government and the citizens. However, the question still remains, which president was the strongest amongst the rest? Having to choose between Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and George washington, the obvious choice of the stronger president is Abraham Lincoln. Not only did Lincoln serve during a tragic time in the countries history which was the civil war and had the potentional to tear the country in half, he also abolished slavery, and he was always sure to make sure his candiacy wasn't two sided by electing officials who had differing viewpoints.