Lafayette

by Harlow Giles Unger

Acclaim for Lafayette

""I found Mr. Unger's book exceptionally well done. It's an admirable account of the marquis's two revolutions-one might even say his two lives-the French and the American. It also captures the private Lafayette and his remarkable wife, Adrienne, in often moving detail."" -Thomas Fleming, author, Liberty!: The American Revolution

""Harlow Unger's Lafayette is a remarkable and dramatic account of a life as fully lived as it is possible to imagine, that of Gilbert de Motier, marquis de Lafayette. To American readers Unger's biography will provide a stark reminder of just how near run a thing was our War of Independence and the degree to which our forefathers' victory hinged on the help of our French allies, marshalled for George Washington by his 'adopted' son, Lafayette. But even more absorbing and much less well known to the general reader will be Unger's account of Lafayette's idealistic but naive efforts to plant the fruits of the American democracy he so admired in the unreceptive soil of his homeland. His inspired oratory produced not the constitutional democracy he sought but the bloody Jacobin excesses of the French Revolution.""-Larry Collins, coauthor, Is Paris Burning? and O Jerusalem!

""A lively and entertaining portrait of one of the most important supporting actors in the two revolutions that transformed the modern world.""-Susan Dunn, author, Sister French Lightning, American Light

""Harlow Unger has cornered the market on muses to emerge as America's most readable historian. His new biography of the marquis de Lafayette combines a thoroughgoing account of the age of revolution, a probing psychological study of a complex man, and a literary style that goes down like cream. A worthy successor to his splendid biography of Noah Webster.""-Florence King, Contributing Editor, National Review

""Enlightening! The picture of Lafayette's life is a window to eighteenth- and nineteenth-century history.""-Michel Aubert La Fayette

Genres: History, Biography, Nonfiction, American Revolution, American History, France, Biography Memoir

480 pages, Paperback

First published August 19, 2002

About the author

Harlow Giles Unger is an American author, historian, journalist, broadcaster, and educator known for his extensive work on American history and education. Educated at the Taft School, Yale College, and California State University, Unger began his career as a journalist for the New York Herald Tribune Overseas News Service in Paris. He later wrote for newspapers and magazines across Britain, Canada, and other countries, while also working in radio broadcasting and teaching English and journalism at New York-area colleges.
Unger has written over twenty-seven books, including ten biographies of America's Founding Fathers and a notable biography of Henry Clay. His historical works include Noah Webster: The Life and Times of an American Patriot, The Last Founding Father: James Monroe and a Nation’s Call to Greatness, and First Founding Father: Richard Henry Lee and the Call to Independence. He is also the author of the Encyclopedia of American Education, a three-volume reference work.
A former Distinguished Visiting Fellow in American History at Mount Vernon, Unger has lived in Paris and currently resides in New York City. An avid skier and horseman, he has spent time in Chamonix, France, and Jackson Hole, Wyoming. He has one son, Richard C. Unger.

Reviews

[Marquise · Rating 2 out of 5]

First off, I should note that I was reading this biography alongside the one by Mike Duncan, so if you'll excuse it, there's going to be an unavoidable comparison. Hopefully, a useful one.

Whilst Unger is a better storyteller, more engaging in his narration, and puts more feeling and passion into his writing than Duncan does, there's a noticeable downside to it: he's less objective and more partial, to the point he uses denigrating descriptions that verge on insults on other French notables that were opponents of Lafayette, such as Marat. I'm not one to defend the French Revolution's leaders, especially not the Jacobins, and I'd gladly call them names when I see the terrible consequences of their actions, but there's a level of distance and objectivity, and professionalism, expected from a biographer, so in this case I find it lacking.

Unger is a fan of the Marquis, it's very evident, and there are reasons to admire Gilbert du Motier de Lafayette for his contributions to the American and French revolutions, in both of which he was a key figure. This is a positive portrayal, therefore, and deserved. However, having had Duncan assessing the same information as Unger does at the same time, I could see that the author of this book was more likely than not to omit or simply not discuss some aspects of Lafayette that weren't exactly admiration-worthy. And I have to wonder, why not? Lafayette was human, he had his foibles, his mistakes, he wasn't perfect. That shouldn't have been glossed over, I believe.

And finally, the passionate feeling that drives the engaging narration also plays against it eventually. Unger likes the Washington-Lafayette relationship so much he overdoes it by oversharing bits and pieces of these men's correspondence as if it were some romantic entanglement. That makes the book drag for a significant portion of it, and the author's partiality is made all the more evident.

So, overall, I'd say Mike Duncan's biography was better. Drier, yes, and more opinionated, but at least he avoided the issues that ultimately sank Unger's biography for me.

[Tom · Rating 5 out of 5]

I am seriously considering throwing, "Lafayette," in as the middle name of one of my children. Usually when I read a biography I walk away a little disenchanted about the subject, but in this case I found that there once was someone in the universe who could truly be 'admired. How can one man just kick-ass his whole life? From a political, moral and strategic point of view? At 70 he was still kicking ass.

And yeah, I came close to crying at times too.

The only minor complaint is that I grew weary of the sappy letters to and from George Washington.

I'd also add that the next time someone says, "The French would be speaking German if it wasn't for the United State," I'd reply that, "We'd have the Queen on our dollar bill if it wasn't for Marquis de Lafayette."

[Micah Cummins · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thoughts coming tonight...)

[Colleen · Rating 3 out of 5]

Sometimes it can hard to weigh a book when you like the subject so much, it's easy to overlook certain flaws perhaps in your overall enthusiasm. I enjoyed this book a great deal, because you can't help but like Lafayette, but so does the author. It's that lack of impartiality that I think detracts from it overall though. He mentions how vast the Lafayette souvenir and trinket industry (which exploded in the US) and most of the idealized portraits looked absolutely nothing like him--and you can't help but wonder a bit if you are getting the correct image of Lafayette through this book. The author does mention that there are thousands upon thousands of books on Lafayette--that just printing out the titles of all books up to 1930 runs to 280 pages and then there are vast Lafayette archives--mostly I suspect as I read this book because Lafayette gave de Stael a run for her money in letter writing.

Now we know what they did back in the age before television and the internet--furious letter writing. Some of Lafayette's letters ran to 50 pages to "tome sized" and it seemed by this book that Washington got the majority of these mash notes. The author does point out that the disparity of views on Lafayette across history depends a great deal on what country you're from. France had no public mourning for him and the jealous King ordered a private funeral, where hostile royalist troops kept the crowd cowering in their houses. Meanwhile, America underwent an almost orgy of grief. Every city went into mourning; flags half-staff; every military post & ship fired 24 gun salute at daybreak and another 1 cannon salute every 30 minutes all day; army & navy officers had to wear a mourning band for 6 months; Congress asked all Americans to be in mourning clothes for 30 days; John Quincy Adam's eulogy was handed out to 50,000 schools and libraries. He was the 18th century Princess Di. Our Marquis.

The reaction to his death is so extreme, with exuberance and indifference tinged with fear perhaps. It's obvious why Americans love him so much--perhaps no one loved the US as much as he did, and the reason why he's so beloved in America is why you can make a case against him. Although this book almost never criticizes Lafayette and it's so glowing, it makes you unsure. I've read a few other books that touch on Lafayette lately and watched a couple documentaries, including the recent PBS one, and from those sources I know he did cheat on his wife. His wife's sister found out and told her and she was crushed.

You would never know by reading this book though, which presents them as the Romance of the Century. I mean they still kind of were--they had that creepy aspect of being paired up at 12 & 14, although Lafayette was pointed towards some understanding courtesans during the early teen years and they were kept separate so that it wasn't too Flowers in the Atticish. And whatever lapses might have occurred earlier in the marriage, obviously with her going to a hay smeared with sewage rathole for years with him proves they mended their marriage. I was expecting to read about the affairs but nope not in this book. Lucy de la Tour thought he was an imbecile and other books have mentioned him being kind of a lucky idiot, but this book makes him out to be an autodidact in talents.

The language in this book is rather extreme, but also not backed up much--like Marat is referred to every time as being a "dwarf" but I noticed in the end notes an aside that he was really 5"1 but had bad posture. And Mirabeau was a pedophile and a rapist? I know he died from syphilis from one book (which Wikipedia lists his cause of death "as excesses of youth" although he was 42)--I know Mirabeau was a pervert even for his day, so god only knows, but the author also calls Robespierre insane or a lunatic many times. I don't think Robespierre was insane--I think he exemplifies the banality of evil and was paranoid, ruthless, jealous, and focused, but not crazy. And how did his wife die? Cholera or something? It wasn't broken by years in the prison, since it mentions how she recovered in her quest to restore the fortune and damn, she was a great financier. Her acumen on managing all the estates and the plantations for free slaves he set up--it may have been his idea--but she ran it for years. I would have liked to read more on what she was doing with all that. I wish authors consulted doctors with like a case study of historical figures to get some sort of diagnosis, rather than "broken heart," etc.

But anyways, this is not an impartial book. Lafayette is beloved in America for a number of reasons--those soldiers lucky enough to be under his command had someone that deeply loved the American cause, super hated the British, was willing to march along them and be cheerful in Valley Forge conditions, and was rich and generous enough to be buying shoes and super cool uniforms for everyone under him, and was actually a good and brave General. He was the perfect old world knight here to rescue us--the beloved adopted son of George Washington--and not just in all the battles, but thanks to him, he opened up trade from US to France, his home to all US traders and tourists, sweet talked on our behalf to Spain & Prussia & Iroquois & the Huron, and got the tons of money, troops, and ships that tilted it all to us.

For no reason other than total love. He didn't get money out of it, he donated half his fortune. He went back home when it was done, and in all his travels up and down the US--poor Lafayette is always criss crossing the US--and then leaving in a blast of glory and pomp, telling us that we're the best country with the best system as he goes and in a sense preserved the union more than any single individual, with his farewell tour coming right as America had its nastiest election results come in. With the idol of the Revolution beaming at them, the 4 disgruntled candidates shook hands and John Quincy Adams got to be president instead of riots and bloodshed. Of course you're going to not have a problem with Lafayette. What many of the cannier American diplomats on the scene noticed though during the Revolution, the main differences between the Revolutions was the participants involved. Franklin instead of Marat. Jefferson instead of Robespierre. Lafayette noticed it when the same rousing speech that worked so well on his American troops had zero effect on the Guard under his control, becoming eventually their prisoner. Reading between the lines in this book, I can see the criticism towards Lafayette, in that on several occasions in his life, he was in a key position to assert leadership during a time of crisis but didn't--preferring instead to do a showy George Washington/Cincinnatus-I must go be a noble farmer in retirement role--but because he wouldn't actively take the reins when handed to him, they fell to others who led the way to the guillotine, total anarchy, and horrible Prussian dungeons.

I can respect why he didn't but I think further information needed. This author also has an interesting thesis for the cause of the Revolution--too high tariffs on American goods, which led to a disastrous economy because of the many tax monopolies around the country: having to pay at the port, and then each county--so a bunch of tobacco that sold for 1 livre in Boston was taxed 54 livres by France, making it worthless to trade there. The author (and Lafayette, because this was Lafayette's view...I think) says that because France didn't take up all the trade opportunities that England was the deathblow. All the raw goods and eager, prosperous American audience was clamoring for French goods but couldn't because of stagnant medieval laws.

This was kind of new to me--he also says that the aristocrats voting down the 2% property tax and the attempt to lower the 20% tax on poor people was the other nail in coffin. Lafayette siding with the poor people over the greedy noblemen vote and support for taxing that 4% (thought that was an interesting # too--96% then to the 99% now), which of course spiraled out to the famous Tennis Court Oath. Author though doesn't mention King Louis' famous quote about how he blamed his support for US for the cause or anything about how France might have gotten the raw end of the deal.

But Lafayette is a guy who spent 5 years running through Carolina swamps to frozen upstate New York to come home and find the peasants starving and horrible famine (I personally think that the volcano that erupted in Iceland is what set the heads rolling) and his reaction? Open up all his silos and feed all the villagers for free. And hire a band to entertain them on Sundays. And when he was told to sell his grain for high prices because of the famine, his response was "No! Now is the best time to give it away!" Of course, most of the other rich landlords sold for high prices, let people starve, and paid for it later.

I was also impressed by James Monroe and especially his wife, Elizabeth, for being the agents who rescued Adrienne Lafayette from the dungeon she had been stuck in for almost 2 years. Kind of annoying though that throughout that part, the author never used Elizabeth Monroe's name, even though she appears multiple times through the book "his wife"or "Mrs. Monroe" only. It actually bothered me not knowing her first name and more info so had to look her up (but not sure if this author used many female sources--it seemed not with no Madame de Stael appearances at all, when Lafayette was a regular at her house). Very crafty strategy, with appeals and direct diplomatic requests to free her only making it worse, instead the US via James Monroe chose to embarrass the French government by sending Elizabeth to call formerly on Adrienne in prison--a really horrible prison. Took two drop ins.

I'm glad I read this though but am going to find another book on Lafayette for contrast.

[Richard Subber · Rating 4 out of 5]

I’m a first-time reader of Lafayette biographies, so I’ll acknowledge that Unger entertains by re-stating the obvious: Marie-Joseph-Paul-Yves-Roch-Gilbert du Motier de la Fayette was a national, military, political and, indeed, a paternal hero to millions in America and France during the American and (several) French revolutions.
There is no doubt that, despite the fact that he was one of the richest French nobles of his time, he was publicly and privately dedicated to republican government and a social/economic order that was far more egalitarian than the monarchical and aristocratic structures that prevailed.
Was he a great man? Unger, like many of his biographers, says yes. Lafayette was a courageous battlefield leader, he was an enlightened manorial lord who enhanced the lives of his peasants, and he was both outspoken and fearless, repeatedly, in literally dangerous political situations for a couple decades in Revolutionary and Napoleonic France. Unger amply—even poetically—demonstrates these lifelong characteristics of the man Americans called “our Marquis.”
I also feel obliged to call attention to some countervailing factors that Unger fully describes but does not adequately interpret.
Lafayette put his money where his mouth was. He repeatedly used his great personal wealth to pay and outfit the troops he commanded, when government funds and supplies ran low. I suggest a case could be made that the Marquis, uniquely among American commanders, paid for his military success in the Revolutionary War. Throughout the war, the options and operations of colonial commanders were significantly hindered by short funds and short supplies. If Lafayette had not been able to pay, feed, clothe and arm his troops with his personal resources, could he have been as winning a general as he was? I suspect the answer is “No.”
Some biographers refer to Lafayette as the “victor” at Yorktown in 1781. Unger calls him a “hero” of Yorktown. Lafayette was not the only American general at Yorktown, and he wasn’t the only French general. Lafayette did use his small force to isolate Cornwallis in Yorktown, but he had to wait until Washington, Rochambeau and others arrived with sufficient forces before he participated in the final assaults.
In France he repeatedly declined to step up to the plate and take executive leadership, during the revolutionary and Napoleonic convulsions, when the French people and the contentious military/political factions would have handed the throne or the presidency of France to him on a velvet pillow. The Marquis repeatedly risked his life to defuse explosive situations by his personal, courageous intervention. However, Unger fastidiously details Lafayette’s repeated reluctance to take the final step and take control when, arguably, he could have stabilized dangerous situations, and forestalled or prevented catastrophic consequences, by doing so. Lafayette wasn’t responsible for the violence, but, time after time, he left a void that was unfortunately filled by lesser men.
Was Lafayette a great man? Yes. A successful general? Yes. Was he a really lucky guy? Yes. Did he and his reputation benefit immensely from great wealth and fortuitous circumstance? Yes. Did he live up to his potential in serving France and the French nation? Maybe not.
Just one other thing: Unger profligately demonstrates that Lafayette and Washington had a deeply affectionate man-to-man—explicitly, like father and son—relationship, by using far too many excerpts from their numerous letters. No biggie, but I had to stop reading them about halfway through the book….they bonded, I get it.
Read more on my website:
http://richardsubber.com/

[Numidica · Rating 4 out of 5]

Many other reviewers have praised this book, so I won't go on at length. It is a good companion to Chernow's Hamilton, and His Excellency by Joseph Ellis. Also highly recommended for a detailed account of how the Revolutionary War was won at Yorktown (with much additional information about Lafayette's role in bringing French Naval and Army forces into the war) is Washington's Great Gamble by James Nelson. Lafayette was a true friend of the US, and was instrumental in winning the war by bringing in France on the side of America, but he was also a very brave man and a good general.

The book drags a bit in the portion which covers Lafayette's life between the end of the American Revolution and the beginning of the French Revolution, but it runs at galloping pace otherwise. Adrienne's letter to George Washington entrusting Lafayette's and her son to Washington's care at the height of the French Revolutionary terror will bring tears to your eyes.

[James Spurgeon · Rating 5 out of 5]

When I started reading this book, I already had a great respect for the Marquis de Lafayette. Upon conclusion, that respect has now grown into admiration. Here was a man, maybe the last true knight, who defied his king and came to fight in America in our revolution... not for fame and glory but because he truly believed in our glorious cause. He demanded no compensation for his service.

When General Washington took him to the army camp for the first time, Washington apologized for its squalor condition. Lafayette replied, "I have come here to learn, mon general, not to teach."

Lafayette would be wounded in his first battle at Brandywine Creek. As he was departing the army to recover from this wound, he overheard Washington tell the doctor, "Treat him as if he were my own son." The two patriots would form a father-son relationship that would last through both lifetimes. And he would be made a citizen of the US by an act of Congress following the war.

It would be General Lafayette that would stalk British General Cornwallis through Virginia and trap him at Yorktown for the American victory and possible conclusion of the war.

Lafayette would return home a hero to his people and country. Great celebrations lit up Paris for the American victory. But Lafayette brought back the principles of that revolution which would end up throwing France into chaos and him into an Austrian prison. Several times, in the early days of the French Revolution, the people tried to give him power. He stayed true to republican principles and declined. Even later in life, they tried once again, but again he declined. In 1824/25, he would visit America for the first time since it had drafted the Constitution... something he called for long before anyone was doing so in the country as the states had to be unified. Every city he visited (and he visited every state), greeted him with massive crowds and great celebrations. Nothing was too good to honor our last revolutionary general.

Throughout his life, he lived by the republican principles he fought for in his adoptive country. When there was a food shortage in Chavaniac, he ordered his food stores to be opened and food to be dispensed to the people free of charge. He fought for the end of slavery, the end of feudal laws, and popular elections open to all (including women). His wife and family were by his side the entire way.

Even to his dying day, he spoke up against autocratic rule and despotism. Though he was always in the minority, he never lost his spirit or the fight. He had fought and bled for republican values in a far off land, and he believed in them through every bit of his mind, body, and soul. And he always valued his adoptive America.

When he died there was barely anything of note in Paris or France. Even his funeral procession was bared from the public. In the US, the nation went into deep mourning. Flag flew at half staff, Congress was draped in black bunting, bells tolled and ships saluted. He was the last of his kind and now he was gone... buried in Picpus Cemetery by his beloved wife under soil from both France and America (soil taken from Bunker Hill during his tour). Even President Andrew Jackson ordered the same military honors for Lafayette that had been awarded to George Washington when he had died.

Former-President and then current-Representative John Quincy Adams gave the official eulogy.
"Pronounce him one of the first men of his age and you have yet not done him justice... Turn back your eyes upon the records of time; summon from the creation of the world to this day the mighty dead of every age and every clime-- and where, among the race of merely mortal men, shall one be found, who, as the benefactor of his kind, shall claim to take precedence of Lafayette.

In 1917, US General Pershing sent his aide Colonel Charles Stanton to Picpus Cemetery to replant the American flag at Lafayette's grave. In a ceremony on July 4,, Stanton saluted him, "Lafayette, we are here." An American flag has continuously been at Lafayette's grave. Not even Hitler removed it.

He is a man of two worlds... old and new. In France, there is not a lot of respect for the man who brought about the end of the monarchy and the start of the French Revolution. But in America, he is the knight who came to fight for our cause and lived his life by it. He is a hero. He is "our Marquis," and he always will be.

[Marc Shoemaker · Rating 2 out of 5]

I wanted to like this book, and maybe I should have given it another star, but in the end it was one more breathless, uncritical Lafayette biography. I've been looking for a good Lafayette bio for years, and when I found this one in a bookstore at Yorktown I thought that it might have been what I was looking for. Unfortunately Unger overpraises Lafayette and often overlooks his faults. He portrays him as a devoted husband in spite of his womanizing, for instance, while the language he uses overly effusive language to praise his virtues. A biography of Lafayette does not need to do this. The young revolutionary was a brilliant, forward-thinking man, and I would love to read a good, balanced, biography. Yet the obvious winsomeness of Lafayette's character seems to cause his biographers to lose their objectivity. I have put down bios of him after only a few chapters because of this very problem. At leas Unger writes well enough that I read the book through the end.

Over the course of the book Unger frequently crosses the line from historian to propagandist. For instance, he seems to link Marat's viciousness with is height, calling him an "ill-kept Swiss dwarf" (249) and says, in an amazing sentence, "The ugly dwarf Marat sought a dictatorship--his own--and a crowd of equally misshapen idolaters shrieked their approval." (274) While I agree that Marat was a singularly wicked person, I found this conflation of his appearance, particularly his height, and his character disturbing. I was also bothered by Unger's frequent implication that the French people were of a naturally lower character than Americans.

The reason I may be underrating this book is because, as I said earlier, it is well written. Unger includes vivid details of the excesses of the French Revolution and tells a compelling story of Lafayette's imprisonment in Moravia after the Emperor Joseph, blaming Lafayette for beginning the troubles that led to his sister, Marie Antoinette, being guillotined, refuses to help him. He describes the sickeningly squalid conditions in the prison, how his wife, Adrienne, and their two daughters joined him there, and the awful toll this took on the family.

I can't recommend this book as a solid history, because its breathless style left me with the impression that I wasn't getting the whole story. It is, however, an interesting tale, particularly as it deals with the French Revolution. If you read it, just be aware of the author's bias.

[Nicole Dust · Rating 4 out of 5]

I. CRIED. SO. HARD. AT THE END.

AND LAFAYETTE NEEDS A MUSICAL.

For anyone who likes biographies and/or Hamilton, 9/10 would recommend this book. My only issue was that the pacing at the very end seemed way off compared to the rest of the book.

Other than that? Truly amazing. Lafayette was an incredible person, and this book reflected him perfectly.

[BAM doesn’t answer to her real name · Rating 4 out of 5]

6/30 THIS BOOOK WAS SO GOOOD! Lafayette was so dynamic. A menace to revolutionary society. Fearless. Hopeful. Chivalrous. Respectful. I could go on. The author could not have possibly left anything out just no way there was so much information and I never felt like the story dragged. I will say I chose audiobook format so that may have been part of the reason. Great narrator.
I might come back sometime and move this to five stars I was that impressed by the subject matter and its presentation. I’m almost positive I will read this again.

I cannot wait to begin this book! The Hamilton is screaming to get out and this is the only audiobook I own that is related and not already read. The ratings are unbelievable! If anyone has any books American revolution related I’d love the suggestions

[Rebekah · Rating 5 out of 5]

Amazing man. I am so impressed by him. I feel he was placed in France by Providence. He had the thought like the Americans of his generation, not the French, but he needed to be there to help us win. His wife was so smart, compassionate and completely devoted to him. When she went to prsion with her daughters to be with him, I nearly fell out of my seat! I loved this book. I learned so much about the French Revolutions.

[Jerome Otte · Rating 4 out of 5]

A detailed, well-written and gripping biography of Lafayette. Unger clearly lays out Lafayette’s life and accomplishments, and his impact on the history of the North American and European continents. Unger clearly explains Lafayette’s role and personality, and his easy reception among the colonists due to his status as a Mason, his wealth, and his access to Washington and the king of France.

There are some errors. At one point Unger writes that Patrick Henry warned Jefferson of the British advance on Monticello (it was Jack Jouett). Elsewhere he writes that “Saratoga had been America’s only military victory since the beginning of the war.” Elsewhere he describes Benedict Arnold as “reluctant” to take command on the battlefield, and mixes up John Adams with Arthur Lee at one point. Also, it often seems like Unger is a bit too in love with his subject, and the writing can get over the top (Marat is called a “foul, ill kempt Swiss dwarf” and it seems like Unger can’t write a single sentence about Louis XVIII that doesn’t include “obese”) Unger also writes that Washington had “refused pay for his service in the Revolutionary War.” Unger does not mention that Washington instead chose to work for expenses because he knew these would end up totaling much more. He also writes that “a huge European coalition had formed to crush the the French Revolution and prevent its spread to neighboring countries,” although the aims of France’s European enemies were arguably just to contain France within the 1792 frontiers.

A readable, well-paced, and illuminating biography.

[Ozymandias · Rating 2 out of 5]

Some biographers need to love their subjects. I get it. But I’d much rather read a book by one who found their subjects interesting instead.

And that is why I did not like this book. For all that Lafayette’s life is lovingly drawn across the pages here, the question of what drives him is rarely raised. His inherent nobility of spirit he’d undoubtedly say. Okay. What does that mean exactly? What were his core beliefs? Liberty? Anyone with a passing knowledge of the French Revolution knows how deceptively complicated that word can be. What about his chivalric code? It’s not enough to just say the man was the last true knight; what does an 18th century knight believe in? And are there no internal contradictions in any of these values? I couldn’t help notice that Lafayette planned to murder his father’s killer in battle. Is that chivalry? If so, what else is covered by that term and how does it square with the courteous treatment meted out to other defeated enemies? If not, what does that say about Lafayette?

Basically, this book is a shallow panegyric with little to no analysis and a tediously tendentious viewpoint. Unger takes Lafayette’s side so instinctively that all the man’s enemies become his own. There’s no effort made to tell both sides of a viewpoint because St. Lafayette’s is obviously the correct one. If Lafayette was within a hundred miles of a battle or spoke at a meeting the responsibility for the (positive) outcome is his and his alone. The author also skips over or elides matters that reflect poorly upon the young marquis. For example, his charge into a Paris crowd with the National Guard killing hundreds of rioters (including women and children) is treated as a heroic spectacle when it’s a big part of what damned him in the eyes of the revolutionary movement. His grand romance with his wife ignores that he had affairs outside marriage, which it would indeed have been unusual for a young French lord not to do. And his constant refusal to seize opportunities when they fall in his lap speaks to a certain uncertainty or feeling of inadequacy. Something stopped him from living up to the astounding potential he revealed as a youth in America. Just as something kept him seeking to rekindle the revolution even after his generation of revolutionaries had grown disillusioned at the violent collapse of their dreams.

About the best thing I can say about the book is that it is filled with long quotes from Lafayette’s memoirs and letters, which means that you do get some sense of the man regardless of authorial exaggeration. I like Lafayette, for all that I dislike seeing an overblown account of him, and enjoyed hearing his views on matters of significance. And good use is made of the writings of other American patriots as well. On the other hand, there is very little attention given to French authors or letter collections.

The reason for this gross imbalance is as obvious as it is inevitable: the author was uninterested in the French Revolution (because, I imagine, it doesn’t fit his hero worship) and so did no research on it. The bibliography reveals a grand total of ONE secondary source concerning the French Revolution, and that a comparison between it and the American one. I’m hardly an expert but I’ve read more than that! As a result, we get a grossly distorted vision of events that places Lafayette at the center and dismisses anyone who differed with him, in whatever direction, as an inhuman monster. I mean, a “grotesque giant” with “an even more hideous soul” is how he describes Mirabeau, who was actually more a leader of the moderate republicans than Lafayette. And he has much worse things to say about the “psychotic” Marat and “imbecile fanatic” Robespierre.

The complete mess that this book makes of the French Revolution accounts for a lot of my anger. It’s obvious the author has no clue what’s going on, which doesn’t stop him from speaking confidently about it. Descriptions of the forces at work are simplistic and patronizing. Sometimes nonsensical. The Jacobins(!) are presented as anti-democratic and determined to punish the lower classes! This is the exact opposite of the truth. What’s so frustrating about the Revolution is that the most vicious group (the Jacobins) was the one advocating a democracy closest to what we have today. Lafayette’s moderates were all for an electorate composed of only the wealthiest citizens. No hint of that here. It’s just mob = evil, lords = greedy, Lafayette and the middle way = good/democratic. No mention either of the different and conflicting needs of the provinces/Paris, farmers/bourgeois, and peasants/landowners. Ugh.

This is a childish and lazy biography that doesn’t seek to answer any questions of motivation but merely laud a great hero. Lafayette was a hero, but he was hardly perfect and it does him an injustice to pretend he was. A man with no faults is a boring man indeed. Posing everything in moral terms makes for ugly reading. Every personal enemy of the great man must be a villain and differing viewpoints remain unexplored. Moreover, the view that this gives for the differing outcomes of Lafayette’s two revolutions is patronizing enough to be insulting: the autocratic Catholic French mob is unworthy of democracy while the noble Protestant American farmer deserves true liberty. I would not recommend this biography if you can find another covering the same subject. Something with a little more (meaning any) nuance.

[Fergie · Rating 4 out of 5]

** 4 1/2 stars out of 5 ** Unger's biographical depiction of Lafayette is one of clear admiration backed by extensive research as intimate as the letters the Marquis wrote to his contemporaries and family. The French aristocrat who devoted so much of his life for America's pursuit for liberty and independence was a man who is still worthy of our devotion.

Within the pages of this engrossing biography, Lafayette is worthy of the esteem Unger clearly has for his subject. Wisely using Lafayette's own letters to people such as his wife, Washington, Jefferson, and Monroe, the reader is allowed to get an intimate glimpse into the heart and soul of this great French-American patriot.

Despite his naivete at thinking his ancient country of France could march into history by following the steps towards liberty as the young American country he so loved successfully did, I couldn't help being impressed by his devotion and unwaivering belief in democracy. Unger lays the evidence to support how dearly the Marquis held to the tenents of this faith as well as his sense of honor. Lafayette inhabited that virtue as easily as his hero and mentor, Washington; the man who he adored and who treated him as a son.

Lafayette was one of the most successful, greatest generals the Americans had during the Revolution; and one of its best diplomats, using his influence at the French court and his close connection to the French king to secure the necessary money, soldiers, and ships to win America's freedom. Without his personal part in the war, it is not too much of a stretch to imagine that without Lafayette, America would not have won its independence from England. Because of his assistance both militarily and diplomatically, Amercians treated him with the respect & reverence that often escaped him in his native France during and after their own revolution.

While Unger clearly admires Lafayette, he doesn't shy away from covering Lafayette's flaws. In a real sense, Lafayette was a naive knight of the Old World, with visions of glory that had nothing to do with personal gain. He viewed America's New World through utopic lenses and, when envisioning France's future, he failed to see how the deep roots of its governance and temperaments of its citizenry would prevent his homeland from enjoying the fruits of liberty. This inabiltity to adapt his vision with reality helped spark one of the darkest moments in world history...France's own revolution a little over ten years after America's. Lafayette's failure to foresee the bloodbath terror that would claim members of his own family is perhaps one of the saddest chapter in Lafayette's life.

Harlow Giles Unger's Lafayette is a man of integrity and charm. One of the most touching elements of Lafayette's life is the love that he and his wife held for each other and their children. When Lafayette was at his lowest, it was the love and wisdom of his brillliant, adoring wife who saved him. In this sense, Lafayette's story is not only one of a brilliant strategist, general, diplomat, and statesman, but also one of a loving husband, father, and friend.

I wanted to read this book because my eighteen year old niece, Kaitlin, will be attending Lafayette College in Easton, Pennsylvania next fall. Lafayette College is one of the more than 600 towns, counties, mountains, rivers, and educational institutes that are named in his honor. Once you've read Unger's biography, you'll understand why.

[Kusaimamekirai · Rating 5 out of 5]

I must admit to a small amount of shame as someone born in America, if not unwilling to label myself as an American, that while reading this book I had to acknowledge that the Marquis Lafayette despite being French, was more American than me. Hell, I don’t think there have been many Americans in history who can claim they were more American than him.
From an early age, Lafayette, despite his well heeled upbringing and prestigious background, became intoxicated with the ideals of individual liberty and equality for all. His concept of liberty extended beyond class, despite the highly stratified French culture he was a part of, and even extended to a denunciation of slavery. Inevitably, his burgeoning beliefs would lead him to make several attempts as a teenager to runaway from home (his first abortive attempt was an attempt to board a ship called “The Terrible” captained by a man named “Captain Death”) and join the emerging independence movement in America.
Once established there, Lafayette would go on to distinguish himself in battle, become a highly decorated general, and close personal friend to George Washington, a friendship that would last for the remainder of their lives.
During the darkest moments of the revolution, Lafayette would accept no salary and instead paid to feed and equip his troops out of his own pocket.
With the revolution completed, Lafayette returned to France and set about bringing republicanism to his native land. While it can certainly be said that Lafayette succeeded in bringing about change, it was by no means as smooth or stable a transition as he helped bring about in America. One could argue in fact that through his revolutionary ideas, Lafayette was much more in his element as a fighter and inspiration for liberty than in the day to day details of maintaining it.
Lafayette would go on to live through a series of revolutions and counter-revolutions, each bloodier and more chaotic than the last. Try as he might to harness the passions for liberty he unleashed on France, things quickly spiraled out of control as vicious and power hungry men filled the leadership voids he was unable or unwilling to fill, on part due to his unwillingness to resemble anything like a kind or tyrant.
Despite personal depredations, imprisonment, and constant dear of death, as well as his dismay at watching his native land descend into chaos, Lafayette never let go go his belief in the individual rights of all men (he is seemingly silent on the rights of women however).
There is much to admire about Lafayette. He was in every sense an extraordinary who while perhaps politically naive at times, was in every sense one of the founding fathers of America as well as a founding father of freedom for oppressed peoples around the globe.
I walk away from this book with a deep and abiding respect for what he accomplished in his life. If any of us could do half as much with ours as he did with his, I think we could consider ourselves blessed.

[Chris Sobbing · Rating 5 out of 5]

A hero of American Independence, and the naively tragic patriarch of what would become the terror of the French Revolution, Lafayette is a man of liberty seeking character unmatched in the annuals of history.

[Andrew Canfield · Rating 4 out of 5]

Hero of two revolutions and an often forgotten member of America’s founding generation, the life story of the Marquis de Lafayette is certainly one worth telling.

This book expertly lays out its subject’s exploits, beginning with his noble heritage in his home country of France. Born into a family lineage already well-respected for its furnishing of knights (his father died during the Battle of Minden, fought in 1759 during the Seven Years’ War), Lafayette voluntarily went to America as a nineteen-year-old major general at the outbreak of the thirteen colonies’ rebellion against Great Britain.

The circumstances under which he traveled to America would alone make for a harrowing tale. Since England was at peace with France for a change at the outbreak of the American Revolution, the fact that Lafayette and several fellow Frenchmen sought passage to help General George Washington’s efforts angered the governments of both European nations. He and his men were initially even turned away during a meeting of the Continental Congress; the delegates were turned off by past brushes with French troops’ haughtiness and expectations of being vaulted over Americans in command positions.

When coupled with the punishment he was bound to face from the French government, sailing back to France after being of no service would have been catastrophic.

So he was soon employed with the army, earning acclaim for bravery when wounded during fighting at the Battle of Brandywine. Although he butted heads with Generals John Sullivan and Charles Lee, Lafayette got along well for the most part with his fellow American commanders. He endured the winter at Valley Forge with his men, a trial that went a long way toward expelling any doubts troops might have harbored about his dedication to the cause of independence.

His service throughout the war--including earning the nickname Conqueror of Cornwallis thanks to his presence at the concluding Battle of Yorktown in 1781--was spurred by his support of America’s fight for liberty. Unger makes frequent references to Lafayette’s letters (many warm ones which were exchanged with general then president Washington, the man for whom he named his son George Washington Lafayette) where he states his fervent belief in the cause of democracy the colonies were ostensibly fighting for.

The second half of the book deals with the onset of the French Revolution and the manner in which it brought about Lafayette’s imprisonment and fall from grace in France. His efforts to meet the initial stages of unrest during a time of famine demonstrated an admirable selflessness and underscored how he, a man of noble birth, felt there was validity to complaints about the Ancien Régime. In an effort to break up the ferme générale’s power over the peasantry during a time of famine, Lafayette passed up a prime profit-making opportunity to provide sustenance to the hurting poor.

Lafayette is shown to be a conservative revolutionary, maintaining a friendship with King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette while subsequently serving as a Second Estate representative to the National Assembly. In effect, he sought to recreate the American Revolution in his home country across the Atlantic; this would be a French version whereby constitutional government would exist alongside monarchy.

But unlike the successful version taking root in the 1790s in the former colonies, Lafayette’s attempts to see democracy take root in France were frequently stymied. His frustrations with the extremes the revolution would go to were evident, as was his disgust with the barbaric tactics of marauding Parisian mobs.

The French Revolution’s worst years saw him imprisoned--largely at Olmütz in Austria from 1794-1797 following confinement in Prussian prisons--after being captured by the Austrian government while attempting to flee France. Having earned the enmity of the French mob for allegedly not pushing the revolution far enough, he was viewed with almost equal distaste by monarchs in the nations bordering France as a democratizing agent of destabilization. The years he spent behind bars were particularly frustrating due to America's unwillingness to help out; adherence to neutrality was prized over freeing a man to whom they owed much gratefulness.

The rise of Napoleon Bonaparte as military dictator left Lafayette dispirited about the ultimate course the revolution took. Following on the heels of Maximilien Robespierre's bloodthirsty Terror, Lafayette was left to wonder if France would have been better off never revolting in the first place.

Napoleon and Lafayette had little in common and never seemed to bond; Lafayette actually found himself relieved when the Bourbon dynasty was reinstalled on the throne following Napoleon's banishment to St. Helena. He continued to work hard for democracy in France, taking part in the 1830 July Revolution against King Charles X.

Lafayette remained popular in the United States, frequently referring to himself as an American citizen. He made a triumphal tour of America in 1824, feted in one major city after another and meeting with outgoing president President James Monroe (as well as the incoming John Quincy Adams and General Andrew Jackson, who had just lost a highly contested election to the former). His role as the Conqueror of Cornwallis and as an invaluable part of the American Revolution’s successful conclusion made him wildly popular in America throughout his lifetime.

The book does solid work humanizing Lafayette’s family. His wife, Marie de Adrienne, is shown to be a compassionate spouse who even shares his confinement in Austrian prison. Their children do not play a major role in the story line, but his dedication to them in extremely trying circumstances is evident. His humanitarian concern for ending slavery made for some awkward exchanges with Virginians George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, but even these two men acknowledged the rightness of this abolitionist cause, at least in the long term, to their French comrade.

Harlow Giles Unger is an awesome historian, and Lafayette is an exceptionally strong book. Often overlooked in both America and France when it comes to the assistance provided to their revolutions, this book does a tremendous service by detailing just how much Lafayette actually did to make them happen.

Underlying much of the book is a melancholy over France's disastrous course largely offset by joy over how well America's own revolt against arbitrary power seemed to be turning out. The tension between these two parallel courses is laid out well by Unger, and those who read this work will have a strong understanding of the bond between these two countries represented by the Marquis de Lafayette, Conqueror of Cornwallis and Hero of Two Worlds.

-Andrew Canfield Denver, Colorado

[Sarah · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was a little bothered by the slightly breathless tone with which Unger often wrote about Lafayette- he came off a bit like an adolescent writing about his first crush, rather than a serious biographer. I also noticed some minor incorrect details here and there, including some unverified facts, and some cases of simplistic wrapping up of complicated issues. On the whole, not a bad biography- just not an outstanding one, though it had some inspiring moments.

[Ross Cohen · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent telling of an excellent life. Lafayette was one of a kind and incredibly accomplished. If the author were to have claimed Lafayette could spit rhymes a-la-Lin-Manuel Miranda, I wouldn't have been surprised.

[James · Rating 5 out of 5]

Walt Disney Animation Studios released 'Tangled' in 2010. A wonderful repackaging of the Rapunzel fairy tale, there is an iconic scene wherein the roguish Flynn Ryder declares "You should know that this is the strangest thing I've ever done!"

The life of Gilbert du Motier, marquis de Lafayette captures the spirit of that quote. Indeed (and by deeds) the last great knight - Lafayette was his chosen moniker throughout his life - lived a tremendous life without compare in the modern era.

An early captaincy of the Musketeers was awarded to him by 15. I always thought this was for his prowess as a warrior.

It was because, as a tall youth, he was decided to appear "most striking" when approaching the King on horseback to receive (null) orders for the day's agenda.

But Lafayette leaned into that cosmetic captaincy, and became the leader of men which the title had bequeathed him. By the measure of his life, he perhaps had the greatest most influence on the political landscape of Europe as Divine Right (Monarchy) began to fall out of favor as the sheer number of 'have nots' became a force to be reckoned with.

Knowing from grade school that Lafayette was instrumental to the American Revolutionary War, and being reminded by 'Hamilton' the degree to which his aide was instrumental to his "Dear General" George Washington, I was unprepared for the personal investment Lafayette made again, again, and again. Ranging the gamut from single-handedly (and quite by accident) foiling a French Royalist Plot to free the American Colonies from Britain only to claim them for herself, to outfitting his troops with boots and uniforms from his own purse, to the razor thin moments which turned a continental route into a victory: Lafayette was perhaps the luckiest warrior to have ever taken the field of battle.

His luck did not convey to his political endeavors. Lafayette ruled all France, at two separate times of his life, for a grand total of about one week. Time and time again he refused 'token leadership' from Constitutional Monarchs dismissive of the bicameral legislature, while also refusing genuine governorship of American territory and states at fear of infuriating the very same French rulers who caused him such consternation. Lafayette would be an integral figure in three revolutions during his lifetime, but none would share the success of his American compatriots.

Harlow Giles Unger offers a phenomenal interpretation of primary sources in his biography. He displays a symmetrical life (the 21 chapters are divided into two parts: 'The Best of Times' and 'The Worst of Times' reflecting his American and European efforts at pursuing personal liberties for citizens and installing a representative, democratic Republic). The most poignant quotes Unger shares, critiquing Lafayette's actions in France, are what will remain with me the longest.

"[Lafayette taught the French] the theory of revolution, not their theory of government- their cutting, not their sewing." - England's Lord Acton.

"The cutting - whether colonial war or regicide, whether declaration of independence or tennis court oath - is the easy part. The art is in the sewing." - historian Susan Dunn
___

Link to Flynn Ryder scene; spoiler for 'Tangled'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULGax...

[William Bahr · Rating 5 out of 5]

Lafayette, you are here...in this book!

This is an extremely well-written biography which just happens to be about Lafayette, and which to my extreme luck somehow came with an autograph by the author. It was a must-read in preparation for my own book about the main key to the Bastille, which Lafayette gave to George Washington. In Unger's book you'll find information you'll likely not find elsewhere. For example, you'll learn that besides his loyalty to Washington, the reason why Lafayette accepted his assignment to the troublesome, malaria-ridden southern theater in the latter stages of the American Revolution was revenge: the traitor Benedict Arnold was there as well as British General Phillips, the man that had killed Lafayette's father at the Battle of Minden. The book also outlines the major, repeat major, ways in which through his many talents -- from donations of much-needed money, to singular diplomacy, to courageous and inspired leadership on the battlefield -- Lafayette helped the American Revolution succeed. Also included are insights into why Lafayette was good at starting revolutions but not so good at finishing them in forms he would have been happy with. Regardless, you'll come to love the man. Vive Lafayette!

If the author does revise his book, I would recommend he take a look at the following: p 39. Washington was likely not 6 foot 4 inches tall, as the author describes him. Washington’s undertaker had him measured at 6 foot 3.5 inches (with toes pointing). Almost everyone else has him at 6 foot 2 inches. The author has Lafayette at 6 foot 1 inch in this book. In “The Unexpected George Washington,” the heights are reversed. p 48. The author has Washington begin soldiering in 1754 as a lieutenant colonel under General Braddock. Actually, in 1753 as a major, Washington traveled on a mission to the Ohio Valley. p. 120 The author has Benedict Arnold receiving a crippling leg wound at Quebec in 1776, which made him reluctant to assume any more battlefield commands. Actually, it was the further leg wound and his horse falling on him at Saratoga in 1777 that finally sent Arnold to noncombatant status in Philadelphia and subsequently to West Point. p 229. Maryland didn’t cede just 10 square miles for Washington, DC. Together, Maryland and Virginia together ceded 10 miles square (100 square miles). Virginia later took back its portion. p 236. 5 cannons didn’t blast through the Bastille’s outer walls. The Bastille’s governor surrendered when the attackers were about to fire at the drawbridge. The mob didn’t hang the Bastille’s governor; they decapitated him. p 240. Lafayette didn’t salvage the key from the rubble of the Bastille. It was presented to him by Brissot, a member of the city council, at Paris’ city hall. p 250. It’s questionable that the King’s troops actually trampled their revolutionary cockades. More likely it was a vicious rumor concocted by the journalist Marat to spur the Women’s March to Versailles. These issues aside, however, the book is excellent! Highly recommended by a fellow author.

[Alexandra · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a MAGICAL read. It was a visionary romp that felt like a heart-pounding, chivalrous reimagining of the three musketeers. It’s not easy to call a dense biographical book a “wild, exciting ride” - but this is.

It’s also not often I pick up a biography about an old dead white guy and come away thinking “Whoa, he was better than I imagined.”

I’ve been a Lafayette fangirl since he had a cameo in a “Dear America” diary book I read in elementary school - and like many, Lin Manuel Miranda’s “Hamilton” only fanned the flames.

Unger paints a dashing, swoon-worthy, magnificent portrait of “the hero of two worlds,” digging into Lafayette’s youth, education, family, and the bloody, brutal chaos of his time post-America. I was fairly familiar with his American exploits; but this book gave me a horrific education on many aspects of the French Revolution era - and the constant disappointment Lafayette experienced as he tried to lift his beloved nation towards his cherished ideals.

As much as I enjoyed this love letter to Lafayette, I have to dock it a star - and it’s precisely because it’s such a love letter. I’ve also read Unger’s biography of Monroe, and I had the same issue - Unger is simply too head-over-heels. Not one single bad thing is ever uttered about our dear Marquis, which forces me to adopt some skepticism, as no one is perfect (despite the fact that I want Lafayette to be). I’m also no expert on the French Revolution, but I question Unger’s assessment of it because it is portrayed as so virulently heinous in all respects.

Really rousing historical read, with a touch too much romanticism - but there’s no doubt that Lafayette was an outstanding man; the truest American patriot there ever was.

He’s my favorite founding father.

[Dan Moss · Rating 4 out of 5]

As it turns out, Lafayette was a total badass. Who knew?

Everybody knew. This book reaffirms it.

Pros: This book is full of monarchies across Europe collectively soiling their pants at the thought of LaFayette, from that sack of shit King George III to several Austrian, Prussian, and French royalists trying (but not succeeding) in silencing him.

Cons: Surprisingly, LaFayette didn't rap at 240 beats per minute like the musical "Hamilton" led me to believe. I'm disappointed that he didn't collect names like Daenerys Targaryen because that would be epic, but "Gilbert du Motier, marquis de LaFayette" is long enough I suppose.

I'm going to go tell my wife I'm not putting up with her authoritarian ways anymore.

4/5 crepes. Will read again. Oui Oui!

[Daniel Kukwa · Rating 4 out of 5]

I might rate this closer to 3.5 stars, as there is (far too often) a deep time into too-much-minutiae territory. But what is made abundantly clear is that Lafayette is far more than an interesting footnote to the American Revolution. He is a fascinating, exceptionally courageous, loyal, loving patriot who dreamed of a world full of democratic rights and freedoms for all...and he did more than anyone until the 20th century to make it happen. He deserves far more respect and recognition that he currently receives...he has earned it.

[Nathan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent and eye-opening!
21st Century Americans (and perhaps French) may not realize the extent of Lafayette's involvement and critical importance in America and France during the late 1700s and early 1800s. He was so key in both countries' histories that it makes a modern reader wonder why the "Hero of Two Worlds"' biography is not taught more thoroughly.

[C · Rating 5 out of 5]

A beautiful insight to the man and the times he lived in. I am inspired by his dedication to constitutional rule.

[Igor · Rating 5 out of 5]

Rating 5 is not enough to grade this book. It was surely the best biography I have ever read (or to be completely fair, listen to).

[Amy Havard · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really enjoyed this comprehensive look at his life and added a few items to my "must see list" next time I travel to France.

[Briana Gadke · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5. An incredible man (family really) that embodied a life of sacrifice for the greater good. I loved it. Broke my heart in places. Must read if you’re going through the Founding Fathers

[Olga R. · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was interesting to read, however it felt strongly biased. The praise to Lafayette himself and to all things American seemed out of proportion. I was left wanting to hear more about Lafayette's actual views, aside from loving America. Many signifficant figures were presented only as mentions of those who were awed by the marquis.
On the other hand, if you relax and read it for the fun of it - the book rather feels like an adventure book, with battles, banquets, love, intrigue and horse chases.