Danny,
First, that isn't a stupid question. I sell books for a living and the sheer number of books on Lincoln (and other historical figures, as you point out) is tremendous.
There's an old publisher's joke that goes, "the three biggest sellers in publishing are books on Abraham Lincoln, books on medicine, and books on pets. Our next book will be called 'Lincoln's Doctor's Dog'."
The University of Illinois Lincoln scholar James G. Randall asked the same thing in his 1934 speech to a joint session of the American Historical Association and the Mississippi Valley Historical Association, which was later published in 1936 with the title
"Has The Lincoln Theme Been Exhausted." Randall answered his own question with a resounding "no," although he set strict limits on who he thought capable of writing accurately on Lincoln. "The hand of the amateur has rested heavily on Lincoln studies," Randall said sternly. He noted that in specialized studies and monographs, the university-trained scholar appeared often, while in the general, over-arching biography, he or she was rarely present. Randall, and his numerous students, worked to fill the gaps that Randall noted in his speech, but it wasn't until Benjamin Thomas's biography appeared in 1952 that academic scholars found something that fit their notion of what a Lincoln biography should be.
Critics and authors have continuously asked that question for well over a hundred years. Ida Tarbell was told that her attempts to write on Lincoln would be fruitless because John Hay and John G. Nicolay had saturated the field with their 10-volume
Abraham Lincoln: A History along with their 12-volume
Complete Works of Abraham Lincoln. Yet, she proved them wrong.
I don't believe the question should be "is there anything new we can find on Lincoln?" but rather "does the author bring a fresh voice to the subject or fresh ideas." For example, Lincoln has always been known popularly as "the Great Emancipator." Yet, serious scholars both inside and outside the academy knows the story is far more nuanced and complex. In the past decade or so, however, there has come a new voice out that claims blacks worked to emancipate themselves in far greater numbers then previously noted. If it could be shown that a significant number of African-Americans did indeed free themselves outside of the influence or efforts of white soldiers and politicians, that would certainly change the way we view Lincoln as "the Great Emancipator."
Another example. One of the biggest gaps in our story of Lincoln's life has been a detailed examination of Nancy Hanks Lincoln. Adin Baber, a Hanks descendent, made an attempt to write about her in the 1960s, but as
I've pointed out before, that book is hard to find outside of a library and wasn't broadly distributed. To date, there has never been a widely distributed biography of Nancy. To be sure, part of the reason is knowledge about her is greatly limited, yet we now know, thanks to modern DNA evidence, that Nancy was illegitimate. I truly believe it would be possible to write a biography of her, although whether that biography would pass scholarly muster, given that it would have to rely on tradition more so than more-accepted documentation that academics require, is a valid question.
Biographies of those who surrounded Lincoln would also be of interest. David Donald attempted to write a book on the influence of six key players in the Lincoln story, but there were numerous others who played a role in Lincoln's life that could merit a chapter in a book. What about James Matheny? Leonard Swett? The only biography of David Davis written came out over 50 years ago. Surely there could be something new to say of him. Up until a few years ago, the work of William Herndon was considered by many to be toxic waste. Yet, through the tireless efforts of Douglas Wilson and Rodney O. Davis, we now have a more nuanced and reasonable picture of what Herndon really accomplished. Yet, as I pointed out in another thread, there hasn't been a new biography of Herndon since Donald's.
William E. Barton wrote what many consider to be the best book on Lincoln's religion, although it has serious issues. A detailed examination of the questions surrounding Lincoln's religion would likely not break much new ground, but adding another voice to the discussion could shed new light on an age-old question, and that would always be welcome.
Joe Di Cola will be bringing out a new book in March on New Salem. Benjamin Thomas's book was published in 1934. I have no doubt that although Thomas's book will remain a must-read for those interested in that time, Joe's book will supplant it as the go-to source for Lincoln's time there.
Also, Thomas's
Portrait for Posterity provided an intriguing look at various Lincoln biographers and scholars. Yet, it too is showing its age. I'm trying to produce a nuanced portrait of how Ida Tarbell contributed to the field of Lincoln studies, and I hope to extend that to Carl Sandburg. Showing the process of how authors approached their studies of Lincoln by showing what they left in or left out, what their techniques were in interviewing, and how their early success affected their later works, would show how Americans remembered Lincoln and how as a collective society we choose to remember all historical figures.
So while the publishing houses continue to crank out book after book after book on Lincoln, I don't think the fact that there already exists a veritable avalanche of Lincoln books should stop them anytime soon. Serious students of Lincoln soon learn to separate the wheat from the chaff, and while Randall's claim that the hand of amateur rests heavily on Lincoln is as true today as it was then, so too can it be said that each new book on Lincoln brings us that much closer to a better understanding of the man and his work. That can never be a bad thing.
Best
Rob