Fallen Founder: The Life of Aaron Burr (Hardcover)

by Nancy Isenberg (Author) "In 1793-94, Gilbert Stuart, best known today for his unfinished likeness of George Washington, painted a portrait of a promising politician..." (more)
Key Phrases: wisp treason, fallen founder, election tie, New York, Aaron Burr, New Orleans (more...)

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly
Does Burr belong in the pantheon of founding fathers? Or is he, as historians have asserted ever since he fatally shot Alexander Hamilton in a duel, a faux founder who happened to be in the right place at the right time? Was he really the enigmatic villain, the political schemer who lacked any moral core, the sexual pervert, the cherubic-faced slanderer so beloved of popular imagination? This striking new biography by Isenberg (Sex and Citizenship in Antebellum America) argues that Burr was, indeed, the real thing, a founder "at the center of nation building" and a "capable leader in New York political circles." Interestingly, if controversially, Isenberg believes Burr was "the only founder to embrace feminism," the only one who "adhered to the ideal that reason should transcend party differences." Far from being an empty vessel, she says, Burr defended freedom of speech, wanted to expand suffrage and was a proponent of equal rights. Burr was not without his faults, she concludes, but then, none of the other founders was entirely angelic, either, and his actions must be viewed in the context of his political times. As this important book reminds us, America's founders behaved like ordinary human beings even when they were performing their extraordinary deeds. Illus. (May 14)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

From Booklist
In this positive portrayal of the controversial Aaron Burr (1756-1836), Isenberg departs from all previous biographers, deploring their lack of basic research. Although she acknowledges that studying Burr is hampered by the loss of his papers in a shipwreck, Isenberg more than compensates by tapping negative publicity disseminated by Burr's political enemies. Comparing their scurrilous reports with private descriptions of Burr as cultured, well liked, and progressive for the times (Isenberg approves him as a "feminist"), the author argues that Burr's reputation was marred not by genuine defects of character but by political competition. And she details the three episodes on which opinion of Burr rises and falls: his tie with Jefferson for the presidency in the 1800 election, his 1804 duel with Hamilton, and his 1807 treason trial. Making a strong case for revising received wisdom about Burr, Isenberg significantly contributes to the history of the early republic. Gilbert Taylor
Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 544 pages
• Publisher: Viking Adult (May 10, 2007)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0670063525
• ISBN-13: 978-0670063529
• Product Dimensions: 9.4 x 6.1 x 1.9 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.8 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.5 out of 5 stars See all reviews (41 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #270,350 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

  Popular in this category: (What's this?)

  #29 in

  Books > Nonfiction > Social Sciences > Political Science > United States > Federal System

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

68 of 82 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A fallen hero? Maybe not., May 14, 2007

By	Robert Busko (Waynesville, NC USA) - See all my reviews (TOP 500 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)

To say that Aaron Burr has been vilified by historians is a gross understatement. It seems that hardly a generation goes by without each new group of historians falling into lock step with their predecessors in a general hatred of this founding father. Most recently Ron Chernow in his book Alexander Hamilton, the bile reserved for Burr is obvious.

Then comes Nancy Isenberg and her book Fallen Founder: The Life of Aaron Burr. I must admit that I started to let this one go. When it arrived at our public library last week I flipped through it and then put in it on the cart to be processed. Then I picked it up again. And again. Eventually I spent the weekend with Isenberg and Burr. I have to admit that I have started the process of being won over. Nancy Isenberg has spent a lot of time researching Fallen Founder. She includes copious notes which are worth reading.

Burr, the killer of everyone's darling Alexander Hamilton was the son of Aaron Burr, Sr. the president of Princeton University. He was bright, hansom, and a charmer. Is it any wonder that he was destined for success?
Some how, however, history has chosen to mark Burr as a murderer and traitor. Isenberg does a masterful job at examining Burr relative to his time in history.

At 414 pages of text and 107 pages of notes, you'll find the examination of Burr a complete one.

You'll want to read this one slowly.

48 of 61 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars A Not So Convincing Biography of Aaron Burr, July 9, 2007

By	C. Baker "[e-mail]" (Washington, DC) - See all my reviews (TOP 1000 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)

This biography of Aaron Burr unsuccessfully tries to resurrect his sullied reputation. While as a biography it provides an excellent account of his life, its interpretation of his role and character in the founding era is utterly unconvincing. To give an idea of just how biased the biography is, its title "Fallen Founder" astounds me. While Burr was an officer during the Revolutionary War, seeing most of his action in Canada, he had no hand in the drafting of the Constitution. His primary role during the founding era was as a prominent New York politician. He was very state centric in his political dealings. In fact, it is unclear what his role was during the debate over ratification of the Constitution in New York, although he was against it. To put him in the pantheon of a founding father is not only a stretch, but frankly a little ridiculous.

There is a positive aspect of this biography in that it is it is very well researched and provides a good account of Burr's life. The best part for this reader was to provide a detailed account of Burr's actions after his Vice-Presidency where he as accused of treason for plotting to separate southwestern states from the United States and create his own country. I do believe that the author has proven, to the extent possible, how his political enemies used his actions to lead a filibuster into Mexico, to create an incredible and unbelievable set of charges against him.

That said, for the most part this biography fails to convince that Burr wasn't just a power hungry opportunist. The author clearly demonstrates what a nasty, mean spirited political world it really was back then. Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, and his political enemies in New York are shown to be vicious politicians who were untrustworthy and used personal attacks, often attacks that were not true or so exaggerated as to be the same as untrue, to undermine their opponents. Jefferson, of course, being the sly fellow he was, used others to do his dirty work while staying out of the fray to protect his reputation. Hamilton was willing to throw his name out there with is attacks, which eventually lead in a more roundabout way to the duel where Burr killed Hamilton. Isenberg tries to paint Burr has having a higher level of honor and code of ethics in his political dealings than his opponents. While he didn't necessarily use the personal attacks, his machinations in New York politics, during the debate over the tie for the Vice-Presidency with Jefferson, and his questionable, if not treasonable actions in trying to lead a filibuster into Mexico belie this. Isenberg spends a lot of time talking about sexual ethics of the founders, particularly Hamilton, as they were all philanderers and had what some would consider questionable ethics in their private lives, which they often used to attack each other. She points out that Burr is no better or worse than his contemporaries in sexual morals. This is undeniably true. But this reader also believes that Burr was no better or worse than his opponents in his hunger for power and political position. It is clear that he was unfairly and viciously attacked by his opponents, but the bottom line for this reader is he is not as bad a man as his opponents made him out to be, but I doubt his political ethics are as pristine as this biography suggests.

Finally, you can't write a biography of Burr without talking about his duel with Hamilton. Historically the key question is the intent of both parties and who fired first. Neither of these can be answered with any certainty. Some claim Hamilton intended to waste his shot hoping for a peaceful, non-lethal resolution of his dispute with Burr. Burr obviously killed Hamilton. The historical record here is very muddy and the author does of good job of discussing it without drawing conclusions where none can be found. Given the accounts of the seconds at the duel I have no idea what Hamilton's intent was, despite some proof exists he did indeed intend to waste his shot, at least he told this to others. But I do believe, as Isenberg's account and others have conveyed, that the actions of Hamilton and his stray shot over Burr's head would have appeared to any reasonable person to be an attempt to kill Burr. And given the descriptions of the duel, I lean toward believing Hamilton fired first or they fired at nearly the same time. Either way, given the gravity of the situation and the enmity between the two men, it's hard to blame Burr for his actions during the duel given culture of the time period.

In conclusion, I find the thesis of this biography unbelievable. His opponents, including Hamilton, did unfairly and viciously attack him and he was probably a better man than history has painted him. Burr was no better or worse than any of the other political players of this era. But the author goes too far in trying to make a claim that, in fact, his political ethics were more honorable than those of his opponents.

15 of 18 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Nice Try But Burr Is No Founding Father, August 24, 2007

By	Glenn R. Boston (Silver Spring, MD United States) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

Aaron Burr probably has gotten a raw deal from historians. Alexander Hamilton was an avowed enemy of Burr who deliberately provoked him, and the Western conspiracy doesn't looks like much in hindsight. But none of this means Burr should be elevated to the pantheon of the Founding Fathers. Did Burr write the Declaration of Independence or a pamphlet as powerful as "Common Sense"? Nope. Did he help draft the U.S. Constitution? No. Was he a pivotal player in the Revolution? He might have been, but he got angry because he was not promoted fast enough and resigned his commission, complaining of headaches. Burr, under the direction of the "Virginia Junto," helped launch a political party that became a viable option to the Federalists. Most of his political accomplishments were limited to New York state. He eventually fell victim to infighting and jockeying for power among rival factions. That is a shame -- but none of it makes Burr the equal of Thomas Jefferson, James Madison or George Washington.

I give three stars because Isenberg's book is well written and contains a wealth of interesting and amusing detail. Burr certainly was colorful. But she forgives too much from Burr while throwing mud on people like Jefferson (a tiresome game many historians have been playing lately). Yes, Jefferson did indeed view politics as a blood sport -- but the Declaration of Independence alone secured his place in history (and that is only one of his accomplishments). Isenberg, in attempting to correct the damage done by previous writers who viewed Burr only as a scoundrel and a sexual libertine, goes too far in the other direction. She admires her subject too much, and this book borders on hagiography. Burr, like all historical figures, did things that were good and bad, smart and foolish. We do early American leaders no favors by insisting they be demi-gods. A more balanced, clear-eyed assessment of Burr, warts and all, would have made this book a more valuable contribution.