Average customer rating:
- Had Me Laughing Out Loud
- Scathing View of Founding Fathers
- A fascinating biography that made me laugh out loud
- Vidal the Iconoclast, more appropriate today than ever.
- Fun to read but emotionally distant
|
Burr a Novel
Gore Vidal
Manufacturer: Random House
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
 Contemporary
| General
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
Vidal, Gore
| ( V )
| Authors, A-Z
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
Similar Items:
-
Lincoln: A Novel
-
1876: A Novel
-
Empire: A Novel
-
Washington, D.C.: A Novel
-
Hollywood
ASIN: 0394480244
Release Date: 1973-10-12 |
Amazon.com
Charles Schuyler is a personal assistant to Aaron Burr, the former Revolutionary War hero, vice president under Jefferson, and infamous slayer of Alexander Hamilton. He's also been employed by a group of political operatives in New York journalism circles to dig up evidence that Burr is the "natural father," as the expression goes, of up-and-coming presidential candidate Martin van Buren. Schuyler's journal entries are a wondrous prose picture of Jacksonian society, while an imagined autobiographical account from Burr provides a similar depiction of the nation's origins. Like all of Vidal's historical fiction, Burr has little use for America's received iconography, and draws upon contemporary sources to puncture the legendary reputations of Washington and Jefferson. There are also marvelous cameo appearances from figures like Washington Irving and Davy Crockett, of whom Schuyler notes, "He is considered a delightful figure. I can't think why." (There's also a substantial subplot in which Schuyler falls in love with a prostitute named Helen Jewett; readers may be interested to learn that she is, in fact, a real historical figure). --Ron Hogan
Book Description
Burr is the opening volume in Gore Vidal's great fictional chronicle of American history, each of which is being republished in the Modern Library .
Burr
Customer Reviews:
Had Me Laughing Out Loud.......2007-09-29
To appreciate this novel you have to know the issues surrounding Burr, Hamilton, and Jefferson. Having recently read Chernow's Alexander Hamilton and Isenburg's Fallen Founder: The Life of Aaron Burr I was glad to have the events still fresh in my mind. Vidal put it all together 30 years before these biographies, that is without the advantage of new research and contemporary thinking. This novel also, notably, predates DNA and the confirmation of Jefferson's "bright" children.
Vidal's cleverly grafts his outlook and sensibility onto Burr. We will never know, but it may be an excellent fit. In telling the tale through Burr's eyes he gives a stronger defense of Burr than the Isenburg bio. While fictional, all the events are here. At the end, Vidal has a short note clarifying the few occasions when he strayed from the facts and noting that much of Jefferson's dialog was taken from Jefferson's own, copious, writings.
I was laughing out loud at the Vidal/Burr takes on the Jefferson plantation, Jefferson's White House (the books, the garden tools and the mocking bird who lands on his shoulder), Andrew Jackson (dialog, sore false teeth and comments on Davy Crockett's demise) and of course Burr's terse comments on Hamilton. While this is all serious history, Burr (the character and the novel) doesn't take himself/itself at all seriously.
This book begs to be a movie. It would surely be a riotous and controversial one.
Scathing View of Founding Fathers.......2007-06-06
Gore Vidal's BURR is an interesting, if somewhat rambling account of a lesser known man from our nations origins. Burr has often been vilified for his fatal "Interview" with Hamilton on Weehawken Heights. This novel seeks to put a voice on a little known personage who inter-acted with all the famous founding fathers.
Vidal has taken a lot of historical research and novelized it in order to flesh out an individual who left little or no paper trail of his life. Much that we know about Burr seems to come mostly from others. He was vilified by Hamilton who became his arch-enemy. Vidal uses Burr as a means to provide a scathing and perhaps more realistic view of our founding fathers.
This book came out shortly before the Bicenntenial in 1976 and few dared at that time to have any but praise and admiration for our nations origins. Gore Vidal wanted to be controversial in his view of the early republic. In this book, Washington, Hamilton and Jefferson all come down a peg or two. The novel shows us that all these famous men were guys on the make with the insider knowledge to make themselves the ruling elite of the nation. Burr was merely one of the more controversial of the crowd. He certainly lead a fascinating life and could have been a man of great influence for his time.
The novel proceeds at a slow pace at times moving back and forth between the present and the past. The chapters which deal with Burr's supposed memoirs are by far the most interesting and entertaining parts of the book. The rest of the story tends to drag a bit, and while Burr's views are certainly interesting, much of the perspective comes from the hand of the author. Vidal has a generally bad opinion of the government of the USA, and one can see here that he believes its origins were in Burr's time.
His portrait of Washy as a stiff, arrogant elitest of little imagination will no dount rile up many of his hero worshipers. I suspect that this portrait, while exaggerated, is not that far off the mark! The same can be said for the novel as a whole: Exaggerated, but not completely so. While I am not a Gore Vidal fan, this was the first work of his I have ever read, I would say for those interested in the early republic period that it is quite worthwhile.
Fans of Vidal no doubt have long read this book as his following is a devoted one. I don't know if I will ever read another of his books, but I did find this one worthwhile. An interesting view of a man and his times.
A fascinating biography that made me laugh out loud.......2006-12-21
First, I have to admit that I have not studied America's "Founding Fathers" so it is possible that some of what Vidal included in his book is controversial among historians. However, the book was a great read that helped me understand a bit of what was going on in our country during that time. Years ago I read "Lies My Teacher Told Me" about how American History is distorted when it is taught in our public schools. Since then I've been keeping an eye out for scholarly accurate but accessible books about the early republic. I'd definitely recommend this one. I'd give it 5 starts if it included a preface that stated what aspects were "controversial" among scholars. Whether you like Vidal or not, he is a great writer.
Vidal the Iconoclast, more appropriate today than ever........2006-12-04
"Burr" is my very belated introduction to the works of Gore Vidal. I'm glad I waited so long to read anything of his. Not only are other authors are just now catching up with him, but also it is part of today's political and literary climate in America to topple and stomp on our triumphal presidential statuary. "Burr" is at its best when burning historical idols, and burn it does -- this sure ain't Disney's Davy Crockett! Vidal may demur in the Afterword of this book that his opinions on Washington and Jefferson are not as severe as those of his title character, but they are hilarious nonetheless and may motivate the reader to consult other biographical material to peer behind these icons' magisterial facades. The book is uneven, however, with its disconcerting leaps back and forth between the two narrators and across decades. I wished for more of Burr's voice and less of his acolyte's. And that implausibly soapy surprise ending, wrapping up the two main characters in a big exclamation point, left me cold.
Fun to read but emotionally distant.......2006-09-01
Like most people of my generation, I've known Gore Vidal primarily as a personality, not as an author. His historical novel Burr (1973) was the first of his books I've ever read.
Burr is constructed as a novel with two narrators. The "present-day" (1833) narrator is Charlie Schuyler, a young law clerk in the office of Aaron Burr, an elderly but still vital man of 77. Charlie becomes interested in the life of this witty and roguish older man and eventually Burr agrees to dictate his memoirs to Charlie. This brings in the second and more interesting narrator, Burr himself, as he spins self-serving yarns about his life from his days as a young soldier in the Revolution to the duel with Alexander Hamilton to the adventurous plot that led to his sensational trial for treason.
As a novel, Burr is a mixed bag. The Aaron Burr portions of the narrative bristle with charm and energy. Every paragraph is full of biting and often hilarious commentary on the Founding Fathers. As with a real autobiography, Burr makes himself look good and glosses over his mistakes and tragedies. He shows no remorse for the death of Hamilton, and barely touches on the only meaningful relationship of his life, that with his daughter Theodosia, whom he molded into his idea of the perfect woman only to lose her in a shipwreck.
I found the Schuyler portions of the book much less interesting. Though Charlie does some investigation into the unanswered questions of Burr's life, I kept wishing there were more chances to hear from other voices. We're mostly just left to take Burr's word about things. Instead of more digging into the more nebulous aspects of Burr's life, the Charlie portion of the story is bogged down with two subplots that I found less than compelling: Charlie's relationship with a doomed prostitute and his involvement in a scheme to betray Burr by attempting to prove that the current presidential candidate, Martin Van Buren, is actually Burr's illegitimate son. At one point, he even meets Van Buren, who is portrayed as extremely charismatic. I just couldn't get interested in this ancient political "gotcha."
A larger problem with Burr is that the entire book is done as narrative summary. Almost nothing happens in "real time." Though Vidal is so skilled as a writer that the voice of Burr reminiscing about old times is very entertaining, this format dictates that there can be no surprises and no suspense. All of the events are long in the past, and both Burr and the reader know exactly where it's all going. We hear Burr tell about the dire insult that led him to duel Hamilton, but we never feel the anger. We hear about Burr's love for Theodosia (and the implications of others that it may have been unhealthy), but we never feel this one grand passion of the old rascal. We hear Burr weave his tale about the plot to storm into Mexico with the help of the nefarious James Wilkinson, but we're never recruited into Burr's dreams of conquest.
Book Description
This definitive biography of the revolutionary era villain overturns every myth and image we have of him
The narrative of America's founding is filled with godlike geniuses—Franklin, Washington, Adams, Jefferson—versus the villainous Aaron Burr. Generations have been told Burr was a betrayer—of Hamilton, of his country, of those who had nobler ideas. All untrue. He did not turn on Hamilton; rather, the politically aggressive Hamilton was preoccupied with Burr and subverted Burr's career at every turn for more than a decade through outright lies and slanderous letters.
In Fallen Founder, Nancy Isenberg portrays the founders as they all really were and proves that Burr was no less a patriot and no less a principled thinker than those who debased him. He was an inspired politician who promoted decency at a moment when factionalism and ugly party politics were coalescing. He was a genuine hero of the Revolution, as much an Enlightenment figure as Jefferson, and a feminist generations ahead of his time. A brilliant orator and lawyer, he was New York's attorney general, a senator, and vice president. Denounced as a man of extreme tastes, he in fact pursued a moderate course, and his political assassination was accomplished by rivals who feared his power and who promoted the notion of his sexual perversions.
Fallen Founder is an antidote to the worshipful biographies far too prevalent in the histories of the revolutionary era. Burr's story returns us to reality: to the cunning politicians our nation's founders really were and to a world of political maneuvering, cutthroat politicking, and media slander that is stunningly modern.
Customer Reviews:
A unique blend of history and biography.......2007-10-20
Actor and author Scott Brick provides an excellent and powerful narration to the biography of a Revolutionary War patriot who should have received as much acclaim as his contemporary Jefferson. He was a feminist before the word was invented, and a politician and legislator who promoted decency and solidarity to a chaotic world. His background as a lawyer and speaker would help change his world, even though Alexander Hamilton thwarted his career and spread lies about his life and politics. 18th century American history comes to life in a unique blend of history and biography perfect for audio libraries featuring nonfiction history.
Diane C. Donovan
California Bookwatch
Follow the Money.......2007-10-16
Most of my negative feelings regarding Isenberg's work have already been ably stated. I am appalled that a working, teaching historian could write such a poorly balanced book. If her purpose was to reopen the Burr debate by arousing the ire of historians working in this historical period, so be it. That is a legitimate aim. But there is evidential materials and there are evidential materials. Which do you use and which do you ignore.
But my most important criticism is where did Burr get his money. Who was paying his bills as he traveled about the nation and the world at large. I wanted this question answered. Ms. Isenberg disappoints.
A Burr in One's Saddle.......2007-10-01
A sober reassessment of Aaron Burr is much needed. This isn't it. Rather than convince us that perhaps Burr wasn't quite the scoundrel we all grew up believing he was--well, all of us except maybe Gore Vidal--the author's only recourse is snipe at Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson, Burr's two great antagonists. Yes, both were flawed men, but both left behind tremendous legacies to the Republic; in Hamilton's case, a sound economy and in Jefferson's a much expanded country and a reputation for being a man of letters. And Burr? Besides being somewhat ahead of his times in his treatment and regard for women and a pretty good lawyer, one comes up short One comes away from Ms. Isenberg's book with the distinct impression that she fell victim to the biographer's fatal mistake: she fell in love with her subject. A good biography of Burr remains to be written.
Superb biography. Beautiful history........2007-09-23
Most revisionist biographies are dedicated to tearing down the marble statues we've constructed for our founders. This exhaustively researched biography (which brings to mind McCullough's biography of John Adams) builds one. Thoroughly and intentionally revisionist, this nearly perfect blend of biography and colonial history corrects many of the stale myths we carry about Aaron Burr and his contributions to the founding of the United States. Burr was a restless and mammoth intellect severely limited by the provincial political bickering around him. His refusal to be politically labeled has come down to us from historians as his "lack of integrity." And since he refused to allow Hamilton and Jefferson to tag and control him, they attacked him personally. Too liberal for the Federalists and too elitist for the Republicans, ad hominem from resentful enemies has been Burr's unfortunate legacy. This beautifully written book will help you reconsider all that. Includes one of the most impressive collections of fully annotated endnotes I've ever seen.
Saint Burr?.......2007-09-13
To begin, I think this is a well-written and researched book. It also pretty well written. That said, Isenberg's constant drum beat of blind support for Burr make it difficult to take the material seriously. Certainly, Burr was no more the vile snake than Washington, Jefferson, Monroe, Madison and Hamilton are the saints they are portrayed as by history.
Isenberg does little to assist Burr's cause, as her thesis is too easily discounted due to her completely one-sided, sometimes disingenuous and many times childish support for Burr. A reader without a foundation in this era would believe that Burr is (1) a founder of the republic and (2) the actual mythical figure of the pure revolutionary American that was besmirched and ruined by moneyed interests and unscrupulous politicians. Often times, rather than acknowledging Burr's faults, Isenberg excuses them. For me, when a historian makes excuses they eliminate any possibility for objectivity. When she excuses some of Burr's financial schemes and other bad behavior by stating that Hamilton's or other contemporaries were worse, I almost put the book down.
Overall, her attempts to re-create Burr as a man of utmost political and moral character that was virtually the only man of public life during the formative years of this country that remained true to his political cause and refused to engage in dirty tricks, financial schemes and political machinations is so preposterous, that her obviously detailed work backfires. It would have done Burr a better service to portray the man for what he was, with all of his faults, which would have achieved Isenburg's goal -- to show he was not the dastardly villian most know him as. Her attempt to elevate him upon a pedestal above even Washington, Jefferson and others makes her sound ridiculous.
Book Description
The story of General Benedict Arnold's defection to the British in September of 1780 has never been presented in this way. “Brilliantly conceived and thoroughly researched book. A fascinating new look at one of history’s most infamous men. You-are-there feel of a novel. Thought-provoking, intriguing and historically important, Eye of the Eagle will truly open your eyes”. New York Times best-selling author Ellen Tanner Marsh
Customer Reviews:
Great reading.......2007-07-29
I very good book that gives the reader an interesting twist on what was believed to be gospel. The author's research is convincing.
awesome .......2007-04-20
An awesome book....definitely a different view .... a must read for anyone seeking to truely understand Benedict Arnold's story.
A Novel Approach to History.......2007-04-19
Who would have thought that what was assumed by the average student of American history to be an open and shut case against Benedict Arnold could be brought into question. And, furthermore, to do so with such detailed facts woven into a rather gripping novel format. Mr. WIlczak has laid out a compelling case that Arnold was not a traitor but a collaborator with George Washington to ultimately fool the British. This book could be the basis of an excellent movie.
Finally a different view!.......2007-04-13
This book expresses a thoroughly researched, fresh approach to one of history's most infamous legends. When I began to read the book I felt my feelings regarding Benedict Arnold could not be swayed. The author, however, through meticulous use of timeline, documented fact, and letters of many of the involved, opened my eyes to the possibility that Arnold may have been the protaganist in a great scheme to free the colonies and help create the United States. I highly recommend this book to anyone who seeks the truth instead of the commonly handed down history stories we have been fed since childhood. AAAAA+++++
AMAZING FACT FILLED BOOK.......2007-03-27
Well written and amazing to read. Author captured the moment and took you there. Book was flooded with facts.
I would highly recommend this book, it is not only for the history buffs.
If you do enjoy history, you will love the author's details.
Book Description
Aaron Burr remains one of the most darkly compelling figures in early United States history. Best known as the man who killed Alexander Hamilton in a duel at Weehawken, New Jersey, Burr served as a U.S. senator and as Thomas Jefferson's vice president from 1800 to 1804. Before that, he gained a national reputation as a brilliant attorney.
In the first popular book to focus on one of the most intriguing chapters in Burr's long life, historian Buckner F. Melton Jr. explores Aaron Burr's part in one of the most sensational criminal conspiracies in American history. Known as the "Burr Conspiracy," it involved a plan to invade Mexico and set up an independent republic there or, alternately, to get the Western frontiers to cede from the Union and form a separate republic. Although he was ultimately acquitted of the charges against him, Burr was ruined professionally and financially. Melton, who is an acknowledged U.S. constitutional law expert, demystifies the legal issues involved in the case and explores the ethical issues that arose during the trial. He also delves into the relationships lying at the heart of the conspiracy, including those between Burr and Jefferson, Hamilton, and coconspirator General James Wilkinson, commander of the Western United States forces.
Customer Reviews:
Book has subtle but major flaw(s).......2007-03-04
I am going to have to differ with my fellow reviewers in their opinions both about Melton's book and about Burr himself.
Melton is an attorney and a law professor. He is also the author of another book that I enjoyed a great deal (and have reviewed also): "The First Impeachment." However, I don't feel that Melton's Burr Conspiracy book contributes much to the existing opinions on Burr, the Burr Conspiracy, or the trial.
While the book is well-researched and well-written -- and as a fellow historian, scholar, writer, book author (and also someone with a law degree), I understand the difficulties in doing that and appreciate Melton's work generally -- I have several complaints about this book, which I think are central to the issue of who Burr was and what he was up to. To be fair, my complaint is not solely against Melton but against his sources -- which, to some degree, is not Melton's fault.
Before I get into my complaints, though, let me mention that the best discussion of the Burr trial I have seen to date is in volume 3 of Albert J. Beveridge's "The Life of John Marshall" (available on Amazon).
Melton, as a practitioner of the discipline of law, knows how to find and use primary and secondary source material. However, in this book he relies heavily on Thomas P. Abernethy's "Burr Conspiracy," while almost completely ignoring Walter F. McCaleb's book of the same name. In my view, this is a huge omission, since I feel that McCaleb's book is the most important book on the conspiracy, unraveling as it does many of the mysteries of Burr's intentions in that period.
Secondly, Melton also relied heavily on Dumas Malone's multi-volume biography of Thomas Jefferson. Malone was a man who excused a great deal of Jefferson's criminal behavior with a virtual wave of the pen and was strongly biased against Burr.
While Melton does also cite to various biographies of Burr (including Parton, Davis, Daniels, Todd, Lomask, Wandell & Minnigerode, and Parmet & Hecht -- nearly all the standard ones) and to Mary-Jo Kline's important collection of "Political Correspondence and Public Papers of Aaron Burr" (as well as to much other solid primary source material), he does not cite at all to Roger G. Kennedy's ground-breaking, if rambling, book, "Burr, Hamilton, and Jefferson: A Study in Character."
The reliance on Abernethy and Malone and the failure to study and include McCaleb and Kennedy constitute, for me, a major flaw in Melton's work. I believe this omission leads to a perpetuation of speculations and misconceptions about Burr, and since Melton has more credibility because of his credentials, this lends more weight to the inaccuracies.
Many Amazon reviewers note (as did Melton) that nobody will ever know what Burr's intentions were, that Burr was brilliant and charismatic, that "the best and the brightest are always fallible," that Burr lacked principles, that the bulk of Burr's letters never surfaced, that public opinion at or after Burr's trial "overwhelmingly concluded" that Burr was "up to no good," that the "evidence strongly indicates that [Burr] was the ringleader in a plot to establish an independent nation" in the West, and so on.
I stand somewhat alone in my disagreement with each of these statements. I believe Burr's intentions are discoverable. I am tired of hearing that Burr was brilliant and charismatic and lacked principles. Burr was intelligent and charming, but the brilliant/charismatic/unprincipled combination is grossly misleading and is used to justify all manner of unsubstantiated speculation and ill opinion about Burr.
The evidence does not "strongly indicate" that Burr was a "ringleader" in a "plot to establish an independent nation." Burr was merely one in a line of many -- including, by the way, Alexander Hamilton, and many others who were supported by Jefferson (both before and during his presidency) and his successors -- who wanted to "liberate" Spanish Mexico (and possibly even South American states), which included at the time, New Orleans.
Burr's plan was, if there was a U.S. declaration of war against Spain, to invade and liberate. He later said that Jefferson had sanctioned this plan. Absent such a declaration, Burr planned to make a (perfectly lawful) settlement north of New Orleans. The rest of his "intrigues" with agents of Britain and France were mere efforts to obtain funding (see McCaleb on this). He told those people what they wanted to hear.
Many before Burr had sought or obtained foreign funding for such expeditions(including George Rogers Clark, mentioned below, and U.S. Senator William Blount, whose enterprise some say VP Jefferson was secretly supporting). None were brought up on charges of treason. Some Westerners were even in Spanish pay -- including Jefferson's saw, James Wilkinson, and other eminent western citizens who were trusted by several Presidents -- and none were charged with treason.
But even if Burr did want to establish an independent nation, Jefferson himself had once verbally sanctioned the separation of the West from the East and the former's independence from the United States. On this issue, Burr was really on the tail end of a long line of westerners who wanted independence from the U.S. -- or who already felt they were independent. This included George Rogers Clark who was sponsored by then Virginia governor Thomas Jefferson on various covert missions, including an unlawful exploration of what was then the Spanish west. (See Kennedy's book.)
Much of Burr's personal correspondence apparently went down with his daughter at sea, but this was NOT MOST of his correspondence. There are 11 reels of microfilm of Burr's letters and another 16 reels that contain his orderly books, journal, and court documents.
Public opinion about Burr during the trial was not overwhelmingly against him. In fact, he had a tremendous amount of popular support, but with a President as your enemy, few friends will risk their careers to ally with you. Thus, friends who believed in him were afraid to stand up for him.
After all, Jefferson declared Burr guilty and ordered (or supported Willkinson in ordering) him to be taken dead or alive before his arrest or trial occurred.
While Burr may be the most famous of those Jefferson persecuted, Burr was not the only one whose life was ruined by Jefferson (or Wilkinson, for that matter -- and in this case, Burr had both men plotting against him, both knowing they were unjustifiably and illegally doing so). The full story of all Jefferson's victims has not yet been written, but for those interested in exploring the issue, I suggest David Leon Chandler's "The Jefferson Conspiracies: A President's Role in the Assassination of Meriwether Lewis," and Leonard W. Levy, "Jefferson and Civil Liberties: The Darker Side," as well as Kennedy's book mentioned above. See also Richard Zacks "The Pirate Coast: Thomas Jefferson, the First Marines, and the Secret Mission of 1805."
Wilkinson's victims, by the way, included several assassinations and/or attempted assassinations.
Like the story of Jefferson and Wilkinson's many victims, Burr's story has not yet been fully written. While he was certainly a complex man, and while his "conspiracy" confusingly led in several directions at once, both the man and the story are discoverable. I hope one day to contribute further to these understandings, but in the meantime, I hope readers can separate fact from mere speculation or inference, including such as arises out of reliance on biased sources, which is the case in Melton's otherwise well-done book.
Jennifer Van Bergen, J.D.
Author of "The Twilight of Democracy: The Bush Plan for America" (Common Courage Press, 2004), "Archetypes for Writers: Using the Power of Your Subconscious" (Michael Wiese Productions, 2007), "Aaron Burr and the Electoral Tie of 1801: Strict Constitutional Construction" (1 Cardozo Public Law Policy & Ethics Journal 92 [2003]), "In the Absence of Democracy: The Designation and Material Support Provisions of the Anti-Terrorism Laws" (2 Card. Pub. Law Pol. & Ethics J. 107 [2003]), and "The Dangerous World of Indefinite Detentions: Vietnam to Abu Ghraib" (37 Case Western Reserve Journal of Int'l Law 449 [2006]).
A Very Detailed Study of a Very Elusive Complex Man .......2005-01-23
Aaron Burr will always remain a mystery since it's never totally clear what his intentions were when he went west to join a band of men traveling south to join the commanding General of the U.S. Armies, James Wilkinson, in a complex plot. However, Melton enjoins his own legal expertise to not only provide a history of Burr's western misadventure but to also analyze the courtroom proceedings that involved the greatest attorneys at that time including Burr himself. The trial was before Supreme Court Justice Marshall who was also doubling as a circuit judge in Virginia. This is a very confusing story since Burr whose political career was ruined by Jefferson and Hamilton; the duel does not help either, goes west to coordinate or participate in separating the west or getting involved with a filibuster to take over Spanish held territory much like George Rodgers Clark attempted before and Jackson and Houston later succeeded. Burr seems very erratic in trying to solicit support from France and England while working with the virtual double agent James Wilkinson. Melton does well explaining the complex relationship between the men and does an excellent job in explaining the complexities of the unique trial and the involvement of Jefferson. However, no one can quite get a definitive handle on what Burr's ultimate plan was. What is missing from all books on Burr is a study of Burr from a psychological point of view. Burr achieved a period of political greatness in spite of losing his parents and grandparents while only a toddler and he partakes on his misadventure not too long after his wife dies and his political career is crushed. One must wonder if Burr would have gotten so involved had his wife survived. Burr; however, was kind to his friends and children after rebounding from poverty and Melton provides this interesting epilogue that makes one wonder if Burr's life might have made a better turn had his domestic situation been more solid when his political career vaporized.
A Clever Adventurer.......2004-04-01
This very readable book outlines the Burr Conspiracy. Burr was handsome, charismatic, brilliant, and from one of the foremost families of colonial America; a Revolutionary War hero and Lt. Colonel under Washington. Burr was one of the most famous lawyers, Attorney-General of NY, US Senator, and VP to Jefferson. But those that knew him considered him an "unprincipled villain". This book is an overview of Burr's life and the Conspiracy - an alleged attempt to create a new republic from the western territories of the US. Burr was a genius or hero like Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, Marshall, or others. They were all important, and all had their flaws. The best and the brightest are always fallible humans; this book is a reminder (p.236). That is the ever-present reason for checks and balances in government, and a limited term for Chief Executives in state and federal governments. The Charge of Treason against Burr is similar to the conflicts that arose in newly liberated countries in the 20th century. The Trial kept people's attention for nearly a year. Burr was found 'not guilty' but his political career was still ruined.
King George's edict banning settlements west of the Appalachians was one of the causes of the Revolution. The population growth of the Americans was as feared as their arms (p.11). The dangerous life of the squatters who preceded the settlers is described on pages 11-12. The Western Waters were hemmed in by the mountains to the east, the lakes in the north, and the Spanish Empire on the south. The latter was the only possible shipping outlet. An earlier conspiracy was exposed; US Senator William Blount was impeached and expelled. Later he became Governor of Tennessee.
Part Two traces Burr's rise to power and fame from his skills as a lawyer. Burr the lawyer stayed on good terms with both the Federalist and Republicans; this made him both powerful and loathed (p.32). Burr's strength was his popular support in New York and elsewhere (p.33). But his downfall began when he didn't give way to Jefferson in 1800; this antagonized his strongest ally. Page 63 explains Marshall's strategy in Marbury vs. Madison. After his term as VIce-President ended Burr moved westward. Burr was popular there for slaying Hamilton, their Federalist enemy (p.78). Burr was linked with the Yazoo land swindlers (p.87). General William Eaton learned of Burr's plan to gain the marine corps and naval commanders to overthrow Congress, assassinate the President, and become ruler (p.94). Burr planned to attack both Mexico and the Union. General James Wilkinson saw he could gain more by denouncing Burr, and did so (p.122). If Burr could be silenced Wilkinson would be a hero (p.145).
Leading citizens composed the Grand Jury that indicted Burr. When Wilkinson showed up with a letter Burr asked for his arrest for mail theft! This was ruled irrelevant since it happened in another jurisdiction. Burr and others were indicted for treason (p.189). Jury selection was as important then (pp.196-8). The jury found Burr 'not guilty' because the charge wasn't proven (p.216). Also 'not guilty' of violating the Neutrality Act (p.218). His most serious problems were the suits to recover loans (p.219). Burr escaped by fleeing to Europe for years. He returned to New York in 1812 and practiced law, living in obscurity. Burr died in 1836, months after the Battle of San Jacinto (p.233) which seemed to justify his dreams of expansion into the southeast. Perhaps in today's world he would be as famous and successful as other smiley-faced politicians? His lack of any principles suggests this (p.233).
Chock Full of Information.......2003-01-04
Who was Aaron Burr? Everyone knows that he was Vice President of the United States and the man who killed Alexander Hamilton in a duel. We all learn this in our high school history class. What we don't learn in our history class is presented here, in this book, a book that is chock for of information about a man who we are not taught enough about.
After the duel with Hamilton, Burr's political worth declined drastically. He and Jefferson were at odds and his career seemed to be over. He went west for many reasons and this is the story of what transpired, as best we can tell. Unfortunately Aaron Burr was not survived by much correspondence. Unlike Jefferson and Adams, the bulk of Burr's letters have never surfaced.
Aaron Burr was put on trial for treason. An unlikely charge against a former Vice President but times were different and Burr's actions at the time left many questions as to what he was actually trying to accomplish. He was rallying disenters in the land west of the Appalachian Mountains for some reason. He talked of invading Mexico but there was also other options. Invading Spanish Florida? To rein as King over his own country once he helped the western territories rebel against Washington DC and secede from the Union? We don't know for sure.
We do know that Burr talked to British diplomats trying to get the British Navy to help him by blocking the port of New Orleans. He tried to get US Military commanders to help him take over the city of New Orleans. What was it that he was really up to? While we may never know for sure this book goes an awful long way toward explaining many of the questions that you may have.
Filled with many of the outstanding names in history, offering insight into their character as well as their role in defending the United States, or involved in the conspiracy with Burr. See where they stand. Cheif Justice John Marshall, future President Andrew Jackson, current President Thomas Jefferson, future President James Madison, Francis Scott Key, Army Generals and Territorial Governors. In the end, Aaron Burr was found not guilty and faded away into history. But he left a legacy of hate and confusion.
This book was very interesting but at times did read like a history book. If that is not your cup of tea you may want to think twice. But th book was very good at explaining the details of Burr's actions. Where he was at, what he was doing and who he was meeting with. The book didn't have the flair of "Founding Fathers" but it is non the less worth the price. If you are in to history you will love this book.
Extremely Well Written Story of Burr's Mysterious Plot.......2002-07-19
Exactly what Burr was up to in his plans for the West will never be perfectly known. Many of his associates destroyed documents because of Burr's trial for treason--the trial of the century involving a Who's Who in the U.S. during the early 19th century. As the author quotes (from William Whichard) "history is only the recorded part of the remembered part of the observed part of what happened." (page 235) Yet public opinion in his time overwhelmingly concluded that Burr, the slayer of Alexander Hamilton, was up to no good. The author wrote this book as a reminder: "...if we are to govern ourselves, we must remember the danger of a brilliant mind driven by frail human needs." (page 236) This book, an excellently written summary of Burr's life much aided by the author's legal expertise, is a call to citizen vigilance against future threats to liberty by brilliant politicians whose motives are far from noble. In the latter half of the 20th Century Americans witnessed such scoundrels in both parties. The author will have achieved his purpose only if we continue to be vigilant by recognizing in our national political choices what Aristotle said long ago: character is destiny.
Average customer rating:
- Great book on two of American's founding fathers
- How little things change...
- Not Always Balanced... But Always Entertaining
- Fantastic, if you love history and drama
- Intellectually engaging, with flaws
|
Duel: Alexander Hamilton, Aaron Burr, and the Future of America
Thomas J. Fleming , and
Thomas Fleming
Manufacturer: Basic Books
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
General
| 19th Century
| United States
| Americas
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| United States
| Americas
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Americas
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Look Inside History Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Similar Items:
-
Burr, Hamilton, and Jefferson: A Study in Character
-
A Fatal Friendship: Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr
-
Jefferson's Vendetta: The Pursuit of Aaron Burr and the Judiciary
-
Aaron Burr : Conspiracy to Treason
-
The Creation of the American Republic, 1776-1787 (Published for the Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture, Williamsburg, Virginia)
ASIN: 0465017371
Release Date: 2000-09-05 |
Amazon.com
To judge by many standard histories, the revolutionary founders of the United States came equipped with wings and haloes. They were anything but saintly, however; their behavior, public and private, was often scandalous. One of the most outrageous men of the day was Alexander Hamilton, the Federalist leader and architect of the American banking and judiciary systems, whose amorous exploits and political maneuverings alike were the stuff of legend. Tangled in a succession of failed business ventures and personal intrigues, and convinced that the might of the United States should not be hampered by such inconveniences as checks and balances, Hamilton fell afoul of just about everyone he encountered in his quest for influence and wealth.
To his eventual misfortune, one of those he crossed was Thomas Jefferson's vice president, Aaron Burr. Many histories of their tangled relationship personalize their differences, and, to be sure, they disliked each other with splendid fervor. Thomas Fleming's contribution to the often-told tale is to ground the Hamilton-Burr rivalry in the politics of the day--a politics complicated by many contending ideological factions, powerful interest groups, and lobbyists. Writing with vigor and clarity, Fleming points to the clay feet on which Hamilton and Burr marched to their sad destiny, and he crafts an exceptionally interesting portrait of the early Republic. --Gregory McNamee
Book Description
A rich brew of political intrigue that dwarfs even the most salacious political scandal today.
All school children know the story of the fatal duel between Hamilton and Burr - but do they really? In this remarkable retelling, Thomas Fleming takes the reader into the post-revolutionary world of 1804, a chaotic and fragile time in the young country as well as a time of tremendous global instability.
The success of the French Revolution and the proclamation of Napoleon as First Consul for Life had enormous impact on men like Hamilton and Burr, feeding their own political fantasies at a time of perceived Federal government weakness and corrosion. Their hunger for fame spawned antagonisms that wreaked havoc on themselves and their families and threatened to destabilize the fragile young American republic. From that poisonous brew came the tangle of regret and anger and ambition that drove the two to their murderous confrontation in Weehawken, New Jersey.
Readers will find this is popular narrative history at its most authoritative, and authoritative history at its most readable.
Customer Reviews:
Great book on two of American's founding fathers.......2004-04-04
A great book on Aaron Burr if you want/need to know more about this Vice President. Tells a sad story about the end of a great American - Alexander Hamilton. Good book to understand what the country was going through at this time of Jefferson.
How little things change..........2003-01-15
Reading about the drama of politics nearly two centuries ago really shows how little things change. Our founding fathers were wonderful men, but men all the same. A captivating and intelligent piece of literature.
Not Always Balanced... But Always Entertaining.......2002-12-31
Thomas Fleming's "Duel" paints history with broad, vivid, and colorful strokes and gives to the history a certain drama and interaction that makes it an engaging product to the reader.
However, the reader should be forewarned that the account given to the times of Hamilton and Burr is not (always) balanced. Fleming's open and articulated biases make it hard for the reader to accept "Duel" as an "objective" piece of history.
With that said, there are some real gems to be found in this book. Fleming's account of the genesis and execution of the Sedition Act is incredible. Also of great worth was Fleming's account of Hamilton's libel appeal before New York State's highest court. Until that time, TRUTH could not be asserted as a defense in a libel prosecution. Fleming illuminates this with great detail.
Many reviewers find sympathy with Aaron Burr, who has commonly been portrayed as a villain. Fleming does a lot of heavy lifting to rehabilitating Burr's historical character, but Fleming also leaves some of Burr's deceit intact (Burr's dreams of ruling a Western Empire).
What I find curious is that many reviewers felt little sympathy for Alexander Hamilton. While it is true that Fleming's account does portray Hamilton as a washed-up Federalist, it is important to note that (generally) ANY Federalist after 1800 was a washed-up Federalist. The Federalist fall after 1800 was sudden and complete. Fleming portrays Hamilton as having many admirable qualities (i.e. intelligence, diligence, a desire to re-invent himself - at least religiously, etc.)
The real villainry in Fleming's work is reserved for Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson is the mythical "Founding Father" that takes the hardest (deserved?) fall.
All in all, "Duel" is an engaging read and highly recommended - even with its apparent drawbacks.
Fantastic, if you love history and drama.......2002-10-24
I would consider this a very balanced account of the backgrounds and lives of Burr and Hamilton. Unlike some historians who are obviously prejudiced against one man or the other, Fleming's style allows the reader to decide. The events leading up to the duel are sobering. Reading the exact words that Burr and Hamilton exchanged in letters that led up to the fateful day, evoke true emotion. You do not need an historian to explain what Burr and Hamilton meant to say in these exchanges - it is there for you to read in black and white and to interpret on your own - it is very powerful. All in all, a great read for those interested in the drama of american history.
Intellectually engaging, with flaws.......2002-07-23
Parts of this book make calling it a "historical account" an insult to historians. While it does supply ample history that coincides with much of the original source material I've read, the author asks us to accept what the author has concluded about his subjects on faith.
Fleming spends an inordinate amount of space for a historian attacking the professed faith of Alexander Hamilton, and fires an inappropriate shot at Washington's as well. Hamilton, you see, cannot be a genuine Christian because he did some bad things, according to Fleming's view of the Christian faith. By that standard, no one can ever truly be a Christian. By my estimation, there are approximately four pages detailing this analysis, which in my opinion, requires too much analysis, judgement, and speculation of Hamilton's thoughts and the requirements of the Christian faith in general to be included in, lack of footnotes notwithstanding, an otherwise excellent and readable historical narrative.
Fleming doesn't falsely claim, as Ellis did, that DNA evidence shows that Jefferson IN FACT sired any children with Sally Hemmings, but just pointed out the accusation that was made in Jefferson's day, sans the inconclusive and falsely reported DNA test made amidst the Clinton scandal.
One other thing I found disheartening about the book was Fleming's claim that Hamilton wanted to be another Napoleon (certainly Jefferson and the Adams' Family thought he did). There just doesn't seem to be enough evidence presented in 'Duel' to draw that conclusion as conclusively as Fleming does and still call it history. With Burr, on the other hand, Fleming cites plenty of evidence that he wanted to head either a secession or revolution in the Louisiana territory, provided the source material is correct, which isn't all annotated.
All in all I do recommend this book for entertainment and a particular point of view. My only fear is that others will read it and consider it a history book, when many parts of it are merely dramatic speculation. Anyone who would represent it honest and plain history is trying to sell something besides a book, and prospective readers should proceed with this in mind.
Customer Reviews:
One vote away from the Presidency.......2006-04-10
No historical figure could be described as an enigma more so than Aaron Burr, a colonel, lawyer, New York Legislator, U.S. Senator, Vice President, and the murderer of Alexander Hamilton. Although Burr had the advantage of coming from a line of presidents of Princeton, he lost both his parents early, and was raised by an uncle he had little feelings for. However, he was an extremely smart and ambitious youth, and made his way through education to become a distinguished soldier (except in the eyes of George Washington, who never trusted him) and a lawyer who practiced in New York. He was always aware of how important appearances were, so he lived far above his means, to the point of being in perpetual debt. Because of a combination of intelligence, ambition and fortunate circumstances, he found himself sought out by Democrat Republicans to be Jefferson's running mate against John Adams in the 1800 Presidential election. The truth was however, that Burr lacked any strong political views, and could have easily allied himself with the rival party, the Federalists. Burr, indeed had his ardent supporters (known as "Burrites") as well as arch-enemies (as Lomask points out, it's difficult to say when exactly Hamilton would fall into this category), not necessarily along party lines.
Burr attempted, as best he could, to keep himself above the struggles of the most powerful New York politicians, and he was, at first, uncontroversial enough to be nominated as Jefferson's running mate. However, because of a quirk in the electoral college (each elector had two votes), Aaron Burr received as many votes as Thomas Jefferson, placing the election between these two in the hands of Congress. Amazingly, Jefferson and Burr never spoke, but the Democratic Republican party asked Burr to announce that he would not serve if elected President, whereas the Federalists now supported Burr as the lesser of two evils (they thought Jefferson, who had served as Vice-President under Adams, would ruin the Country). Burr, playing the middle, refused to say anything, causing Jefferson, when he was finally elected after multiple votes were taken, to absolutely despise his Vice-President, to the point where Burr became a complete Washington outsider, even though he was supposedly the number two man.
Of course, the most notorious part of the first half of Burr's life was his feud with Hamilton, which arose from Burr's learning about a negative comment Hamilton allegedly made at a party concerning Burr's character (Burr was something of a cad) leading to, by far, the most famous duel in American History. And, if you read my review of Lomask's biography of the second part of Burr's life, you will see that the utterly bizarre life of Aaron Burr would become even more bizarre.
The subject matter of Lomask's two biographies, which are both quite good, cannot be more interesting. I do believe, however, that it's only a matter of time until we get a biography about this fascinating and strange man from a more top-flight biographer, perhaps Ron Chernow, who one would think would consider writing a book on Aaron Burr after his extremely well-received biography of Hamilton.
Amazon.com
Aaron Burr has been villainized by historians ever since he killed Alexander Hamilton in 1804. In A Fatal Friendship, Arnold Rogow attempts to rehabilitate Aaron Burr by fully describing the context of the duel and the personal histories of the two men. All that is really known about the duel is that Vice President Aaron Burr challenged Hamilton because Hamilton had made disparaging remarks about him in a public place. No one knows what Hamilton said, and because Rogow is a very careful historian, he doesn't come to many firm conclusions here, but he does present some compelling arguments about the sources of enmity between the two men.
Hamilton may have resented Burr because they came from such different backgrounds--Hamilton was illegitimate and had to work his way up in the world, while Burr was born into money and high social status. Both men became lawyers and politicians, but while Hamilton cowrote The Federalist Papers and authored important legislation, Burr never achieved much political influence. Hamilton did much more to mold the United States in its early years than Burr did, so it is understandable that historians have portrayed him sympathetically. In this book, Rogow suggests that Hamilton may not have been above reproach. Both men had multiple extramarital affairs, so it is possible that the duel was over a woman. Hamilton may have accused Burr of having an incestuous relationship with his daughter Theo. The problem with this book is that there is not enough evidence to support any of these theories, and there probably never will be. However, Rogow is a capable historian and this book is worth reading for its re-evaluation of these pivotal characters in American history. --Jill Marquis
Book Description
A dramatic reinterpretation of the duel that shocked America.
For almost two centuries, historians have struggled to explain the extraordinary duel that killed Alexander Hamilton, our first Secretary of the Treasury, and ended Vice President Aaron Burr's political career. In A Fatal Friendship, the distinguished political scientist Arnold A. Rogow demonstrates for the first time that the roots of the fatal encounter lay not in Burr's (admittedly flawed) political or private conduct but rather in Hamilton's conflicted history and character. With his detailed archival research, his close (and unprecedented) examination of the friendship between the two heroic figures, and his bold, imaginative writing, Rogow changes forever our understanding of honor, politics, and friendship in the early American Republic.
6 Black-and-White Photographs Notes/Bibliography/Index
Arnold A. Rogow has taught at Stanford University, the University of Iowa, and the City University of New York. He is the author of many books, including James Forrestal: A Study of Personality, Politics, and Policy. He lives in New York City.
Customer Reviews:
A Complement to any Early U.S Historian's Library.......2001-09-01
Arnold Rogow's "A Fatal Friendship" does not set out to villify Aaron Burr, nor does it exhalt Alexander Hamilton unduly.
Instead, it accurately gauges parallel events of their unique relationship, as befits a historian. Readers should remember Rogow is a psychologist, first and foremost, and thus he is permitted to speculate as to Burr and Hamilton's motivations. Rogow consistently qualifies any statements he makes, without overstatements or hyperbole. Therefore, any reader who wants a simple parable of good and evil will be greatly disappointed.
While a history undergrad, I purchased this book simultaneously with Thomas Fleming's own interpretation, "Duel." I was pleased with both books, but I must say Rogow's writing satisfied more because of his more objective stance. Fleming seems to always nurture a slight, though forgivable, bias against Aaron Burr. It is refreshing to see a just assessment of that unprincipled, infuriating, but somehow likeable rogue. As for Hamilton, Rogow ably commends his great political contributions, but also reminds us of our "flawed giant"'s scandalous affair with Maria Reynolds and scurrilous smear campaigns against Federalist president John Adams. Finally, Rogow portrays Hamilton as the true instigator of the vendetta leading to Burr's final challenge and the duel of 1804.
Aaron Burr was no saint, but neither was Hamilton an angelic martyr for the Republic. Two complex historical figures with a tangled common thread. Rogow's study has helped us unravel a Gordian knot of American history. A pity "A Fatal Friendship" is now out of print.
Interesting Historical Effort.......2001-04-10
Author Rogow presents a well crafted dual biography of Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr, trying to piece together the events that culiminated in the duel which left Hamilton dead and Burr an outcast. More emphasis is laid on Hamilton and his life, with Aaron Burr becoming more of a cipher. Burr seems to never have committed his thoughts to paper so his stand on various political issues isn't clear. Hamilton on the other hand, wrote volumes about all facets of his political life. The two came from a very different background yet both ended up as successful attorneys in New York City. Hamilton never stopped trying to sabotage the political rise of Burr and the reasons never seemed very clear. Many political figures of the time commented on questionable ethics and morals of Burr yet Hamilton himself was immersed in one of the first major political sex scandals.
Rogow tries to analyze both men and provide various ideas about what could have led to the duel. It is interesting to note that Hamilton seemed to possess a "death wish" in the final years of his life, after his eldest son Philip had been killed in a duel. This seems to be the only context in which the duel makes any sense. Hamilton could not end his own life but dying a noble death and making Burr an outcast too boot was simply to enticing.
The book was very well done and I especially liked the fact that the author didn't seem predispose to agree or disagree with either man. The men were shown with all their faults and yet their contributions to the founding of the country is richly demonstrated.
good analysis.......2000-05-19
I originally purchased this book as a source for a term paper on the subject, and actually planned to only spot-read the book. Yet, after reading Rogow's introduction, I found his argument so intriguing that I felt I just had to read the whole thing. Imagine, Hamilton having "playground" issues with Burr's wealth. Its such an odd little interpretation of history, and its presented so well, that it not only makes for an interesting read, but actually does its job in convincing you of the argument. If you have a penchant for early American History, this is a must read.
An original approach.......1999-12-01
I found "Fatal Friendship" to be an original, engaging and well-written account of a fascinating and still largely unresolved incident in American history. The book was also refreshingly free of the typical "anti-Burr" bias that has been the norm from the 1800's through Fawn Brodie. Rogow did an excellent job of discussing the protagonists' differing characters in the proper historical context. History of this sort cannot be neatly tied up with simple black-and-white explanations (despite what the grammatically-challenged reviewers from Oklahoma and Kansas below would seem to prefer). Rogow deserves credit for tackling an interesting subject from a new perspective. Two very recent books, Kennedy's "Burr, Hamilton and Jefferson" and Fleming's "Duel," follow Rogow's lead in examining this period and these two Founding Fathers from a new angle, and also are higly recommended.
An Historical Embellishment ..........1999-09-07
Although a mildly useful work, the author seems content to conclude that a simpleton argument is the underlying reason for the two men's duel and fails to disclose perhaps the most revealing, yet little-known fact of all surrounding this most famous event -- that in 1804 Alexander Hamilton had exposed political moves by Vice President Burr, Jr. and Burr's cousin, Theodore Dwight, among others, ultimately designed to return the United States back to British rule. Like so many others here, I rate this book in the category of "mostly fiction".
Book Description
Generations of Americans have known Thomas Jefferson as one of our unambiguously great presidents, a man of honor and optimism unencumbered by pettiness and spite; and so they have known Aaron Burr, his greatest adversary, as a traitorous would-be destroyer of that distinguished legacy. In Jefferson’s Vendetta, Joseph Wheelan examines one of the eminent political rivalries in our history, set against the backdrop of postcolonial Virginia, and discovers a truth vastly different from what is taught in high schools and universities.
Here is Burr, the flawed but gifted politician who made powerful enemies because his charm and skill rivaled Jefferson’s own, and who trusted the fairness of American democracy too deeply to rebut the wild criticisms aimed at him by slanderers in the U.S. government. Also shown in vivid detail is Jefferson, whose obsessive crusade to destroy Burr was undone by one mammoth but historically overlooked miscalculation.
Exquisitely researched and brilliantly written, Jefferson’s Vendetta challenges the blackened legacy of Aaron Burr and shows the beloved President Jefferson mired in the kind of hateful and manipulative politics that tradition has depicted him as rising above.
Customer Reviews:
Corruption and Treason.......2006-08-13
This is a part of history I had not studied before, and the same story is told in the earlier "The Jefferson Conspiracies" which continues on with the death of Meriwether Lewis and the rest of the career of General Wilkinson the really corrupt and treasonous person in both books. Both books are very readable, I found some of the points more clear in the other book. Both books feel Wilkinson betrayed Burr to hide his own involvement and would have killed him rather than see him go to trial. The second book speculates the same may have happened to Lewis as he was traveling East because he felt he was being framed in the same manner as Burr (thou in this case apparently competely innocent), and Wilkinson may have thought he was also going to provide evidence of his corrupt land deals.
This book tries to portray Burr as an innocent, which is hard to believe. While it is clear with just 50 men on there way to live on land owned by Burr , no treasous armed uprising against the US or Spain had yet occurred, (rather than the thousands of armed men approaching New Orleans that Wilkinson claimed). But it seemed that both Wilkinson and Burr solicited British and others for help with attacking Spain with Burr to be King (not President) and perhaps to divide the western territory from the US so at least in todays standards treason had occurred. Back then the Federalist were considering withdrawing New England from the union as well and before it was made illegal (but only a high misdameanor) there were US forays into Spainish terrority Jefferson at least wanted Spain to worry about a rogue attack from the US,such thoughts were not unusual in those days.
It is clear that Wilkinson was in Spain's payroll, and was traitous. Both books argue Jefferson shielded him by letting him have a phoney Court Marshall rather than an investigation by Congress. The one book claims it is to protect himself and his support of his star witness against Burr. The other for the national interest, from New England threatening to leave the Union and Britain invasion from Canada , the country could not stand for the distraction, plus Wilkinson's contacts with Spain made him useful with negotian about Florida and Mexico. He escaped conviction again in 1815, which even President Madison found troubling.
A Critical Moment in American History.......2005-07-07
Every society has a moment in time where a decision affecting civil liberties has enormous repercussions. For example, laws giving the government power to curtail political assassinations were abused by Stalin and Hitler to consolidate their dictatorships. This book covers the issues and personalities involved in the courtroom battle over whether the United States would adopt the British doctrine of constructive treason in which merely thinking that it would be desirable to have the King killed would be sufficient grounds for capital punishment. Jefferson, who intensely disliked his former vice-president Burr, sought to press treason charges for an alleged plan to cause the western regions to sucede from the United States. Faced with shaky evidence, the prosecutors urged that the Constitution be interpreted to enable them to convict Burr on the basis of constructive treason. The book cogently describes the societal and personal issues at stake, and how Chief Justice Marshall navigated the intense political and judicial issues involved in the grand jury proceeding and trial. The author does an excellent job of setting the matter in its historical context and does so in a very readable style.
Revisionist History.......2005-07-05
I don't know why Mr. Wheelan has such a sore spot about Jefferson. I would just warn readers that if you read this book, make sure you read many other historical books about these same characters. If you happen to read this book, and have not read other material about these characters, you will come away with a slanted view about Thomas Jefferson, and the other historical characters in this book. There are so many writers who, for reasons of profit or ideology, have taken upon themselves the job of rewriting history to their own liking, or that of their publisher. This book has several historical mistakes, but the overall tone reminds me of some of our current extremists who take a one sided view about many issues. Jefferson was a flawed human being, that is clear to anyone who reads history. But to paint him in this light is unfair. Burr, on the other hand, was not a nice guy. He was the kind of man Bush would have been if he had lived during that time. Power hungry, instigating failed military missions, and willing to kill to get his way. Yes, that is harsh, but painfully true. Be wary of revisionist history. I give this book four stars for its inventiveness; it does have some entertainment value. Wheelan writes well, but perhaps he should switch to fiction and stop trying to turn Jefferson into someone he was not. Thomas Jefferson was a man who would not tolerate tyrants and insisted on civil liberty. Not perfect, but not the character created in Mr. Wheelan's book.
Truly, "The Trial of the Century".......2005-07-03
In the early nineteenth century, former Vice-President Aaron Burr -- the recent killer of Alexander Hamilton in a duel -- was up to something. Maybe it was an attempt to conquer Spanish Mexico and set up an American empire. Perhaps it was a plot to separate the western territories (and Kentucky) from the rest of the Union. Maybe it was both. Maybe it was neither, Historians still debate the matter. But whatever it was, it ended up with Burr on trial for treason, with Chief Justice John Marshall presiding over the trial (and President Thomas Jefferson a behind-the-scenes prosecutor). Burr was eventually acqutted (probably more for lack of specific evidence and creditable witnesses -- Burr's co-conspirators did not inspire confidence in their own integrity) but it was an extraordinarily dramatic event in the early American Republic. Wheelan tells it story well, although he is clearly not sympathetic to Jefferson. I regret to say that Wheelan's accuracy is made suspect by errors he makes: in the space of four pages Wheelan writes that James Wilkinson (the comanding general of the US Army and secretly a paid Spanish agent and the chief Government witness against Aaron Burr) had in 1775 accompanied Benedict Arnold in his famous march across the Maine wilderness to attack Canada (Wilkinson had actually been among the reinforcements reaching Arnold the next year) and also that Westchester County is in Connecticut (a statement that would amaze thousands of New York State taxpayers). But, overall I found Wheelan's account to be a gripping narrative about both conspiracy and trial.
Vendetta.......2005-03-21
A lively account of a notable trial in U.S. history. Mr. Wheelan writes like a reporter (which he has been) more than a more measured historian. Here President Jefferson is the bad guy with Chief Justice Marshall saving the day. Burr is presented as a mis-understood rogue with political enemies in high places. I do not accept the author's version of the first presidential election of Jefferson, which gives an exceedingly favorable bent to Burr's actions. Burr also killed Hamilton, which does not cause the author much pause.
In my mind, John Marshall is our country's greatest jurist. This book does help in showing an important example of his fine work.
Average customer rating:
|
Memoirs Of Aaron Burr
Matthew L. Davis
Manufacturer: Kessinger Publishing
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
General
| United States
| Americas
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Americas
| History
| Subjects
| Books
ASIN: 1419133578 |
Book Description
On the 11th February, 1801, being the day appointed by law for counting the votes of the electoral colleges, the House of Representatives proceeded in a body to the Senate chamber, where the vice-president, in view of both houses of Congress, opened the certificates of the electors of the different states; and, as the votes were read, the tellers on the part of each house counted and took lists of them, which, being compared and delivered to him, he announced to both houses the state of the votes; which was, for Thomas Jefferson 73 votes, for Aaron Burr 73 votes, for John Adams 65 votes, for Charles Pinckney 64 votes, for John Jay one vote; and then declared that the greatest number and majority of votes being equal, the choice had devolved on the House of Representatives.
Download Description
On the 11th February, 1801, being the day appointed by law for counting the votes of the electoral colleges, the House of Representatives proceeded in a body to the Senate chamber, where the vice-president, in view of both houses of Congress, opened the certificates of the electors of the different states; and, as the votes were read, the tellers on the part of each house counted and took lists of them, which, being compared and delivered to him, he announced to both houses the state of the votes; which was, for Thomas Jefferson 73 votes, for Aaron Burr 73 votes, for John Adams 65 votes, for Charles Pinckney 64 votes, for John Jay one vote; and then declared that the greatest number and majority of votes being equal, the choice had devolved on the House of Representatives.
Books:
- CARTER BEATS THE DEVIL
- Chief of Station, Congo: Fighting the Cold War in a Hot Zone
- Complete Works - 6 Volumes (Notable American Authors Series - Part I)
- Conscience of a Conservative
- Conversations with God : An Uncommon Dialogue (Book 1)
- Courage After Fire: Coping Strategies for Troops Returning from Iraq and Afghanistan and Their Families
- Crimes Against Nature: How George W. Bush and His Corporate Pals Are Plundering the Country and Hijacking Our Democracy
- Crisis
- Cuban Death-Lift
- Day Of The Dragon-King (Magic Tree House 14, paper)
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- For Women Only: What You Need to Know about the Inner Lives of Men
- Vice Cream: Over 70 Sinfully Delicious Dairy-Free Delights
- Snakehunter
- The Basque History of the World: The Story of a Nation
- The Beatles As Musicians: Revolver through the Anthology
- Warped Passages: Unraveling the Mysteries of the Universe's Hidden Dimensions
- The Seasons of Cumberland Island
- Reaping the Revenue Code Why We Need Sensible Tax Reform for Sustainable Agriculture
- The 6 Success Strategies for Winning at Life, Love & Business
- County Business Patterns Minnesota 1999
