Duel: Alexander Hamilton, Aaron Burr and the Future of America

by Thomas Fleming

All school children know the story of the fatal duel between Hamilton and Burr - but do they really? In this remarkable retelling, Thomas Fleming takes the reader into the post-revolutionary world of 1804, a chaotic and fragile time in the young country as well as a time of tremendous global instability.The success of the French Revolution and the proclamation of Napoleon as First Consul for Life had enormous impact on men like Hamilton and Burr, feeding their own political fantasies at a time of perceived Federal government weakness and corrosion. Their hunger for fame spawned antagonisms that wreaked havoc on themselves and their families and threatened to destabilize the fragile young American republic. From that poisonous brew came the tangle of regret and anger and ambition that drove the two to their murderous confrontation in Weehawken, New Jersey.Readers will find this is popular narrative history at its most authoritative, and authoritative history at its most readable.

Genres: History, American History, Nonfiction, Biography, Politics, American Revolution, The United States Of America

464 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1999

About the author

Librarian note:
There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name

Thomas James Fleming was an historian and historical novelist, with a special interest in the American Revolution. He was born in 1927 in Jersey City, New Jersey, the son of a World War I hero who was a leader in Jersey City politics for three decades. Before her marriage, his mother, Katherine Dolan Fleming, was a teacher in the Jersey City Public School System.

After graduating from St. Peter's Preparatory School in Jersey City, Fleming spent a year in the United States Navy. He received a Bachelor's degree, with honors, from Fordham University in 1950. After brief stints as a newspaperman and magazine editor, he became a full-time writer in 1960. His first history book, Now We Are Enemies, an account of the Battle of Bunker Hill, was published that same year. It was a best-seller, reviewed in more than 75 newspapers and featured as a main selection of the Literary Guild.

Fleming published books about various events and figures of the Revolutionary era. He also wrote about other periods of American history and wrote over a dozen well-received novels set against various historical backgrounds. He said, "I never wanted to be an Irish American writer, my whole idea was to get across that bridge and be an American writer".

Fleming died at his home in New York City on July 23, 2017, at the age of 90.

Reviews

[Michelle · Rating 1 out of 5]

I have only two points to make about this book:

1) The topic is engaging…but somehow not as much as I expected it to be. In a book about the duel that killed one of America’s founding fathers, you anticipate a moving story. But I just didn’t feel this one very much. (Come on, no seething, violent rage on the part of either duelist? Seems unnatural.) But most of my disappointment was certainly based in my strong dislike of the author’s style. Which brings me to point two.

2) The author is blatantly and overwhelmingly biased. This man surely nurtures a burning hatred for Thomas Jefferson. Now of course I am not interested in a book that paints everything rosy. No—facts are good enough for me. Neutrality, as far as possible. But this author seemed intent on spewing his opinion everywhere and making a general mess. There were many points where I became so extremely frustrated with the author’s sneering disdain that I seriously struggled with my determination to finish the book.

The facts of this story speak quite loudly enough. And in my opinion a good author can state the historical facts cleanly, and let them do just that—speak for themselves. That is what Fleming failed to do. Perhaps if I had been able to get over this failure, I might have enjoyed the book more. As it is, I’m glad to have finally learned the Hamilton v. Burr story, but wish that I had done it some other way.

[sabrina · Rating 2 out of 5]

Though I enjoyed reading about the duel between Hamilton and Burr, the title is somewhat misleading. In reality, the duel takes up about a chapter - maybe two. The rest of the book is more of an examination of every small political skirmish of the early 1800s that may or may not have involved Hamilton or Burr. While I can appreciate what the author is trying to do here, and it's interesting to learn about the political atmosphere of the time, reading about it was very tedious. It was hard to keep track of everyone and Fleming tended to jump around quite a bit; at times I was confused as to how some of the passages correlated to one another.

In theory, it could make sense to provide excruciating detail of all the politics that took place before the duel, but in this book it's hard to see the connection. When it got to the actual duel, Fleming basically said that Burr challenged Hamilton due to the depression he was in, and the fact that he wanted some kind of Bonaparte glory. This renders the 300 pages prior, and the politics they examined, insignificant and frivolous details.

I also had an issue with how Fleming was blatantly wrong about some of the things he stated as facts. For instance, he once stated that Jefferson was undeniably the start of the modern Democratic party - something that makes no sense. Jefferson was for a weak central government and states' rights. He was a slave owner that was for cutting taxes, legislative power, and a strict construction of the constitution. These are all very conservative ideals, and much closer to the modern Republican party than the Democratic one. Not only that, but Fleming also presents the idea of an affair between Angelica Schuyler-Church and Alexander Hamilton as an undeniable fact, when there is no evidence of it at all, only rumors.

My final complaint is of Fleming's criticism of Hamilton's religious beliefs. Fleming was repeatedly saying things like "this is not the Christian way" or "a genuine Christian would not have told anyone", going so far as to quote the Bible as proof that Hamilton wasn't truly a Christian. Honestly, to me, it felt gross and much like Fleming is a devout Christian attempting to defend his faith. Personally, I've never seen identifying yourself with a religion as something that you have to adhere to strict rules for. Maybe it's just me. But Fleming's criticism of Hamilton in that respect seemed unwarranted.

Overall, this book left me disappointed. While I did enjoy reading about the duel, that was not the main focus.

[Mark Mortensen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Years ago I was under the impression that the Founding Fathers and other politicians from the late 1700’s to early 1800’s got along in harmony, however the more I read it is apparent that quite often the opposite is true. It was not uncommon for the Federalists and Republicans to bitterly oppose each other and internal disagreements within a party were also common.

This book details the political climate leading up to a unique chapter in American history. On July 11, 1804 a prearranged pistol dual pitted sitting U.S. Vice President Aaron Burr against General Alexander Hamilton, George Washington’s chief military advisor, a politician in his own right and former Secretary of the Treasury. It is not a spoiler to state that one of the participants was mortally wounded.

The author has performed much detailed research. I recommend this book to those with an interest in early American history as well as to those who have an interest in politics and are under the impression that today’s politicians are as divisive as ever.

[Michael Compton · Rating 4 out of 5]

Hamilton may have had it coming. Author Thomas Fleming in no way tries to absolve Aaron Burr of his sins, but anyone who reads this blow-by-blow account of the events leading up to the infamous duel with Hamilton can't help but have some sympathy for the man. In Hamilton, Jefferson, and the Clintons of New York (George and De Witt, not Bill and Hillary), Burr had some powerful enemies. With Jefferson freezing him out in Washington, and Hamilton and the Clintons relentlessly tag-teaming him in New York--and with the help of newspapers printing the most slanderous lies and insinuations--it's a wonder Burr wasn't reaching for his dueling pistols every day. He made some terrible mistakes and errors in judgment--not least of which his eventual machinations to break apart the Union--but somehow he remained indominable, living life to the fullest, and often with good humor. Fleming may show a soft spot for Burr, but he also shows great admiration and sympathy for Hamilton. Fleming does a fine job of showing each man as a complex human being with both great virtues and great flaws. By extension, what we learn about the principals, we learn about the young nation and its time. The complexity, conflicting motives, and clashing ideologies of our founders and the time in which they lived is often mind-boggling. In the end, this is not a tale of hero and villain, but of two monumental figures who fell short of all they might have been.

[Javier Cruz]

Duel was decent, and went into great detail about the history of both Hamilton and Burr. I have a few complaints though. Throughout the book, it seems that it is flooded with other information that does not have anything to do with Hamilton, or his future duel with Burr. It went into great detail about the politics of the late 1700's and the early 1800's. It has everything that you would want to know about early american politics. There was also lots of information leading up to the duel of Hamilton and Burr.
I would recommend this book if you want to learn everything about early American politics around the turn of the century. One of my complaints is that Duel is a 400+ page book that only spends about ten pages about the main subject of the book. My other main complaint is that the author takes sides, which is distracting in this book. Overall, I enjoyed reading and learning about early America despite the book flaws.

[Bat713 · Rating 4 out of 5]

Exceptionally researched. I wanted to learn more about Hamilton and especially Burr after seeing the musical. Learn, I did. 400 + pages. What I did find out is not the romantic story we are familiar with from Maranda. These were complicated flawed humans whose stories included much more than the rivalry portrayed in the play. It took me a long time to finish the book but ai am glad I did. I probably will go back every once and a while to reread and reabsorb the very different life stories of these two men.

[Scott · Rating 2 out of 5]

The author presents a well-researched and very detailed examination of the events leading up to and beyond the famous duel between Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr.

However, for two primary reasons, I cannot recommend this book. First, the author's disjointed writing style jumps around in the chronological events to such a degree that I eventually failed to see how things connected.

Second, and more importantly, I was offended by what seemed to be a personal attack on the apparent religious conversion of Hamilton toward the end of his life. The author seems to take great delight in pointing out the man's flaws, almost maliciously at times. This approach was so strong that it intruded on the story.

In conclusion, I'd recommend reading of the events in our nation's history, especially in the twenty or so years after 1789. I just don't highly recommend you do it with this particular book.

[Dan · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a good, very high level version of the history. It's written simply enough that I could read it to my kindergartner and her two pre-school sisters.

With that said, it really short-changes Alexander Hamilton in order to play up the somewhat-parallels between the two. At some point you should just admit that they're not that parallel and that A-Ham was right that Burr had no integrity and no interests beyond advancing himself.

[Amanda · Rating 3 out of 5]

This makes you wonder how our country survived when people like Hamilton and Burr were responsible for it.

[Jostalady · Rating 3 out of 5]

I did the audio book. I felt it was well done, very interesting.

[John · Rating 4 out of 5]

Two men stand apart, facing each other. One is the vice president of the United States. The other is the former Treasury secretary. Each fires a gun at the other. One misses, perhaps on purpose. The other doesn't.
Thomas Fleming's account of the most infamous duel in U.S. history was an education for me. I felt like I was learning something new and surprising on almost every page. Alexander Hamilton had recently committed his life to Christ. Aaron Burr, the challenger, had much more reason to take umbrage with a newspaper editor named James Cheetham than with Hamilton. Hamilton and Burr had much in common. Both disliked the president, Thomas Jefferson, even though Burr was Jefferson's vice president. Both had substantial military backgrounds. Each felt his political career was over. Each envisioned himself as the Napoleon of the American West.
Duels were falling out of favor at the time of the Burr-Hamilton confrontation. They were illegal in New York, which was why Burr and Hamilton and their seconds traveled to New Jersey for the deadly contest. Only one in five duels ended in a fatal wound. This was one of the five. Dueling may have been legal in New Jersey, but the state still charged Burr with murder. He was not convicted.
Days before the duel, with the details of the encounter already determined, the two men sat next to each other at a banquet. (Talk about a challenging occasion for small talk! "So, Alex, got any plans?")
Each prepared a will the day before the duel. This makes perfect sense, but the wills were of little value since each man was deeply in debt.
Not long after killing Hamilton, Burr -- in his role as vice president -- presided over the impeachment hearing of a Supreme Court justice. Imagine the social media!
Have you heard, my fellow citizens of the year 2023, that the U.S. people have never been so polarized? That the political climate in Washington has never been so disagreeable?
Those who engage in such hyperbole reveal a lack of reading of history. The only real difference in the late 18th and early 19th centuries from today was that disputes then sometimes (rather ofen, actually) ended in a supervised gunbattle, carried out according to well-defined rules.
Polarized? Good grief -- Burr not only wanted the American West to develop as a separate country but was part of discussions about New York and New England seceding from the Union.
This was the sort of book that tempted me to stop reading and engage strangers in conversation: "Did you know that Aaron Burr ... ?" "Did you realize Alexander Hamilton was ... ?"
This wasn't simply a dispute between two men. Many people were involved, and at times I got a little lost in it all. Kudos to Thomas Fleming for managing to assemble the personalities and the facts and for weaving into a cohesive narrative.

[Akflier300 · Rating 3 out of 5]

Fleming dives deep into the era to set the stage for the most notorious 'interview' in American history. For the devotee of early US politics, this is a catalog of every ornament in the setting, from either man's service in the Revolution to their political maneuverings and respective bases of power. This Burr, unlike those portrayed by other authors, is no less mean or manipulative than his peers, Hamilton and Jefferson. He has commendable attributes as well as faults. Fleming sets him apart, however, as America's first 'professional politician.' Other reviewers rate this book low because it takes the reader on a twisting journey through New York state politics, early Federal history, relations between England and France and even the ins and outs of the Louisiana Purchase. That's all fascinating stuff and we see the messy details that are sorted into clean narratives in our high school textbooks. My critique, as many others have said, is that one needs a program to keep all the Clintons, Livingstons, Van Nesses, Pendletons, et al in order. Another book could be written, and probably exists somewhere, just on the numerous newspapers, their editors and backers that play a crucial role in the story of the duel. Middle chapters were a slog, and this book makes a ready reference for students of history, not just the set-to at Weehawken. Be prepared for a lot more story than you imagined. Final note: Yes, as others point out, personal attacks, vindictive politics, backstage maneuvering, media manipulation have been with us since the Republic's founding. The Army commander was a foreign agent long before the 21st century.

[Dennis · Rating 3 out of 5]

If you are an historian this book will satisfy your quest for the inside scoop on Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr, along with many of their contemporaries. If, like me, you are more interested in an overview, the pages turn ever so slowly. There are nuggets of information that never seemed to surface in elementary and high school history classes. The events with which the author deals take place, for the most part, between 1801 and 1804. The duel between Hamilton and Burr are only a small part.
It is interesting to note that little has changed in the arena of Washington politics since those days. Egos and the quest for power ruled the day and established alliances. Slander in those days could end up being settled in court, or in a duel. Today it is in the court of public opinion. The author, in great detail, lays out the relationships between Jefferson and Hamilton, between Hamilton and Burr and between the Republicans and Federalists. Good information for the historian, but a bit laborious for the casual reader such as myself.
I should add that these were fragile times for our newly formed democracy. There were those who would derail it by secession, or political coup. There were those who hated Jefferson and those who hated Hamilton. Both men played important roles in the development of our government and our financial systems, respectively. Each had its detractors.

[Mme Forte · Rating 3 out of 5]

Four stars for being super-informative; minus one for the author's style. This is a quibble, I admit, but there is no reason to refer to Congressmen as "solons". There were tangents galore, and he has a penchant for referring to people by their titles, which gets confusing. In addition, I believe the author was biased -- he was probably a Jefferson hater, and he really handled Burr with kid gloves. I mean, he portrayed Burr as someone who was always very conscious of what he was doing and its meaning, while Hamilton was -- I don't know, what's the term? Spiritually confused? Plus over-sensitive and a monarchist...and maybe that's the way things really were. What all this means is that, whenever you read a book where you can't truly know how things went down, or what people were thinking, you have to weigh the author's tone and word choice that much more carefully, and make your own decisions.

Did I learn a lot? Sure. Was this an easy read? Nope.

[Dana · Rating 5 out of 5]

“The Duel: The Parallel Lives of Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr” is a fascinating piece of literature that compares and contrasts the lives of Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr. It is written by Judith St. George. Judith is a respected author, she has written forty-five books, including this one. All of her books tend to bring the characters to life, as she entends them to be. In this particular piece of literature she does an outstanding job of grasping every little detail of all of Hamilton and Burr’s lives. The book starts by explaining the early life struggles of each of the two men. The book then proceeds to tell us about their life as grown men and their encounter. As the book goes on you will find a lot similarities between them, as they were both wise and very hardworking men. Overall this is a great read, and a great way to learn a little bit more about our American history.

[William Lowe · Rating 3 out of 5]

The Duel gives a perspective of the government at the time of Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr from their point of view. It tries to put the reader in their shoes as much as possible. It’s a strange thing to read about a sitting Vice President killing a well known war hero and the first secretary of the treasury. I can’t say Hamilton didn’t have it coming though. It seemed that he took every opportunity he could to slander Burr. In his mind he thought it was for the benefit of the country. That if Burr were to be President or Governor of New York his ambitions would ruin the Union. He may have been right. I also think Hamilton was one for the dramatic. He laid his bread crumbs down to make Burr look bad if the duel went poorly, which it did. I thought the book had a lot of lead up to the titular event. I was happily surprised to read more about what happened to Burr after the Duel though.

[Clinton · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book explores the politics and actions that led to the "interview" between Hamilton and Burr. The country and society were a lot different then. I find it mind-boggling to imagine a sitting Vice President of the United States shooting down a former Treasury Secretary. Hamilton and Burr shared many political views, but saw each other as a rival. Their mutual hatred resulting in Hamilton grossly insulting Burr in what he assumed was a private dinner conversation after a few rounds of wine. Word got back to Burr and...

You can learn what happened next by watching a Broadway musical. What you will learn in this book is the political atmosphere that permeated the country and made such an ending possible. I found it challenging to keep track of which characters were aligned with which side and the writing style (or was it the subject matter) put me to sleep a few times. But for a thorough understanding of the politics that led to the Duel, this book is a good resource.

[Macy · Rating 4 out of 5]

From a historical aspect, I really enjoyed delving deeper into the many layers and personalities of the founding fathers. Unless you have a specific interest, you never learn more about their differences or blatant hatred for each other. It's quite amusing and interesting. The language of the book did make it a slower read, which is ok. At times, it read more like a history text than a book I was reading for fun, which isn't surprising. Overall, the historical context and complexities of the characters that really existed in all of their humanity made this an interesting read, even if it took me some time to parse the language.

[Katie Galucki · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was a rather cumbersome read. The author seemed to go off on so many tangents that it was difficult to follow what was going on. If the entire book had been written in the same style as the Afterward it would have been easier to follow. Still, the book was well researched and presented details that we don't always hear about our founding fathers and the political climate of that era.

[Robert Mattei · Rating 3 out of 5]

If you believe the current level of political discord is as bad as it gets, this book will give you a different perspective. Vanity, yellow journalism, dirty politics and even treasonous behavior are part of our history from the earliest days.

I found the telling long-winded and overly detailed in parts but fascinating overall.

[Sheila · Rating 3 out of 5]

Ugh............I usually love reading books like this; however, this particular book was like reading 104 highschool history books. I truly love historical facts, but there were so many names and situations that I couldn't keep track.

Very interesting book, but too much info.

[Beth Fox · Rating 2 out of 5]

I had a very difficult time in the first half of this book. The author was obviously trying to introduce the key players, but he jumped around in time so much that it was very difficult to keep track of where in time he was.

[Diana · Rating 3 out of 5]

I definitely learned some new history, but nonfiction books are so dense.

[Christopher Hellstrom · Rating 4 out of 5]

Audio version.

[Clove · Rating 1 out of 5]

Poorly written and poorly organized

[Katy Lovejoy · Rating 4 out of 5]

As much as I like history the only thing I knew about these two previously cane from watching hamilton 1 time

[Bradley Brill · Rating 5 out of 5]

All the detail of that fateful day and more. Well written and compelling.

[Patricia · Rating 4 out of 5]

I will review ASAP. Had a little time to read with a snowstorm power outage that lasted several days.

[Thomas Mosher · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very detailed history, amazing how much happened in 1804! Very good book

[Kelsey Hutcheson · Rating 1 out of 5]

So boring. read like a history textbook not a novel