5 comments about Thurgood Marshall: American Revolutionary.

1. Maybe its unfair that I read this book after reading the spectacular autobiography of John Lewis, Walking in the Wind. However, I found that this book was too detached from the man. I did not come away from this book with a better understanding of this man than I did before hand. Thurgood Marshall is one of the most important people of 20th century America but you don't see why in this book.

   The major problem with this book is its writing style which makes reading this book tedious. I found myself bored by page 200. Also, I believe the Brown decision is given 20 pages and his solcitor general appointment is given more.

   If you want to learn more about this guy, study the cases of the era. Sweatt v. painter, Brown of course, etc. Marshall's personal life really is irrelevant towards understanding this man's accomplishments. I would not recommend this book.




2. Juan Williams' biography of Thurgood Marshall is a worthwhile read. Williams has a great sense of the dramatic story in this man's life and he firmly sets him in the historical context of a nation in turmoil. I went away from this book with a better understanding of Marshall's life, personality and importance in American History. Williams also does a very good job with contrasting Marshall's social and political opinions with those of civil rights leaders in the 60s and 70s, with whom he occasionally butted heads. Williams paints him as the feisty individual that he was but he also does not sugar coat his flaws and mistakes. For me, the most interesting aspects of the autobiography were the accounts of Marshall's trials and travels with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund and his inexhaustible energy to confront the laws of the times. If you have any interest in learning about this man and his place both in history and in the Civil Rights Movement, defintely pick up this worthwhile book.



3. As a white man from the deep south, it boggles my mind how a totally free republic could twist the best Constitution ever written to deny a class of people their freedom. Civil right, the Vietnam war, the 1960's in general fascinate me.
   
   Mr. Williams book is particularly good at setting up how Justice Marshall came to his way of thinking. He learned early on how to play the game in the other man's (whites) territory. If you want to know how hard it was to operate during these times, with the threats and bigotry, I suggest this book. I think it is paramount for the younger people in today's society to understand the severity of the risk and opposition that people like Justice Marshall had to deal with. I think it would make them realize that even though progress still needs to be made, these individuals put their lives on the line to advance society to where it is today.



4. As a review on the back cover states, this book truly "reads like fiction." It gives a fascinating perspective of his life, and although I've read other technical biographies and his opinions, lectures and decisions, I would recommend this as a "first read" for anyone studying Thurgood. You feel as if you know Thurgood after reading this, and knowing his personal background helps you understand his professional background. His role in black freedom is no less than that of Martin Luther King's. (And quite frankly I think he should be revered as such.) The realities of black history nauseate me, and I can't comprehend how people historically treated blacks -- but Thurgood fought, and he fought legally and intelligently. Our children need to learn more about Thurgood and his overcoming adversity and changing the history of our country.



5. I think this book a "must read" for anyone who wants to know the truth about "back in the days" and "Jim Crow" days and such. Thurgood Marshall was the most inportant African-American man of the 20th century and probably of all time! The things he did have never nor will they ever be equaled. I only wish I'd had the pleasure and blessing of meeting this great man and shaking his hand. I recommend this book to everyone.

5 comments about "Bayonet! Forward": My Civil War Reminiscences.

1. If you want to learn more about Joshua L. Chamberlain, what better way to do it than to read his first hand accounts and speeches. This book is a compilation of several articles he wrote for a magazine and a number of speeches he gave after the war. Bear in mind that the magazine articles were heavily edited by the editor of the magazine, much to the chagrin of Chamberlain, who was quite angry! One of his speeches at the dedication of the Gettysburg monuments very succinctly outlines his reasons for volunteering for the Union Army and the ideology that kept him going back to the field, even after a horrible wound that should have killed him. Chamberlain wrote very eloquently about his experiences and his speeches are extremely moving. A must read for any Chamberlain fan!



2. These United States of America have more pretenders to the title than genuine heroes. Revisionist historians often inform us that our idols have feet of clay. George Washington, the "father of our country," was too proud to shake the hand of ordinary American citizens. Thomas Jefferson, "author of the Declaration of Independence," held others in servitude. Abraham Lincoln was subject to deep bouts of depression. George Patton was a bully incapable of showing compassion for psychologically wounded soldiers. It is even whispered that "Ike," the very symbol of 1950s family stability, may have had an affair during WWII, while Mamie patiently waited at home for the return of her soldier. The list goes on.

   That on-going litany of real world disappointments is what makes Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain so important to the American story. In Chamberlain, we find one of the few genuine heroes, so far revealed in our short, national history.

   In this volume, we read Chamberlain's (mostly) post-war speechs and reports on some of the most critical actions of the Civil War. Despite his meteoric rise from Lieutenant Colonel to Major General in four, awful years, Chamberlain does not turn the spot light upon himself. Despite being awarded the Medal of Honor, Chamberlain does not see himself as special. Instead, in speech after speech, Chamberlain gives credit (by name) to his soldiers and to his God. Like Alvin York, another American hero who would follow him 50 years later, Chamberlain was truly humble, and in his humility could be found the seeds of his heroism.

   This book, like Chamberlain's other writings is a magnificent primer for those who would seek to give selfless service to their nation, their God, or both.




3. An excellent read. Chamberlain brings himself to you for examination. He hides nothing while bringing you through some very vivid accounts of the Civil War. If this book is not in your library, you should consider getting your hands on it. Enjoy!



4. I became acquainted with the story of Joshua Chamberlain after reading Shaaras' "Killer Angels" and wanted to learn more about him. This book has been an overwhelming dissapointment. For a man who was present at a number of important and exciting events in US history and an authentic American hero, his narrative is plodding and dull. His battle decriptions and his attention to minor troop movements are confusing and essentially unreadable. The maps he provides are completely inadequate in providing a better understanding what took place. The maps can be excused by the fact that they are provided with 19th century technology, his muddled writing style cant be. If you're looking for an enjoyable reading experience that will help you learn more about Chamberlain, I suggest you look elsewhere.



5. This book, written by Civil War hero Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, is an interesting first person look at his experiences in the war. While some of his passages are self-serving and do not necessarily reflect what actually happened (e.g., his and the 20th Maine's actions at Little Round Top during the battle at Gettysburg), this is a good rendering of one person's account of his experiences.
   
   The book provides a tour of Chamberlain's part in the War, beginning with his engagement at Fredericksburg, through the violence at Gettysburg, to the battle at Petersburg (where he was badly wounded), to White Oak Road and Five Forks (and his dramatic encounters with the fiery Phil Sheridan), to Appomattox. The book concludes with the story of the Army of the Potomac's grand review in Washington D. C. after hostilities had ended.
   
   It is written in the style of the times, which seems somewhat overblown and overstylized today. Nonetheless, it provides one soldier's perspective on the War.
   
   In addition, there are a series of Appendices that flesh out Chamberlain's story (such as his comments at the dedication of the 20th Maine's monument at Gettysburg in 1889, Chamberlain's report on his and the 20th Maine's role at Gettysburg, his rendering of the last salute of the Army of Northern Virginia at Appomattox. The volume ends with a memoriam to Chamberlain upon his death.
   
   All in all, a useful book to gain a sense of the perspective of an important soldier in the Union Army, although flawed to some extent by some self-serving discussion.

5 comments about Memoirs of General W.T. Sherman (Library of America).

1. General William T. Sherman's memoirs, first published in 1875, are primarily an account of his service in uniform during the Civil War. Sherman rallied to the Union colors early in the conflict, but had indifferent success until the searing crucible of the Battle of Shiloh, where he fought under the command of the stalwart U.S. Grant. Shiloh was a turning point. With increasing confidence as a leader, Sherman played key roles in the siege of Vicksburg and in the relief of beseiged Union forces at Chattanooga. When Grant was called east to head up all Union forces, he hand-picked Sherman as his successor in the West. Sherman would go on to take Atlanta, march to the sea at Savannah, and pillage his way through the Carolinas to hasten the end of the war.
   
   Sherman the man, and his memoirs, stand in vivid contrast to his contemporary and close friend U.S. Grant. Where Grant was modest and reserved, Sherman comes across as all nervous energy, talking up a storm and hardly able to sit still doing it. His memoirs are reflective of his personality, passionate and argumentative in between inserted copies of key correspondence. While less polished than Grant's, they are in many ways more entertaining and certainly more revealing of Sherman's feelings and personality.
   
   Sherman expresses an opinion on practically everything. His battles with newspaper reporters, whom he despised, date from an alleged nervious breakdown in the first year of the war. His exchange of correspondence with Confederate General John Hood over the forced evacuation of Atlanta, are a malstrom in miniature of the passions behind the war itself. Sherman is more than frank about the politics within the Union Army, and its sometimes troubled relations with civilian authority. Above all, Sherman recognized the cruelty of the war, and was unwilling to sugarcoat that reality for anyone. Sherman and Grant each understood the grim arithmetic that the Confederate Armies must be bled to death in order for the Confederacy to be defeated and were prepared to carry out that strategy.
   
   This book is highly recommended to students of the Civil War, who will find Sherman to be an instructive and even at times entertaining guide through those portions that he personally experienced.



2. INTERESTING TO READ "SHERMANS" SIDE OF THE STORY !! GOOD READ IN CONJUCTION WITH "CITIZEN SHERMAN" BY MICHAEL FELLMAN !!!



3. Sherman is (perhaps arguably) the most articulate and intelligent autobiographer (and biographer) of the Civil War period. Yes, he was controversial, but that, in great part, came from the times, and the period politics, and later from the political agendas of modern politically correct historians/writers. The overriding elements in Sherman's autobiography are the matter-of-factness and the fairness with which he describes events and people in his life. With much the same exquisite Dignity as U. S. Grant in his memoiors, Sherman speaks to the reader with a clarity and honesty no decent person can help but admire. He is painstaking in relating military associations - sometimes wearily so. But his thorough and candid descriptions of events, people and places still present themselves in an entertaining manner time and time again. For the reader mature enough to accept those times without tainted sanctimonious judgement, Sherman's memoirs will be a fascinating and enlightening glimpse of the people and the soul of our country during one of our most trying eras.



4. There's the example of Julius Caesar, of course. And in America, there was Ulysses Grant, whose orders and dispatches were so concise and unequivocal that they were credited by his subordinates for many of his victories. Grant's Memoirs are widely recognized as a classic of autobiography, as much for their literary merit as for their content. I've had this Penguin edition of "Cump" Sherman's Memoirs on my shelf for so long that the price is about a third of the current, but I've never been tempted to read them, chiefly because of Sherman's reputation for inhumanity during his service against the trans-Mississippi Indians.
   A couple days ago, however, I opened the book on a whim and started reading, and I've hardly looked at anything else since. The writing is fantastic! Utterly unadorned yet vividly descriptive. Witty, and that's a surprise! Forthright, modest, down-to-earth. As thoroughly planned as one of his campaigns, which I find may be explained in part by his frequent assignment of logistic tasks in his early military career. He knew how to move supplies and keep account of where things were.
   
   Like any 19th C memoirist, or any Viking skald, Sherman feels obliged to trace his ancestry for a few pages, which I confess didn't immediately stir my interest. Then, however, when he begins his narrative of his military service in Florida, against the Seminoles, suddenly the saga comes to life. I learned more from this one chapter, as a primary source, about the early Americanization of Florida than from anything I've read elsewhere. I could feel the rash from the palmetto on my skin. Likewise, the two chapters on his years in California just after the invasion of Mexico, took me to Monterey, to Yerba Buena before it became San Francisco, and up the river to Sutter's Mill and the Gold Rush Country more vividly, more "virtually" in the game-boy sense of the word, than any historian's account of those years. Sherman was, in his blunt style, as fine a writer as Twain. No wonder he was so effective as a general. Good writers make good generals, as I said before. My thesis is proven; I'll be sending a sample of my reviews here on amazon to the new Commander-in-Chief in Washington next February, in hopes of an appointment in the field. I will, of course, in true 19th C fashion, remind Pres. Obama of my ardent electioneering on his behalf.
   
   [I had no intention of reviewing this book until I finished it, but the first 112 pages have been so exciting that I wanted to share them. I plan now to add paragraphs to this report as I continue reading.]
   
   One of the thrills of reading Sherman's account of his years in California is encountering the street names of San Francisco -- Mason, Larkin, Stockton, Ord -- incarnated as ardent young bucks, flesh-and-blood yearning for the accomplishments you know lie well in their futures. It's also intriguing - poignant, if you will - to find Sherman hunting geese or courting señoritas in company with young fellow officers whom he will be thrashing on the battlefields in another fifteen years.
   
   * It's worth noting that Sherman was only slightly more successful during the 1850s than Grant. Despite his intrepid energy, probity, and obvious business skills, he found himself in 1858 with no significant wealth, no stable occupation, and a family of a wife and four daughters. Perhaps it wasn't so easy, after all, for a person without deep pockets to achieve success in ante-bellum America, except by luck, dishonesty, or slavery. Sherman's last job before the elction of Lincoln was as the superintendent of a "military seminary," that is, a school for the sons of planters, in Louisiana. Knowing that his moderate criticisms of the slave system would get him fired anyway, Sherman resigned as soon as Lincoln was elected. No one around him in Louisiana expressed any doubt that the preservation of slavery was the "fighting issue" behind secession.
   
   ** As Sherman left his youth behind and entered the fray of the Civil War, he shifts his tone from that of an adventurous raconteur to an earnest historian, and I've found that I need to read him differntly also, less for pleasure than for historical knowledge. I've slowed down and taken time to evaluate his reportage in comparison to what I already 'know' of Civil War historiography. Sherman's manner of constructing his narrative also changed; he began to incorporate documents - his field reports and letters, the field reports of other officers, etc. By the mid 1870's when Sherman wrote these memoirs, the true course of events and the soundest interpretation of them were already afire with controversy.
   Two insights, from Sherman's perspective: 1) the elite Louisianans whom Sherman conflicted with, over the act of secession, were amazingly confident that there would be no war and that their 'peculiar institution' would thrive. They were all remarkably civil and genteel in their agreement to disagree, and Sherman departed without obstruction and with his pay in his pocket! 2) from Sherman's perspective, right at the front firing line with his green regiments, the Battle of Bull Run was a wash; either nobody won or both sides did, but neither side had the military skills to follow up and inflict a tactical victory. The war would continue until somebody on one side or the other knew how to win... and as "we" know, that would be Grant and Sherman himself.



5. As a writer Sherman was a natural. This book is a wonderful read and I've heard that it is the most important of all of the Civil War era autobiographies and I believe it. Everything that can be said of the book has been said in the many reviews, but I would just like to add my approval. Highly recommended book.

5 comments about Reading the Man: A Portrait of Robert E. Lee Through His Private Letters.

1. Fun to read a pissant writing about a man with such integrity. Taking some letters, scrutinize them carefully, add preconceived ideas and a few tea leaves, and viola, pissant can give a portrait of Robert E. Lee.



2. By trying to examine R. E. Lee by the world of the 21st century, Ms. Pryor has put together some personal letters from or to Lee and made serious mistakes of judgement. While there is perhaps a chance to sell a few books by attempting to show unexpected flaws in the life of someone judged by almost all serious historians or biographers to have been very worthy, Ms. Pryor has chosen a belittle one of the great men of our American experience. I am very sorry I bought this book and feel that it is an egregious slur on the memory of a much better person than Ms. Pryor.



3. I was anxious to learn more about Ms Pryor's "reading" of Lee the general through whatever letters she had uncovered. Oooppps. No such thing.
   
   Pryor's "reading" of the Lee the general is so second-handish that it reminded me of another infamous treatment of Lee's generalship. So similar were the concepts and critiques of Lee the general that looking at her footnotes, I discovered that her "reading" of Lee during the war comes from her reading of select, secondary sources that support her agenda and have been thoroughly discredited as inaccurately portraiting Lee's generalship.
   
   For me, this spoiled the book. I have gifted my copy to charity.



4. Despite the author's comments to the contrary, this book is clearly biased attempt at using recently discovered coorespondance from and about the subject, in an attempt to tarnish the image of a man of true integrity and statesmanship.
   
   The actual quotations that the author uses are very sparce, and often used out of context, in thinly veiled attempts to show the subject's supposed failings. Robert E. Lee was flawed, as every human being is, but many, many well-qualified researchers have shown that he was revered, loved, and admired by his contemporaries for his impecable sense of honor and integrity.
   
   The author has chosen to allow the reader to view very little of the actual information directly, choosing instead to present it by his own description, or in poorly chosen, heavily edited snippets, obviously intended to support the author's pre-concieved judgement about the subject.
   
   What a shame that this author was given the rare opportunity to view newly discovered historical information, and has used it so carelessly.
   
   Don't waste your money on this large, expensive, and clumsy editorialization in the guise of research.



5. As a historian I have to say that this work is appalling. This work reads more like a partisan hit piece than a true historical investigation. The very best that can be said for this work is that it's sloppy. If the misrepresentation of facts in the book were intentional, then it's unforgivable.
   
   Since the question of the Custis slaves has been commented on so frequently, I'll use it as the main example of the sort of problems this book has. This work makes it sound like Lee inherited a number of slaves from George Washington Parke Custis that he was ordered to free within 5 years. This is NOT the case.
   
   Lee did not inherit any slaves. If anyone could be bothered to read the Custis will, it states, "And upon the legacies to my four granddaughters being paid, and my estates that are required to pay the said legacies, being clear of debts, then I give freedom to my slaves, the said slaves to be emancipated by my executors in such manner as to my executors may seem most expedient and proper, the said emancipation to be accomplished in not exceeding five years from the time of my decease."
   
   What this means is that the slaves were not bequeathed to anyone in the will. However, the will REQUIRED the executers of the will, including Robert E. Lee, to use the slaves for up to 5 years to pay the "legacies" of George Washington Parke Custis's granddaughters. Not only did Lee not own the slaves, but he did not have the power to free them until the final will of Custis was accomplished.
   
   Not only does the work fail to add mush substantially to the understanding of Robert E. Lee, the work is flawed to an extreme degree. I would advise any wishing to learn more on Lee to avoid this book.

5 comments about Beyond the White House: Waging Peace, Fighting Disease, Building Hope.

1. To do good works despite the stigma of the U. S. Government is a wish many of us share, and this book shows it can be done. Jimmy Carter is almost embarrassingly present on every page of this book, in the most oppressed, downtrodden and deprived corners of the world. It is not ego, but the ability to use the stature as a former president, that puts Jimmy Carter on these pages. As the author, he credits hundreds of others for their contributions to world peace, health, and improvement. Reluctantly he includes himself, and joyfully he adds Rosalynn, as the catalyst to uplifting change in the realms of politics, health, oppression, and human-caused tragedy around the world.
   In an encyclopedia or almanac format, short essays understate the enormous changes brought about by the ability to move important people to action on behalf of some of the most powerless. Beginning with election monitoring, and with a major portion on eliminating debilitating "forgotten diseases" that infect millions, he concludes with a vision for continuing this kind of work for the next 25 years.
   It becomes obvious that this book is not about Jimmy Carter, or the Carter Center, but about what change is possible. It is a challenge to the best in all of us to follow the example of the plain-spoken nuclear physicist from Plains to do what we can to improve the world. Don't give up; despite massive obstacles from powerful people, bringing the best of each human forward can still bring us all to a better world.
   You can read this as a biography, or as a promotion of the Carter Center, but at the end the possibility of positive change is the torch carried forward by this book.



2. Jimmy Carter's effectiveness as president will be long debated, as will the presidencies of most of the people who have held that office but despite some criticism from the extreme right his post presidential career has won the hearts of most Americans. From the fact that he went back home to his modest Georgia house to the work of the Carter Center to the fact that anyone can go and meet him on most Sundays as he teaches Sunday School at his home church, Jimmy Carter has become the very image of how many people think former presidents should spend their post presidential career.
   
   This book deals almost exclusively with one aspect of Carter's life after the White House and that is the work of the Carter Center. There are numerous very poignant moments described in this book as the former president and first lady travel to many of the most desolate areas of the world seeking to help improve the lives of the people who live there. There is also humor to be found such as the predicament that the first board of directors of the Carter Center found themselves in while trying to figure out how to phrase the by-laws to deal with the governance of the Center after the death of the Carter's. For the most part though this is the very moving story of how the Carter Center has improved the lives of millions of people.
   
   One of the basic thrusts of the book is that because he is an ex-president Jimmy Carter can gain the corporation of third world governments that otherwise would probably not allow these foreigners to work so openly in their countries. There are also diplomatic missions that the Center undertakes and they are well known as election monitors but it is their work fighting and in some cases eliminating disease that is the most impressive and that is the centerpiece of this book. The work of the Center with agriculture is barely mentioned but their success there would likely fill another book all on its own. Also notable is Carter's willingness to give credit for these achievements to others and not to even take all of the credit that is due to he and his wife.
   
   The biggest problem with this book is that a lot of the information found here can be found in President Carter's previous books and so I found that a good bit of the material here seemed pretty repetitive. There is a lot of information that I haven't run across before but in places I did feel like I was rereading a book that I had read before. In all fairness though I can't help but feel that this book was intended to raise public awareness of the Carter Center and its work and to therefore help with fundraising especially in a future that at some point will not include the fundraising powers of a former president. President Carter has become a very skilled author and as usual the writing was excellent and I thoroughly enjoyed the book, even the repetitive parts.



3. What this man has done post presidency is simply amazing. Pres. Carter writes in a simple unassumming style while telling these incredible stories of things he has been involved in since he left office, like eradicating terrible diseases and monitoring elections. A really interesting read..



4. Beyond the White House is a book written by former U.S. President Jimmy Carter and it covers his political, social, and humanitarian activities since he left the White House early in 1981. Carter has achieved much in his days since leaving Washington D.C. and he seems anxious to share his accomplishments with the reader. Through his Carter Center, the former president, his wife Rosalynn, and their team of associates at the center have labored long hours, traveled around the world, and met with dozens of foreign leaders to work out agreements, wipe out disease, and improve political freedom.
   
   Most people already know about Jimmy Carter's humanitarian works and his efforts to improve the world around him. But some may not be aware of the actual events that have transpired while working toward these goals. Carter explains some of them in detail, and in some instances, he takes the details a bit too far. This is especially true in the book's opening chapters when Carter is discussing his meetings with government leaders of different countries. When I started to read this part of the book, I was expecting something written in a manner similar to a personal memoir. Instead, these opening chapters read like a play- by- play excerpt from a diary. I was expecting a quick overview of the meetings and what was achieved, but Carter felt the need to give the rundown on what happened each day and at different times throughout the day. A quick summary would have been sufficient.
   
   In the second half of the book, however, Carter settles down and starts to talk about some of his important humanitarian achievements. I particularly liked the chapter on fighting disease. I was fully aware of Carter's work with Habitat for Humanity and I knew that he and his wife Rosalynn Carter were active in working toward a disease- free world. But I did not know exactly what diseases were high on their list and what level of success they had achieved. This chapter explains it all, and it includes some graphic photographs of individuals inflicted with certain preventable diseases. Carter explains in this chapter how he and his associates at the Carter Center have worked with the native people of different African nations and have helped them eliminate many diseases simply by encouraging cleanliness and by advocating filtering water before drinking.
   
   The chapter titled "Building Hope" is another good chapter because it includes some of Carter's work on human rights. I would have preferred that this chapter be a little longer, but it still gets the point across. Carter is very concerned about political freedom and he has worked long and hard to spread democracy and basic human rights around the world. I also liked that he included a section on his work in his home state of Georgia; specifically, in the city of Atlanta, to improve living conditions among the city's poor.
   
   Beyond the White House isn't a political book in the usual sense. Carter voices a few concerns about the human rights violations that have taken place under George W. Bush's watch and he points out the positive working relationship he has enjoyed with Gerald Ford, George H.W. Bush, and others. But other than that, he steers clear of political criticisms and differences in this book. He wanted this to be a book about the accomplishments of the Carter Center and he wanted to inspire everyone to work toward change for the betterment of humans around the world. For the most part, this book generally succeeds in these endeavors.
   
   Overall, Beyond the White House is a good book about Jimmy Carter's work as an ex- president and it details the many accomplishments of the Carter Center in its efforts to spread democracy, eliminate disease, and encouraging improvements in human rights. The first part of the book is a little more detailed than it needed to be, and some of the other chapters could use a little more length. But the book is still good overall and it presents a nice summary of what a person can achieve to improve the world around them. Carter had his share of difficulties as president, but his days since leaving the White House have been filled with achievement, and his life is a good example of the good that people can do in the later stages of their lives.



5. Pulitzer Prize winner and former President Jimmy Carter presents his memoir/retrospective on twenty-five years of humanitarian work in Beyond the White House: Waging Peace, Fighting Disease, Building Hope, now available in an unabridged audiobook on CD with tracks every three minutes for easy bookmarking. Narrated by Tom Stechschulte and Barbara Caruso, Beyond the White House tells of Carter's travels to distant, often war-torn lands from Haiti to Ethiopia on missions of peacekeeping, as well as his efforts to combat disease. Though told in Carter's plain-spoken, folksy manner, Beyond the White House not only illuminates his world-spanning efforts to do good, but also challenges the listener to think and act in ways that promote responsible worldwide social ethics. Highly recommended. 7 CDs, 7 3/4 hours.

5 comments about Southern Lady, Yankee Spy: The True Story of Elizabeth Van Lew, a Union Agent in the Heart of the Confederacy.

1. Varon's "Southern Lady, Yankee Spy" is a wonderful blend of history and intrigue as she chronicles the life of Elizabeth Van Lew and Van Lew's heroic efforts before, during, and after the Civil War. Brave and eccentric, Van Lew helps the Union cause while surrounded by the blinding ignorance of secessionist loyalty and a dismay for the equal
   rights of women and African Americans.

   Highly recommended for those interested in the early woman's suffrage and civil rights movements. Civil War buffs and lovers of historical espionage will do well to add this work to their collections.




2. .
   I am the great-great grandson of Elizabeth's brother, discussed extensively in the book. Ms. Varon has admirably fleshed out with documented sources many of the accounts passed down through our family. She has (thankfully) quite thoroughly debunked the 'Crazy Bet' nonsense that always bothered those of us who knew something of the real story. In that respect it is a valuable and enjoyable work. Most satisfying was the evident skill with which the author develops the paradox of northerners, starting with Elizabeth's father who came to Richmond in 1807 from New Jersey at age 17, becoming so thoroughly southern that her brother could marry into some of the bluest blood Virginia ever produced.
   
   The book, however, would have been even better had Ms. Varon taken the time to develop a chapter on Elizabeth's sister-in-law, Mary Carter West. They did /not/ get along, and the Secession Crisis blew the Van Lew marriage apart along some already weak seams.
   
   Mary was directly descended from four of the most important families in Virginia -- the Carters, Harrisons, Randolphs, and Wests. Robert E Lee's mother was a Carter cousin. President Harrison was a great-uncle. Mary's brother Thomas enlisted with the 27th Virginia Infantry less than a month after Fort Sumter was shelled, and was one of a handful of original enlistees still alive to surrender at Appomatox. The battle of Malvern Hill (1862) was literally in the West family's front yard.
   
   In fairness to Ms. Varon I should note that she did mention Mary's departure from the family (family lore says that Elizabeth drove her out of the house) and subsequent (1864) testimony intended to finger the Van Lews as traitors. The topic area simply could have been substantially better developed and would have greatly deepened the reader's understanding of what a cauldron the Van Lew household was at the beginning of the war. The historical importance of this is that it is a particularly forceful and poignant example of what was a relatively common situation in Virginia. Most aren't as richly documented.
   
   One area in which I would actively fault the author is that she repeatedly superimposes a late 20th century political correctness framework on a very different era. Example: Elizabeth is described as being a victim of "ageism" late in life.
   
   Then there is the paucity of maps to set geographical context for readers unfamiliar with the area and its historic sites. The map of Richmond has no scale, which is sort of lame, but I'm being picky here. She also stumbles around in trying to understand the Mary Bowser connection, whereby the Van Lew ring supposedly had an operative in President Davis's very household.
   
   On the other hand, her explanation of the 19th century understanding of death and how it related to the famous Col Dahlgren re-burial was delightfully helpful in clarifying an event that otherwise doesn't make much sense, given the huge risks for the parties involved.
   
   All in all, this is vastly better than the other Van Lew books out there, some of which are pure bunk. It is enjoyable and generally well written. Ms. Varon is to be thanked for giving us a valuable window into the American story as experienced by one family -- at a crucial time, in a vital place.



3. One keeps expecting the Civil War, that great motherload for historians, finally to have been mined out. Then a book like SOUTHERN LADY, YANKEE SPY comes along, proving that there are still riches to be discovered in that thar war. Elizabeth Van Lew's name will not ring a bell with most Civil War buffs, but Elizabeth Varon's biography ought to remedy that. This woman's courageous story deserves a place in our textbooks.

   Van Lew, though a member of one of Richmond's most prominent families, was a staunch unionist who led a spy network that fed valuable intelligence to Union Generals Butler and Grant. It is possible that Van Lew even placed a spy among the servants of Jefferson Davis' household. After the war, Van Lew was appointed Postmaster of Richmond by then-President Grant. During her eight-year tenure, she integrated her staff and improved service.

   Varon, who teaches history at Wellesley College, fits into the framework of Van Lew's life story a good overview of unionist sentiment in Virginia prior to the war and its ineffectual leadership during the succession crisis. She thoroughly rebuts the "Crazy Bet" myth, which was Van Lew's image for much of the 20th century -- even among historians. The book's greatest accomplishment,though, is showing Van Lew as a three-dimensional person, constantly changing and evolving in response to the world around her.




4. I'd like to add my voice to the chorus of positive reviews. I found the book to be an excellent addition to the Civil War library. It's consideration of the role and activities of women in this case Elizabeth Van Lew distinguishes this contribution. Often, CW buffs become immersed in battles, generals, and politics of the time. This book is a welcome respite from the male dominated battlefield and offers a perspective of the life and times of the Richmond community. It is an engaging read that will allow many to learn more about this forgotten patriot.

   I do agree that more maps would have been helpful (I've been to Chimborazo hospital and would have benefited from understanding the proximity of Van Lew to the hospital).

   An excellent read. Great present for those interested in the role women have played in shaping the country.




5. "Southern Lady, Yankee Spy" is about a female Union spymaster in Richmond, Virginia, the capital of the Confederacy, during and after the Civil War. It is a wonderful piece of research and writing about a remarkable woman. The retelling of the fall of Richmond is unforgettable. Elizabeth van Lew's management capabilities and dedication to the Union earned her the third ranking position in the federal office of Postmaster General in Washington, DC after the war. Those who want to read an equally fine book about a female spy for the Confederacy should turn to "Wild Rose : Rose O'Neale Greenhow, Civil War Spy" by Ann Blackman, New York: Random House, 2005.

5 comments about Gerald R. Ford.

1. My dad enjoyed Gerald Ford as President because of his honesty, integrity, and rare human quality.



2. This is a good book. It makes you realize that Ford was really a hard working, intelligent, well qualified person at the time that he was selected to be Vice President. It also brings to life, the 70's. As the country gets ready to celebrate another birthday, we can also celebrate the persons who have been willing to get involved in service to their country.



3. Writing a short biography on a president who served such a brief time is a difficult proposition. It is to Brinkley's credit that he did not try to do more with his subject than what the subject deserves (such as Kevin Phillips failed work on William McKinley). Fortunately, Ford is not as an obscure, or I should say unimportant, a presidential figure as some others (e.g., Chester Arthur).
   
   The most dramatic issue for Ford was his pardon of Nixon. The author concludes that Ford acted correctly. Perhaps this is true, that is debatable. I lived through the same time (I almost voted for Ford in '76) and I am not sure that the country would not have been better served if a trial did occur. It may have prevented the recent efforts to devise an imperial presidency and the resulting calamity in foreign/domestic policies. Ford thought that a 1913 Supreme Court decision made clear that Nixon accepted the pardon and his guilt. That was not an accurate conclusion. His position would have made more sense if Ford required Nixon to have explicitly agreed with that conclusion. Ford didn't and Nixon spent much of his remaining years still deflecting blame.
   
   Left out of the bio was the significant revelation after Ford's death that he criticized Bush's Iraq War, but he directed that his thoughts not be published until after his death. In strengthening Ford's stature by highlighting his character, the author seems to have conveniently lost the chance to consider if his silence was consistent with the character issue. In fact, Ford was a party man to the death. His silence, therefore, is consistent with that stance, but was that of high character?
   
   Regardless, I too accept Ford as a very decent person and his presidency was at least (but no more) of average significance. His Helsinki agreement is rightly cited in this book as a landmark act. He was, though, a poor national candidate and that prevented an extension of his presidency.



4. Ford was our longest living president at 93, outliving Reagan by 46 days. He became president without a single vote. Nixon put him in office as someone who would grant him a pardon. Ford became known for his clumsiness, tripping and bumping his head at every opportunity. He put his foot in his mouth in a debate with Jimmy Carter when he declared that Poland was not dominated by the Soviet Union.



5. Well known historian Douglas Brinkley has written this brief biography, as a part of the American Presidents series of works. In the series editor's Introduction, Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. notes that (Page xv): "The president is the central player in the American political order." Gerald Ford was an accidental president, taking over after Richard Nixon's downfall resulting from Watergate and his subsequent resignation.
   
   Gerald Ford's name at birth was Leslie Lynch King, Jr. His father had a violent temper and the marriage did not last long. His mother later married Gerald Rudolf Ford; after a time, her son was renamed Gerald Rudolph (an Americanized version of the stepfather's middle name) Ford. As a youngster, he excelled at athletics and even had the possibility of a pro football career. However, he chose law school and, shortly after that, electoral politics. He saw action in World War II.
   
   When he was elected to the House of Representatives 1948, he began to formulate the ambition to become Speaker of the House. His chosen career was in the legislature. The book does a nice job profiling his rise in the House, with carefully crafted advancement through the ranks; it also depicts the start of a long-time friendship between Ford and Richard Nixon.
   
   When Ford finally became Minority Leader in the House, he used his conciliatory approach well. As Brinkley says (Page 31), ". . .he played the good coach, giving his squad wide latitude to speak their minds. In exchange, he wanted no bickering. Ford's open forum proved smart strategy." Some tho9ught him rather slow of thought, but his amiability and ability to work with others represented a great strength.
   
   When Nixon was elected President, he tended not to work so well with Congress--including his own Republican mates. Ford did not distinguish himself with his unabating support for Nixon after Watergate became a public matter; after former Attorney General John Mitchell reported that the White House was not involved, Ford clung to that long after so many others had seen through the falsehoods.
   
   Then, the unlikely story of his rise to Vice-President and his subsequent ascension to the presidency after Nixon's downfall. The book does a nice job in a brief space noting the major decisions/actions of the Ford Administration, some working out well and some not so well. Here, we read about Whip Inflation Now, swine flu, the withdrawal from Viet Nam, the Mayaguez incident, the Helsinki Accords, and so on. The internecine Republic nomination politics of 1976 essentially doomed him to lose to Jimmy Carter. Then, the amazing life after the presidency and people's changing reflections on his accomplishments. . . .
   
   Another well turned work in the American Presidents series. These short volumes cannot go into the depth that I would sometimes like, but the tradeoff is accessible books for people who might not have the patience to wade through a 600 page tome.

5 comments about A Clearing In The Distance: Frederick Law Olmsted and America in the 19th Century.

1. This book strikes a lovely balance between describing Olmsted's life and personal history and his creations, parks that span the United States.

   You may be surprised to learn, as I was, the vast number of projects he undertook. How Central Park was really his first significant project. How he had to fight political and economic battles to keep it from being ruined. How he was able to truly "get it right" with Brooklyn's Prospect Park.

   Through the fascinating descriptions of the landscapes, the author also provides great insight into Olmsted's life. What struck me the most was how Olmsted, as with many of his contemporaries (U.S. Grant, Mark Twain) worried for most of his life about his finances and his career.

   This is a first rate work, told in a clear and compelling fashion.




2. Olmsted and Rybcznski seem somehow destined together, and this book is a thoroughly readable and engaging introduction to both of them. If they had been contemporaries, they probably would have somehow connected as friends or collaborators or both. Through his work, Olmsted came to define the American public space as distinct from the English or French styles. Early on he was influenced by farming, the English countryside, naturalism, notables such as Carlyle and Ruskin, and by the American pursuit of happiness: our need for recreation and spectacle. In his works, he combined "economics, nature, aesthetics, moral and intellectual improvement, and salvation." He spoke of throwing "a garment of beauty around our homes."

   Author Rybczynski doesn't limit his chronicle to Olmsted the Designer, though. Rather, he devotes ample space to covering Olmsted as a man of letters, Olmsted's brushes with politics and social reform, his travels to the West, his marvelous mind for engineering (everything from pumps to drainage systems and pipes), and his varied and important organizational and administrative accomplishments. Of particular interest are the chapters in the book devoted to the slavery issue and Olmsted's voice in the anti-slavery movement; Olmsted was an idealist who felt that slavery corrupted society. He once leaned once toward joining a group of German settlers in Texas who did not recognize nor condone slavery.

   Olmsted is best remembered though as a designer who brought us the seeds of a national park system through a lifetime of projects, public and private: Stanford and Berkeley, Belle Isle (Mi), Prospect Park (Brooklyn), Central Park, park systems in Boston and Chicago, huge projects in Washington, DC, and many more. Olmsted also deserves credit as the creator of the parkway. The reader will find many familiar names mentioned here, evidence that Olmsted was an extraordinary man who lived in extraordinary times. James Hamilton (the son of Alexander), Charles Dana, William Cullen Bryant, Frederic Church, the Vanderbilts, and others all played a role in his life and work.

   Turf, trees, and lakes -- or grass, woods, and water -- to put it a different way, are the hallmarks of an Olmsted space. He abhorred clear distinctions and separations, flowerbeds and botanic beauty or decorative gardening. Instead, Olmsted embraced illusion and worked to "accommodate chaos and order." He incorporated science, theory, and art; accident and achievement. Architectural dwellings were minimized or hidden. There was careful composition of groups of trees against expanses of lawn. For us, we should be careful when visiting Olmsted's projects, for in the case of several, he lost interest due to squabbles and bickering with clients. Stanford University certainly stands out in this regard--to what degree is it considered a work of Olmsted's? Worn down by periodic bouts of depression and debt, Olmsted did not live an easy live and died from what is almost stated by the author as Alzheimer's disease. But for those that bear his mark, we can delight in the fact that they continue to survive.




3. Olmsted's life is fascinating and Rybczynski does an adequate job of presenting the highlights, but the writing style is something less than engaging. In addition, the author spends too much time on trivial matters while neglecting more important things. For example, he writes page after page about Olmsted's failures to connect with a romantic mate. Goodness, he wasn't much of looker or a lady schmoozer and this plagued him for years. There, I said it in one sentence. Had the author done likewise we might have learned more about the details of some of Olmsted's projects. If the author wanted to play up relationships to give the reader a fuller appreciation of Olmsted's psychological make-up, he would have done better to delve deeper into the parent-child relationship.



4. A Clearing in the Distance is a great biography about a man who had great strength and deep sorrows. The first half of the book covers Olmsted's life before becoming a Landscape Architect. He was basically a very talented man who could not find his calling. Once he found it, he pursued his passion with commitment and daring that changed the way that subsequent generations have thought about their environment and surroundings.
   
   The book provides valuable insights into both Olmsted the man and the world in which he lives. There are musings that are the author's thoughts and are obviously not historical, but they are interesting too in that they give us insight into the author's biases and interests.
   
   Overall, A Clearing in the Distance is well worth reading.



5. The life of Olmstead was a mystery to me. I read about him in the "Devil in the White City" I had to learn more.
   
   This is a capable biography, covering his life seemingly thoroughly. I didn't buy into the convention the author used when he would describe moments in Olmstead's life in a semi-fictional way. Otherwise, good really good stuff.

5 comments about Jim Bridger: Mountain Man.

1. Bridger is a larger than life character. The author portrays Bridger as a character who was unimpressed with developed society. His treasure was the mountains and the mystery of an undeveoped land and people. His humility and lack of concern for unbelievers of the wonder of the mountains aligns him with someone who has a tremendous fishing hole but doesnt want anyone to fish it dry.



2. I'd like to give the book another star, but just don't think I can. I found it an interesting and well researched description of Bridger's life. It has both an excellent index and references. The author gave a fair and balanced assessment of Bridger. It appears that some previous books on him might have been unfair or too praiseworthy about his life. Somehow the descriptions lacked a little spark, although there are a number of vivid passages. Perhaps this has to do with the fact the book was written 100 years after Bridger's death. In fact, this book is now 30 years old, and I believe the author wrote his first book on similar topics back in the 30s. Nevertheless, it's a good and complete description of Bridger's life.
   
   One of the sadder aspects of the story is near the ending when the author reveals that during the last 10-15 years of Bridger's life no writer took the opportunity to interview Bridger. He was in his sixties and seventies, I believe, but was a rather ignored individual, except by his family. He had an exceptionally good memory. Someone missed the opportunity to get more of his rather amazing life straight from the source. The 2-3 page description of his last years, and his desire to keep moving summarize his deep need for adventure and discovery.
   
   He was apparently quite a wit and teller of tall tales. Only four of five of his short tales are found in the book. Interestingly, he told many of his stories in sign languages to the indians.
   
   The book contains on chapter of the famous Hugh Glass incident. It's worth reading if you have not heard it. The story was incorporated into a movie, A Man Called Horse , starring Richard Harris, in a slightly different form. I also found the long passage on "medicine wolves" quite intriguing.
   
   I think this book might disspell a notion that the indian's scalping and body mutiliations of their enemies was derived from copying Europeans might be false. I read such an explanation in another book written at about the same time as this one. However, here we find repeated references to such carnage. In fact, it seems this savagery also been deeply engrained into the mountain men and other early frontiersmen. I suspect such carnages placed on one's enemies has deep roots in all of human history.



3. So far so good. The book tells the life story of Bridger, which is what I wanted to see.



4. I just finish reading this book. I thought it was very excellent and intriguing about Jim Bridger. A man, who took no pleasure in killing, following the number one rule, "Survival of the Fittest and Kill or be Killed. I would've like to have gotten more information on his wife and children. It's sad about what happened to his daughter and that he was widowed twice. But it's good to know that his last years were spent with his children and grandchildren. I was brought almost to tears upon reading the final chapter of this book. I'm very fascinated with the Mountain Men and the Indian women they married.



5. it was a rather hard read and need more details, but a OK read on Jim Bridger. Would like to have detais on Morman fights ect.

5 comments about John Marshall: Definer of a Nation.

1. .....though we can still debate whether he defined it correctly. John Marshall, fourth Chief Justice of the Supreme Court was, and remains, one of the absolute giants of our history. Washington fought the battles, Jefferson and Madison composed the theories, but it remained for Marshall to elucidate what it all meant. This is, to my mind, the definitive biography of a titan.
   
   John Marshall was born in what is now Northern Virginia in 1755, the child of a fairly well off family. On his mother's side, he was descended from the famous Randolphs; his father was a surveying associate of George Washington. His dad taught him a love of education and good books that continued all his days. Before embarking on a career in Law, Marshall was a soldier of the Revolution, serving with Washington in several major battles. After marriage to young Polly Ambler, he was a law student of the great George Wythe [also the law teacher of Jefferson, and of Spencer Roane] at William & Mary. Successful practice, and politics, soon followed...Marshall served on the Governor's Council, and was the leading advocate for Constitutional ratification in the Virginia convention; his battles with Patrick Henry are the stuff of legend [though they served as co-counsel in several cases]. He was a constant supporter of Washington, served as one of Adams' three ministers to France in the XYZ affair, and was briefly a Congressman and Secretary of State. He it was who said of Washington "First in War...", though he let Light Horse Harry Lee speak the words, and get the credit. In 1801, John Adams made a "midnight appointment" of Marshall to be Chief Justice, preventing the incoming President Jefferson from making his own choice...
   
   For the next 34 years, Marshall solidified Federal power, freely interpreting the interstate commerce clause, and the clause which allows Congress to make enabling legislation. Marbury v. Madison asserted the right of judicial review, and further cases expanded it. He wrote the judicial opinions that remain the basis of Federal centrilization of power to this day. Smith gives great detail of individual cases.
   
   One of Marshall's great strengths, and we shouldn't make light of it, was that he was a nice guy. A sociable host, his friends loved him, but even total strangers could find him thoroughly modest and charming. Quoits, and good Madiera were real passions. Even his enemies [with two profound exceptions] liked him. His basic decency certainly aided his consensus building.....
   
   ...the two exceptions were Spencer Roane and Thomas Jefferson. Roane was the son-in-law and political ally of Patrick Henry. A long time neighbor of Marshall, and Chief Justice of the Virginia Supreme Court, Judge Roane believed completely in States Rights and held the US Constitution to be a voluntary compact of free and independent states that could be broken at will. What Spencer Roane proposed, Jeff Davis disposed... Alas, where Marshall was a prince among men, Judge Roane was of such acid, unpleasant, temperment that even his friends and allies couldn't stand him...
   
   ....and then there was Mr. Jefferson. The feud between Marshall and Jefferson is one of the absolute central themes of American history. It was multidimensional...personal, familial, political, philosophical...for about 40 years, the conflict was one of cordial, respectful, dislike; after the Aaron Burr treason trial of 1807, it turned into blind, unreasoning hatred. Part of it was rivalry between branches of the Randolph family; part was Jefferson's civilian service during the revolution while Marshall was in the field; part was publication of a letter to Jefferson from his daughter stating "Mrs. Marshall is insane" [sadly, true]. Mostly, the problem was that Marshall and Jefferson had totally different theories of government and visions of America. [They agreed about religion, though Marshall was a founder of, and regular attender at, Monumental Church in Richmond]. In 1807, Aaron Burr was charged with treason, accused of wanting to set up his own empire. He was tried in Richmond, with Marshall sitting as trial judge. Marshall's friend, neighbor, and occasional law partner John Wickham served as defense counsel, along with the drunken genius, Luther Martin. In what is today generally considered a rigged trial, Burr was acquitted. During this trial, an incident occured that is the only evidence of improper conduct on John Marshall's part that I can find; while Burr was out on bail, Wickham threw a grand dinner party for him. Marshall was invited [not improper], went, and stayed the whole evening. You can well imagine the spin that sympathetic Jefferson biographers put on this; Smith doesn't mention it.
   
   John Marshall was a great and brilliant man; he was also a good and decent man. He had his problems; Polly was an invalid with a combination of physical and mental problems for years...one of his sons was essentially worthless. Thru it all, John Marshall was faithful to both his public and private duties. Now, I'll get personal....my copy of this wonderful book was a Christmas present my wife bought me at the John Marshall House in Richmond. Located at 9th. and Marshall, near the Capitol, it is lovingly maintained by a fine staff of really nice people [the Director even helped me with research for a small biography I wrote of Spencer Roane]. The house, and Marshall's grave in Shockhoe Cemetery a few blocks away, are cared for as monuments to greatness, which they are. The house is nice, but not spectacular; Marshall was a modest, unassuming man [John Wickham's house, two blocks away, IS spectacular]. At the John Marshall House [yes, I contribute financially], and at his grave, I feel awe, intellectual interest, and profound respect; at Monticello, I feel reverence. Maybe I think Jefferson was right about the issues, but I can still look up to John Marshall. If you want to understand America, you need to read this book.
   
   This is the best available biography of Marshall, maybe the best ever. If all you want is case histories, read Hobson; if you want a highly technical biography, read Newmyer; if you want to understand the great cases, AND the great man who decided them, start right here. Newmyer and Hobson wrote fine books, but any intelligent person [not just specialists] can read this one.....



2. This was one of those books I knew I SHOULD read, but its heft put me off for months. When I finally did pick it up, I couldn't put it down.
   
   John Marshall doesn't have the cache or enduring fame that George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, or many others have - and it's a shame. He formed the institution of the Supreme Court, and in so doing, shaped many of the ways our country (tenuous at the time, mind you) began its journey, and perhaps why we've endured this long.
   
   The author does a fantastic job of painting a picture of life in the day, John Marshall's life and contributions, and how he and others in his era related to each other and the world at large. The cases that came before the early SCourt were fascinating, if only to illustrate the thorny issues and perils of the time. The extent to which he was able to be brilliant, rationale, and to build consensus focused on the original intent and vision for this country is impressive, and sorely needed today.
   
   Funny story - I finally DID start reading this book on the beach in Mexico. Not quite the fluff one typically carries to the beach. The first day, people remarked as such, and by about day 3 or 4, they are saying "wow, you are really making progress on that!" as the bookmark moved steadily towards the back.
   
   Don't wait for the beach - get started!



3. Not all historians are fine, interesting writers. Fortunately, Jean Edward Smith is a superb writer, making Chief Justice Marshall's long life an interesting, even fun, read. Moreover, the writing paralells the substance contained in the Book. I wish all historical biographies were of this quality. Buy the Book.



4. This is a full-length, 500 page biography of the fourth Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, John Marshall. It is superb. It is very detailed, yet easy to read. Smith follows the conventional chronological format for a biography, starting with Marshall's birth, and then describing his life sequentially from his childhood, his education, his youthful service as a light infantry officer in the Revolution, his work as a lawyer, his early political career, his rise to national fame as an envoy to France during the time when the nation almost went to war with France during the Adams Administration, his service as Secretary of State to John Adams and finally his long service for 35 years as the Chief Justice who established the power and prestige of the Supreme Court.
   
   What I find most admirable about this book is its balance. It gives you everything that you want in a biography. It is very scholarly, and very readable. It gives you a very good sense of John Marshall, the human being, but it also fully explains the significance of the events in which Marshall participated. As an example of the human side of Marshall, Smith gives us a very moving picture of Marshall's lifelong love affair with his wife, Polly, starting with the dramatic courtship by the penniless young officer and ending with the 80 year old Chief Justice walking twice a week to visit her grave. As an example of how Smith explains the significance of what Marshall did, not only did Smith explain the key decisions, but he gives the facts on what impact they had. In the steamship case, for example, Smith both explains the legal and political issues and gives the economic statistics on what effect the decision had on trade.
   
   I highly recommend this book, both for the excellence of its writing and the importance of its subject matter. John Marshall is one of the most important people in American history. He was instrumentals in making real the balance of the Constitution envisioned by Madison and Hamilton in the Federalist Papers. He was critical in creating the pre-conditions needed for America to be a rich and prosperous nation, with great opportunity for the great majority. Marshall was also a wise and a good man, which shines through on every page of this book. The book is worth reading, finally, as a way to come to know such an extraordinary man.



5. The life and times of John Marshall (1755 - 1835) make for exceptional reading. Although detailed and carefully researched, this excellent biography/history book/study of early constitutional law is written in an enjoyable, non-academic style. In addition to its captivating treatment of the revolutionary war, the evolution of basic governmental structures, and the Nation's other critically important early leaders, the book weaves together a nearly first-hand account of the foundations of the U.S. Supreme Court and its earliest and most enduring decisions.
   
   Marshall was the 4th and longest serving Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court. In his 34 years as Chief Justice, he personally shaped U.S. constitutional law, forged the Supreme Court into a strong and independent institution, and defined the powers of the federal government. He swore in presidents Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Hamilton, Adams, and Jackson. And those were just the last 35 years of his life.
   
   As a young man, he fought bravely in several key battles of the Revolutionary War, wintering at Valley Forge in 1777. He became acquainted with General George Washington and the two thereafter held each other in very high regard. On the state level, Marshall served in the Virginia House of Delegates and on the Virginia Counsel of State. Respected as a lawyer and state politician, he was appointed to serve as a delegate to the Virginia convention tasked with accepting or rejecting the United States Constitution and was instrumental in fighting for its ratification.
   
   Marshall's pre-Supreme Court contributions to the Federal government were also significant and interesting. In 1797, President Adams appointed him to a three person delegation to negotiate with France, an unusual episode that came to be called the "XYZ Affair." French ministers spent the better part of a year trying to extort huge bribes from Marshall and his colleagues. News of Marshall's steadfast refusal to pay the bribes preceded his return from Paris and he was received home as an American hero. In 1799 he was appointed the Nation's 4th Secretary of State. That same year, he reluctantly ran for and won a seat in the House of Representatives in a district heavily favoring the other party.
   
   Over the years, Marshall's dedication to his law practice (and need for income) caused him to graciously decline several appointments, including Minister to France, Attorney General of the United States, Secretary of War and even an earlier Supreme Court position. Despite his many other commitments, Marshall felt compelled to write the first biography of his hero George Washington - a well-received five volume set that today is condensed and marketed as a single volume. Marshall delivered the eulogy at Washington's massive memorial service. Lastly, but worth noting, the famous crack in the Liberty Bell occurred while ringing in honor of Marshall's passing.
   
   Next to George Washington, he may be the most important and most admirable of all our founding fathers.