What do you think?
Rate this book
Patrick Henry: First Among Patriots
Most Americans know Patrick Henry as a fiery speaker whose pronouncement “Give me liberty or give me death!” rallied American defiance to the British Crown. But Henry’s skills as an orator—sharpened in the small towns and courtrooms of colonial Virginia—are only one part of his vast, but largely forgotten, legacy. As historian Thomas S. Kidd shows, Henry cherished a vision of America as a virtuous republic with a clearly circumscribed central government. These ideals brought him into bitter conflict with other Founders and were crystallized in his vociferous opposition to the U.S. Constitution. In Patrick Henry, Kidd pulls back the curtain on one of our most radical, passionate Founders, showing that until we understand Henry himself, we will neglect many of the Revolution’s animating values.
320 pages, Hardcover
First published November 22, 2011
30 people are currently reading
346 people want to read
About the author
Thomas S. Kidd
40 books118 followersThomas S. Kidd teaches history at Baylor University, and is Senior Fellow at Baylor's Institute for Studies of Religion. Dr. Kidd has appeared on the Glenn Beck tv program, the Hugh Hewitt and Dennis Prager radio shows, and written columns for USA Today and the Washington Post. He is a columnist for Patheos.com. His latest book is Patrick Henry: First Among Patriots. Other books include God of Liberty: A Religious History of the American Revolution. His next book projects are a biography of George Whitefield, and a history of Baptists in America.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews
October 10, 2012
The famous "Liberty or Death" speech was early in his career and became one of many that brought him fame and supporters. He was different from the other founders. He was a lawyer, but he was self-taught. He was a planter, but he was not a gentleman farmer. When times were rough, he tended bar. While the founders kept their religious beliefs in the background, Henry brought his into the forefront. But, like the Virginia founders, he did own slaves, and like many of them had qualms about it in his youth that disappeared in later life.
We can only know his speeches were great from their effect. In the world of fiery oratory, he is credited with standing out. Many said that he had won their hearts and minds for the Revolution. On a personal level, he must have been persuasive as well. Despite his lack of military experience he was able to recruit a militia and command it.
This biography acquaints the reader with a some neglected issues. One was presented through a case argued by Patrick Henry as a young lawyer. The Virginia Colony paid the Anglican priests, be it in tobacco or coin, Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians and all paid the Anglican's salaries. Another was how in leading up to the war (and through it) the crown appointed Governor of the Virginia Colony, Governor Dunmore, decreed those slaves that would fight with the British to be free. (For more about this throughout the colonies see Liberty's Exiles: American Loyalists in the Revolutionary World). After the war, a possible treaty could have given Spain navigation rights on the Mississippi River for 20 years.
The reader sees how the British tax policies played out in Virginia and paved the way for an orator like Henry. The reader later sees how in the Post-Revolutionary period Henry's rhetoric fueled the rancor between the different factions of strong states vs. a strong central government. While the Bill of Rights was the lasting fruit of this debate, one wonders how history would have unfolded with a middle continent of small states.
While you come to know the Patrick Henry story, his life and position at the time remain elusive. He popular and often sought out for political office, but his name carried a taint. As a criminal lawyer he won some cases where sentiment strongly favored the victim. It was rumored that he used his office for land speculation, but only one project, which occurred after his career in public life, is specified. The Yazoo Land Grant may have been designed to pull 11 million acres apart from the new nation to form its own. Henry is described as a family man in both narrative and anecdote, but little is said of either wife his or his mother's side of the family. He had 2 wives and 17 children. Quotes to letters to one of his daughters is noted, but there is no biographical info on her.
For a short introduction of Henry to the lay reader, the book does an OK job.
We can only know his speeches were great from their effect. In the world of fiery oratory, he is credited with standing out. Many said that he had won their hearts and minds for the Revolution. On a personal level, he must have been persuasive as well. Despite his lack of military experience he was able to recruit a militia and command it.
This biography acquaints the reader with a some neglected issues. One was presented through a case argued by Patrick Henry as a young lawyer. The Virginia Colony paid the Anglican priests, be it in tobacco or coin, Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians and all paid the Anglican's salaries. Another was how in leading up to the war (and through it) the crown appointed Governor of the Virginia Colony, Governor Dunmore, decreed those slaves that would fight with the British to be free. (For more about this throughout the colonies see Liberty's Exiles: American Loyalists in the Revolutionary World). After the war, a possible treaty could have given Spain navigation rights on the Mississippi River for 20 years.
The reader sees how the British tax policies played out in Virginia and paved the way for an orator like Henry. The reader later sees how in the Post-Revolutionary period Henry's rhetoric fueled the rancor between the different factions of strong states vs. a strong central government. While the Bill of Rights was the lasting fruit of this debate, one wonders how history would have unfolded with a middle continent of small states.
While you come to know the Patrick Henry story, his life and position at the time remain elusive. He popular and often sought out for political office, but his name carried a taint. As a criminal lawyer he won some cases where sentiment strongly favored the victim. It was rumored that he used his office for land speculation, but only one project, which occurred after his career in public life, is specified. The Yazoo Land Grant may have been designed to pull 11 million acres apart from the new nation to form its own. Henry is described as a family man in both narrative and anecdote, but little is said of either wife his or his mother's side of the family. He had 2 wives and 17 children. Quotes to letters to one of his daughters is noted, but there is no biographical info on her.
For a short introduction of Henry to the lay reader, the book does an OK job.
August 3, 2012
This is more of a biography of “Patrick-Henry-as Patriot” then of Patrick Henry. Not so much attention is paid to his private life despite him having 17 children with his two wives. His own political positions, as Kidd portrays them, do help give a reality to some of the arguments during the time—states’ rights vs. centralized government (and the connected debate over the Constitution) being the largest.
January 23, 2018
An adequate book as an overview, but this account references mostly secondary sources and has the feel of a simple summarizing of other books written about Patrick Henry. There is no material that can’t be found elsewhere, and no unique perspective on Henry’s life or views.
November 30, 2020
It pains me to say that Patrick Henry has died recently, RIP in peace bro was a G
February 18, 2012
I really enjoyed this book. For the most part, I found it to be very balanced and well done. There are some places where I felt like Prof. Kidd fell into some modern, politically-correct type analysis that I don't find all that helpful. For example, Prof. Kidd seems to occaisionally accept the prevailing "wisdom" that the American War for Independence was only about money and taxes. Much could be said on this, but it will suffice here to note that this requires us to ignore the words of the Declaration of Independence itself, which talks about a lot more than money. Were all of the Founders just liars who were only concerned about finances but clothed this little financial dispute with the motherland in grandiose language about liberty, freedom, and tyranny? I find such a proposition untenable, but I realize that makes me a distinct minority and probably disqalifies me from being an intellectual due to my audacity to take these people at their word. (Further, lest there be any misunderstanding, I think that economic freedom is enormously important. Right up there with religious and political freedom, as they all go hand-in-hand. Sort of like "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," which undoubtedly included the pursuit of property.)
However, overall, and with that said, I found the book well-written, historically accurate, fair, and engaging. As an example, he doesn't hid Henry's great talents as an orator, his devotion to the Christian faith, or his penchant for land speculation. He shows Henry as a man dedicated to freedom, and he fairly presents his opposition to the Constitution. He notes that many of Henry's fears regarding the Constitution have come to pass, and, in a particularly well done chapter at the end of the book, he endeavors to tell us what he thinks Henry would think about our current situation. Here is a sample: "[I]t is no great leap to imagine that Patrick Henry would fundamentally object to nearly every feature of today's titanic national government. This statement is not to place Henry on either side of today's political spectrum: he would disapprove equally of the massive, top-down social programs championed by the Left, the globetrotting military power championed by the Right, and the bailouts of financial companies championed by a majority of politicians in 2008. Unlike many of his Christian conservative admirers today, he would not approve of America's recent ventures associated with the War on Terrorism . . . . Henry would probably find that today's America has almost nothing in common with the republic of liberty he envisioned in 1776. On the other hand, the national government has seemingly burst all bounds of power on the domestic and international stages, and on the other, the notion of a virtuous republic has been almost entirely abandoned in favor of what people of Henry's age would have called "license." To him, consolidated political power and ethical license historically triggered the loss of true liberty and the rise of moral and political tyranny." (p. 252-253.) That paragraph certainly shows the fairness of the treatment of Henry and the modern situation!
I heartily recommend this book.
However, overall, and with that said, I found the book well-written, historically accurate, fair, and engaging. As an example, he doesn't hid Henry's great talents as an orator, his devotion to the Christian faith, or his penchant for land speculation. He shows Henry as a man dedicated to freedom, and he fairly presents his opposition to the Constitution. He notes that many of Henry's fears regarding the Constitution have come to pass, and, in a particularly well done chapter at the end of the book, he endeavors to tell us what he thinks Henry would think about our current situation. Here is a sample: "[I]t is no great leap to imagine that Patrick Henry would fundamentally object to nearly every feature of today's titanic national government. This statement is not to place Henry on either side of today's political spectrum: he would disapprove equally of the massive, top-down social programs championed by the Left, the globetrotting military power championed by the Right, and the bailouts of financial companies championed by a majority of politicians in 2008. Unlike many of his Christian conservative admirers today, he would not approve of America's recent ventures associated with the War on Terrorism . . . . Henry would probably find that today's America has almost nothing in common with the republic of liberty he envisioned in 1776. On the other hand, the national government has seemingly burst all bounds of power on the domestic and international stages, and on the other, the notion of a virtuous republic has been almost entirely abandoned in favor of what people of Henry's age would have called "license." To him, consolidated political power and ethical license historically triggered the loss of true liberty and the rise of moral and political tyranny." (p. 252-253.) That paragraph certainly shows the fairness of the treatment of Henry and the modern situation!
I heartily recommend this book.
April 18, 2016
This is a politically focused book narrated in a relaxed, somewhat rambling style. It presents itself as even-handed, well researched and objectively probing the contradictions of a complex subject. More often than not, however, the author's assessments of his principle character rest on assertions rather than analyses. Henry is seldom quoted at length. The formative elements in his self-education are not considered in anything but generic terms. Henry's enemies, most notably Thomas Jefferson, are treated with contempt rather than scholarly objectivity. And while the author directly disavows any political agenda in his work, there is a constant partisan motif that is fully articulated in the book's final chapter:
"Surveying our country's current state of affairs, Henry might ... advise us to consider the ways in which we have traded the accountability and responsiveness of diffuse, local governments for the intrusive might of national government. He might warn us that national power makes for effective empire, not good government. ...
In America, Henry's memory has taken on a vague patriotic cast that fails to capture his fractious yet exemplary life. The 'real' Henry was branded a traitor and apostate by his many enemies, including Thomas Jefferson. His vision of the American republic was not a matter of sentiment and grand words and gestures: it was grounded in virtue, religious faith, and responsive local government."(p.254)
This vision of the foundations of the United States is fully consistent with the political agenda of the Tea Party and the ideals of Christian conservatives. While Kidd characterizes the political understanding of these movements as not fully consistent with those of Patrick Henry (p.250), the summary statement above certainly gives aid and comfort to their positions. The Henry Kidd presents stands for states' rights and opposes federal expansiveness; he views religion as the necessary foundation of civil responsibility, and voices regret for the existence of slavery while taking full advantage of his position as a slave owner.
For an important counter argument to the role of these ideas in the foundation of the United States, I recommend Nature's God by Matthew Stewart.
"Surveying our country's current state of affairs, Henry might ... advise us to consider the ways in which we have traded the accountability and responsiveness of diffuse, local governments for the intrusive might of national government. He might warn us that national power makes for effective empire, not good government. ...
In America, Henry's memory has taken on a vague patriotic cast that fails to capture his fractious yet exemplary life. The 'real' Henry was branded a traitor and apostate by his many enemies, including Thomas Jefferson. His vision of the American republic was not a matter of sentiment and grand words and gestures: it was grounded in virtue, religious faith, and responsive local government."(p.254)
This vision of the foundations of the United States is fully consistent with the political agenda of the Tea Party and the ideals of Christian conservatives. While Kidd characterizes the political understanding of these movements as not fully consistent with those of Patrick Henry (p.250), the summary statement above certainly gives aid and comfort to their positions. The Henry Kidd presents stands for states' rights and opposes federal expansiveness; he views religion as the necessary foundation of civil responsibility, and voices regret for the existence of slavery while taking full advantage of his position as a slave owner.
For an important counter argument to the role of these ideas in the foundation of the United States, I recommend Nature's God by Matthew Stewart.
November 27, 2020
The latest three books I have read were all biographies of “founding fathers” purchased from a library used book sale. In picking them up my motivation was simple: these three men are frequently mentioned in every Revolutionary War narrative and I felt that I really didn’t know much about any of them. All three were integral parts of the Revolution intellectually and spiritually. Samuel Adams almost single handedly drove Boston and Massachusetts toward open confrontation with the British. George Mason was a largely forgotten thinker from Virginia who strongly influenced the revolutionary spirit in his home state. The most recent book is this one on Patrick Henry.
Everyone remembers his stirring “Give me liberty or give me death” quote but what else do you know about him? Probably not much. Henry, like so many of the Virginia founders is an enigma. He is full of contradictions and mixed motivations. Like Jefferson he railed about the evils of slavery but never “liberated” any of his 67 slaves. Like Jefferson he was a firm opponent of a large and powerful central Federal government. Despite this he and Jefferson became bitter enemies. He fought desperately against the Constitution, destroying his relationship with Madison. He revered Washington but was bitterly opposed to the concept of a powerful President in the American government.
Ironically, all three of these founders were opposed to the Constitution. Mason actually helped to create much of it but then refused to sign it because it didn’t contain enough controls and limits on Federal power. Henry opposed it for many of the same reasons but also because he felt it made state and local governments inconsequential.
Kidd’s book is well written and thoroughly researched. He takes an admirable unbiased approach to his subject showing us Henry’s heroic side but also the ugly and hypocritical aspects of his life. One is left to decide whether the good outweighs the bad.
Everyone remembers his stirring “Give me liberty or give me death” quote but what else do you know about him? Probably not much. Henry, like so many of the Virginia founders is an enigma. He is full of contradictions and mixed motivations. Like Jefferson he railed about the evils of slavery but never “liberated” any of his 67 slaves. Like Jefferson he was a firm opponent of a large and powerful central Federal government. Despite this he and Jefferson became bitter enemies. He fought desperately against the Constitution, destroying his relationship with Madison. He revered Washington but was bitterly opposed to the concept of a powerful President in the American government.
Ironically, all three of these founders were opposed to the Constitution. Mason actually helped to create much of it but then refused to sign it because it didn’t contain enough controls and limits on Federal power. Henry opposed it for many of the same reasons but also because he felt it made state and local governments inconsequential.
Kidd’s book is well written and thoroughly researched. He takes an admirable unbiased approach to his subject showing us Henry’s heroic side but also the ugly and hypocritical aspects of his life. One is left to decide whether the good outweighs the bad.
November 28, 2021
This biography of Patrick Henry demonstrates Republican philosophy in action. Henry was an extreme Republican who did not sign the Constitution due to his suspicions about its potential to be undermined by Federalism's tendency to favor the interests of big business and overspending. Eventually, after Federalists were elected to office, Henry decided to compromise and respect the principals of democracy.
He was a great orator, much better with the spoken language then with written words. Historians know little about him as compared to Jefferson or Adams, his contemporaries who lived 25 years after Henry's death and who each wrote voluminously. Additionally, the big government philosophy has been much more successful than the small government philosophy during the last century.
Thomas S. Kidd has written a book much more filled with wisdom than most books of its brevity.
He was a great orator, much better with the spoken language then with written words. Historians know little about him as compared to Jefferson or Adams, his contemporaries who lived 25 years after Henry's death and who each wrote voluminously. Additionally, the big government philosophy has been much more successful than the small government philosophy during the last century.
Thomas S. Kidd has written a book much more filled with wisdom than most books of its brevity.
February 28, 2018
Good read on the interesting life of Patrick Henry. After reading this book I feel more sympathetic towards Henry as a revolutionary patriot that defended natural rights. Henry was definitely a revolutionary and stood his ground when it came to defending his beliefs. His, "Give me liberty or give me death speech," is iconic and captures the climate of that time. Sometimes it's easy to look back at the revolution as some sort of spectacle because of Hollywood and the times. But, it was such a monumental moment when you had the United States rebelling against a tyrannical government that was encroaching on their God-given rights. The life and work of Patrick Henry should motivate us to fight against the tyranny of today's times.
September 2, 2018
Pretty concise (about 250 pages of text, but quite a few pages of end notes if you like reading through those) and clear biography on an early founding father. I found this to be pretty intriguing since most of the time the only thing we know about Henry is his "Liberty or Death" speech and his early anti-federalist stance. This gave a good look into the shifts in Henry's thought over time and his place in the founding period of the United States.
March 14, 2018
Baylor professor provides a meticulous study of the famed orator that goes far beyond the basic civics lesson most of us know and examines the development of Henry’s political theories and the seeming contradictions found, as well as his religious beliefs, career and family responsibilities that also seemed to drive him in differing directions.
October 29, 2025
A slog. There must be an engaging way to guide viewers through the complicated life of Patrick Henry, but this wasn’t it. I appreciate that it was the shortest of the Patrick Henry biographies I could find, but the laborious writing doesn’t provide a clear narrative. Maybe a clear narrative is impossible for complicated people, but I could have used more narrative.
December 16, 2017
I learned so very much from this well researched non-hagiographic biography. Henry’s dogged pursuit of liberty and virtues while opposing the Constitution are a fascinating look through the revolutionary time frame of our great republic.
August 9, 2020
Outstanding
Kidd well captures the paradoxes of Henry, a strong Christian but a man capable of using his oratory skills for less than noble purposes, a man who deeply loved his country but fought against the Constitution.
Kidd well captures the paradoxes of Henry, a strong Christian but a man capable of using his oratory skills for less than noble purposes, a man who deeply loved his country but fought against the Constitution.
June 16, 2019
Fantastic read. I have yet to read a Thomas Kidd book that was not highly rewarding and this proved no different.
December 19, 2021
The only bio of P. Henry I have read. Not all that eventful, but interesting in whole.
July 15, 2013
Thomas S. Kidd, Patrick Henry: First Among Patriots (New York: Basic Books, 2011). $28.00, 320 pages.
To be honest, I didn’t know much about Patrick Henry before I read Thomas S. Kidd’s biography of him. I knew—as all schoolboys should know—that he uttered the famous line, “give me liberty, or give me death.” I also knew that his support for a general assessment for religion—taxpayer funded clergy support—in Virginia provoked James Madison’s Memorial and Remonstrance. And finally I knew that Henry, an anti-Federalist, opposed the ratification of the U.S. Constitution. I didn’t know much else, and I didn’t know how to connect what little knowledge I had of Henry into a consistent picture of the man.
The merits of Kidd’s biography are that it filled out my knowledge of Patrick Henry’s and explained why his political vision was more or less consistent. Kidd uses the term Christian republicanism to describe Henry’s politics, which I might summarize as a faith-based practice of ordered liberty. Henry’s belief in liberty explains his early advocacy of the cause of Independence, as well as his opposition to the Constitution, which he felt aggrandized the Federal government with too much power. His belief in order—not merely “law and order,” but the kind of moral self-government that arises from religious practice—led him to support the general assessment for religion. This general assessment was denominationally non-specific: In other words, the taxpayer could direct his assessment to the church of his choice. Henry believed that such an assessment was necessary to the support of Christian churches, which he in turn felt were vital to the health of the American republic. Ironically, it is James Madison's view of religious disestablishment, not Henry's quasi-establishmentarianism, that has turned out to best promote the health of Christianity in America.
Like many Founders, Henry was not always consistent with his own moral principles. As a Christian republican, he felt that virtue was necessary to the health of a free society. And yet, as Kidd shows, Henry—always concerned with his family’s financial health—was not above engaging in instances of morally dubious land speculation. More critically, Henry owned slaves in his lifetime and did not provide for their manumission after his death. Henry knew that the practice of slavery was problematic. As he wrote to Virginia Quaker leader (and abolitionist) Robert Pleasants: “Would anyone believe that I am a master of slaves of my own purchase! I am drawn along by the general inconvenience of living without them. I will not, I cannot justify it...” [emphasis added].
Reading about Patrick Henry—or about any of the Founders—reminds us to avoid the twin dangers of easy hagiography and easy demonology. Patriotic renderings focus on his advocacy of liberty, while critics point to his hypocrisy on slavery. The value of good biography is to bring these two realities of Henry’s life into tension, and Kidd’s book is nothing if not good biography.
P.S. If you found my review helpful, please vote “Yes” on my Amazon.com review page.
To be honest, I didn’t know much about Patrick Henry before I read Thomas S. Kidd’s biography of him. I knew—as all schoolboys should know—that he uttered the famous line, “give me liberty, or give me death.” I also knew that his support for a general assessment for religion—taxpayer funded clergy support—in Virginia provoked James Madison’s Memorial and Remonstrance. And finally I knew that Henry, an anti-Federalist, opposed the ratification of the U.S. Constitution. I didn’t know much else, and I didn’t know how to connect what little knowledge I had of Henry into a consistent picture of the man.
The merits of Kidd’s biography are that it filled out my knowledge of Patrick Henry’s and explained why his political vision was more or less consistent. Kidd uses the term Christian republicanism to describe Henry’s politics, which I might summarize as a faith-based practice of ordered liberty. Henry’s belief in liberty explains his early advocacy of the cause of Independence, as well as his opposition to the Constitution, which he felt aggrandized the Federal government with too much power. His belief in order—not merely “law and order,” but the kind of moral self-government that arises from religious practice—led him to support the general assessment for religion. This general assessment was denominationally non-specific: In other words, the taxpayer could direct his assessment to the church of his choice. Henry believed that such an assessment was necessary to the support of Christian churches, which he in turn felt were vital to the health of the American republic. Ironically, it is James Madison's view of religious disestablishment, not Henry's quasi-establishmentarianism, that has turned out to best promote the health of Christianity in America.
Like many Founders, Henry was not always consistent with his own moral principles. As a Christian republican, he felt that virtue was necessary to the health of a free society. And yet, as Kidd shows, Henry—always concerned with his family’s financial health—was not above engaging in instances of morally dubious land speculation. More critically, Henry owned slaves in his lifetime and did not provide for their manumission after his death. Henry knew that the practice of slavery was problematic. As he wrote to Virginia Quaker leader (and abolitionist) Robert Pleasants: “Would anyone believe that I am a master of slaves of my own purchase! I am drawn along by the general inconvenience of living without them. I will not, I cannot justify it...” [emphasis added].
Reading about Patrick Henry—or about any of the Founders—reminds us to avoid the twin dangers of easy hagiography and easy demonology. Patriotic renderings focus on his advocacy of liberty, while critics point to his hypocrisy on slavery. The value of good biography is to bring these two realities of Henry’s life into tension, and Kidd’s book is nothing if not good biography.
P.S. If you found my review helpful, please vote “Yes” on my Amazon.com review page.
May 17, 2013
I have long been a student of early American History. But after reading numerous books about the American Revolution, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Jay, John Adams, Ratification, etc. I knew very little about the important role Patrick Henry played in the founding of our nation, until I read Thomas Kidd's splendid biography: Patrick Henry: First Among Patriots In addition to learning about Henry, the biography focuses on the formation of our Republic from the perspective of Virginians.
While Henry respected and admired Washington, he did not hesitate to differ with him on crucial issues such as the ratification of the Constitution. Henry, being consistent in his defense of the South and Virginia believed the Constitution favored the Northern States. He also believed its ratification would erode liberties of the average American. Henry became the most formidable opponent of Madison, Hamilton, and Jefferson. His relationship with Jefferson became especially hostile and personal.
Henry like John Jay was a devout Christian. He believed that Christianity was integral in the development of a moral society. None of that deism stuff for him.
Kidd's multiple facet portrait of Henry covers the good and the not so good. He provides perceptive insights into his personal and public lives. Along with praising Henry the great orator and champion of liberty, he questions Henry's defense of slavery.
I strongly recommend this book even for those who think they are well schooled in the lives of the Founders. I am sure you will learn something valuable and something new. I know I did.
While Henry respected and admired Washington, he did not hesitate to differ with him on crucial issues such as the ratification of the Constitution. Henry, being consistent in his defense of the South and Virginia believed the Constitution favored the Northern States. He also believed its ratification would erode liberties of the average American. Henry became the most formidable opponent of Madison, Hamilton, and Jefferson. His relationship with Jefferson became especially hostile and personal.
Henry like John Jay was a devout Christian. He believed that Christianity was integral in the development of a moral society. None of that deism stuff for him.
Kidd's multiple facet portrait of Henry covers the good and the not so good. He provides perceptive insights into his personal and public lives. Along with praising Henry the great orator and champion of liberty, he questions Henry's defense of slavery.
I strongly recommend this book even for those who think they are well schooled in the lives of the Founders. I am sure you will learn something valuable and something new. I know I did.
May 13, 2013
Great book. I represented Henry as a godly man, consistent patriot, and all about freedom and liberty. At the same time he owned slaves and knew it was inconsistent with liberty. He even knew that God was not going to bless the nation as long as slavery existed. He was conflicted between his political leadership, his financial irresponsibility at home, his understanding of scripture and his ownership of people. Patrick Henry did a lot right, and a lot wrong; but he did it with great zeal.
The most interesting things were his interaction with the other founding fathers and his love of liberty that was able to distinguish between the revolution and the constitution. He could see the ramifications of the constitution the way Madison and Jefferson wanted it to be and once he lost that battle could shift and uphold the constitution, but push for the bill of rights which he thought would help keep the constitution in check. As we can see today, he was very right in his understanding of where the constitution would lead, especially when interpreted by ungodly men.
Dr. Kidd did a great job of keeping everything in context, perspective and balanced throughout.
The most interesting things were his interaction with the other founding fathers and his love of liberty that was able to distinguish between the revolution and the constitution. He could see the ramifications of the constitution the way Madison and Jefferson wanted it to be and once he lost that battle could shift and uphold the constitution, but push for the bill of rights which he thought would help keep the constitution in check. As we can see today, he was very right in his understanding of where the constitution would lead, especially when interpreted by ungodly men.
Dr. Kidd did a great job of keeping everything in context, perspective and balanced throughout.
February 16, 2012
This is a good book about one of the Founding Fathers. Professor Kidd has given us a good picture of a man whose great themes are "liberty, virtue and patriotism." (p. 246) I was particularly struck by chapter 9, "Defending the Revolution bu Opposing the Constitution." Henry believed the ideals of the American Revolution were betrayed in adopting the Constitution. He saw the issue as too many expansive powers vested in the government and the chief executive, with a resulting loss of rights to persons and the several states. He would certainly have been an active participant in the present debates over expansive/intrusive government; the "nanny" state and bloated bureaucracy. "Henry warned that the government would become more and more bloated, wasteful and extravagant over time." (p. 203) Certainly, in that sense, he was a prophet!
October 10, 2012
Those wanting to know more about a largely unknown founding father will find the 'information gap' on Patrick Henry well filled by this book. As far as biographies go, this one does a better job of showing where the man fit in the times than it does making you feel like you really know the man himself. In other words, you may not get to know much about Henry's personality, family life, or the specifics of his oritorical greatness, but you will know what he was doing, what role he played, and what positions he held before, during, and after the American Revolution.
There are some surprises along the way like how Patrick Hentry responded to the constitution and what his position was on religion and the state.
A worthwhile, solid biography.
There are some surprises along the way like how Patrick Hentry responded to the constitution and what his position was on religion and the state.
A worthwhile, solid biography.
March 28, 2012
Having recently visited Red Hill, Henry's final home, in central Virginia (near the epicenter of the 2011 Va. earthquake), I figured it was time to read about his life. First thing you notice, after reading the entire bio: the "Don't tread on me" slogan has been twisted out of its original meaning. Overall, an excellent portrayal of a man who truly did live his convictions; and yet, when he saw that his oratory skills and closely held convictions would not win, was able to accept the point-of-view.
March 22, 2012
This book covers the fiery Patrick Henry especially through shortly before the American Revolution to the time of the Constitutional ratification debates and his death. So we learn not only about Patrick Henry himself, but about the times and some of the problems he and others of the time faced. The book is very readable, and makes me curious about some of the other characters of the time, such as the misunderstood (?) Thomas Jefferson.
July 9, 2014
Famous for his oratorical abilities, Patrick Henry became a household name and is known mostly for his "liberty or death" speech. This book is more of a brief political/public service biography of Henry and not an in depth "Ron Chernow or David McCullough-esq" book. It's interesting but dry at times, but a decent book to get a feel for Patrick Henry's career and political positions. I can recommend it to anybody interested in this lesser known patriot and revolutionary figure.
April 24, 2013
Really enjoyable read about a founding father that a lot of people know, but know little about. Author does a good job of presenting a "Cromwellian" biography (that is warts and all) of Patrick Henry that leaves almost no stone unturned as well as giving a good view of the events of the Revolution from a Virginian standpoint.
June 14, 2012
Interesting book on an underappreciated patriot. Occasionally a little redundant - could have used a good editor!
September 11, 2012
Good book! Not the easiest to follow at times but full of information.
April 26, 2014
I liked this book very much. It's not immensely detailed, but a good read and not boring.
February 24, 2014
Good - a basic bio, setting Henry in the context of his times.
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews