Fallen Founder

Jun 13, 2010 A.J. Howard rated it 2 of 5 stars

Shelves: biography, finished-in-2010, history, electioneering

Nancy Isenberg has a valid argument that Aaron Burr has been grossly misjudged by history. However, her restoration is tainted by her devotion to the man. Isenberg's Burr is a brilliant, progressive, selfless hero who deserves a spot on the pantheon of America's founders. His enemies were small, vainglorious, hypocrites who only served their own interest. She attacks other writers, such as Ron Chernow, for upholding the standard story. Isenberg may have a point, but I think the truth lies somewh...more Nancy Isenberg has a valid argument that Aaron Burr has been grossly misjudged by history. However, her restoration is tainted by her devotion to the man. Isenberg's Burr is a brilliant, progressive, selfless hero who deserves a spot on the pantheon of America's founders. His enemies were small, vainglorious, hypocrites who only served their own interest. She attacks other writers, such as Ron Chernow, for upholding the standard story. Isenberg may have a point, but I think the truth lies somewhere between Chernow's version and her own version of history.

At some point, I realized that I no longer trusted the credibility of Isenberg's version of the facts. This started when she described the Jay Treaty. The Jay Treaty was widely criticized at the time but the majority of recent scholars have recognized the pragmatism behind it. The young republic had to make certain tough concessions to Great Britain but it was worth it in the end. Eventually, a large segment of the contemporary American populace recognized the benefits of the treaty, and the Jeffersonians were actually hurt by their continued denunciation of it. Isenberg does not attempt to delve into any sort of nuance whatsoever. Instead, she accepts Jeffersonian propoganda for what it is, using it to highlight Burr as a hero of the masses, and his opponents as craven elites. This type of sloppy history persists throughout the book. Isenberg's Federalists are villains, except when they are supporting Burr. Whenever Burr dirties his hands he is being a rational, whenever his opponents do they are playing dirty politics.

Fallen Founder seems at times to be more devoted to restoring Burr's reputation than being solid history. For example, Burr went from being a consensus Republican vice presidential candidate in 1800 to being blacklisted completely and humiliated in the New York Governor's race in 1804. There must be more to this than Isenberg's attribution of scheming of Dewitt Clinton and Thomas Jefferson. She also whitewashes Burr's activities in the western frontier that led to his treason trial. While his actions may not have justified the government's prosecution, he was definitely up to something not completely legal and legitimate. Isenberg paints Burr as a great progressive, years ahead of his time in woman's rights, but she only glosses over the fact that he was a slave-owner for the majority of his life. Sure, many of the founders owned slaves but their modern biographers don't attempt to make them out to be modern defenders of liberty.

Isenberg also never really proved that Burr belongs with Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Hamilton and others in any supposed pantheon. Burr served with decent distinction in the Revolutionary War but played no part in the debate over the Constitution. Burr seems to be no more or less principled than any other politician in that era. Like most politicians, he seemed to let his principles fluctuate with the times. His greatest accomplishments, other than his treason acquittal and his duel with Hamilton, seem to be his coalition building efforts, which invite comparisons with Martin Van Buren. The argument could be made that, if anything, Burr was a politician ahead of his time and a less successful Van Buren.

There are some joys in the book. If condition yourself to look past some of Isenberg's apparent biases, there is some interesting stuff, particularly about 1790s New York politics. But Isenberg lets her affinity for her subject get in the way of solid history. It really is a shame, because Burr's story at least deserves a balanced, objective telling.
(less)

5 likes · like · see review

view all 6 comments

Erik Simon Great review, A.J. I think you gave a more careful reading of the book than I. I gave it a better rating, but that's because like Isenberg, I'm a bit...more
Jun 14, 2010 06:36pm

A.J. Howard Patrick, you make a good point. I read the Chernow book years ago, and it did have a big influence on my perspectives on the "Founding Fathers." I've...more
Jun 30, 2010 02:20pm

Jun 09, 2008 Stuart rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: history

Yes, Aaron Burr was scheming a lot to invade Mexico and Florida, but the author makes the point that there was a lot of that going around. During Polk's presidency we did end up annexing Mexico. And Andrew Jackson went into Florida, creating the crisis that allowed us to buy it. Burr may have been just as interested in claiming Mexico or Florida for the US as setting up a new Republic. But there was no truth to the charge that he also was going to invade Washington and take over the US governmen...more

2 likes · like · see review

Sep 10, 2012 Carl Rollyson rated it 5 of 5 stars

"It is time to start over," contends Nancy Isenberg in her iconoclastic "Fallen Founder: The Life of Aaron Burr." Burr is, of course, infamous for killing Alexander Hamilton in a duel. But historians have also branded Burr a Machiavellian villain who schemed to deny Thomas Jefferson the presidency and most likely committed treason, even though he escaped conviction.

Ms. Isenberg faults historians and biographers for not examining Burr's papers — although many were lost, thus obscuring the man, sh...more "It is time to start over," contends Nancy Isenberg in her iconoclastic "Fallen Founder: The Life of Aaron Burr." Burr is, of course, infamous for killing Alexander Hamilton in a duel. But historians have also branded Burr a Machiavellian villain who schemed to deny Thomas Jefferson the presidency and most likely committed treason, even though he escaped conviction.

Ms. Isenberg faults historians and biographers for not examining Burr's papers — although many were lost, thus obscuring the man, she acknowledges. In popular fiction, as well, she notes, Burr has been portrayed as a Gothic villain, highly sexed and unscrupulous, a depiction that derives from the notion expressed, for example, in the "Federalist No. 6," that "sexual corruption (i.e., seductive women) could be equated with disunion." Yet, she adds: "It should be clear that Hamilton was not one degree less libidinous than Burr:"

If one reads the newspapers, rather than simply relying on the papers of prominent founders (Hamilton, Jefferson, Adams), it soon becomes clear that sexual satire pervaded politics. The sexualization of Aaron Burr was a means for his opponents to increase their political capital, because the vocabulary to do so was already part of the political scene — not because of Burr's particular shortcomings.

Gore Vidal made the same point in "Burr" (1973), which Ms. Isenberg briefly mentions, but she does not acknowledge that her book validates Mr. Vidal's view of a man abiding by important principles the shifty Thomas Jefferson never respected, and living by a code of honor that the scandalmongering Alexander Hamilton could not fathom. Surprisingly, Ms. Isenberg spares not a word for William Carlos Williams's essay on Burr in "In The American Grain" (1925), which portrays the fallen founder as the very feminist Ms. Isenberg lauds, a man who believed in equal rights for women and practiced his principles in regard to his wife and daughter.

A man with an excellent war record as a staff officer under Washington, attorney general of New York, then a senator, Burr received 30 electoral votes for the presidency in 1796, and tied Jefferson in 1800. Indeed, many electors favored Burr over Jefferson because Burr was a man of both action and principle. He had an admirable reputation in New York —arguing for lower and fairer taxes and various public improvements — that aroused the envy of his rival, Hamilton.

There is no evidence that Burr tried to undermine Jefferson's election — Burr was quite amenable to serving as Jefferson's vice president. But Burr did resent Hamilton's swinging his support to Jefferson in the 1800 election, and the tension between them increased when Hamilton bruited about charges that Burr was a "despicable" man and public servant. Burr demanded that Hamilton explain what he meant, and Hamilton waffled, giving his version of "it depends what you mean by sex."

Hamilton accepted Burr's challenge to a duel in New Jersey (where such affairs of honor were legal), even though Hamilton claimed he opposed dueling. Hamilton left word that he would not aim to wound his opponent. Yet, as Ms. Isenberg notes, Hamilton carefully examined the dueling ground, took up various positions to check the sun's angle, and then put on his spectacles — not exactly the behavior of a man who did not intend to shoot straight. Afterward, Gouverneur Morris, a man who was an excellent "bullshit detector" (to use Hemingway's term) doubted the veracity of Hamilton's pre-duel pacifist declaration.

While many condemned Burr — even alleging that he had somehow got the drop on Hamilton (it is not clear who shot first) — many believed he behaved like a gentleman, and his popularity soared in the South. Jefferson had no qualms about dining several times with Burr after the duel, and all charges against Burr were eventually dropped. He returned to Washington, D.C., and presided with dignity and acumen over the impeachment trial of Justice Salmon Chase, drawing praise even from his political enemies.

But Burr's political career in New York was over. As many Americans did then and since, he went west, hoping to recoup his political power, and earned the admiration of men like Andrew Jackson. Burr's enemies said he was forming an army to occupy the West and overthrow Jefferson's administration. Jefferson himself, besotted with suspicion after reading Republican newspapers and relying on doubtful intelligence, rigged a treason prosecution. Already acquitted by three grand juries, Burr faced trial in Richmond, emerging triumphant both in the jury's verdict and in Chief Justice John Marshall's judgment. At worst, Burr was guilty of a misdemeanor, for organizing a "filibuster," a private army intent on liberating Mexico from the Spanish — although no proof was ever produced that such an army actually existed.

As in Mr. Vidal's novel, Thomas Jefferson emerges in Ms. Isenberg's biography as a chief executive who never seems to have understood the crucial importance of an independent judiciary or of the rule of law. It was sufficient for him to believe the "will of the people" had turned against Burr and therefore he should be punished. Burr, for his part, submitted himself to the legal process again and again, trusting in the courts. He was a brilliant lawyer, of course, but his exoneration was no mere "technicality."

I haven't done justice to Ms. Isenberg's scrupulous handling of evidence. Her work is profoundly original, and if American historians do not "start over again," they will be doing their own profession — not to mention the history of their country — an injustice.(less)

like · see review

Dec 02, 2011 Josh Duggan rated it 4 of 5 stars

Not being an historian of any sort myself (I haven't taken a proper history class since my junior year of high school in 1996-'97), I have to admit that I am no authority on the American Revolution.

With that admittance out in the open, Nancy Isenberg's thoroughly researched 2007 biography of the controversial Aaron Burr is absolutely convincing in painting its portrait of a man who has been short-changed in the larger eye of history. Taking into account the hyper-partisan press, the Alexander Ha...more Not being an historian of any sort myself (I haven't taken a proper history class since my junior year of high school in 1996-'97), I have to admit that I am no authority on the American Revolution.

With that admittance out in the open, Nancy Isenberg's thoroughly researched 2007 biography of the controversial Aaron Burr is absolutely convincing in painting its portrait of a man who has been short-changed in the larger eye of history. Taking into account the hyper-partisan press, the Alexander Hamilton-led Federalist party, and the myriad jealousy-driven factions within his own disjointed Republican party, Isenberg lays more than ample groundwork to make her case.

Through her extensive research, she is able to tell the story of the nation's third Vice President. His potential for broad appeal affixed a target to his back, and his opponents (read: nearly every man wielding any political power after the slightly mishandled election of 1800) took nearly every chance they got to take him down. Despite his best efforts--or possibly because of them--to remain neutral and independent, he ended up getting dragged through the mud worse than any of his peers.

*The notes and index run a whopping 125 of the hardcover's 540 total pages.

Having had his character repeatedly assailed by the spurious and pernicious Alexander Hamilton, the fed-up Aaron Burr finally made the fateful challenge. All of this came closely on the heels of his President abandoning him, fearing for the preservation of the Virginia Dynasty and buying into the baseless lies sold by Burr's foes in print and politics (although little separated the two).

Following those two career-destroying events and fueled by his financial woes resulting from his failed land speculating in years past, he made a run at a privatized liberation of Spanish territories to the west of the Louisiana Territory (any government involvement would have been viewed as an act of war). Unbeknownst to Burr, he had taken a double agent into his inner circle, who then sold Burr out to sitting President Thomas Jefferson by misrepresenting Burr's intent as having been secessionist.

Already we're talking about a pretty compelling story, complete with very vivid personal letters lending Burr's own voice to his biographers set of tools. There is also further characterization of Thomas Jefferson as a politically insecure, passive-aggressive douchebag with a penchant for trusting the wrong people. So clearly what we're talking about is one of the most interesting, historically maligned figures from out batch of founding fathers. Coupled with a fresh take (I hesitate to label this revisionist because of the bitter pang that the term takes for me, personally), this is totally worth your time and effort.

Originally reviewed at http://inconsiderateprick.blogspot.co...(less)

1 like · like · see review

Apr 30, 2011 Doug DePew rated it 5 of 5 stars Recommends it for: Anyone interested in early US history

Recommended to Doug by: History Book Club

"Fallen Founder" by Nancy Isenberg is probably the first time anyone since the 19th century has seen the real Aaron Burr. He has become a parody and most historians ignore his important, nearly unique voice in the founding of our country. He was good looking, intelligent, and passionate. The book is very meticulously researched with massive notes in the back. It is well written and covers Burr's professional, political, and private life as completely as will probably ever be done. It provides a...more

2 likes · like · see review

Sep 04, 2009 Tom Meyer rated it 2 of 5 stars

This was a very irritating biography.

To her credit, Isenberg is less credulous than other Burr biographers and generally brings a healthy level of skepticism to some of the more fantastic claims made about Burr. Her discussions of Burr's marriage and parenting of the younger Theodosia are also good.

Isenberg is significantly less successful in her treatment of Burr's politics. Though her description of Burr's political niche is excellent, her attempt to portray him as politically principled compl...more

like · see review

Oct 30, 2012 Mike rated it 2 of 5 stars

Shelves: american-history, american-revolution-era, biography, non-fiction, own-read

My first thought after finishing this book is that it is good to know that there have been two perfect human beings in history - Jesus Christ and Aaron Burr.

Ok, so that might be a bit of hyperbole. This book was basically written in a way that tells the reader that all of the Founding Fathers, and all historians since, are wrong about Aaron Burr and that he is actually the victim of a political conspiracy by people both in and against his political party. This attitude applies to all of the famo...more My first thought after finishing this book is that it is good to know that there have been two perfect human beings in history - Jesus Christ and Aaron Burr.

Ok, so that might be a bit of hyperbole. This book was basically written in a way that tells the reader that all of the Founding Fathers, and all historians since, are wrong about Aaron Burr and that he is actually the victim of a political conspiracy by people both in and against his political party. This attitude applies to all of the famous events of his life; including the duel with Hamilton and his conspiracy to take an army out west to conquer Mexico.

I obviously had a very hard time with this book and feel the need to be critical even though it usually bothers me to write negative reviews. I imagine that if I were to write a biography on a historical figure, I would need to fall in love with that figure. How else could you spend years of your life researching and writing about someone unless you truly enjoy that person? I just think it would have helped the author if she had more easily recognized the flaws of Burr rather than defend him at every opportunity.

Three more criticisms:

1. The first 60% of this book spend half its words ripping on Alexander Hamilton. I get that these two were rivals, and I get that the author's position is pro-Burr, but it was way over the top.

2. Something about the writing style bugged me. I tell my students that when writing essays about history, never use rhetorical questions. I always tell them to make their points clearly. Also, I tell them to never use exclamation points! It is the sign of a writer too anxious to make the reader believe they are correct. The author uses both of these techniques throughout the book and I just could not get past it.

3. Most narrative biographies use the subject's own words throughout the story. I felt that Burr was almost missing throughout most of this book. He seems like an altruistic bystander during much of the story. The author points out that there are only two volumes of Burr's letters available for historians, but I would like to have seen more to get a better sense of Burr.

In closing, I did learn a lot about the life of Burr that I did not know. His life usually ends with the Hamilton duel in most history books I read and I enjoyed learning about his travels and activities later in life. I would still recommend this to readers of the time period, but I would recommend it with reservations due to the obvious agenda of the author.(less)

like · see review

May 04, 2009 Christopher Carbone rated it 5 of 5 stars Recommends it for: Those Who Like Second Chances

This book is a very compelling guide to the life, personality, and times of Aaron Burr, the most mysterious and most vilified of the founding fathers. Isenberg's portrayal is both realistic and forgiving. At times, the author does seem to be apologizing for Burr's many historical idiosyncrasies, but overall the book does a great job in defining why Burr:

-Acted as he did during the election of 1800, the closest election in American history (there was a tie between Burr and Jefferson); how Burr di...more This book is a very compelling guide to the life, personality, and times of Aaron Burr, the most mysterious and most vilified of the founding fathers. Isenberg's portrayal is both realistic and forgiving. At times, the author does seem to be apologizing for Burr's many historical idiosyncrasies, but overall the book does a great job in defining why Burr:

-Acted as he did during the election of 1800, the closest election in American history (there was a tie between Burr and Jefferson); how Burr did not seek out anyone to get the Presidency away from Jefferson despite the opportunity to do so, and how Jefferson most assuredly DID maneuver;

-Shot and killed Alexander Hamilton for attacking Burr's honor;

-Had ambitions to go West in a filibuster, and how history has tried to pant this as annexing the Western states or Mexico. Isenburg points out, adroitly, that since prior to 1776, the colonies had aspirations on Mexico and the desire to spread the power of the states into Mexico and a weakened Spanish Empire. It was practically the policy of the US government to ignore filibuster attempts by private citizens (and not national armies), so as to spread American influence Westward. Officially, the US could always claim plausible deny-ability; unofficially, they wanted to Americanize the continent. When Burr set out West he was just doing what thousands before had done. Except he was a former VP who would, in turn, attract two future Presidents (Harrison and Jackson) to his scheme, and alienate the President.

-How his treason trials were farces as Burr had committed no treason. All in all, Burr's trial was one of the most important trials in American History, with the former VP on trial, the General of the Army as the crux witness, a former powerful politicians as lawyers, a future President on the witness list, and the sitting Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as the presiding justice. In the end the trial set the law that there was no such thing in America as "constructive treason" and that, more than anything, set Burr free.

The author does make a compelling case for Burr (though, one could argue that she is much like the small Japanese boy in any bad Godzilla movie, chirping, "Aaron Burr is not evil; he's just misunderstood!), and does so in a very reasonable way. I found this book very interesting, very enlightening and very well researched. I would recommend it to anyone who wants to learn more about this most misunderstood founder.

(Note: I listened to the book on CD [unabridged:]; I had purchased the book a year prior and only got half way through. The book, for whatever reason, was much more likable on CD than it was in print. Not sure why). (less)

1 like · like · see review

Oct 25, 2012 Lauren Donoho rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: history

I had always assumed that Aaron Burr, the scoundrel who shot Alexander Hamilton, had just...quietly drunk himself to death, or something, after his disgraced exit from politics. When I learned that, in fact, he had been tried by the Jefferson administration for conspiracy to treason just a few years after leaving the Vice Presidency, I was totally fascinated. Nancy Isenberg's book tells a completely different story about Aaron Burr than the narrative I anticipated, but the truth (as usual) is so...more I had always assumed that Aaron Burr, the scoundrel who shot Alexander Hamilton, had just...quietly drunk himself to death, or something, after his disgraced exit from politics. When I learned that, in fact, he had been tried by the Jefferson administration for conspiracy to treason just a few years after leaving the Vice Presidency, I was totally fascinated. Nancy Isenberg's book tells a completely different story about Aaron Burr than the narrative I anticipated, but the truth (as usual) is so much more interesting than the misrepresentation.

Isenberg's book is no less than an attempt to rewrite all the existing historiography on Burr. With meticulous use of a wide variety of primary source documents, both Burr's own letters and those of his contemporaries, Isenberg illustrates how Hamilton's political attacks against Burr have been blindly accepted by modern historians as fact. I actually think everyone interested in early America should read this book, because the insights it offers into the politics of the Washington, Adams, and Jefferson administrations are unique and intriguing. It directly contradicts the romanticized images many people have of Jefferson and Hamilton, especially. Far from being a "man without ideas," or a fairweather politician, as Hamilton frequently accused him of being, Burr was a strong believer in republicanism, a genuine patriot of the Revolution, and an efficient, practical member of government. Burr's greatest failure, it seems, was his inability to negotiate the more vicious circles of politics; when Burr formally challenged Hamilton for impugning his honor, Hamilton protested that his insults had merely been political strategy, which Burr should not take personally and which Hamilton, of course, did not mean. To Burr, this only magnified the insult. The notion that Hamilton was maligning Burr's character, not because he believed it, but for political gain, violated what Burr understood to be the code of honor. Hardly a man without ideology.

And the conspiracy? Isenberg persuasively makes a case that Burr intended a filibuster into Mexico, with the intent of removing the Spanish from the West to ensure US expansion. His ally in this venture was General James Wilkinson, who worked as a double agent for the Spanish, which Burr evidently knew. But Burr believed Wilkinson was playing the Spanish and that his real goal was US expansion. Spain, however, wanted to avoid a war with the US, and paid Wilkinson to keep the peace. He did so by writing to Jefferson that he had discovered a treasonous plot by Burr to invade Mexico, stir up insurrection in the American West, and create a new empire. The amazing part of the story is that Jefferson believed him, going to extraordinary lengths to ensure Burr's capture and trial. Burr, of course, was acquitted, as the state presented no concrete evidence and only some very contradictory testimony against him.

Burr is a strange character in early American history in that he believed fervently in equal rights for women. A serious admirer of Mary Wollstonecraft, Burr married a highly-educated, independent-minded woman, and made sure his daughter had the same educational opportunities as her male peers. Burr's relationships with women are some of the most interesting aspects of his life and correspondence. Isenberg has done wonderful work unearthing someone like the real Aaron Burr from under centuries of misinformation.(less)

like · see review

Jun 07, 2012 Brent rated it 5 of 5 stars

I always wondered why BURR was always discussed with such distaste within the histories and biographies of the other founding fathers. And yet I was never able to find an actual bio of BURR himself! Hey, even Benedict Arnold has his own biographies! Thank heaven for Nancy Isenberg's bio of BURR!
This well researched book clearly sets the record straight as to our third vice-president. His friendships with almost everyone involved in the founding of the US. Adams, Van Buren, Jackson, Jefferson (in...more

like · see review

Dec 15, 2012 Larry Hostetler rated it 4 of 5 stars

I am glad I read this biography. Perhaps the most excoriated founder as a result of his duel with Alexander Hamilton, this book portrays Burr as a more human and accomplished person than history books generally allow. A political savant, he rose to be VP yet suffered ignominious reversals of fortune both personally and financially. I find it hard to believe one can have a good understanding of the founding of our country without the perspective provided by this book. About far more than "the due...more

like · see review

Sep 02, 2012 Mark rated it 5 of 5 stars

Excellent reassessment of one of the more problematic of America's original Founders, Ms Isenberg returns to primary sources to unravel the truth from the myth about the man who killed Alexander Hamilton while vice president and was later brought to trial for treason. The personality revealed proves to be a far more interesting and in some ways a more dangerous man of his times---one who seemed actually to believe in the founding principles of the new nation and acted upon those beliefs in an op...more

like · see review

Jun 26, 2012 Dennis rated it 3 of 5 stars

The author, as she set out to do, did a good job of presenting Aaron Burr documenting both his good deeds and bad. His trial for treason was ill conceived and only due to the animosity that Thomas Jefferson showed toward Burr. Alexander Hamilton, who died from a duel with Burr, pressed the envelop of decency and perished for it. Burr seemed to relish living on the edge, always challenging his adversaries and challenging the newly formed government. Burr was an interesting figure and I would reco...more

like · see review

Mar 08, 2012 John Kelley rated it 5 of 5 stars

I finally completed Fallen Founder: The Life of Aaron Burr. Although Nancy Eisenberg departs from a dispassionate view of Burr, her research is excellent and opened a new windows into the early Republic period. I had come off reading Chernow's Washington and Alexander Hamilton and I had to read a biography on Aaron Burr. Chernow's coverage of the duel and murder of Hamilton is so methodical that I felt I was among the shrubs and bushes waiting for the duel to happen. So, I began reading Burr to...more

like · see review

Nov 06, 2012 Glenn Robinson rated it 5 of 5 stars

Imagine waking up to read in the New York Times that Joe Biden had just shot and killed Hank Paulson. How wierd would that be? We all know about Burr killing Hamilton in the duel, but many do not know that Burr was tired for treason for trying to pull the Western States away to form a new nation. Those of us that know that part of the Burr story probably know little more of Burr after that. I, for one, thought he was convicted of this, so this book set me straight. He beat the charges and went o...more

like · see review

Jul 24, 2011 Kris Fernandez-everett rated it 2 of 5 stars

Shelves: history-us-18th-century

There's always a need for revisionist history, if only to play the role of devil's advocate and keep us honest in our assessment of people and events in time. However, what there is never a need for -- and is always a danger in biographical writing -- is an apologia. It's almost cliche that it's impossible not to fall in love with the object of your biography -- and yet, the author has fallen very far foul of this very fact. I love the idea that perhaps Aaron Burr wasn't all about sleeping with...more

like · see review

Jan 30, 2012 Ann Marie rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: non-fiction

This book says that the things we have all thought about Aaron Burr are wrong and shows why and how he got the reputation he did. I like the Aaron Burr she talks about. It is a bit difficult to read because she uses a lot of quotes from letters and they did write in a very different way than we do.

To describe my feelings about Aaron Burr I am going to use a quote from the author. "Burr was, in fact, the odd man out, but not because he lacked character. He was odd because he was the only founder...more

1 like · like · see review

Feb 04, 2012 Brian rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: american-history-revolution

Eisenberg presents a controversial look at the life of Aaron Burr in an attempt to resuscitate this founder's life and context in history. For many historians Aaron Burr is one of the great villains of the revolution behind Benedict Arnold and is a great enigma due to the lack of documents that survive about the man's life. He was the target of not only Hamilton but the Republicans making him the most hated politician in early America. He never appears to have developed his own splinter party in...more Eisenberg presents a controversial look at the life of Aaron Burr in an attempt to resuscitate this founder's life and context in history. For many historians Aaron Burr is one of the great villains of the revolution behind Benedict Arnold and is a great enigma due to the lack of documents that survive about the man's life. He was the target of not only Hamilton but the Republicans making him the most hated politician in early America. He never appears to have developed his own splinter party in the way John Adams did (see Party of One by John Grant) but was an astute political observer and really the first modern politician of his time. He believed in active campaigning and was a boots on the ground political operative engaging in polling and stump speeches long before they became the norm.

Burr's early years are focused on establishing himself as a lawyer through his connections at Princeton and serving in the revolutionary war as a Colonel. I have to admit as I read Eisenbergs account for the first 100 pages I was starting to wonder why we would even call Burr a founding father. His role in the revolution was very minor and he did not participate in much of the early forming of government. It was only after the revolution that he established himself in post war government and started to make a name as a dominant politician of the time. His rise to power was characterized through political maneuvering and back room deal making that showed the ugly rise of the American political party that led to Burr becoming vice president under Jefferson.

Burr's life is tainted by two events and not as much by this political maneuvering although the events are linked. The Duel (or if you believe the extreme federalist accounts murder) of Alexander Hamilton would chase Burr from power and force him to flee New York. The bitter rivalry between these two has been explored in countless volumes and in this case most of the blame is placed on Hamilton. Like most things in history the truth lies in the middle and each side exacerbated the situation here. Regardless the duel forced Burr to head west which led to his next great controversy the trial for treason. A host of accounts characterizes Burr as having planned a filibuster to take Mexico and establish it as a separate republic with himself as dictator. With this account we know the filibuster was absolutely within his goal but the other accounts are spotty. On one hand and represented in this book is the accusation that Jefferson was petty and trying to convict on rumor alone. On the other you have those who think Burr is pure evil and this scheme is his way to get back in power after having lost it. Reading in-between the lines it seems that this is a failed filibuster that his political enemies sought to take advantage of and Burr's political compass failed him allowing him to fall into the trap.

Overall it is an interesting book and has a lot of important things to say but it takes Burr to far into the sainthood category. All sides should be considered and if you are looking for a pro-Burr book this is hands down the best one to start with. Pair it with Chernow's Alexander Hamilton and you will get a good account of both sides. (less)

like · see review

Dec 06, 2012 Elliott rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

This book is quite long, but I actually have no idea how thick it is because listened to the audiobook, which is on 16 discs. I really can't say it should be condensed, however, because it's easy to see that Aaron Burr is a figure who's life story truly deserves a full telling in detail, and Nancy Isenberg has done her best to give us just that. It's unfortunate that at times her obvious admiration for Burr throws doubt on the objectivity of her research, but all in all I feel much better inform...more

like · see review

Jul 26, 2011 Meghan rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: history-club, biography

Spent a lot of this wanting to give Nancy Isenberg a hug. It's okay, Nancy, I would say to her. It's okay. I know all those people who wrote all those other books said mean things about Aaron Burr. I know. It's okay. But look! You have this opportunity here to tell me all about him in clear and precise language! And sometimes you totally are accomplishing that, and sometimes you are being awfully reactionary and shadowboxery. I did not write the lousy things about Aaron Burr, after all. I actual...more

2 likes · like · see review

Sep 13, 2010 Riley rated it 3 of 5 stars

I've read a number of books on the Founding Fathers in the past few years, and one thing about the scholarship really sticks in my craw. All the biographers feel the need to trumpet their subjects a la David McCullough in a way that I haven't seen in histories of other eras. In each case, the hero is given the benefit of the doubt, while his critics are dismissed as biased or worse. This book taught me a lot about Aaron Burr, but it left me unconvinced that the author's perspective was the objec...more

like · see review

Mar 29, 2010 Evan Bolick rated it 2 of 5 stars

Shelves: i-read-this-sucker

First off, Aaron Burr is a fascinating guy. He rose from the middle class, served as a Revolutionary War General, became Vice President, shot and killed the man on the $20 bill, attempted to invade Mexico, was on trial for treason, subsequently claimed British citizen, was exiled Scandanavia, and then returned to the U.S. to resume his law practice until he died. Burr is probably a man who has received undeservedly poor treatment from historians as he was an enemy of both Hamilton and Jefferson....more

like · see review

Apr 13, 2009 Preston rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: quarter-iii

All school-children are taught the scandalous story of Aaron Burr. He was a vicious opportunist who attempted to ruin the grand plans of our esteemed founding fathers. He was licentious in his personal conduct and a corrupter of youth. He had no core principles and would go to any lengths -or depths- to win a political battle. Eventually, he wrongly shot and killed Alexander Hamilton, the revered American statesman, in a duel. Fleeing to Europe to escape punishment for his crime, he returned to...more All school-children are taught the scandalous story of Aaron Burr. He was a vicious opportunist who attempted to ruin the grand plans of our esteemed founding fathers. He was licentious in his personal conduct and a corrupter of youth. He had no core principles and would go to any lengths -or depths- to win a political battle. Eventually, he wrongly shot and killed Alexander Hamilton, the revered American statesman, in a duel. Fleeing to Europe to escape punishment for his crime, he returned to concoct a plot to create an independent empire in the western U.S. and Mexico.

What if this interpretation, however, was inaccurate. What if it was a gross misrepresentation of Burr's life, based only on the slurring propaganda of his contemporary political opponents. In Falling Founder, Nancy Isenberg decides to go back to the evidence and craft an objectively true picture of Aaron Burr. Her hypothesis of Burr as an anachronism: a proto-democrat, proto-feminist, and proto-utilitarian, makes perfect sense. Burr would be a character quite at home in the 20th century, but in the late 18th century he seemed a paradox. Even worse to his opponents, this nature combined with his exceeding ability to make him a dangerous subverter of established institutions.

Her historiography is very precise. By merely giving Burr the professsional treatment given to Hamilton, Adams, Jefferson, and all of his many opponents, she reveals this completely perspective on him.

Burr personally contributed more to the revolutionary war effort than any of his political opponents. Later during his law career he took up cases predominantly concerning poor debtors and women (he perhaps pioneered the "family-law" profession). As a politician, he mobilized support on the grassroots level, canvassing voters and marshalling volunteers on election day. These tactics were seen as disgraceful to some of his more "noble" counterparts, but they foreshadowed modern democratic politics. But while he allied himself with Jefferson for most of the 1790s, when Jefferson was finally empowered in his first term as President he backstabbed Burr, the new Vice-President, cutting him off from all the reins of power and backing his political opponents in New York. In reality, Jefferson's aristocratic agarianism was just as threatend by the democrat Burr as Hamilton's eastern capitalism.

Isenberg thus crafts a supremely un-American, "riches to rags" tragedy, a tale of one who starts with great promise, and achieves manifold success in warfare, law, and politics, only to become betrayed in the prime of his career, and slowly declines into infamy and even irrelevance. (less)

like · see review

Jun 09, 2009 Cassidy Cassidy rated it 1 of 5 stars

Abandon ship.

All the ingredients were there. A self-styled history nerd picks up a biography of one of the most devious and dastardly Founders (allegedly). Loved Chernow's lengthy, detailed survey of Hamilton's life. Couldn't put down His Excellency. McCullogh's John Adams?!? Fuhgeddabadit.

You see where this is going: I should have loved this book.

Maybe I knew that all too well, letting it sit on shelf after shelf. In state after state, Burr's clever facade glared over my living room, my bedroo...more

like · see review

Apr 15, 2009 Mardel Fehrenbach rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

I enjoyed this book. It was well written and fascinating. I admit that I have long been an admirer of Burr and also long been aware that he had his warts as did Hamilton and Jefferson. That, I suppose is one advantage of being the daughter of a historian who felt it was his duty to disabuse me of false impressions garnered from the simplistic views of history taught during my public school days.

That said, I am not a historian my nature or design but I do enjoy reading about history and I found t...more

1 like · like · see review

Oct 05, 2008 Rick rated it 2 of 5 stars

This book was not worth the read. Although it wasn't long Isenberg provided a good level of detail, I continually felt like the author was writing about her secret love. Burr has been a 'his and a byword' in political circles and indeed he did great things although he is defined by his dual with Hamilton and as a result he doesn't get a fair shake from most historians. I felt like Isenberg was making up for this by leaning too far in support of Burr. She portrayed him as a victim not of his own...more

1 like · like · see review

Dec 19, 2008 Christine rated it 4 of 5 stars

I was concerned when I first started reading this that the author was going to try so hard to overturn our current view of Burr as villain and scoundrel that she was just going to push it too far. I was pleasantly surprised. Isenberg presents Burr as he was--a person with both flaws and redeeming qualities, one who made some brilliant decisions and some monumental mistakes. Aaron Burr emerges from this work as a fully formed personality, instead of a one-dimensional cartoon character. In additio...more

like · see review

Nov 20, 2007 Andres rated it 4 of 5 stars

Very interesting take on Aaron Burr, who most famously killed Alexander Hamilton in a duel. Most writings on Burr have been critical, and of course, written by his detractors.

The author of this book researches his life and gives us a more factual and unbiased view of Burr's life. She doesn't paint him as an angel, but neither is he the villain and traitor that the Jefferson and Hamilton crowd paint him out to be.

It's a shame that these types of books are rarely read by people nowadays. I'm a hug...more

1 like · like · see review

Sep 10, 2007 John rated it 3 of 5 stars Recommends it for: early American history scholars

This is a serious a relatively impartial, though sympathetic, life of Burr. While it favors Burr, it does not defend him by proclaiming his innocence, but by showing the
famous Americans who opposed him were, in many cases, guilty of similar conduct. I think this is true as far as his ordinary political maneuvers are concerned, and even his duel with Hamilton (whom Isenberg says had been involved 12 previous duels). I am less sure that it works as as defense
of Burr in the notorious "Conspiracy" w...more

like · see review

Sep 13, 2011 Kelley Ridings rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Fantastic biography of one of US history's most misunderstood figures. Isenberg does a masterful job recounting Arron Burr's life. While this former US vice president is notorious for killing Alexander Hamilton in a duel and for being put on trial for treason, Isenberg skillfully brings to light new facts about Burr's true motivations and how his political rivals who were fearful of his power actually sought to bring him down. As much a treatise on the politics of the post Revolutionary War peri...more

like · see review

title link	preview: Fallen Founder: The Life of Aaron Burr
avg rating	preview: Fallen Founder: The Life of Aaron Burr Goodreads rating: 3.57 (360 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/244625.Fallen_Founder?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1173078550l/244625.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/244625.Fallen_Founder?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]Fallen Founder: The Life of Aaron Burr by Nancy Isenberg[/url]

Fallen Founder: The Life of Aaron Burr

Friend Reviews

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

combine
Other Editions (12)

Genres

Readers also enjoyed similar books

Books by Nancy Isenberg

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website

Trivia About Fallen Founder: T...

Fallen Founder: The Life of Aaron Burr

Friend Reviews

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topicDiscuss This Book

combineOther Editions (12)

Genres

Readers also enjoyed similar books

Books by Nancy Isenberg

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website

Trivia About Fallen Founder: T...

new topic
Discuss This Book

combine
Other Editions (12)