Member Review Killing Lincoln, By Bill O'Reily

Robert E Lee 1

Private
Joined
Jul 3, 2019
It is by far one of the best books , it gives incredible detail no other book I've read on the plot and assassination of Lincoln . What I love about the Killing series is how history is put down in the pages like as if you are there you can tell what a person is feeling and get an inside understanding of a historical event such as this.
 
Can you by chance, give us a more in depth review? Just curious.

 
YeH
Can you by chance, give us a more in depth review? Just curious.

Yeah so first the books the way they describe events it's like first person or your there seeing the event. This book tells you who's involved in the plot and info about them. Should I add on
 
I saw the requirements so this may take time
We have a thread on the book if you want to use it in expanding your review. Most people here panned the book because of the author, but if you stick to the content of the book it's not a bad book and quite readable. But the book is meant for the general public, not 'history snobs' like most of us that come to sites like this. I look forward to reading your review.
 
I received a book titled "Lincoln's Final Days" by the same author as a gift. I wonder if it's the same book with a different title.
 
These series of books by Bill Reilly were mostly ghost written by another author. Regardless, the books are very entertaining and readable and provide a general account of the subject matter. I would not rely on these books, however, for a more serious understanding of, in this case, the Lincoln assassination.
 
These series of books by Bill Reilly were mostly ghost written by another author. Regardless, the books are very entertaining and readable and provide a general account of the subject matter. I would not rely on these books, however, for a more serious understanding of, in this case, the Lincoln assassination.

I think you are absolutely correct. History.net would agree with you too. Here is an excerpt from their review of "Killing Lincoln":

"But while the authors demonstrate that Lincoln’s assassin, John Wilkes Booth, was an amateurish mess lacking impulse control, their book’s factual errors diminish an otherwise penetrating story. As a result Killing Lincoln—or more especially, its media-star co-author Bill O’Reilly—has created consternation among Lincoln scholars. The book has been banned from the Ford’s Theatre National Historic Site because it “suffers from factual errors and a lack of documentation.” But both print and e-book editions have endured on the best-seller lists of The New York Times Book Review. "
 
Last edited:
It is by far one of the best books , it gives incredible detail no other book I've read on the plot and assassination of Lincoln .

What other books have you read on the assassination of Lincoln?
My daughter was in a hurry to buy me a father's day gift and asked which O-Reily book did I want. I had read "Killing Kennedy" because I have always been interested in the details and the theories surrounding that event which I lived through. So I answered he by choosing this book---but I don't even know what I did with it.
I read "Killing Kennedy" and I did enjoy reviewing the events. The only thing that was a new revelation was the stories of the affairs and the salacious activities in the White House. Even though I read it on paper, I couldn't help wonder how did O'Reily document these events. There are so many wild theories and rumors that I hope that he has researched them.
Where there any new "revelations" that came out in "Killing Lincoln"? If not, then how did he hope to sale some old boring history? Was he banking on his TV personality appeal to sale these? I had hopes that he was a real historian and not just putting his name on material prepared by some ghost writer.
 
Where there any new "revelations" that came out in "Killing Lincoln"? If not, then how did he hope to sale some old boring history? Was he banking on his TV personality appeal to sale these? I had hopes that he was a real historian and not just putting his name on material prepared by some ghost writer.
As I typed out earlier, these are written for the general public, not serious students of history. So yes, the same story but better written than most historians could manage. These books are like history shows you might see on History or National Geographic. You have to understand the purpose of them.
 
There has been a virtual mountain of books written about the Lincoln assassination, many of them sensationalistic and conspiracy-theory-laden, and I seriously doubt this one is anything but a rehash of many more detailed and equally salacious titles.
 
I think you are absolutely correct. History.net would agree with you too. Here is an excerpt from their review of "Killing Lincoln":

"But while the authors demonstrate that Lincoln’s assassin, John Wilkes Booth, was an amateurish mess lacking impulse control, their book’s factual errors diminish an otherwise penetrating story. As a result Killing Lincoln—or more especially, its media-star co-author Bill O’Reilly—has created consternation among Lincoln scholars. The book has been banned from the Ford’s Theatre National Historic Site because it “suffers from factual errors and a lack of documentation.” But both print and e-book editions have endured on the best-seller lists of The New York Times Book Review. "

Wow! I didn't realize it got that kind of negative response!
 
I disliked it so much that it was actually the only book I ever deleted from my purchase history at Amazon after I had read it. It is rife with errors, big and small, and filled with speculation. I would not recommend it to anyone at any time, not even as a beginner text.
 
Again, as posted in the other thread on the book the amount and severity of the errors are overstated.

The book is a basic rehashing of the main points of the assassination and the plot. In the back of the book it does mention some of the theories that have came down since the killing of Lincoln. Again, the main issues seem to be with the author (who I don't like as well) and not so much with the context, with the exception of depth.
 
Back
Top