5 comments about A Life in Secrets: Vera Atkins and the Missing Agents of WWII.

1. When I think of secret agents from the United Kingdom, normally I think of MI 5 or MI 6. Another agency was created during World War II--and disbanded at its end--called the Special Operations Executive or SOE. This book is about one woman, Vera Atkins, and her work within this branch of covert operations that sent patriotic men and women spies into France to help bolster the work of the French Resistance prior to the 1944 D-Day invasion at Normandy.
   
   It is obvious from the start of the book that author Sarah Helm has done extensive research on Ms. Atkins, piecing together not only her work for the SOE, but also Ms. Atkins' personal life. For example, Helm was tireless in trying to find exact locations of photos taken during Ms. Atkins' childhood in Romania. At the very beginning of the book the author talks about the one and only encounter she had with Vera Atkins.
   
   At the time of the interview, Ms. Atkins was but a few weeks from her 90th birthday, and chose to speak little of her involvement with the SOE. With that as a backdrop, the author used her skill and connections to interview anyone who had worked with or knew Vera Atkins to put together a very interesting story. The book is written in narrative form, but at times Helm drops into the text a snippet from one of these various interviews with survivors from that era. Most of the book is about how Vera Atkins tracked down leads on the agents who didn't return or were presumed dead, because Ms. Atkins felt responsible to give an accurate accounting to the families that were unaware their missing family members were agents.
   
   When reading this book, you are aware that you are reading about British history by a British author. One of the ways that this is evident is by the author's liberal usage of French phrases, some of which are not translated into English. For a British audience this may not be a problem, but for the average American audience, it can be troubling at times.
   
   Armchair Interviews says: A fascinating story about World War II and well worth the time to read.



2. It's one thing to be a trained trooper, heavily armed and supported by your comrades. It's another to be a young female civilian, clandestinely landed or air-dropped into enemy occupied territory. Sarah Helms has written a very personal biography, a page-turner that helps today's interested reader access a facet of the war that hasn't been forgotten because it's never been widely known. The portal is Vera Atkins, the woman behind F section at SOE, who was personally responsible for recruiting, training, dispatching and managing civilian female agents in occupied France. It's an inspiring and byzantine story that takes the reader back to the roots of the 20th century. More immediately it makes you shake your head when you realize that many of these young heroines, idealists all, risked and lost their lives owing to the incompetence and betrayal of their colleagues, as well as the twisted and bestial treatment they received from the men and women they faced in German uniforms. It's comforting to know that at least one person - Vera Atkins - felt a personal responsibility to discover the fate of her female agents. Vera's motivations are sometimes questionable and murky, and the tapestry of her roots and experiences are as complex as the war itself. It would have been useful to read more about the specific training of the agents and have more details of their actions in the field. It's not entirely clear what they were supposed to do and what they actually accomplished. More attention on the issue of whether these women were legally considered spieds or not would have helped. Overall Helms book succeeds because it makes an important chapter of the war accessible to today's reader/student. It makes you want to go out and continuing reading on the subject, but one already suspects that her book is one of the best.



3. Numerous interviews with family members and friends, aggressive pursuit of declassified documents and old letters, allow secrets to be revealed in this book. A LIFE IN SECRETS traces the history of special agents parachuted into France during World War II and their fate. The bravery of these people, and especially of the women, should always be remembered.
   
   Secret organizations are secret, their files restricted, purged, and hidden. That makes it especially difficult to trace decisions, responsibilities, and fates. To place credit for the actual heroic achievements and to place blame for mistakes and over-developed egos is exceedingly difficult.
   
   This book is meticulously researched and reconstructed and reveals the facts of agents in World War II yet it evades being tedious. The reader is left to decide the personality and motives of various responsible cadre members and who may be a traitor or not.
   
   There is no doubt as to the achievement of the agents or the author of this superb book. It is an extraordinary book about courageous people in monstrous times.



4. The extraordinary life of Vera Atkins- the woman who parachuted female secret agents into occupied France during the war, and then in 1945 made it her personal mission to track down the missing agents and find out the awful truth of what had happened to them. Sarah Helm, the author of A Life In Secrets: The story of Vera Atkins and SOE's lost agents, tells the whole story about the underground and dark side of political intrigues, spies and beyond. A most fascinating book.



5. I loved every second of A Life In Secrets. It was like reading the best mystery, spy novel, espionage thriller, personal history, and WWII fact-finding book all in one volume. In it Sarah Helm tells several stories and unravels many mysteries. The obvious story is that of Vera Atkins and her "missing agents", the women (mostly) and men who were dropped into France and other countries by Britain's Special Operations Executive, formed to help assist underground resistance movements in Nazi occupied countries. These agents were civilians who were hand picked and trained to blend in and do their job, and it was Atkins' job to communicate with their families and make sure they were okay.
   
   The obvious aim of Secrets is Helm's biographical telling of the life and career of Vera Atkins, which partially involves interviews with Atkins herself as well as surviving relatives, co-workers, and friends. Just the recounting is fascinating, as Helms travels all over East and West Germany, Roumania, France, Canada, and England, tracking down her tale. Then we have the chronicles of the missing SOE agents and Atkins' dogged pursuit of their fates, however tragic, made even more interesting when Atkins gets approval to travel to France and Germany. Her stories of attendance at war crimes trials, testimonials from concentration camp leaders, guards, and inmates, and her search for closure amongst the wreckage of post-war Europe are detached enough to be clear and objective yet connected enough to be horrifying.
   
   But the deepest and most interesting mystery turns out to be that of Atkins herself. How did Vera Rosenberg, a Roumanian Jew, become naturalized British citizen and SOE leader Vera Atkins? Why was she so interested in Nazi Germany? What drew her to this work, and especially to her dissection of the ends of the lives of her agents? What secrets was Vera Atkins hiding?
   
   The answers to these questions are surprising and a bit disturbing. The lines between good and bad, collaborator and enemy, friend and enemy are blurred. But in the end I had not only a great respect for Atkins and how she did her job (in more ways than one) but for Helm, who solves several deeply buried mysteries. Highly recommended!

5 comments about Chronicle of the Roman Emperors: The Reign-By-Reign Record of the Rulers of Imperial Rome (Chronicle).

1. I bought a second one for a friend a week after the first copy arrived. Great, concise book.



2. Excellent book, very few errors. Good source of information, very nice colorfull pictures and sketches. Worth the cost.



3. Replete with timelines, maps, sidebars, and photographs, this is a wonderful resource. Whether you're watching a DVD of "I, Claudius" or reading Gibbon, it's a highly useful reference book where you can get a quick read on any emperor. Often, I'll pull it down from the shelf to research a particular emperor, then find myself still reading it an hour later.
   
   What I like best about it are the photographed busts of the emperors which along with the lively writing really bring the Roman rulers to life. They also allow one to trace the change in Roman art from the idealized classicism of Augustus to the grim realism of the mid 3rd century's portrait of Philip the Arab when the Empire was falling apart to the stolid and blank cartoonlike portrait of Constantine the Great in the 4th century when the Empire had been restored, but had become Christian and more medieval.
   
   A real gem, this book is highly recommended for fans of Roman history.



4. 
   For anyone with even a passing interest in Roman history this book is an invaluable source of knowledge about the Roman Emperor's. Personally it helps to set the scene for me even if the book is a work of fiction if I can pin point the period of Roman history that is being written about and knowing what emperor was reigning in Rome and in what years is a sure fire way of pin-pointing the period in which the book is written.
   
   Of course the book is so much more than a time scale of Roman history, there is also information regarding what wars if any were fought during a particular emperor's reign and what Roman building were attributable to any given emperor. The book covers the succession of 80 emperors, with biographical portraits of the 56 most notable ones. Names that leap out from the pages of the history books, Julius Caesar, Hadrian, Nero, all names to conjure with.
   
   There are contemporary judgements made by writers of the time including Suetonius and Tacitus and these are balanced by character assessments made in the light of modern research. This is a book that is well worth having, not only for its reference capabilities but also it is a good read in its own right.



5. Fun to read, but also very informative. A good book for the non-speacilist who wants to learn more about history or simply get a good overview before taking a trip to Rome.

5 comments about Passionate Sage: The Character and Legacy of John Adams.

1. This book by Joseph Ellis covers the post-presidential years of John Adam. It discusses his renewed correspondence with Thomas Jefferson after many years of silence because of partisan politics. It reveals a picture of a brillant but misunderstood founding father who Ellis calls "the voice of the Revolution" and Jefferson "the pen of the Revolution." A well-written and insightful book! A must read especially for those who read McCullouch's book on Adams.



2. Great book that I shared with friends at Christmas. John Adams, an extraordinary intellectual who, thanks to Joseph Ellis, history has not forgotten. Fascinating, one that you want to read word for word, slowly.



3. Joseph Ellis has taken upon himself the task of bringing the relatively unknown 2nd President of the United States out of obscurity and making him relevant to today's industrial America. Surprisingly, Ellis finds a way to make this shadowy figure between Washington and Jefferson every bit as memorable and important as his predecessor and successor; no simple task, given that Adams was forcibly shoved from the pantheon of American heroes over a century ago.
   
   Passionate Sage reveals Adams as he would have liked: Contrarian in every respect, an irritating mixture of sanguine and volcanic, pessimistic and hopeful, witty and reserved. More importantly, though, Ellis reveals Adams for the master of political thought that he was. No longer is Adams a footnote between the Great Leader and the Republican - in this slim tome, Ellis finds a way to enlighten readers to Adams' unparalleled contributions to Constitutional and American history. As history has shown, few men did more for the American cause than the underappreciated John Adams, and even fewer living Americans are aware of the monumental accomplishments the Sage of Quincy achieved in his nearly nine decades in America.
   
   Though Passionate Sage falls victim to the dry definitions of a professional academic, these drudging pages do not occur with great frequency. However, the slim size of this volume does seem cluttered with pedantic and tangential discussions that distract from the subject himself - ironically, the same slight Adams suffered in his own time.



4. Ellis again does an excellent job of making public figures who are seemingly lost to history real again. While not as flowery and readable as McCullough's work, I believe Ellis' effort to be more substantive. Following only Adams' post-presidency years, Ellis explores Adams' core political principles and beliefs through the struggles and battles of his sunset years.
   
   Through Adams' fight with long-time friend Mercy Otis Warren over his legacy, to his arguments with Mary Wollstonecraft in the margins of her own books, Ellis is able to show an aging John Adams at his best (or worst): outspoken, irreverent, fiesty, and more often than not, correct. The reader is led through Adams' opinions on government, law, the French Revolution, and more. The curious reader would do well to compare Adams' and Jefferson's opinions of the French revolutionaries, keeping "track of score."
   
   I only wish that Ellis could have written more. This book, while dry at times, will hold the reader's attention and leave them wanting more chapters.
   
   Recommended to the general reader who has already read through a full-length Adams biography.



5. Ellis' biography of John Adams, one of the earliest published portraits of the Founding Fathers by the author, is well suited for those who want a shorter, crisper account than the longer ones produced by other biographers (e.g., McCullough). Though it does not include some important material unearthed since its appearance, it honors Adams' essential brilliance and his determinative role in both the success of the American Revolution and the country's endurance while a Federalist president.

5 comments about Theodore Roosevelt: A Life.

1. He assumed the Presidency at the untimely death of President McKinley and for 7 1/2 years, Theodore Roosevelt made history. He was the first American to win the Nobel Peace Prize (Russo-Japanese War) and he put The Panama Canal project back on the rails when it stalled. He entered into a treaty with Japan that forbade Japanese involvement with the Philippines, Hawaii and US interests in China but that enabled Japan to annex Korea later. He negotiated with France, Spain and Germany regarding Morocco that resulted in France and Spain dividing up Morocco and that convinced Germany to build up its navy for war at another time. He also negotiated to reposition the dividing line between Alaska and Canada. On the home front, his administration created laws regulating food and drugs, supervision of insurance companies, investigation of child labor, regulation of the packing houses, establishing standards for meat processing and opened up competition by breaking up the railway, steamship and coal mine joint ownership. TR had the States set up conservation programs for parklands but also for power sites (Niagara Falls) and natural resources such as oil and coal. Roosevelt was the first President to bring the people of the press into the White House to field their questions and also to acknowledge and welcome visitors of artistic/creative talents to the White House. There is so much more. This is not a full biography but centers predominantly on his activities as President. The writer's style is never pedantic or sentimental. Recommended.



2. Having read a biography of Theodore Roosevelt 20 years ago it's amazing the light years biographies have come. Biographies until recent times had been little more than recitations of their life and times, but now are delving much more deeply into original source documents and completing a much fuller and more comprehensive picture of that subject. Biographers are also taking a much more multi-disciplinary approach pulling in sociology, psychology, history, political science and economics that make biographies a much richer read. You feel like you really understand them in the context of their times.
   
   Theodore Roosevelt by Nathan Miller is just such a read. Theodore Roosevelt is already a lively and entertaining figure and his life was like a movie anyways. Sickly child to Wildman of the West, Society Dandy to wily politician, scorned outsider to President. Miller captures it all in style that fairly crackles with life. His writing on the period of TR's entry to politics through to the Spanish-American War was so gripping I could hardly put it down. Miller pulls in a great number of archival and original sources to paint a much more complete comprehensive and engaging portrait of TR. I haven't read Edmund Morris's Theodore Rex yet, but hear it's equally good. The anecdotes Miller throws in showcases what a manic bundle of energy TR was, yet he lets TR live in his era. Too often revisionist historians try and impose today's standards on past figures. Miller eschews that and TR is really seen for the man he is.
   
   Theodore Roosevelt is a compelling read for those interested in learning more on him and the Progressive Era. I'd read this book as a companion piece to two courses I was taking last semester, Gilded Age and Progressive Era (HIST 4461) and US Diplomatic History 1890 to Present (HIST 3321) and it tied to both exceedingly well, providing great insight into the context of the times. As far as insight into TR himself I dare say Miller is far more objective than TR was in his autobiography and truly captures TR in most every respect.



3. Whether studying the presidents or just looking for enjoyable reading, this book is a must. From the young boy, to his young bride, to his adventurous days in the American frontier, the Charge, the presidency and until the disappointing decisions of his old age, this book can not be put down. It reads more like a novel than a biography of a historical figure. A larger than life historical figure. Bravo!



4. I am reading all the presential bios in order.
   
   This was by FAR one of the greatest bios I have read thus far. The author does a magnificent job in showing us what TR was like. I got very close to the subject and really *felt* this book.
   
   He provides LOTS of detail and anecdotes, but in such a readable way. I would find myself reading 75 to 100 pages in one sitting without even realizing it.
   
   If you are reading all the presidential bios like I am, THIS is the book to read for TR. After you are done, you can go back and read the series currently out (Theodore Rex, When the Trumpets Call, etc) to fill in the rest.
   
   This book does TR great justice. A great book for a great person!



5. I feel the same as some of the other reviewers here. The coverage of Roosevelts presidency was somewhat limited as was his post presidential accomplishments. It seems as if Miller was rushed for time when writing the conclusion. Had this been a two volume set and each part of Roosevelts life given the same concern, this would have been delightful. I was also taken aback that the book just ended. I would loved to have known how the public responded to this great man's death, and seen a little more enlightenment into how his legacy grew beyond his mortality.
   Positively though, the book at times made me laugh out loud, especially at the thought of a ten year old Theodore finding that his latest science experiment had been chucked out the window by the maid. "Oh, the loss to science, the loss!"
   I so wish that another great American like Theodore Roosevelt would step up to the plate. His legacy is even stronger nearly one hundred years after his presidency.

5 comments about The Gettysburg Gospel: The Lincoln Speech That Nobody Knows (Simon & Schuster Lincoln Library).

1. Boritt's 'Gettysburg Gospel' is one of the very few Civil War books that I could not get into. Stylistically, this book is way too haphazard and unorganized to be considered one of the best books in the Lincoln cannon. Boritt falls into the trap that Garry Wills fell into in his "Lincoln at Gettysburg." The two authors try to be over-elegant and verbose because their book itself is about one of the greatest triumphs of the English language rather then a singular event. Boritt (and Wills for that matter) would be better to just write in a plain, inelegant fashion without the grossly excessive verbiage which permeates this book. Wills, in all fairness, can get away with it, but the more academic Boritt has a difficult time indeed. For example, Boritt writes early on in describing the dead on the battlefield: "Others even pulled bodies from shallow graves. A weapon is worth a great deal. Who cares who the dead man was? Who was it? Dead." This kind of useless prose brings the momentum of this book down time and time again.
   
   For Civil War enthusiasts themselves, many already knew that Everett went on for a very long time before Lincoln delivered his address. One of the things that surprised me was the lack of analysis of the address itself. That disappointed me because the book was subtitled as: `The Lincoln Speech Nobody Knows." In order to get a fresh analysis that Wills does not offer in his book, the reader will have to turn to the appendix to get the several versions of the address. Overall, more focus and less sentimentality would have made for a leaner, more coherent account of the making of the address and it's meaning through the last 140 years.



2. The Gettysburg Address was delivered by President Abraham Lincoln on November 19, 1863. The battle had been fought in July but now a National Cemetery was to dedicated honoring the Union dead who had died that the United States might live.
   What a day it was ! A beautiful autumn crisp with the promise of a warm sky sailing serenly over the sight of the bloodiest batlle in American history. A day when the renowned orator Edward Everett spoke for over two hours drawing analogies between Gettysburg and those men who died to preserve Athenian democracy. Everett gave a detailed account of the battle emphasizing the legitimacy of the Union effort. He also spoke with insight on the superiority of the federal government to which the individual states pledged their loyalty.
   And then...after the bands and the songs, the prayers and the cheers were silent the sixteenth President of the United States rose to speak. He had a mild form of smallpox; had lost his son Willie to death in the White House and had a son Tad who was ill back home in Washington DC.
   Lincoln spoke his 272 words concluding with his immortal words, "''that the goverment of the people, by the people and for the people shall not perish from the earth."
   Lincoln drew on a lifetime of study to produce this masterpiece. The Declaration of Independence; the oratory of Webster and Clay, Shakespeare and the Bible all played a role in his crafting of the speech. If the Emancipation Proclamation was prose genius then the Gettysburg Address is poetry sublime in its assertion of indivdual freedom and the right of human beings to breathe free air.
   The speech was neglected, for the most part, by contemporary press accounts. Only in the 1880s when the movement to reconcile NOrth and South picked up steam did it take on an importance in the American heart that has never been usurped, The GA inspired black fighters for Civil Rights as the twentieth century led to a cry for racial equality in our nation. Men like Martin Luther King Jr and Nelson Mandela in South Africa were inspired by Lincoln's words.
   Boritt's book is divided into several sections. The first two hundred pages deal with the account of the night and the day Lincoln spent in Gettysburg in 1863. We learn of the horrific battlefield casualties and see closeup the preparations made and the carrying out of the ceremony on November 19th. Other sections deal with the five authentic copies of the Gettysburg Address; the complete text of Edward Everett's two hour oration that day; an extensive bibliography and notes. Professor Boritt also shows us pictures of the drafts as written in longhand by Lincoln.
   The book is also a fascinating look into how the Gettysburg Address achieved mythic fame since it was first uttered on that November day. In a moving final chapter we read the address in the context of a 9-11 obervance of the attack on the World Trade Center.
   As long as our United States lives we all pray that the Gettysburg Address will be there to inspire us to work for equality and justice for all of our citizens regardless of race, religion or political affiliation.
   Boritt is one of the best scholars on the life of Lincoln and the Civil War era. Anyone who teaches the Civil War in the classroom should make use of this outstanding work of scholarship and love.



3. It truly is amazing that so many words and books can be written about a speech that is but 272 words long. Gabor Boritt's book is an enjoyable and easy read on Lincoln's most famous speech.
   Much of the book deals with the immediate aftermath of the terrible Gettysburg battle with the author painting a vivid picture of the terrible scene which must have greeted the eye on July 4th.
   It is interesting that the famous address did not get immediate general approval. Boritt shows that the speech was almost forgotten until the 1880's.
   As with most Lincoln supporters, the author attempts to show that the speech was not written on the train to Gettysburg and that Lincoln gave the speech considerable thought. The truth is no one knows, but a good argument can be made for the proposition that Lincoln must have given it little thought prior to the event. Who in their right mind is going to travel from Washington to Gettysburg and DECIDE to present an address of only 272 words. The words came from the heart and from years of experience and empathy. Just as Martin Luther King's "I have a dream" speech was somewhat spontaneous (although a very similar speech was presented at Cobo Hall, Detroit some weeks previously), there is strong circumstantial evidence that Lincoln put this speech together at short notice.
   I have no idea why the book is sub-titled "The Lincoln Speech that Nobody Knows," but Boritt does provide a number of slightly different versions of the speech in the appendix. Most of the differences are minor to put it mildly. The author's description of how the speech initially got little response but grew to be appreciated over time to be a work of genius is well developed.
   Paradoxically, the most enjoyable section of the book is the full text of Edward Everett's speech which I read fully for the first time. You can appreciate why Everett was seen as a great orator because of his ability to paint pictures with words although his two hour address can hardly be described as uplifting. Almost all of the speech was taken up with a chronological history of the events at Gettysburg (spoken from memory) and the aging orator failed to properly commend and eulogize the thousands who had given their life on the adjacent battlefield.
   The book has copious appendices, bibliography, notes which provide a rich resource for serious students of Lincoln and Gettysburg. Overall, an enjoyable not too studious read on the topic.



4. I found this an interesting, but possibly flawed book.
   
   The history and detail was fascinating, as was the examination (and inclusion!) of Everett's speech, of which I'd heard, but had never read. The description of Gettysburg immediately after the battle, and in the days surrounding the dedication ceremony was truly a window into another era.
   
   However, as the book continued, and the instances of "Good, God fearing Republicans, struggling to save the country" and "Bad, pro-slavery/appeasement-minded Democrats not caring about the Union" mounted, I felt I was reading a political text that was slanted to support the current national situation, and not a dispassionate historical examination of the events of a century and a half gone. Other reviewers have mentioned this occurance as an interetsing coincidence. Even though I'm a Republican, I was jarred by the tone.
   
   As a result, my enjoyment of the book was lessened, as was my trust of the text and the author's use selected references.
   
   An interesting book, but too interpretive for my tastes. Read it, but have a pinch of salt ready.



5. I remember having to memorize The Gettysburg Address in elementary school as part of my history class. This books contains a lot of documents from eye witnesses who were present several days before the dedication through several days after Lincoln's famous speech.
   
   This book is very educational and a few parts gets a little boring, but overall it is worth the read. I believe all school children should be required to memorize and give the speech in class like I had too. Properly educating children on historical American facts are so important today. We have too many liberals trying to re-write our history.

2 comments about The Jefferson Bible, The Life and Morals of Jesus.

1. As a "semi" Christian, this "bible" is quite a read. It includes all of the teachings of Jesus without all of the "miracles". My pastor and I disagree on the whole resurrection thing, but I think this book shows that Jesus would have followers even without that fantasy.



2. THE JEFFERSON BIBLE is an interesting historical source by one of America's brilliant "Founding Fathers." Many know Jefferson as the author (co-author) of The Declaration of Independence, third US President, architect, etc. What many readers may not know is that Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826)was an accomplished violinist, a brilliant mathematician (he knew calculus which was know as "fluctions"),and someathing of an expert on the Bible. Jefferson was obviously not a "mainline" Christian, but he knew the Bible much better than many self proclaimed Christians.
   
   As readers may know Jefferson titled his "bible" THE LIFE AND MORALS OF JESUS OF NAZARETH. As mentioned in other reviews, Jefferson accepted much of Christ's social teachings, but he did not believe in the miracle stories which he thought were exploited to enhance supersition at the expense of moral conduct.
   
   Another interesting feature of Jefferson's "Bible" is that he wrote this source in parallel columes in English, Greek, Latin, and French. This arrangement was designed to help his children to learn these languages. Such work also demonstrates Jefferson's knowledge of fogeign languages.Some editions of THE JEFFERSON BIBLE have photoplates of these translations which would appeal to those who know these languages.
   
   Some editions of THE JEFFERSON BIBLE has essays and comments by Jefferson who passionately believed in freedom of religion. Recent "critics" have attempted to distort Jefferson's passionate defense of religious freedom by claiming he did not claim such freedom. Essays and anecdotes refute such distortions. For example, some have denied that Jefferson used the phrase Separation of Church and State. It was Jefferson who used the phrase that there was a wall of separation between Church and State. Jefferson argued that only error needed defense of the government and that different views should be brought to the bar reason. Truth would stand on her own. One must reaalize Jefferson's time. Terrible religious persecutions in Europe and colonial America were recent history during Jefferson's lifetime. One must remember that the Salem Witchcraft trials occured between 1692-1693.
   
   Jefferson accepted reason as an adequet guide to find truth as mentioned above. Some editions of JEFFERSON'S BIBLE have a well written, well reasoned essay of Jefferson's scathing denounciation of John Calvin. This essay is not only penetrating criticism of Calvin, but Jefferson effectively denounces religious persecution in this particular essay.
   
   Thomas Jefferson was brilliantly talented indivudual. His intelligence is reflected in his constitutional thought, mathematics (mentioned above), etc. Supposedly the late US President John F. Kennedy reflected that when there was never so much intellect who sat at the White House dinner table as when Jefferson sat there alone. The above titled book is a good example to justify this high praise.

5 comments about Franklin Delano Roosevelt: Champion of Freedom.

1. We gave two copies of this book for Christmas this year. The recipients have had nothing but great things to say.



2. We would be remiss to not credit Washington with defining the parameters of the powers of the Presidency, but for all intent and purposes, as far as impact is concerned, Franklin Delano Roosevelt was the greatest President in the nation, including Lincoln. We must remember that history tends to overestimate martyrdom. As good as Lincoln was, he was never tested in a peace time setting.
   Conrad Black has written the definitive and best book on the great FDR, hands down. Far from being a fawning soft sell, "Champion Of Freedom" is very fair, and Black does not hesitate to discuss Roosevelt's shortcomings, as well as his triumphs. It is an incredibly thoughtful read, and the research is amazing.
   Roosevelt could, at times, be calculating, devious and even mean, especially toward political enemies. This was fair game, however, and in a world where deceit and hidden agendas permeate every action, Roosevelt simply was a mile ahead of everybody else and played the politics game better than anybody ever had before, or will again.
   His concern for the working man, the New Deal and landmark programs like the WMA put America to work when there was none to be had. Some lunk headed conservatives claim he stole the work from industry, but that is pure bull. We have Social Security, the Labor Relations Act, and a great park system because of Roosevelt's domestic programs. As far as a wartime president, his foresight and action was almost divinely inspired, and may well have been.
   While critics blame him for Pearl Harbor, Black points out that Roosevelt, who loved the Navy and was Assistant Secretary to the Navy in WWI, would never have deliberately put the men of Pearl Harbor in harm's way as it happened. Rather, he had expected the admirals to be fully prepared for possible attack, and was aghast (albeit privately) at the incompetence shown at Pearl Harbor, which should have been more than able to put up a very good fight against the Japanese attackers. True, he expected war, and knew that the sooner, the better once our armed forces were ready, and that was well underway.
   This is just one revelation of a very complex man who was regarded in Messianic proportions by the populace and by the world at large. Black is a master writer, and truly has created a masterpiece worthy of its subject. For serious history and Roosevelt fans, it's a must have.



3. It took a month to receive my book; I was happy with it once it arrived, but the slowness was a problem.



4. Franklin Delano Roosevelt: Champion of Freedom
   
   What can you say? It's a thoroughly researched, skillfully wound tale of a man who has no statesman-like comparison in modern American history. I'm an 'Eisenhower Republican' - though, I fear we're a dying breed - however, remark at the leadership and undying dedication to country this magnificently flawed giant of a president consistently demonstrated throughout the course of his illustrious political career.
   
   It's exhaustively researched and fact packed, to be sure - but will nary leave you wanting to leave this bulky work on the nightstand before dozing off. Whether you agree or disagree with FDR's policies or tactics, this book is never tendentious and should appeal to readers across political spectrum and ideologies....the way a masterful biography should, in this humble history junkies mind.
   
   Fans of Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt may want to pick up a separate bio for her life story, as Black certainly does not treat her with kid gloves. However, this book accurately hones in on the key subject - FDR - and Lord Black sticks to his prime subject matter with uncompromising rigdity, a keen focus and honesty.
   
   Bravo. I promise to read more of Mr. Black as a result of this admirable and impressive work.
   
   - Johnny Concannon



5. Having grown up in the great depression,I always admired F.D.R.for all he did to try to end it.Churchill said that he was the greatest man he ever knew,and I wholeheartedly agree.I rank him right behind Washington and Lincoln as one of our greatest Presidents.I enjoyed this book so much,I am thinking of reading it again.

5 comments about The Life of Andrew Jackson (Perennial Classics).

1. Few Americans have won the mythical status enjoyed by Andrew Jackson. Often portrayed, in his day and since, as the champion of the common man, Jackson came to Washington as an outsider, the first President born outside the thirteen original states, indeed the first president born neither in Virginia nor Massachusetts. Throughout Jackson historiography, Jackson via his policy of `rotation' in office has been accused of instituting the spoils system in American politics. This criticism highlights how Whig myths have come to permeate the historical writing on this subject.
   
   Starting with James Parton in 1860, anti-Jackson historians have followed this criticism, blaming Jackson for replacing a supposed merit system with a partisanship that corrupted the civil service for generations. Despite further research since Jackson's time, many historians have uncritically repeated these accusations without examining the actual record of appointments during the presidency unhappily described by some as "The Reign of Andrew Jackson".
   
   There have been essentially four cycles of studies into the life and Presidency of Andrew Jackson. The first cycle began soon after the death of Jackson with the "liberal patrician" or "Whig" school, who were generally unfavourable towards the policy of rotation. Most familiar is James Parton's classic The "Life of Andrew Jackson". So critical of rotation was Parton that he stated "this single feature of his administration would suffice to render it deplorable rather than admirable." Other members of the "Whig" school include Sumner, Schouler and Von Holst, all very critical of Jackson's policy of rotation. Parton's biography was the standard source on the Jacksonian era, until the second cycle represented by the Progressive Historians, such as John Spencer Bassett's "The Life of Andrew Jackson (1911), which cast Jackson in somewhat of a different light. Bassett reduces the amount of blame put on Jackson for rotation by suggesting that his democratic views made him oblivious to unintentional dangers from partisan appointments. However, the Progressives shared with the Whigs the view that Jackson had brought a spoils system to national politics and that its effects were negative.
   
   Historians in the third cycle of Jacksonian studies, of which Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr.'s "The Age of Jackson" (1945) served as a pivotal work, shifted attention away from Jackson himself towards larger forces in his era. Historians of the third cycle, such as Hofstadter and Hammond, debated the effects of class and culture in determining party differences while showing little interest in evaluating Jackson's rotation policy, though tending to criticise it briefly. No biographies of Jackson discussed the policy of rotation in depth during the next thirty years.
   
   The appearance of Robert V. Remini's three-volume biography of Jackson marked the start of the fourth cycle of interpretation. Based on modern scholarship, Remini covers all aspects of Jackson's life and career, demonstrating his contribution to the great developments of nineteenth century America, particularly empire, freedom and democracy. By returning to first hand sources, Remini shows that the policy of rotation in office has been exaggerated and misunderstood. However, having set himself the remarkable task of producing a thorough study of the life and Presidency of Jackson, Remini did not have the scope for a detailed re-interpretation and re-evaluation of rotation. Since Remini's work there have been many scholarly works on Jackson, but none offer an in-depth reassessment of rotation as touched upon by Remini.
   
   Remini states that Jackson has received a disproportionate share of the blame for the spoils system and that there is a need to disprove the Whig myths, which have come to permeate the historical writings of historians over the generations. Remini was not the first to stress the need for such a revision; in fact a similar plea was expressed by J.R. Poinsett in the "Oration on the life and character of Andrew Jackson, delivered July 4, 1845" when he stated about Jackson, "His instinctive love of justice... gave a high tone to his government and exalted the honor of his country. His hatred of corruption rendered his administration pure.... I will content myself with expressing my belief that in future time the impartial historian will justify both his motives and his conduct on this trying occasion.
   
   Remini offers the reader a great insight into the pioneering mind of one of America's greatest Presidents.
   
   
   [The above Review is taken in part from 'Andrew Jackson's policy of 'Rotation in Office' by Alexander Rayden. © Copyright 2005 Alexander Rayden, All Rights Reserved].



2. This is an excellent book, as are all of Professor Remini's books. They are thorough and very easy to read which lends to the excitement of learning history. Recently I purchased a letter from 1834 which refers to the censure of Andrew Jackson. I'm not sure how to contact Professor Remini, but I think he would be very much interested in reading this letter. It was written on April 18, 1834, by Rufus McIntire (1784-1866), City of Washington, and sent to William A. Hayes, South Berwick, Maine, about 21 days after the censure was passed by the Senate. I'll quote sections from this letter, hoping to inspire students of history to read Professor Remini's books.
   
   "You will probably see the Presidents message of protest &c to the Senate which has put that dignified body on the defence & in a passion. They evidently see that the issue is against them unless they can turn it on some collateral issue or some deduced assumption of principles abstractedly from some part of the message. Mr. Leigh has spoken today in which he has shown very clearly that he has not the experience & tact of a politician. He has lived too long in Virginia ever to extend his views beyond the limits & local circumstances of his State except what he gets from books generally of European history & politics. He labored hard today to explain the resolution against which the President protests & says it means no such censure on the President as he supposes. The opposition generally is the Senate manifested as much dissatisfaction with the speech as with the message. Benj Hardin of Ken. of the House - talented & coarse man of the opposition - remarked that of all great men he had ever seen Mr Leigh is the smallest. Mr Leighs defence is the opposite of that set up yesterday by Mr South and who with a harsh'hood & effrontery that shocked every body declared that the resolution was passed as the foundation & basis of legislation. This is in contradiction not only to its language & import but in flat contradiction to every avowal while under discussion. In answer to the objection to its passage as a naked censure without any legislative effect it was urged not that any other legislation was contemplated but upon the duty of the Secy of the Treasury to restore the deposits after this expression that their removal was not approved by both branches. If that alone had been the object - simple expression that they advised to a restorative or disapproved of this removal would have been sufficient."
   
   "Today being, one of those days for private business in the House, has been literally wasted in attempts to get up the appropriation bill & to introduce various resolutions & a call of the House in consequence. The House adjourned at rather an early hour there being so much excitement that there did not appear to be any prospect of business or any good done by continuing longer in Session. Mr Wise attempted to introduce a set of resolutions on the subject of the powers of Congress over the money in the Treasury intended to negative some supposed deduction [declaration?] of principle, contained in the Presidents message - and failing gave notice he should offer them every day during the Session or till recessed - Mr Peytre gave notice also that whenever they were received he should move a substitute by way of amendment of ???? declaring the late vote of the Senate, censuring the President in an impeachable matter alone belonging to the House as the impeaching power, an usurpation & assumption of the prerogatives of the House of Reps by the Senate. So you see the battle is but begun."
   
   "The opposition here speak confidently of carrying Maine at the next election. King is to be candidate f[or] Governor & he says the Jeffersonians will be out against the administration shortly & only delays at present for the sake of saving Mitchell. Is King correct in his avowal & his letters - (letter at least -) to one of his opposition in regard to the Jeffersonians & if so will Mr Seaver go with it? I am pleased with the present appearance of the Ags - It is what I expected - hoped at least but from the complexion of the Jeffersonians I feared would not be seen. A short time must disclose the views of our politicians. I regret to learn so many of our Portland friends are in favor of a national Bank - or rather at present think proper to express it. No other than the constitutional ground will enable us to defeat the ???? of the Bank - all the South who ???? constitutional objections if a bank is to be chartered prefer the old to a new one with like provisions - I can say no more at present but must close - "



3. Over the years, President Andrew Jackson's standing among historians has gone up and down. In this biography, Robert Remini presents a well-balanced account of this controversial President. For instance, Professor Remini explains President Jackson's Indian policy through the prism of a 19th century nation-builder, while, at the same time, not letting Jackson off the hook for his often heavy-handed treatment of the Indians. Moreover, Professor Remini presents Jackson as someone who cared deeply for the nation, and would not tolerate what he saw as abuse of the public good. As examples of this, Professor Remini provides 2 important events: the Tariff/Nullification Crisis of 1832 and the Bank War. In both incidents, President Jackson acted in what he perceived to be the nation's best interest (and here, Professor Remini is rather sympathetic toward Jackson) calling the offending party to task in some form. While I am not a huge fan of President Jackson's politics in general, reading this book did lead me to have a higher opinion of Jackson's abilities to govern the nation.



4. The Life of Andrew Jackson
   
   Remini is best known for his all-inclusive three volumes of the life of Andrew Jackson, and this book is a valuable comprehensive version. Jackson is portrayed with both his strengths and his poor leadership qualities. Overall, however, it is possible to conclude that the author asserts a sympathic version of the man whose era bears his name--Andrew Jackson. This book is an historical narrative at its best.



5. Andrew Jackson is one of the better Presidents in the history of the United States. He set several precidents while in office, and his outgoing personality and rugged exterior made him the President of the people.
   
   While Jackson is often thought of as the hero of the battle of New Orleans and a man who could not contain his tempor this book shows a somewhat different side. It shows a calculating Jackson who did not always let his emotions make snap judgements.
   
   Remini does a good job condensing his pre-Presidency and his time in office to under 400 pages which is no easy task. The book includes the major events one would expect to find in a Jackson biography and the standard biographical information. It also incldes short vinnetes which gives an insight to the type of man that Andrew Jackson was. This abridged version does a good job condensing the exciting material. This is a must read!

5 comments about George Washington: The Founding Father (Eminent Lives).

1. This is a great small book on Washington, things I didn,t know about him.
   Easy to read, too, in a short time.



2. Paul Johnson has written one superb book, The Birth of the Modern, one monstrosity, Intellectuals, and quite a shelf of books well worth reading even when they are blinkered by ideology. This chapbook biography of George Washington, unfortunately, is one of his shallower efforts.
   Johnson declares his intention of portraying Washington as less of "a remote and mysterious figure" than others have. The Washington that he gives us, however, is such a paragon that I for one long for a little flesh to contain all that noble blood. Johnson's Washington is above all an English land-owner of the early 18th C, a properly insular squire, a gentleman of much Whiggish convictions but Tory instincts, much like Johnson himself. It's not an inconsistent portrayal. However, Johnson is dead wrong about some very significant aspects of Washington's thought and about pre-revolutionary America.
   
   Johnson correctly focuses on Washington's self-interest in westward expansion of Virginia into the Ohio Valley as a prime reason for the rebellion against English rule. But with his ever-present British chauvinism, Johnson completely misrepresents the situations of the French and the Indians in the 1760s, and fails to grasp the important conflicts that already separated Americans of the seacoast like Washington from Americans of the interior. For a thorough and intelligent examination of these matters, I strongly recommend: The Middle Ground, by Richard White.
   
   Johnson is quite far from the mark on the question of the role of slavery among the causes of the revolution. His is the old-fashioned apologetic position, that slavery was already on the wane at the time of Washington, that the Founding Fathers foresaw its gradual extinction, and that only the cotton gin made later events tragic. In fact, the defense of slavery as an economic institution and the fear of British emancipationism were significant motivators for Southern participation in the Revolution. See: Forced Founders, by Woody Holton
   
   Johnson is also altogether too willing to credit Washington with sincere humantitarian impulses toward his own slaves. The truth is that Washington took less-than-kindly steps to retrieve runaways, was outraged by the efforts of the English to recruit slaves to run away and fight against their 'masters', and made every possible effort to seize runaways and free Blacks from their English protectors, after the end of fighting, before such 'property' could be carried beyond his reach. For a powerful account of the Revolutionaries' hypocrisy toward the rights of man, see: Rough Crossing, by Simon Schama, which also tells the story of the fate of the expatriated African-Americans in Canada and eventually in Sierra Leone.
   
   One amusing aspect of Johnson's book, by the way, is his hardly-concealed contempt for Thomas Jefferson -- another of those "Intellectuals" Johnson so thoroughly detests. Washington apparently developed quite an open scorn for Jefferson also, in his later years, a scorn I've come to share with both the author and his subject. The title to read on this matter: Jefferson's Secrets, by Michael Burstein.



3. A fascinating look into one of the most fascinating and important characters in American history - George Washington. If you're looking for a good, brief overview of why George Washington was such an integral part of the foundation of our country, this little book is a good place to start. Johnson examines the early life of Washington, including his early military career and how that coupled with his surveying acumen played greatly in this vision for this nation. The one concept I took away from this book was that Washington was a man of vision. He was constantly looking westward with an eye on expansion and the English and French efforts to contain the early colonies was a key factor in the revolution. Washington was also a man of significant means and status in the early colonies - but, one of the greatest commentaries on his character is his constant refusal to remain as president beyond the first two terms. He was a man who had a vision for a great republic and a man who surrounded himself with the best and the brightest of his day. Washington was a great leader and was the man for the job for just such a time.



4. Johnson appears to be quite the patriot. It's natural that he would offer a very favorable position of Washington in this narrative. As an African American and a student of history, it's hard for me to swallow this portrait of Washington whole. Johnson at times snidely derides recent historical efforts to show negative aspects of Washington's slaveholding that undermine his eventual emancipation of slaves. Johnson also appears to be very favorable toward centralizing federalists such as Hamilton, who he gives credit for saving the American economy, and Washington at the expense of Jefferson and Madison. In Johnson's view, it's Washington who's doing the work and saving the country and those idealistic Francophile Democrats who are flirting with its destruction. As one of those who would have been 3/5 of a person back in the Constitutional times, I have to be a little more critical of the compromises that created the racial conflict. I do applaud Johnson's recognition that Washington missed some opportunities to stem the tide of slavery as president.
   
   The best part of Johnson's analysis is the compare and contrast aspects to Napoleon. Showing the tightrope that Washington walks between choosing democracy that sacrifices Napoleon's power and seeking a strong executive branch that occasionally exceeds Napoleon's power is very helpful indeed. Napoleon is only as strong as his last battle. Washington is always as strong as his elected position and well-earned prestige. There's a very cogent statement in the middle of the book at how the British were stupid in not offering Washington a major position in their military soon after his successes in the French and Indian War. As we reflect on our military and politicians in present times, it's important that we realize that when we become self-satisfied and scorn merit for promotions, we risk birthing the revolutionaries who may overturn our social order and way of life.
   
   Washington's quite a figure and this is a satisfactory introduction. I look forward to pursuing more of the resources described in other reviews such as Giordano's especially helpful review recommending David Hackett Fisher's "Washington's Crossing".
   
   3.5 stars
   
   --SD



5. This is a small book, both in dimensions (5 1/4" x 7 3/8") and length (126pp), so it is a relatively quick read. It seems to be well-researched and is quite readable, as is to be expected of anything by the esteemed Dr. Johnson.
   
   Surprisingly for something so short, the book does span Washington's entire life. It begins by giving some background information on the preceding two or three generations on his father's side, then proceeds with his birth, family situation, and education. Sources for information on Washington's childhood are sparse, so this section is understandably thin. Johnson does take time, though, to dispel a couple prominent myths about his subject.
   
   The book's chapters are as follows:
   
   One: A Young Gentleman's Youth in Virginia
   Two: A Gallant Young Colonel and His Rich Wife
   Three: Slaveowner, Agricultural Pioneer, Builder
   Four: Commander in Chief and Victor
   Five: Creating a Nation: Theory
   Six: Creating a Nation: Practice
   Seven: Last Years
   
   As might be guessed from the chapter titles, the structure of the book is generally chronological. Johnson ably weaves in other information that doesn't necessarily belong to a specific period in Washington's life (e.g., his developing thoughts on the socio-economic and governmental future of the new nation). There is a good mix of information on Washington's private life & business dealings, as well as his military & governmental service. Naturally, some subjects get more attention than others, and every reader will wish that something in particular had received more (or less). But, I thought Johnson did a fairly balanced job, while understandably weighted a bit more on the years 1775 to 1797 (i.e., Revolutionary War thru Constitutional Convention thru Presidency).
   
   There are a couple of typos, which should have been caught by a copy editor, but that is to be expected in any book, really. I noticed a couple places where the author repeated a piece of information. For example, with regard to Washington's physical presence, chapters one & two both quote Benjamin Latrobe saying, "Washington had something uncommonly majestic and commanding in his walk, his address, his figure and his countenance." I found this a little annoying, but not really a big deal.
   
   There is a brief bibliography of recommended reading at the end but no end/footnotes or index. In a more comprehensive work, this would bother me, but not for something that is meant to be such a brief introduction to the life of the subject.
   
   Overall, a fine introduction to the life of George Washington, and definitely recommended.
   
   Content: 4.5
   Style & Structure: 4
   Average: 4.25, rounded down to 4

5 comments about Grant.

1. This is an excellent and highly readable biography of Grant. However if you are considering the Kindle edition, note that there are some transcription problems:
   
   * Footnotes have been transcribed as inline paragraphs within the main text flow. They are normally included closely after the relevant paragraph, but they sometimes lag by a screen (or even two) and in one place surfaced in a prior screen.
   
   * The maps have been omitted.
   
   * The full original index is included. But since it includes neither hyperlinks to the text, nor Kindle locations, nor even paper page numbers, it is essentially useless.
   
   * The paper version uses indented paragraphs to indicate extended quotes. Unfortunately these show up as normal undistinguished paragraphs in the Kindle version, so I was sometimes surprised to discover I was in a quote, or that I had left one.
   
   * There are also occasional minor transcription glitches such as words being erroneously joined together or erroneously split apart; or sentences erroneously broken into separate paragraphs. But these are relatively minor.
   
   Note that most of these issues aren't due to the Kindle itself: for example it handle footnotes and textual links just fine. The issues are mostly with how this particular book has been converted.
   
   I don't want to overstate the issues: the book is still quite readable in the Kindle edition, and suitable for (say) travel reading. However the various glitches are sufficiently annoying (and the book sufficiently good!) that I have ended up also buying a hardcover version, for browsing and reference.
   
   For the biography itself 5 stars. For the Kindle transcription, only two.



2. After reading Professor Smith's Grant biography, two apparent things come to mind: the same cult of ignorance that has removed George Washington and Eisenhower from the lips of children and TV ditto-heads was responsible for the "overlooking" of this great leader; and, they, the racist, largely-white Establishment is on the march as we wage unnecessary war today with clue-less leaders in charge. This southern biography in one volume does great justice to that 19th Century and our 21st Century that stands on a precipice,serving as a trumpet call-to-arms. From the middle of Grant's memoirs at Vicksburg, I went headlong into this thrilling read, moved many times by its revelations,riveting insertions of quotes that dramatize the action with tremendous clarity. Insightful, balanced and engrossing from beginning to end. Clearly, U.S. Grant was forgotten by those whose sensibilities were offended that one man could be charged with being a Negro-lover, Indian-lover and a unifier. And for once, Jean Edward Smith got it right: the man who masters the battlefield challenges can deftly handle the administrative ones as well, without the meddling of professional politicians and slicksters. Until reading this biography, I was led to believe that the Confederacy was more noble defending the genteel plantation ways and pleasantries against the crudities of Northern pride. Like, how dare they attack Miss Scarlett! The Civil War was much larger than Margaret Mitchell, and Jean Smith builds this biography to a deeper understanding about the war and its cost. Not only does Grant rise in dimension, but he levels off and enjoys a special relationship with Lincoln that is unique and illuminating, before moving into his White House years and retirement.If one needs to know why leadership is empty in the Executive Branch since Eisenhower, you need not look beyond the enemies of Grant's legacy. The standards of conduct,on and off the battlefield, by all participants, their levels of understanding of the cause, especially their civility was so moving and numerous that one is shocked to return to 21st century conduct. There is much to admire about those times and the great man, U.S. Grant. Read this, keep it and learn plenty.



3. I really loved this book. What a great General he was. Very underrated President. Should be ranked right up there. His battlefield skills saved the country.



4. Jean Edward Smith has written an outstanding biography of Ulysses S. Grant, one of the more complex heroes of American history. Grant's complexity does not stem from his own actions, but from the fact that his career as a general is considered such a success while his presidency has always been looked at as an abject failure. Henry Adams had even written that denunciation of Grant, saying, "The Progress of evolution from President Washington to President Grant was enough to upset Darwin." Mr. Smith had the good sense to compare what Adams wrote to the earlier thoughts of his brother Charles Francis Adams Jr. who admired the general and called him "an extraordinary man."
   Sometimes history needs to unfold over a longer period of time before a figure can be properly judged. With Grant the fact was that for over 100-years he came out on the losing end of history because he was for Reconstruction and the civil rights of the freed blacks. When Rutherford B. Hayes came into power in 1877 the freedoms of blacks had become a dead issue and Grant was destined to appear a failure in the eyes of history. It has only been with the success of the Civil Rights movement throughout the 1960s that Grant was in a large way vindicated. Finally southern biographers were unable to point to him as a man who picked the losing side of history, and a man who sympathized with blacks and therefore was wrong.
   It is always difficult to attempt to judge anyone or any act of the past by the standards of today. That is why it is hard to condemn George Washington and Thomas Jefferson for owning slaves because it was common-place at the time. They don't deserve any positive press for owning slaves, BUT if they had turned over their slaves while they lived and fought for the freedom of all then they would have been so far ahead of their time to almost not have been real. There was no-such-thing as Virginia planters of the 18th and 19th centuries who refused to embrace the benefits of free slave labor. At least, I do not recall anything of such people.
   Grant is different because while he was President he WAS popular and DID protect the freedoms of people (which is correct even though it was judged as wrong in the south from 1877 to the 1960s). Mr. Smith is actually righting a historic wrong by trying to view Grant as the people of his time viewed him rather than those who came after and detested him for taking what was for 100-years the losing side of history. For instance, if George W. Bush has many biographies written by his supporters (now less than 28% of the population) that help to shape how he is looked at in the future, it would require a writer like Mr. Smith to come in and show that DURING the vast majority of his term, he was not exactly what one would call "popular."
   Re-writing history is a dangerous game and it takes writers like Mr. Smith to set the story straight after it has gone too far astray. In the south for instance, it was around a century or more before there started to be seen positive views of Abraham Lincoln. It is said that history is written by the winner, but really history is written by whoever happens to be holding the pen, and it isn't always the winner. How else could one explain the "Lost Cause" mythology that turned Lincoln, Grant, and Sherman into villains? It is only after carefully dissecting what actually took place that the story can be set straight.
   In "Grant" Mr. Smith has written a biography of the 18th President and first four-star general in the nation's history that is more accurate than a great majority of those that have come before. His biography is free from the anti-Grant bias that flooded the view for so long. However he also does not gloss over faults of Grant. Grant was a man who sometimes drank too much, and Mr. Smith doesn't hide it. But neither does he extrapolate and assume (as many anti-Grant biographers have done) that Grant was a hopeless drunk who stumbled around at all-times and was hardly ever sober. That such views have been accepted by many historians as fact is absolutely ridiculous, and Mr. Smith finally sets things to right.
   In closing, what we get from Mr. Smith is not a biography that overlooks all Grant's faults and pretends that he was a man heaven-sent who never made a wrong turn in his life. Instead we are given the portrait of a man who sometimes trusted the wrong kinds of people too much and who would other times have been better off as President had he sounded his views out amongst the public (especially the Cabinet and Congress). We see a man who as general came close to defeat more than a few times, but who had the nerves and calm to stand his ground. We get an accurate view of a man whose best traits as a general (indeed the fact that he was not easily perturbed in the most trying moments) are what got him into such trouble with historians for over a century. Not only did Grant wind up on the losing side by supporting the rights of black Americans, he showed no remorse for having done so (nor should he have, though it hurt his legacy).
   Time has vindicated Grant in the end and given Mr. Smith the clarity to write a definitive biography of the man from Galena, IL. Finally Grant can be reassessed and while he may never crack the top ten or even top twenty on the list of the greatest presidents of all-time, he at least can leave the likes of Buchanan, Harding, Pierce, and (something tells me) George W. Bush behind at the bottom forever.



5. Jean Edward Smith's biography of Grant provides an excellent summation of his life by looking at the areas that defined him as a person. This is by no means a comprehensive biography of his generalship or presidential years but it does a thorough job of hitting all of the highlights. I will not go into excessive detail about all of the topics covered but there area few notable things to point out that Smith does well.
   
   1. The Civil war years are covered succinctly and through the lens of how Grants leadership allowed his subordinates to achieve victory while he pushed them on to continue fighting.
   2. It seems that there is some adequate explanation of the bad judgments that Grant made during his White House years and Smith points out there was never "a businessman Grant did not trust" which led him astray during his White House years.
   3. This is one of the few books that spend some time on Grant's personal life and the role his wife and daughter played are covered well. It also covers his military relationships very clearly which helps to understand the years after the Civil War.
   Overall it is an excellent summary of Grant's life and well worth reading.