One member of Barack Obama’s campaign team is playing a central role in forming his new Administration – despite being dead for 143 years.

Abraham Lincoln is shaping the next White House in profound ways, most notably in Mr Obama’s pledge to follow his predecessor’s example by appointing former adversaries into his Cabinet in a “team of rivals”.

Mr Obama, who frequently cites Lincoln as a role model, is taking lessons from history like no president before him. Whether he is taking the right ones, however, is debatable.

The rivals that Obama is expected to appoint include Senator Hillary Clinton, as his Secretary of State, and the New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson as Secretary of Commerce, both of whom were contenders for the Democratic nomination. Senator Joe Biden, another competitor, will be Vice-President and, in a clear sign that he intends to let bygones be bygones, Mr Obama is also expected to retain George W. Bush’s Defence Secretary, Robert Gates.

The set textbook for the first weeks of the Obama era has been Team of Rivals, by Doris Kearns Goodwin, a brilliant work of historical reconstruction describing how Lincoln surrounded himself with former antagonists, forging an unlikely alliance that helped to steer the Union through the darkest hours of the Civil War.

Asked what book he would regard as essential reading in the White House, Mr Obama cited the 2005 bestseller, which he called “a remarkable study in leadership”. Lincoln “basically pulled in all the people who had been running against him into his Cabinet”, Mr Obama said. “Whatever personal feelings there were, the issue was: how can we get this country through this time of crisis?”

The President-elect’s decision to follow Lincoln’s lead has givenRivalsa further boost up the bestseller lists, but it has also sparked a historical dispute over whether that precedent is a recipe for success or an invitation to disaster.

The tactic sounds simple and effective: defang erstwhile enemies by pulling them into your inner circle, gather the most talented politicians beneath your banner, and combine against the common enemy – but the strategy does not always work. It certainly did not work for Lincoln.

He deliberately picked political competitors when forming his Cabinet: William Henry Seward, the powerful New York Senator, became Secretary of State; the veteran statesman Edward Bates of Missouri was appointed Attorney-General; Senator Salmon Chase of Ohio headed up the Treasury, and Senator Simon Cameron became Secretary of War. All four had competed with Lincoln for the Republican nomination. In the words of Mr Goodwin, “the unprecedented decision to incorporate his eminent rivals into his political family was evidence of a profound self-confidence . . . Abraham Lincoln would emerge the undisputed leader of this most unusual Cabinet, truly a team of rivals.”

Mr Goodwin’s scholarly rivals, however, have pointed out that these appointments produced anything but harmony and loyalty, and the rivals spent much of the war scheming against Lincoln, and each other.

Cameron was forced to resign in 1862 over allegations of gross corruption in the sale of military contracts. Chase was never reconciled to Lincoln, and plotted continuously to replace him. He did his best to prevent Lincoln winning the renomination and when he failed, resigned. Bates grumbled and grouched throughout his time in office, and then resigned in 1864, denouncing “the profound ignorance of policy and prudence” in the Lincoln Administration.

Seward would eventually become a close friend but initially he regarded his appointment as an opportunity to unseat Lincoln, and attempted to seize control in 1861. He was the only one of the four to remain in office after Lincoln’s first term. Losing one of your rivals may be misfortune; losing three, in rapid succession, looks like a tactic. Lincoln frequently declined to consult his “team” on some of the most important decisions, including the issuing of the Emancipation Proclamation.

Mathew Pinkser, a Lincoln scholar writing in the Los Angeles Times, has accused Mr Goodwin of seeing Lincoln’s team of rivals through rose-tinted spectacles: “His model for Cabinet-building should stand more as a cautionary tale than as a leadership manual.” Bringing ambitious opponents into your government seems magnanimous, but it is a high-risk strategy.

“Keep your friends close, but keep your enemies closer,” Michael Corleone says in The Godfather Part II. If your enemies are too close, however, it is much easier for them to stab you in the front. As Harold Wilson and Margaret Thatcher both found, allowing ambitious rivals a taste of power can increase the appetite for plotting.

Rewarding former enemies has the added danger of potentially alienating friends, particularly those who have worked hard to get a candidate elected. Some of Lincoln’s allies were deeply disgruntled to find former foes in power, just as some Obama supporters are dismayed to find so many of the Clinton team returning to office.

Lincoln had a remarkable capacity to forget grievances, salve bruised feelings and suppress grudges. In the end it was his political skill, more than the simple strategy of rewarding his rivals, that ensured his triumph. The success of Mr Obama’s team of rivals will depend on how much bad blood is left over from the bitter primary race, with Mrs Clinton known for a willingness to nurse grudges. Drawing historical parallels often involves a degree of wishful thinking; something that Mr Obama has been accused of before. One critic in particular has ridiculed Mr Obama’s faith in his own ability to reconcile opponents: “Let’s just get everybody together. Let’s get unified. The sky will open, the light will come down, celestial choirs will be singing . . . and the world will be perfect.”

Who was the author of those mocking words? Hillary Clinton – former rival, now a team player.

Times Recommends

• Please help: maimed children of war want their lives back
• Cabal seizes diamond riches to buy power
• White House gatecrashers got to the president