Rating: 
Summary: Puzzled - Longest lived republic?
Review: After reading Founding Brothers I'm left with a puzzle. Ellis states at least twice that the US is now the world's longest lived republic, and even compares it at one point to "Cicero's republic". The Roman Republic lasted from approximately 507 BC to 46 BC, so Ellis's claim is puzzling. Is he trying to make some point about the nature of a "true" republic, dismissing the Roman Republic for some reason?
Rating:
Summary: Founding Brothers: The Revolutionary Generation
Review: I have just recently become interested in the Revolutionary period and this was one of the first books I bought. I thought it was easy to read and even funny at times. Ellis does expect a certain amount of knowledge of revolutionary history which I lack. But, it just makes me want to find out about some events he referred to that I haven't the foggiest about. I think 8th grade history was after lunch, maybe I slept thru it? I really enjoyed the book and I'm ordering his American Sphinx next.
Rating:
Summary: Entertaining and Informative
Review: Without re-hashing all the subjects that have already been covered here, allow me to add that I enjoyed the book. Often books that deal with politics and personalities are either boring or slanted to fit an agenda. The author managed to write a well crafted story that entertains at the same time it informs.
Rating: 
Summary: Entertaining and Informative
Review: I am not a scholar nor am I an academic. I am not a Revolutionary War afficionado. I occasionally watch the History Channel when I can't find anything else worthy of my time on the television. I picked up this book because it seemed to me like it would be a good read. I wasn't disappointed. This book is written for people like me who, though possessing a basic knowledge of America's early history, view the Founding Fathers more as legends than as real flesh and blood people, with their own personalities, styles and faults. This book is not a grand overview of the American Revolution, rather it is a collection of noteworthy snapshots that together paint an interesting and entertaining picture of the main Revolutionary characters. Their lives and interactions are the focus of the book. The book connects the reader to the past. I was there for the duel. I feel like I was the third wheel to the correspondence between Thomas Jefferson and John Adams. I walked away from this book with the impression that I knew these people and lived in their time. Good book. Read it.
Rating:
Summary: Insightful, interesting, enlightening
Review: This is the first book on this topic I have read, but it will not be the last. Ellis does a masterful job of introducing the major players and issues of our nations formative years: a fascinating look at the personalities, motives, aspirations, beliefs, prejudices, regional loyalties, and opinions that guided the government from its conception.
Rating: 
Summary: Missed an Important Part of the Farewell Address
Review: Was it purposeful or accidental? I find it interesting that Mr. Ellis skipped over a small but very important part of Washington's Farewell Address. In the address, Washington states that religion (no, this was not a "you pick your flavor of religion" but Christianity) and morality are "indispensable supports" for "political prosperity." He further adds that "And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion." In an age when we have stripped the Ten Commandments from the walls of schools and wrecklessly and ignorantly promoted "separation of church and state", shouldn't we heed Washington's words before the two pillars have completely crumbled?
Rating: 
Summary: Disappointing
Review: This book was my first experience with Mr. Ellis and it will definitely be my last--life is short, good books are many, and Ellis is just plain inferior. As an overview of people and central events, Founding Brothers doesn't entirely fail and may even be called adequate since it's engagingly written and may inspire further study. But to anyone more than superficially acquainted with the era and the men in question, and more interested in a historically sound and fair analysis rather than the currently-prevailing P.C. approach to America's founding embraced by Mr. Ellis, the book not only disappoints, it occasionally disgusts. Most irritating to me was the fact that a) Mr. Ellis' personal politics are glaringly obvious in his work, and b) he attributes the worst possible motives to everyone. In his world, no one is selfless or has an eye toward the greater good--except maybe his one big hero, John Adams. His favorite target is Thomas Jefferson. Indeed, it is amazing to me that Mr. Ellis could have borne with the company of a man he so obviously holds in contempt long enough to have written an entire book about him (American Sphinx). And my favorite example of this ridiculous and petulant disdain is that he accuses Jefferson of purposely willing himself to die on July 4, 1826 so that he could make a grand and immortalizing exit--one of the greatest P.R. stunts of all time. That Mr. Ellis thinks such nonsense a more plausible motive than a dying Jefferson determined to live long enough to see for himself the dawning of the 50th anniversary of the independence he'd helped to secure says some unflattering things about the author. After reading the book, I was not surprised a few months ago when Mr. Ellis was disciplined by his college (Mt. Holyoke, I believe) for lying to his students about his alleged exploits in Vietnam. Such behavior is congruent with the essence of a man who could look so smugly down on the integrity of our nation's greatest heroes and find them wanting. The revelation and punishment of Ellis' own indiscretions seems a kind of poetic justice. And though a few lies to impressionable students don't negate the body of Ellis' work, they do put a few dings in his credibility and turn a cynical eye on the morally superior stance he takes in relation to his very worthy subjects. I won't say don't read this book, but if you do read it, read CRITICALLY. Question Mr. Ellis' assertions and conclusions--as, indeed, all of us should with everything we read. And above all, since one book does not an education make, consult other sources--not limited to, but certainly including those that have stood the test of time and are considered to be the definitive works on their subject--i.e. on Washington, James Flexner's books or Douglas Southall Freeman's series; on Jefferson, Willard Sterne Randall's biography and Dumas Malone's famous multivolume superbio. The men who founded the American nation were some of the finest people who've ever walked the earth. They merit study and emulation. They also deserve better treatment from the heirs of their life's labors and sacrifices than that accorded them in Founding Brothers. Read Ellis' latest if you will, but let it be a launching pad to the truly great books available about these men and the enduring nation they founded.
Rating:
Summary: Humanity of the Founding Brothers
Review: To start with I am a proud American from Christian Egyptian, Coptic, ancestry. I did not learn American history at school, but I guess the love and appreciation for history run in the blood. I found this book to be both well-written and entertaining. However, what impressed me the most is the humanity of these great Americans. The book illustrates their strengths, weaknesses, ambitions, perceptions, misunderstandings, passions, and even sense of humor.
The book starts by recounting the duel between Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton on July 11, 1804 at Weehawken, N.J. The review of this unfortunate episode in history shows it could have been avoided. It shows how misperceptions and miscalculations have led to an early and untimely end for Hamilton, a brillliant statesman and a prolific writer. Should either of these men have taken the initiative to clear the air between them a duel could have been avoided. By contrast the long lasting friendship between Thomas Jefferson and John Adams shows both men in a much better light. Their friendship was tested by political and personal rivalries. Estrangement between the second and the third Presidents could have resulted from these rivalries. However both men, with a helping hand from Adams wife Abigail, managed to patch up their differences and maintain friendship long after their retirement from public office. The sense of humor is clearly manifested by an episode during the presidency of Adams. Some of Adams political opponents wrote an article in the Aurora paper describing him as " old, garrulous, bald, blind and crippled." Abigail, a capable woman in her own right, responded, or more precisely joked about the article about her husband that " she alone possessed the intimate knowledge to testify about the president physical condition ".
The Founding Brothers of the American Revolution shared the common desire and goal to create an independent and democratic republic, however they differed in their vision and views on how to achieve their common goal. Two political factions or parties came into existence and dominated the political debate of the time, namely the Hamiltonian and Jeffersonian visions for the governance of the US. The US was still a young nation, with the memory of the war of Independence still fresh on the minds of every body. The French aided the US against England in the war of Independence. By the same token many Americans also had a strong affinity to England. This led to the evolution of two opposing political factions, pro-French and pro-English factions. However, England and France were antagonists who engaged in military conflicts for some time. The tilt towards one side could spell an unnecessary confrontation and possible war with the other. George Washington the first President advocated a neutral stance for the US. The linchpin for his policy was the Proclamation of Neutrality 1793, which declared the US as an impartial witness to the then ongoing conflict in Europe. This US early neutrality helped the nation focus its efforts on its best interests and building itself. This was a great feat for a new democracy considering that many of its political elite had sympathetic leaning towards one of the combatants or the other e.g. Jefferson was considered to be pro-France, whereas Hamilton and Jay were considered to be pro-England. It is an interesting book that offers both a perspective on the humanity of the early brothers, and an entertaining summer reading.
Rating:
Summary: From a Duel to Reconciliation
Review: "Founding Brothers," begins with the most famous duel in American history, and ends with what may be the most famous reconciliation. Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr, ten-paces apart, level their pistols at each other, shots are fired, and one man is left standing with his reputation about to be demolished as surely as his opponent lay demolished on the banks of the Hudson. At the other end, two friends, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, who, in the heat of politics, became bitter enemies, reconcile in their old age, and die within hours of each other on the day of the 50th anniversary of American independence. Between these book-ends, Washington, Franklin, Madison, and Abigail Adams, make their appearance as we watch the birth of a nation. "Founding Brothers," makes clear the primary task of our first leaders, and that was nationhood. All other questions, including the most burning issue of slavery, were secondary. Without the primacy of nationhood, nothing else could be accomplished, and these men knew full well the import of their actions. Part of their greatness was in acting for the ages. Whatever narrow interests they may have held, they knew they would ultimately be judged on accomplishing the first task. Abigail Adams, possibly the most literate woman of the time, is the only woman to figure in this history. She is portrayed as equal to her husband, wise and gracious in her own right. Joseph J. Ellis has done a magnificent job of bringing us both the drama, and the intricate arguments that surrounded the issues the "brothers" dealt with. Reading this book has brought me an understanding of American democracy, then and now, and I recommend it to anyone who cares about why we are what we are.
Rating:
Summary: an old world perspective
Review: I should begin by saying I'm English, so my school history
didn't cover the gentlemen in question in great detail. I did
enjoy the book, and learn something from it, but I was
disturbed by obvious mistakes - for example, it wasn't Voltaire
who wished to see the last king strangled by the last priest,
that was Diderot. Voltaire was quite a fan of Britain's
constitutional monarchy. So the author was rather sloppy in
places, and often failed to provide references where appropriate.
It is alleged George III said Washington would be the greatest
man in the world if he relinquished power freely, which
astonished me - several pages later we learn George snubbed
two American ambassadors in London - so where does the quote
come from? Without citing sources history is merely recorded
gossip, and the book recalled to mind a professor I heard
of who was dismissed for inventing much of his "research". So
it was revealing to learn from other Amazon reviewers that
Dr. Ellis has a reputation for invention (I had never heard
of him before reading this book). Overall the book is readable,
though a little uneven as noted by others. Read it with an
open mind, and remember you will not find the whole truth
in any one book.
|
