Revolutionary Characters: What Made the Founders Different

This is a fairly short, but informative book on the ideas and values held by the different founding fathers. This book is highly recommended for readers interested in both intellectual history and the American Revolution. The chapter on George Washington emphasizes how Washington went to great lengths to ensure that the American presidency would not have the powers of a monarch. This extreme caution played a key role in Washington's stepping down after two term limits, his warning against a standing army and his personal distress over whether he allowed himself to receive too much adulation or too many gifts as President. In this respect, George Washington is a remarkable man. The history of the United States would surely be substantially different, in terms of precedents set by Washington, had he not been so reluctant to wield executive power. The chapter on Thomas Jefferson is also very good. Thomas Jefferson is obviously an incredibly accomplished intellectual and statesman. In addition to penning the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson also fought to abolish the laws of primogeniture (which automatically passed all estate property to the eldest son of every family) as well as helped establish the separation of church and state with the famous Virginia Bill for Establishing Religious Freedom. However, Wood's work suggests that Jefferson sometimes got too lost in ideals while failing to note how those ideas played out in practice. This shortcoming cannot be better illustrated than Jefferson's infamous "Adam and Eve" letter where he wrote the following to comment on the violence of the French Revolution: "My own affections have been deeply wounded by some of the martyrs to this cause, but rather than it should have failed, I would have seen half the earth desolated. Were there but an Adam and an Eve left in every country, and left free, it would be better than as it now is." The chapter on Alexander Hamilton will be unsettling to those who value free market capitalism. This chapter details how Hamilton was instrumental in establishing a national bank despite the opposition from John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. In addition, Wood also details how Hamilton repudiated the benefits of unregulated markets and how he pushed to ban private banking. This chapter also details how Hamilton advocated an "American empire" over a "Democracy" and wanted a standing army contrary to the admonition against one in Washington's farewell address. Although I will not detail them here, many of the other chapters in this book are also very good. The chapter on James Madison explores the alleged change in James Madison's values when he went from a co-author of the Federalist Papers to a staunch Democratic-Republican and concludes that there were no substantial changes in Madison's political philosophy. The chapter on Benjamin Franklin explores Wood's thesis that Benjamin Franklin was a longtime British loyalist who, up until his seventies, clung to the overly optimistic belief that the British crown was still generally good for the American colonies. The chapter on John Adams does delve into some of his impressive intellectual achievements, including his 'Defense of the Constitution of the United States'. However, my perception is this chapter understates the importance of John Adams in many of the ideas expressed in the Declaration of Independence, say compared to C. Bradley Thompson's 'John Adams and the Spirit of Liberty'. Overall, this is a great read for anyone seeking to understand the important moral and political ideas that the different Founders held.

very interesting book and well written.

Gordon Wood has distilled a large body of knowledge into cogent chapters on the founding fathers, bookended by essays that put their legacy into perspective. What he tries to do is peel away the layers of mythmaking and revisionist history that have taken place over the last two centuries and get to the heart of what made these "revolutionary characters" tick. What he reveals is that it was their strong sense of public character and duty that separated them from not only the mainstream of their time but the mainstream thought that prevails today. Wood argues that you cannot separate the Founding Fathers from their era, they lived under a very different set of circumstances, and responded to these circumstances in their own unique ways. Since so much of their writings and journals have survived down through the ages,it makes these early statesmen prime subjects for psycho-analysis, but what Wood tries to do is take the position of an observer, looking into their conduct as one would in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. While a ranking of their conduct can more or less be inferred by the order of the chapters and the way Wood assesses their individual characters, the author stresses the pivotal roles each had in shaping the United States. Washington is paramount in the way he was able to balance all these competing forces in his presidential administration. He was a leader, if not necessarily a "decider," capable of weighing the opinions of his administration and reaching what he regarded as a just and due course for the nation. He may have lacked the intellectual abilities of Jefferson and Hamilton, or the judicial acumen of Adams, but he didn't seem to second guess his decisions, sticking by them and accepting the consequences like the gentleman he saw himself as. While this may have lent him a stiff air he was so respected in his day that the deification of his role in the American Revolution had already begun by the time of the Constitutional assemblies. If he was reluctant to assume the role of President, Wood argues it was because he did not wish to become king, which was the way many leading figures were projecting him at the time. Franklin and Adams were less concerned with how they were viewed by others, but they too cultivated public characters that served them well throughout the revolution. Both saw politics as a form of theatre, and as such perception was as important as the reality of their actions. Franklin seemed to be the more optimistic of the two, whereas Adams was deeply worried about the balance of government, something which Wood says gave Adams no rest throughout his lifetime. This could also be said of James Madison, which Wood devotes an excellent chapter to, showing how he was misinterpreted both in his time by his fellow statesmen, and later by historians. It is largely viewed that Madison underwent a major change of heart in the 1790's from that of an ardent Federalist to an anti-Federalist over the role the federal government should play in the United States. But, Wood argues Madison never saw the federal government as anything more than an adjucator, resolving state disputes, not governing over them. Here is where Madison differed sharply from Hamilton, who believed strenuously in a strong federal government, to the point of being an authoritarian regime, which in many ways the early Federal government was. Wood even devotes a chapter to Thomas Paine, the most democratic-minded of all the early statesman, and perhaps the most "revolutionary." Paine's role in the revolution is often overlooked because he did not serve in the federal government. However, his pamphlet "The Rights of Man," was one of the key documents of the revolution and perhaps the most far-reaching. In a time when many persons, both historians and politicians, are reassessing the Founding Fathers, it is refreshing to have a book like this, which strips away all the attempts to make these "revolutionary characters" into mythological figures and views them within their 18th century context.

I have read so much about these individuals over many years, since college. I thought I knew them, like many of us may. But Professor Wood has moved past the obvious to provide a thoughtful and balanced portrayal of the men behind the history books; reminding us that they really were just men after all. And yet, if these “ordinary” men could construct a democracy lasting for nearly three hundred years, one wonders what we ourselves might do, if we used our intellect and confidently engaged our passion for change??

First, this is more of an academic work than a popular one. If you are looking for a collection of engagingly told short bio's of some of the founders, this is not it. This is more of an academic work. It contains analysis and summary of scholarly opinion. For what it intends to be it is nicely done. Due to its nature, I found it less interesting in places, but it was beneficial to see what the current ideas are on these men. The book is largely a collection of previously published reviews or articles and it shows in places. For one, the choices of whom to include seems odd in places. Why include Thomas Paine and Aaron Burr but neglect Patrick Henry? Sure Paine was a key figure early on but in the end he was not much of a "Founder." Aaron Burr's chief qualities are negative ones as Wood points out. Henry, however, was perhaps the key early voice calling for independence- his resolutions reprinted throughout the colonies defined the issue and galvanized support. In addition to other examples that could be given of his oratory his role as governor of Virginia- the richest and most populous colony- during the war and his efforts in supplying Washington's troops were very significant. He is typically neglected due to his opposition to the Constitution, but this is actually another significant contribution to the shaping of the country since his criticisms helped to produce the Bill of Rights. In the end, if you want an engaging synopsis of the lives of the Founders, this is not it. If, however, you want one historian's analysis of their life and work this is a fine one. A good supplement on the issue of which Founders are most remembered and why is Daniel Dreisbach's essay "Founders Famous and Forgotten" in The Intercollegiate Review 42 (Fall 2007): 3-12. For just as scholarly but more positive assesment of Washington see Patriot Sage: George Washington and the American Political Tradition (ISI Books, 1999).

"Revolutionary Characters" is more of a teacher than a book, highlighting in the most balanced manner the common streak of excellence that characterized the Founding Fathers. It was their character that outshone all others accomplishments. The beauty is that all those larger-than- life characters were humans like us, most of them not born with a silver spoon in their mouths, carrying the kind of dreams and desires shining like stars in our eyes, but what took them to the ultimate heights was their sincerity, honesty, linkage with the people and stead-fastness of purpose. it is a book that must be on the shelf of those who are honest seekers of improvement, betterment and growth, in themselves as well as in those that surround them. Thank you Mr. Gordon S. Wood, for writing such a readable book.

A very interesting series of biographies about the important people of the founding fathers of the country. Got a bit too much into the weeds but had a lot of things I never knew about these people. Each chapter is one person. I recommend it.

After a detailed discussion of the culture, beliefs, and ideals of 18th century British America, provides a brief discussion of the life of each principal leader of the American Revolution, and in each case it measures the individual against the culture his personal aspirations, successes and failures, and for each his contributions to the cause of our independence. Recommended for anyone seriously interested in our War for Independence. The first chapter is of enormous value to readers with a limited background in American History. My only criticism: The title, in my view, tends to trivialize a book that makes a significant contribution to the literature of the American Revolution.

This book explains why the founders of the USA were one off people and why they can never be duplicated. I had never realized that they literally created the infrastructure of a new government and that it took 50 years to hammer it home. This story could probably fill a library, but this book condenses it to manageable proportions. Well worth a read.

This was one of the few times when I couldn't continue reading a book. The achievements were glossed over. Very poor.