Jeff Broadwater

Somewhat underwhelmed by James Broadwater’s biography on our 3rd President James Madison. Just over 300 pages it lightly goes over Madison’s life with the most detailed and interesting aspects being his contributions to and thoughts on the constitution and the developments the led up to The War of 1812.

In general the Madison Presidency and the war of 1812 were not thoroughly covered. The book is a lifelong biography but is certainly not a definitive biography on James Madison..

I would not disparage this book but if one is looking for a great biography on James Madison this is not it.

Ultimately Broadwater see Madison as a figure who tried to balance his pet beliefs for a more centralized government while not making it overpowering. He apparently believed the legislative branch would be the most important of the 3 branches of government but did believe in significant checks and balances.

My take on James Madison is he was a good man whose most significant contributions were to the formation of the constitution and the early Republic but not a great President.… (mais)

We learn of him, but still don't "know" him....

George Mason, truly an ignored Founder of whom Thomas Jefferson said was "one of our really great men", is treated in a fair and easy to read biography penned by Jeff Broadwater.

The book follows his political career touching upon the many important bills and concepts he introduced into the Revolutionary era Virginia Legislature. The book does a fine job shining a light upon what a key figure to our founding that Mason was.

In many ways, however, one gets a negative view of the man over his constant shirking of duty -- he too often arrived late or not at all to legislative sessions -- and his constant complaining over his health. Granted, if one knows much about the Founders and their era, health seems to be one thing they all constantly whined about. After all, men rarely lived past the late 30s in those days, so any pain or discomfort was feared to be death come a' knocking.

In any case, it was interesting to see the turmoil and difficulty that the state of Virginia had funding and supplying troops to the war effort. With history settled, it is always too easy to feel that the country was united with a single mind and all for the spilt with England as well as ready to sacrifice their last strengths to that effort. Reality, though, is a far different thing than the rose-colored glasses of popular sentiment.

One thing seemed missing from this book, as important as is the information contained within. Mason's voice does not come through in Broadwater's work. We never get as much of a feel for the man as we do for his end work and the times in which he lived.

It's a shame that Broadwater didn't give us more of Mason's own quotes so that we might see what his contemporaries saw in his applauded rhetoric. Perhaps not enough of his own words survive to have attempted that treatment and maybe Broadwater really only had Mason;'s legislative work from which to glean "the" man, but I still felt the book seemed somewhat detached from the man himself.

In any case, I recommend the book to those who are interested in a Founder who has missed out on the lionizing so many of his fellows have received.… (mais)

Biographies of the American founders may be a dime a dozen these days, but Jeff Broadwater's George Mason, Forgotten Founder fills one of the few gaps, providing a comprehensive and readable treatment of one of Virginia's most important Revolutionary and Anti-Federalist leaders. George Mason's "relative obscurity is explained," Broadwater argues in the preface, "by his own reluctance to seek the historical spotlight. Mason never sought national office. He never wrote his memoirs. He made no concerted effort, as best as we can tell, to preserve his papers. Even more important is the elusive nature of Mason's accomplishments ... Mason remained one step away from the dramatic event or the single line ... that could ensure certain immortality."

A financially comfortable (and unindebted) planter in the years leading up to the Revolution, Mason came fairly slowly to the "patriot cause," but after 1769 proved himself a key - if somewhat unwilling - leader in Virginia's debates during the immediate leadup to the war. He was instrumental in the design and structure of Virginia's post-independence constitution and Declaration of Rights, and later played a major role in the Constitutional Convention (only Madison, G. Morris, Wilson and Sherman spoke more frequently in debate). Faced with several losses on points of great importance to him, however, Mason concluded that he could not support the Convention's finished product and did not sign the Constitution. He spoke against its passage in the Virginia ratifying convention, but was unable to muster enough support to block ratification or force concessions.

Broadwater's analysis of Mason's motives, actions and philosophy is cautious and well-sourced; he suggests that Mason's strong commitment to English opposition philosophy, while making him inclined toward a strong central government, made him mistrust any government "more than did Madison or Washington, and he lacked Jefferson's optimistic [to put it mildly] faith in the wisdom of the people." I really wish that Broadwater had followed up more on a point he started to make in the preface - however much they may have disagreed on specific policies (and they did), Mason can be aptly compared to John Adams in an important respect: the two shared a "jaundiced view of unchecked individualism, transient popular majorities, and the inherent virtue of the marketplace." Not exactly concerns that we associate with some of their better known comrades-in-arms (Hamilton, Jefferson, Franklin spring to mind).

Mason can be distinguished from his colleagues in another very important way: here was a man who really did not seem to want to be in charge. He certainly wanted to be involved, in his own way, but Broadwater, by outlining Mason's extremely spotty attendance record at legislative sessions and other public duties (with the glaring exception of the Philadelphia Convention) shows that Mason's major concerns did not center around governing (he seemed to find it an awful chore most of the time, sort of like mucking stalls). He refused a seat in the post-ratification Senate, preferring to stay home with his family.

Something else which complicates our portrait of Mason and makes him difficult to pin down on the ideological spectrum of today (I suspect that, like Adams, he wouldn't fit on our present continuum at all) were a few of his important positions. He opposed slavery and the slave trade (and made perhaps the most strident speech in opposition to its continuation at the Convention), but did not free his slaves. He was very much concerned with local issues and spent much of his time and energy focused on those matters instead of writing grand philosophical tracts. He understood perhaps better than anyone the conflict that was sure to come between north and south in the future, and he worried that any republic as big as the one he'd helped to create could survive in the long term. It has, I'd say, largely because in each generation there are people like Mason who ask the tough questions.

Broadwater's book is, for the most part, excellent. There are the usual minor typographical errors (conservation for conservatism, tenants for tenets, Fort Stanwick for Fort Stanwix) and the index could be much more extensive (several people mentioned in the text get no mention in the index at all), but on the whole I had no major complaints. Broadwater's captured the essence of Mason's character well, and does a good job at dispelling the myths that have grown up around him while restoring him to his rightful place near the top of the heap. Recommended.

http://philobiblos.blogspot.com/2007/02/book-review-george-mason-forgotten.html… (mais)