Founding Brothers by Joseph J. Ellis is a novel book that concentrates on the political settlements during the American Revolution and the lives of the Founding Fathers. Divided into six chapters, Ellis examines how the relationships of the Founding Brothers swayed, or were influenced by, the last two decades of the eighteenth century. The reader finds out about the great compromise that led to the new location of the capital. Also, the debate over the issue of slavery, and why it was such a big problem. Lastly, the friendship that was lost because of the differences between Federalists and Anti-Federalists. Joseph J. Ellis discovers how "the revolutionary generation found a way to contain the explosive energies of the debate in the form of an ongoing argument or dialogue that was eventually institutionalized and rendered safe by the creation of political parties".
The second chapter, The Dinner, goes back to eighteenth century. Ellis tells about Thomas Jefferson’s dinner he held at his home in 1790. He invited Alexander Hamilton and James Madison to talk about the location of the nation’s capital, and individuals who would be penalized by the Assumption Bill. Ellis describes the personalities of these men which helps the reader comprehend why they made the decisions they did and how their public relationships affected them. The dinner led to a compromise between Madison and Hamilton. Madison would not oppose Hamilton’s financial plan in exchange for Hamilton’s support for the capital’s location to be along the Potomac River. I don’t really like how Ellis stuck with Madison’s side because the reader can’t get a feel of both sides. An example of this in the novel is, “"The assumption proposal therefore did them an injustice, by ...
... middle of paper ...
...g letters. Ellis describes the letters as “Adams and Rush in Wonderland.” Ellis adds that Adams's letters were more scholarly and interesting; meanwhile Jefferson's provide the starting point for the Revolution that most of the public uses. The letter correspondence consisted of 158 letters ending in 1826 when both men died.
Founding Brothers is definitely one of the most detailed books on American history that I’ve read. It’s very active and entertaining, and is very respectful when it comes to its subject matter. Throughout the book, Ellis explains the compromises of early American politics, and writes about that the members of the eighteenth century and how they were mindful when they were setting standards on which upcoming generations would depend on. This novel will attract readers who have an interest in Americas founding brothers and to those who don’t.
The compelling and infectious novel of Founding Brothers; The Revolutionary Generation written by Joseph J. Ellis combines our founding fathers weakness’ and strongest abilities in just six chapters. His six chapters tell the stories of: The duel between Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr. This entertaining chapter describes how duels were undertaken and played out in that time, and helps the reader understand both men's motives. The dinner which Thomas Jefferson held for Alexander Hamilton and James
Unfortunately, by choosing to focus on only a few events, Ellis's book fails in that it lacks somewhat of a scope. The book also focuses on some of the founding brothers in much greater detail than others. While I come away with a wealth of knowledge about both Adams and Jefferson, I have less knowledge of Ben Franklin and Aaron Burr, as Ellis's focus is significantly less on them.
... to the realness of this man. This book was first published in 2001, in New York. Though probably released before the September 11 attacks, it is assurable that if it had been released after, the direct correlation of the American hero would be made of John Adams. I think that the author’s goal, in writing this book, is to present the reality of this particular co-revolutionary, which through all the primary documents especially, he was very successful in doing. The single most memorable thing that I learned about were the relationships that Adams had, with other familiar names. This book had really helped me to understand the happenings that went on in the life period of Adams, but also really just how all these historical co-revolutionaries and Founding Fathers were all related.
...arate societies by the time of the 1700's. Agriculture, motive, people, religion, and terrain are all factors that affected how they grew apart. However, it is also through the actions of the men and woman who settled in the regions and the choices they made that led to the development of two societies. The Chesapeake region became a society of money-driven, wealthy plantation owners, virtually no middle class workers, and those in extreme poverty. The New England colonies, in contrast, developed into a society of middle class family men who placed extreme emphasis on religion. The two societies in what would become one nation may have had effects on America in the future. The dispute over slavery, the imbalance of workers, and the class differences cause rifts between the two regions over time. Two radically different cultures cannot coincide in harmony forever.
There were many men involved in the establishment of the government, the laws regulating states and people, and individual rights in the construction of the United States of America. Two men stand out as instrumental to our founding principles: Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton.
Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton were both men for the greater good and for the future of the nation. Jefferson and Hamilton had their differences, and public policies but also similarities. Thomas and Alexander were both part of different political parties. The political parties were called Federalists and anti-Federalists. Federalists were led by Alexander Hamilton who were a group of people were for a strong governments and strong government. The anti-federalist’s leader was none other but Thomas Jefferson. The anti-federalists were for a state and local government. The main comparison among these two gentlemen were that they were both leaders of their own political party. The other difference was their view on both of the types of
In the United States during the late 18th century, the American Colonies were struggling with their identity. The Revolutionary War had won Americans their collective freedom, but the best way to exercise it was the subject of much debate. One American, Alexander Hamilton, felt a need for a common, strong economic and political base for the states. This ideology stemmed from both his boyhood on the Island of St. Croix, and trying events during the Revolutionary War- influences that would later be instrumental in his publishing of the Federalist Papers.
The growth of a new nation can be a great struggle. Our founding struggled to form a perfect nation through the enactments of The Articles of Confederation, The Constitution, and also The Federalist Papers. They struggled to make a document that they could depend on in times of need, and the constitution was the one that really set the line and challenged the government to near perfection. Something can never be perfect that's why the federalist papers were created to enhance the constitution and make it something very close to perfect. All of these essays under the federalist papers were very important building blocks that helped us become the great nation that we are now.
Roark, J.L., Johnson, M.P., Cohen, P.C., Stage, S., Lawson, A., Hartmann, S.M. (2009). The american promise: A history of the united states (4th ed.), The New West and Free North 1840-1860, The slave south, 1820-1860, The house divided 1846-1861 (Vol. 1, pp. 279-354).
There are many people who can be considered the indirect founding fathers of The United States. Such people are The Christian Crusaders, Marco Polo, Cortez, Pizarro, and Martin Luther. The Crusades were a series of holy wars fought to win the holy land of Christianity from those who follow Mohammed. Even though these wars failed in the respect of winning the land back, they did triumph in another aspect. The crusaders introduced a lifestyle to the Europeans in the Holy Land that was more appealing than they knew before.
However, the author 's interpretations of Jefferson 's decisions and their connection to modern politics are intriguing, to say the least. In 1774, Jefferson penned A Summary View of the Rights of British America and, later, in 1775, drafted the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (Ellis 32-44). According to Ellis, the documents act as proof that Jefferson was insensitive to the constitutional complexities a Revolution held as his interpretation of otherwise important matters revolved around his “pattern of juvenile romanticism” (38). Evidently, the American colonies’ desire for independence from the mother country was a momentous decision that affected all thirteen colonies. However, in Ellis’ arguments, Thomas Jefferson’s writing at the time showed either his failure to acknowledge the severity of the situation or his disregard of the same. Accordingly, as written in the American Sphinx, Jefferson’s mannerisms in the first Continental Congress and Virginia evokes the picture of an adolescent instead of the thirty-year-old man he was at the time (Ellis 38). It is no wonder Ellis observes Thomas Jefferson as a founding father who was not only “wildly idealistic” but also possessed “extraordinary naivete” while advocating the notions of a Jeffersonian utopia that unrestrained
The Founding Fathers were a revolutionary group, diverse in personalities and ideologies but shared the common goal of American liberty. They understood that the citizens should have a say in their government, and the government only obtains its power from the citizen’s consent. In order to avoid endless debates on issues that needed to be solved immediately, the revolutionary leaders compromised their beliefs. Joseph J. Ellis writes of the compromises that changed the constitutional debate into the creation of political parties in, The Founding Brothers. The 3 main chapters that show cased The Founding Brothers’ compromises are The Dinner, The Silence, and The Collaborators.
The men who founded America were men with deep religious beliefs and a firm faith in God. They based their actions and decisions on what the Bible teaches, and used God’s laws to write the laws of our nations. Benjamin Franklin once said “Here is my Creed. I believe in one God, the Creator of the Universe. That He governs it by His Providence. That He ought to be worshipped…as to Jesus of Nazareth, my opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think the system of morals and his religion, as he left them to us, is the best the world ever saw, or is likely to see.” (Franklin, Founding Faith Archive). His statement was not only indicative of his beliefs, but of the beliefs of the rest of the founding fathers. They believed that a successful country was built upon principles laid out in the Bible by God, and that ultimately, the “ideal society” could be formed if everyone adhered to the guidelines established throughout the word of God. While these men were not deities that served as any sort of moral standard, they did serve as Godly influences. Their belief that the guidelines for a successful country were written in the Bible ultimately led to these men laying the foundation for one of the most dominant societies this world has ever seen.
Many sections of the book were unnecessary and useless for my certain task. Most of the book was also written in a story format and was not cold hard facts. However Chapter 5 gave an in-depth description of the Boston Tea Party and also the effects it had on the colonist. It also stated what the colonies did about this and how they went about rectifying it.
In conclusion, we can assert that the paths to aristocracy of the two leaders as we have seen were an uphill task. These paths are in one way or another similar with Franklin pioneering and Douglas following after his steps. It is also evident that Douglas through his actions fighting against slavery came to be regarded as a representative man. This owes to the fact that he not only represented slaves in America but in the entire world. The lives of Fredrick Douglas and Benjamin Franklin are indeed worth examining.