The Last Founding Father: James Monroe and a Nation's Call to Greatness

by Harlow Giles Unger

From the New York Times bestselling author, the larger than life story of America's fifth president, who transformed a small, fragile nation into a powerful empire In this compelling biography, award-winning author Harlow Giles Unger reveals the epic story of James Monroe (1758-1831)-the last of America's Founding Fathers-who transformed a small, fragile nation beset by enemies into a powerful empire stretching "from sea to shining sea." Like David McCullough's John Adams and Jon Meacham's American Lion, The Last Founding Father is both a superb read and stellar scholarship-action-filled history in the grand tradition.

Genres: Presidents, Biography, History, Nonfiction, American History, Us Presidents, Politics

402 pages, Kindle Edition

First published September 1, 2009

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

[Martin Bihl · Rating 2 out of 5]

As I’ve said in preface to reviews of other bios, I accept a level of bias in these things – because you can’t expect someone who has dedicated several years of their life to studying someone to remain objective. But you know you're in for an exceptionally wild ride when, in the introduction, the author refers to Adams, Jefferson and Madison as mere "caretakers" and implies that Monroe was the obvious heir to Washington’s legacy.

But hey, everyone gets to have an opinion, and Unger should be no different. So does he make his case? And if not, does he at least justify the book’s title? Is Monroe really the last of the founding fathers?

Well, no. And no.

In spite of the bias, a slim portrait of Monroe still emerges. The fifth president comes across as thin-skinned, shallow, not a little vain, and fairly self-involved. A man who lived off the largesse of his uncle, constantly grasping for legitimacy and aristocracy, unable (or unwilling) to build a law practice or a plantation, marrying wealth and using friends and connections to succeed.

But that, for all I can tell, is just how Monroe was, and was not what I found annoying about the biography. Instead, there are three areas that I found particularly frustrating, and which I think are indicative of the faults of the bio as a whole.

The first concerns the Louisiana Purchase. Clearly in spite of the fact that everyone alive at the time of the Louisiana Purchase wants to take credit for it, it’s pretty clear that the purchase only happened because Napoleon was eager to sell. The Americans did not put the idea into his head and did not convince him he needed to get rid of it. On this, I think, most historians are agreed.

That said, then the only real responsibility that Monroe had – and the only way he can really claim the purchase as his accomplishment - was to draft a comprehensive, accurate and thorough treaty to close the deal. And this he failed to do. For years afterwards, America was embroiled in disputes with various European powers (most notably Spain) about just exactly what was included in the Louisiana Purchase. Was Florida? Was the panhandle? What about the Northern border? What about the Southern? No one knew, thereby creating international chaos for a generation.

The second area has to do with credit. On the one hand, Unger is quick to dismiss as foolish those writers who credit Quincy Adams with the substance of the Monroe Doctrine, intimating that those writers really don’t understand that the driving personalities of presidents would preclude letting anyone else speak for them. Fair enough.

But on several occasions Unger states that he believes Madison was so incapacitated during and after the War of 1812, that he had given complete control of the government to Monroe. That Madison was really only president in name only, and that Monroe was really running the show. Really? The Madison biographers don’t see it quite that way…

And later, closer to home, after Monroe’s own final midterm elections, Unger paints a portrait of a president completely on the sidelines. Completely outflanked by his own cabinet ministers, all of whom were, it seems, running for president themselves. Again, really? Poor Monroe! If only he had power to fire his cabinet ministers and appoint people who would do what he said. Oh yeah, he did have that power.

But it seems like the sidelines is where Monroe lives most of the time in this biography. Long passages discuss events that Monroe has no direct involvement in. There’s a lot about Washington, which feels pulled from Unger’s bio of him, and from Lafayette’s life, which feels pulled from Unger’s work on him. These sections not only feel like padding, but they actually serve to make Monroe a less important and less compelling figure in his own biography.

The third area has to do with Monroe’s republican politics. Here is a man who inherits the mantle of Jefferson and Madison, who proclaims himself a republican – a member of the party that mocked John Adams and seriously believed that Adams had monarchical intentions because of his opinions on titles and ceremony – bringing a level of pomp and circumstance to the White House that would have made the Sun King blush. And Unger doesn’t bat an eye – transcribing long passages describing the sumptuousness and delicacy of the gowns of Monroe’s wife and daughters. Don’t get me wrong – I’m frustrated by Jefferson’s and Madison’s policies, and actually believe that Monroe’s pursuit of a national bank, of a standing army, of, in short, a stronger federal government, was a good thing. But those beliefs put his so far out of the mainstream of Jeffersonian-Madisonian Republicanism that they cry out for commentary. And Unger is silent.

He’s also silent on Monroe’s relationship to slavery, which I find to be ultimately inexcusable. Monroe started out poor, and therefore must have intentionally acquired slaves at the same time that he was building a political career. He cannot use the excuse of Washington, Jefferson and Madison that he “inherited” the slavery problem. He clearly leapt into it. And yet Unger makes so few references to it that one might think Monroe had only waiters and servants in his employ.

Let me be clear - any president who owned slaves – any American who styled himself as representing “freedom” in an otherwise tyrannical world – was living a profound contradiction. Understanding the mental gymnastics they performed to live this contradiction do not absolve them of it, but at least help us to understand them. But this contradiction needs to be addressed and Unger doesn’t even come close to approaching it. Much to the work’s detriment.

Adult biographies of Monroe are few and far between, and I am happy to at least have this volume to familiarize myself with some of the issues of his life. But I will undoubtedly have to look elsewhere for something more substantive. Perhaps I’ll take a look at Ammons 600 page bio – or maybe I’ll just move on to JQA.

[Mara · Rating 2 out of 5]

A more suitable title for this biography may have been something to the effect of James Monroe: the Musings of a Fanboy. You might think I'm exaggerating, that, like many biographers after years of research and editing, Harlow Giles Unger was just a bit taken with his subject at the time of his writing. In that case, I'll direct you to Exhibit A (which I've tried to keep mercifully short).

Washington’s three successors—John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison—were mere caretaker presidents who left the nation bankrupt, its people deeply divided, its borders under attack, its capital city in ashes. Monroe took office determined to lead the nation to greatness by making the United States impregnable to foreign attack and ensuring the safety of Americans across the face of the continent.

Now I'm no historian, and I haven't gotten to Madison as of yet in my presidential readings, but I'm pretty sure that the general consensus has not traditionally been that the era of POTUSes two through four was about little more than, well, "caretaking."

The problem with Unger's unflappable gushing around Monroe, is that it was difficult to discern the reality of Monroe's contributions (of which I'm sure there were many).Take the eponymous Monroe Doctrine for example, obviously Monroe had something to do with it (after all, they named it after the guy), but Unger is so defensive about other scholars' assertions re. JQA's contributions, that it left me feeling suspect about the whole affair.

As for territorial expansion, I'll give Monroe some credit there (though I've gotta go with the Jack Donaghy wisdom re. Florida "Have you ever been to Florida? It's basically a criminal population. It's America's Australia.")



Dude took us bi-coastal, true fact, but, again, Unger's language just made me queasy.

He expanded the nation’s military and naval power, then sent American troops to rip Florida and parts of the West from the Spanish, extending the nation’s borders to the natural defenses of the Rocky Mountains in the West and the rivers, lakes, and oceans of the nation’s other borders.

I could go on and on with examples of Unger's hyperbole, but I think you get the point (and I'd like to keep my breakfast down). I give Monroe props for public schools, and highways and such- I'm not totally cold-hearted.

There isn't exactly a plethora of Monroe biographies out there, so Unger gets an extra star for contributing to the body of available material with a full portrait of the Monroe family. I just wish he'd felt up to the task of adding a wart or two to the “Era of Good Feelings” without which it simply seemed too good to be true.

[Jay Schutt · Rating 5 out of 5]

After previously reading a biography of James Monroe's predecessor, James Madison -who was a very uncharismatic and rather dull man-this bio of Monroe was a welcome change.

Monroe was a warrior in the Continental army of the American Revolution surviving the hardship of Valley Forge. He served in Congress, was a minister to England and France under Thomas Jefferson and brokered the deal with Napoleon to acquire the Louisiana territory and was governor of Virginia. He was secretary of state/war in Madison's administration and helped maneuver and rally troops during decisive battles around Washington D.C. in the War of 1812. While a two-term president, he created the constructive and prosperous "Era of Good Feeling" and secured our countries boarders with the Monroe Doctrine.

Monroe and his wife Elizabeth endured many personal and financial hardships while keeping their country foremost in their hearts. True patriots.

This was an extensively-researched, well-written and easy to read book. It had great flow and held my interest throughout.

[Aaron Million · Rating 1 out of 5]

The tone of this James Monroe biography is set immediately, on page 2, when Harlow Giles Unger refers to John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison as "mere caretaker presidents". As Unger proceeds to tell us, over and over and over again, they - and everyone else too - pale in comparison to the greatness of Monroe. In fact, if one didn't know better, the reader would think Monroe was more a god than a man, with the amount of fawning over him that Unger does. Any negative aspect of Monroe's life is either someone else's fault, or if nobody else can be blamed, then Monroe's own actions are somehow excused away. An example from page 46: "Although he had [Monroe] accomplished nothing, he had done no less than his colleagues - which is exactly what Virginia planters had elected them to do." So, even when Monroe does nothing, he still does something!

Unger reviews Monroe's childhood, service in the Revolutionary War, and emergence first into Virginia politics, then national politics. Despite being stocked with no shortage of historical figures, none of them are more than mere props to Monroe in some way or another. Jefferson and Madison get a little more attention only because Monroe was close to both of them and viewed each as a mentor. The larger context of the times is often missing from the story, as Unger is too busy lavishing praise on Monroe. If you are looking for any analysis of Monroe in terms of him owning slaves, look elsewhere: the subject is not broached until page 137, and Unger never dives into Monroe's thoughts on the controversial topic other than a sentence from a letter that he wrote stating that blacks should not be physically abused. While Monroe was not in the same league as Jefferson or George Washington in terms of plantation size and number of slaves owned, owning a slave is owning a slave. It is quite disappointing that Unger spends next to no time on this divisive subject, and does not at any time take Monroe to task for owning other human beings.

The only other person who comes close to Monroe in hero-worship is his wife Elizabeth. On page 109: "Elizabeth kept her poise, head high - aloof and unafraid - her hand firmly clutching her daughter's...". This is typical of how Unger treats her. On page 121, he says that John Quincy Adams' wife Louisa called her a "goddess", and Unger does not seem to disagree. The narrative is filled with mentions of how beautiful she looked, how she barely aged, and how stoic she was while ill. Again on page 121: "She was the personification of beauty and elegance." On the same page, Unger writes that "...Monroe was as close to becoming a god in French officialdom as it was possible for any foreigner to be." Unger lays it on thick throughout the book with sentences such as those.

There are also inconsistencies in Unger's narrative. Again on page 121, while Monroe is serving as Minister to France: "Indeed, Monroe spoke so well, he disregarded his diplomatic instructions and dispensed with interpreters...". Yet just six pages later, on page 127, Unger writes "...Monroe had followed his instructions to the letter in Paris." Well, which is it? You can't disregard instructions while simultaneously following them to the letter.

Monroe always struggled financially, constantly striving to belong to the upper class of wealthy Southern planters but never being able to achieve that status. Part of the problem, aside from not being born to wealth like Washington or Jefferson, was that Monroe and his wife struggled to live within their means. While in Paris, the purchased expensive furniture, then expected the U.S. Government to reimburse them for it. Elizabeth struck me as a snob, always behaving as if she were above most everyone else. Monroe struck me as that way too, although I think he made genuine efforts to reach out to ordinary citizens while he was President when he went on several nationwide tours. Yet, again, Unger would never venture such a criticism of Monroe. On page 201, writing about the 1808 presidential election and the fact that Monroe did no campaigning (nor was it expected back then) he makes the ludicrous comment: "Like most Americans, he remained land rich and cash poor." Like most Americans? What? I cannot and do not for a second believe that "most Americans" were land rich back in 1808. Or any year during this country's history. "Most Americans" were probably just trying to scrape by, and most weren't rich in land or money.

Somehow, Unger manages to turn his worship of Monroe up a notch once the War of 1812 occurs. Monroe was serving as Madison's Secretary of State then, and came to play a key role in attempting to defend Washington, D.C. from British attack. On page 247: "He was everywhere, immersing himself in every detail of the city's defense, all but hauling logs into the breastworks himself. His was an inspiring presence that rallied citizen spirits - bound the best of them as one to save their city from further assault." Worse than this though was how badly Unger throws Madison under the bus. Page 246: "The explosion at Fort Washington left Madison shaking - emotionally spent. A tiny man, only slightly more than five feet tall, he had been subject to seizures much of his life that left him sickly and often rather weak. He winced at the destruction that surrounded him and all but shrank behind Monroe at the approach of angry citizens who cursed him for permitting the destruction of their city." Page 249: "The previous days had so shaken the sickly Madison that he deferred to Monroe on almost everything that came before him." I seriously question if this is true.

The above seems especially difficult to believe when, later on page 313, Unger discusses the formation of the Monroe Doctrine. As you can imagine, almost total credit goes to Monroe. Unger quickly dismisses any notion that John Quincy Adams had much of a hand in forming the policy: "Contrary to the writings of some historians, Monroe's proclamation was entirely his own creation - not Adam's. The assertion that Adams authored the 'Monroe Doctrine' is not only untrue, it borders on the ludicrous by implying that President Monroe was little more than a puppet manipulated by another's hand. Such assertions show little insight into the presidency itself and the type of man who aspires to and assumes that office; indeed, they denigrate the characters, the intellect, the intensity, and the sense of power that drive American presidents." But isn't that what Unger himself did to Madison earlier in the book?

But Unger does not stop there. He continues on the next page, 314: "President James Monroe had almost eight years of experience as an American diplomat in Paris, London, and Madrid - posts that were far more exacting than Quincy Adams's five years of 'dinners, balls, parades, receptions' in St. Petersburg, Russia, with his friend the czar. Like Washington, Monroe was a powerful, decisive leader - as fearless in the cabinet room or Congress among politicians and intellects as he was on the battlefield among soldiers.... He did not shrink before cabinet appointments or defer to their judgments. Like Washington and most other American presidents, he decided policies and expected cabinet officers to implement those policies - or quit. They were there to advise, not to consent or govern." Someone please tell that to Monroe when he was under Madison.

This book was deeply disappointing to read. I was expecting a serious biography of Monroe, not a fluff piece. This is not remotely close to being a good biography, or even a good story. Monroe himself could not have written a more positive, slanted version of his life story. I am not sure which is more offensive to me as a reader: the fact that Unger makes Monroe into a virtually flawless human being, or that he basically says that everyone else around Monroe was a bumbling fool, and thank goodness James Monroe was there to save them and the nation from disaster.

Grade: F

[Jay Connor · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fascinating President who deserved a less subjective biography. Monroe by himself is due five stars, but the fawning, blind-eye treatment by Unger diminishes rather than elevates. I can't think of one situation where Unger finds fault in his hero. If recent historical biographers (from Vidal to Ellis to McCullough to Chernow) allow us to see and relish in the founding generation -- warts and all -- why isn't James Monroe, who certainly deserves to be in the pantheon of greatness, afforded this honesty. For example, while many of his contemporaries were embracing manumission either personally or as the requirement of a great nation, Unger simply states: "Monroe had no strong objection to slavery." This is particularly concerning because the conversion of the economy in the South from the tobacco base in the days of the framing of the Constitution to the cotton base in the early 1800's changed slave existence dramatically on Monroe's own lands -- from a crop delicate enough to require worker contentment to a significantly more brutish existence. Unger passively even observes: "Cruelty replaced paternalism across the South." Thus, the Missouri Compromise, reached in Monroe's second term, which extended slavery to the new territories is favorably viewed by Unger, as a furthering of Monroe's Era of Good Feelings, rather than the seminal foreshadowing of the Civil War.

Despite, rather than because of, this lack of subjectivity, "The Last Founding Father" is a great read and does put Monroe in his proper place in history as a result of the impact of his actions and sacrifices. Though Unger is lavish with his praise of Monroe, he often feels compelled to take it even a step further by undergirding his thesis of Monroe-greatness with a diminishment of those around his central figure. "Washington's three successors -- Adams, Jefferson, Madison -- were mere caretaker presidents who left the nation bankrupt, its people divided, its borders under attack, its capital city in ashes." Well ... Monroe was a significant player in both the Jefferson and Madison administrations and much of the opportunity for Monroe's Era of Good Feelings was laid in these prior administrations. Is Monroe great because of timing or personal contribution? A less biased biographer would have found more in the balance.

But perhaps the most blatant case of compliment by diminishment comes around the foundational "Monroe Doctrine." Unger seeks to destroy any assertion that Monroe's proclamation was not entirely his own creation. Especially not John Quincy Adams. He calls the suggestion "ludicrous" and demeans Adams diplomatic experience. He states that Monroe's eight years as a diplomat was far more taxing than Quincy Adam's five years of "dinners, balls, parades, receptions in St. Petersburg, Russia with his friend the czar." But, hidden in the notes for the chapter is this draft proposal from Adams: "the American continents by the free and independent condition which they have assumed, and maintain are henceforth not to be considered as the subject of future colonization by any European power." That is the essence of the Monroe Doctrine ... the fact that it came from a open recommendation of his Secretary of State should not be hidden by his biographer or be diminished as mere "parroting" of an earlier Monroe warning. If Monroe is to be valued in the wisdom he showed in his formative ministerial roles, can he not also be valued in listening to his own ministers? Harlow Unger, I think you protest too much.

Unger does present a very interesting contemporary current in Monroe's evolving view of the role of government. Monroe was present at both the American Revolution (staff to Washington) and the French Revolution (American Ambassador). At first, like Jefferson he fails to distinguish the two. This unified view frames revolution as about the expansion of human liberties. As a result of Napoleon's policy reversal re Spain and Florida, however, he understands something which was never fully comprehended by his mentor: protection of national interests was the raison d'etra of all governments, whether born of revolution or not. Expansion of individual liberties had simply been a by-product of the American Revolution because it was essential in uniting the American people and, therefore, in the national interest. Tyranny -- indeed Napoleon -- had been the by-product of the French Revolution, because it was essential for maintaining the unity of the French people. The US foreign policy still struggles with this lesson. The core outcome in revolution is what brings unity (beyond throwing the bastards out). We can't assume that it will always be democracy, even in the headiest revolution in the Middle East.

Parallels abound between Monroe and later Presidents. Monroe was central to expanding exponentially the territory of the United States (Louisiana Purchase which he negotiated with Talleyrand) as was Polk (Mexican War). Monroe sought permission from the President to lead a army in the War of 1812, as Teddy Roosevelt had petitioned Wilson during the First World War. Monroe failed to adequately pass the baton to a successor (John Quincy Adams v. Andrew Jackson) like Clinton to Gore which served to create a vacuum wherein many of his successes were reversed.

Monroe was a states rights republican who was, in John Quincy Adams words, "strengthening and consolidating the federative edifice of his country's Union, til he was entitled to say, like Augustus Caesar of his imperial city, that he found her built in brick and left her constructed of marble."

[Joy D · Rating 4 out of 5]

After a rather dry Prologue, this book picks up and provides a great deal of information about the life of James Monroe, the last president to participate in the Revolutionary War. It covers Monroe’s service under Washington, his legal practice, designation as ambassador to France and Great Britain, role in the War of 1812, and Presidency. It also covers his personal life – his marriage to Elizabeth Courltland, children, and friendships with both James Madison and John Quincy Adams. I particularly enjoyed learning about his family’s role in assisting the family of the Marquis de Lafayette escape harm in the French Revolution.

We learn more about the expansion of the American territories, Monroe’s role in negotiating the Louisiana Purchase, and development of the Monroe Doctrine. There are a few downsides. This book takes a rather antiquated view of the impact of westward expansions on the indigenous people. I am also puzzled as to why it was necessary to denigrate the contributions of James Madison, Monroe’s predecessor, regularly referring to his short stature and “sickliness.” I am reading the Presidential biographies in order, and found very few options for Monroe, but this turned out to be informative and interesting.

[bup · Rating 4 out of 5]

I never knew what a daring political chess player Monroe was, but this book shows him taking calculated risks and dancing right on the edge of constitutional authority like Polk or Jackson.

I also never knew Monroe was seriously wounded at the battle of Trenton and that his life lay in serious peril for hours there.

I also never knew that Madison's Secretary of War during the War of 1812 smugly assured everybody that Washington DC would never be attacked then basically fled his duty when it was, leaving Monroe to clean up Mr. Madison's War as the de facto, then actual, replacement Secretary of War.

So it's a great book for learning about who is often treated as a 'he was also a founding father' afterthought except for oh, yeah, he articulated that doctrine that's named after him.

Unger kind of throws Madison under the bus, though, and I've never heard him cast in so poor a light both before and during the War of 1812.

Monroe really did puff up America's reputation on the world stage - expanding the nation's boundaries, making her defensive capabilities have real oomph, and declaring that there would be no more old-world colonization in the new world at precisely the right time. Unger shows how he made it all look easy, so it's all remembered as 'the era of good feeling.'

[GoldGato · Rating 4 out of 5]

James Monroe was the last of the American Revolution Founding Fathers, the youngest of that famous generation. He wore 18th-century clothes in a 19th-century world and his thought process was that of the previous generation. While the Jacksonians were changing style and thought, it was Monroe who ensured the expansion of the growing United States Republic. He still gets overlooked because of the reputations of Washington, Adams Sr., Jefferson, and Madison, but the originator of the famous Monroe Doctrine could certainly hold his own on the battlefield and in the White House itself.

He was old school in morals and courage but forward-thinking in understanding the needs and wants of the nation. As the original states of the East Coast became increasingly crowded, pioneers were already moving westward in search of more land. In the Era Of Good Feelings, Monroe capitalized on that national yearning for greatness and expansion. He even toured in Revolutionary garb so that Independence Day took on a greater significance under his presidency. Russia was kept away from California, Florida was wrested from Spain, and the Northwest border came into being. Plus, he was a big proponent of women's education, something unheard of for his place and time.

This book is a very good primer to learning more about the fifth American President but it also accomplishes a link to other historical figures such as James Madison and Alexander Hamilton. The author definitely is a fan of Monroe but not in such a way as to detract from the overall reading. More importantly, this isn't one of those massive presidential tomes. The reader gets the point without being overwhelmed by footnotes.

Book Season = Year Round (last of the past)

[Alan Tomkins · Rating 5 out of 5]

Harlow Giles Unger delivers another superb biography of a lesser known founding father who was actually instrumental in forging the successful and powerful republic that our nation matured into during the early nineteenth century. Unger excels at writing narrative history that is as exciting as it is informative, and this book, like his biography of John Marshall, proves it. Readers will come away with a deeper appreciation and understanding of what made the unprecedented political experiment that was the United States so improbable, but successful; so tenuous at the beginning, yet so enduring as to seem inevitable. Monroe was a highly principled public servant who was teachable and pragmatic and humble enough to evolve in his political philosophy and leadership, and this, along with his integrity and ability to befriend and work with others across the political spectrum, was perhaps his greatest strength. He had a fascinating career as a soldier, diplomat, governor, congressman, secretary of state, secretary of war, and president. His experiences across America and in Europe, crossing paths with all the other greats who shaped history, are astonishing and make for fascinating reading. His contributions to America are legend. He engineered and consummated the Louisiana Purchase for the Jefferson administration, and he ended his own presidential administration with the bold and logical, shockingly assertive Monroe Doctrine. Read this book to see why Monroe truly deserves to be better known and appreciated by the nation he played such a large role in shaping and preparing for a long, prosperous, and powerful future.

[Steve · Rating 3 out of 5]

http://bestpresidentialbios.com/2013/...

“The Last Founding Father: James Monroe and a Nation’s Call to Greatness” is one of the most recent of author Harlow Unger‘s nearly two dozen books. He is a former journalist, broadcaster and professor and has written biographies of John Quincy Adams, Patrick Henry, Lafayette and George Washington, among many others.

Unger’s biography of Monroe is, on a basic level, extremely readable and entertaining, but excessively opinionated and needlessly provocative. In contrast to Harry Ammon’s “James Monroe” (where the author seems reluctant to stray from the facts and offer his own opinions) Unger’s praise is consistent and one-sided. The reader almost begins to wonder if Monroe himself has been reincarnated as Harlow Unger.

To its credit “The Last Founding Father: James Monroe” manages to animate the fifth president in a way that Ammon was unable in his lengthier biography. And in many ways, Unger describes what seems the classic American success story: a person born into modest circumstances and without the benefit of tremendous intellectual gifts who, nonetheless, rose above his early station in life to become a strong leader and successful politician.

Though Monroe was not a strategic thinker (like Madison) or naturally charming (like Jefferson), Unger describes him as hard working, keenly observant, highly aspirational and personally affable. But he was often quite thin-skinned and usually seemed a step behind others in the the crowd he followed (which notably included James Madison). Nonetheless, he was unfailingly indefatigable and possessed enough “street smarts” to allow him to eventually succeed where other equally ambitious politicians fell short.

The author does a nice job abbreviating many years of history into a rather compact book, and non-historians will find Monroe’s pre-presidential years neatly summarized in a way that is easy to understand. Indeed, the years leading up to Monroe’s presidency account for nearly three-quarters of the book while his two terms in office take up a fairly small portion of the text. And if not for the author’s persistent bias, this would have proven one of the better of the shorter biographies of the early presidents.

But it is not only unfailing praise of Monroe that afflicts this biography; the author also proves excessively defensive on several occasions, rushing to shield Monroe (and even his wife) from criticism of nearly any sort. Unger blasts the notion that John Quincy Adams had anything to do with the Monroe Doctrine, he howls at critiques of Mrs. Monroe by her contemporaries (mainly relating to her ostentatious attire and stuffy receptions) and ignores fatal flaws in the Monroe-Pinkney Treaty which led Jefferson to reject it.

Fortunately, most of the author’s favoritism is obvious enough that it does not seriously detract from the reader’s experience. Many of his more dramatic statements are so broadly sweeping and seemingly shallow that they merely add levity to the biography (probably unintentionally). On the other hand, if they are serious observations, they deserve additional evidence and should be edited to resemble groundbreaking revelations rather than punchy, provocative one-liners.

As others have pointed out, missing from this biography is any meaningful discussion of slavery. Monroe was not, as far as I know, born into a slave-owning family but some point during his life he made a conscious decision to acquire slaves. However, this decision, and his personal views on the contradictions slave ownership carried for someone who fought for individual rights, is never explored in any depth. (But Unger is quick to point out that Monrovia was named in the president’s honor by a small group of grateful emancipated slaves.)

Overall, Harlow Unger’s biography of James Monroe was an easy, entertaining and enjoyable read. It does not not suffer from a tendency toward unnecessary detail or weighty academic prose devoid of historical context – maladies which negatively impact a significant number of other presidential biographies. But it is too unbalanced to be taken as seriously as it might otherwise deserve. Monroe is a president who seems due more credit and notoriety than he receives, but this biography went too far in staking that claim. For entertainment value, Unger’s biography of Monroe deserves close to 5 stars. For unbiased enlightenment and scholarship, it merits perhaps 2 stars.

Overall rating: 3½ stars

[Celia · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Last Founding Father: James Monroe

This book, written by Harlow Giles Unger is an excellent read, full of many facts about James Monroe, his family, his friends, and his service to the colonies and to the United States. Some of the areas covered in this book are:

Early Life
• Born in 1758
• Orphaned by the age of 16
• Second of five children

Revolutionary War
• Rank of Major
• Tended Lafayette’s wounds after Battle of Brandywine
• Fought in the Battle of Trenton

Married to Elizabeth Kortwright
Three children: two girls who married and produced grandchildren, one son who died at 16 months

Minister to France
• Very successful
• Rescued Lafayette’s wife from French prison
• Helped Lafayette’s wife and daughters flee France
• Smuggled Lafayette’s son, George Washington Lafayette, to the US

President for two terms
• Presided over the Era of Good Feelings
• Wrote the Monroe Doctrine
• Left furniture procured in France in the White House

Post Presidency
• Elizabeth died first
• Monroe died on July 4, 1831, the third president to die on Independence Day

There is so much more. I thoroughly enjoyed learning of Monroe and hope you have the time to learn from this book too.

4 stars

[Bill · Rating 1 out of 5]

Unger is a talented writer who produces very readable, easily digestible biographies about individuals from the Founding era, with this 2009 work focusing on the underappreciated James Monroe.

But don't let that praise fool you into thinking this is in any way a good book.

I found "The Last Founding Father" to be an intellectually dishonest hagiography that distorts facts, misrepresents events and ignores inconvenient truths in order to portray its subject in the best, most fawning possible light. I was offended that the book insults its readers' intelligence by presenting itself as a true, trustworthy, historical biography as opposed to the light, breezy piece of entertaining historical semi-fiction that it is.

The tone is set right away in the prologue. Monroe was "the most beloved president after Washington," whose three immediate predecessors were "mere caretaker presidents, who left the nation bankrupt, its people deeply divided, its borders under attack, its capital city in ashes." Not only that, but Monroe's "self-serving, politically ambitious successors undermined the national unity he created during his presidency," during which Monroe "made poor men rich, turned political allies into friends, and united a divided people."

And the clouds parted, the birds sang and the flowers bloomed, as Monroe hung the moon and became the best, most effective, most brilliant, most accomplished, most upstanding and most successful president of any who served between Washington and Lincoln, if not ever.

Oh, and he also married well, because his wife was, hands down, "America's most beautiful and most courageous First Lady."

The hyperbole borders on the ridiculous, yet it might be more easily forgiven as just an enthusiastic author overly enamored with his subject, had the author not gone on to twist the truth to suit his story.

Monroe was prone to petulance and pique, and even many of his supporters acknowledged he was far from perfect. One colleague gently described him as having "a mind neither rapid nor rich," while another described him as "somewhat slow in his apprehension," and Aaron Burr once tore into him as "naturally dull and stupid — extremely illiterate — indecisive to a degree that would be incredible to one who did not know him — pusillanimous and of course hypocritical."

Whether or not such descriptions are true or warranted, there are enough of them like that from Monroe's contemporaries, that they at least deserve to be mentioned - and refuted, if you're so inclined. But Unger simply ignores them because they don't suit his embellished story.

Notably, descriptions of two key events related to Monroe's European diplomatic service are fudged to fit Unger's narrative. First, during the Washington administration, Monroe was sent to France to mollify the French while the administration negotiated a treaty with France's enemy, Britain. Monroe is generally understood to have overdone it with his pro-France stance, risking the success of the British diplomatic mission, while advocating his own political point of view over that of the administration he served. He was reprimanded and recalled over this, yet Unger waves away any criticism, turns the blame on Monroe's critics, fails to even mention George Washington's angry responses to Monroe's attempts to defend his actions, and simply declares that Monroe had "done his job to perfection."

More troubling is Unger's description of Monroe's second diplomatic blunder. During the Jefferson administration, Monroe negotiated another treaty with Britain that went completely counter to his instructions from Thomas Jefferson and Secretary of State Madison. They were not pleased. Monroe believed he did the best he could, and that his superiors' instructions were unrealistic, which may well be true. But Unger concludes, with little to no evidence, that they intentionally set him up to fail, to damage any chance that Monroe might be elected Jefferson's successor as president over Madison. To bolster his claim, Unger completely misattributes a quote suggesting that Madison was playing partisan politics, expressing worry that Monroe's failed diplomatic mission would turn him into a martyr, "and the martyr will be president." In the text, Unger suggests the quote came from Madison himself; in the end notes, he attributes it to Jefferson; but in reality, the quote came from a partisan anti-Jefferson, pro-Monroe Senator who believed this to be true, so Unger simply considers it so, by falsely putting words into Madison and/or Jefferson's mouths.

Anything else that might tarnish Monroe's legacy in any way, is simply omitted or explained away. His status as a slaveowner is barely mentioned, so when Unger describes how plantation owner Monroe diligently "continued clearing more land - adding sizeable wheat and corn crops, then building a grist mill and distillery to produce his own flour and whiskey," you'd be forgiven if you came away with the impression that Monroe actually did this work himself. The Panic of 1819, the country's first serious economic crisis which occurred on Monroe's watch, was absolutely not "a dark day in Monroe's presidency," in Unger's estimation, because it simply was not that big of a deal at all. And Monroe's work on behalf of the American Colonization Society, which advocated extreme segregation by resettling freed slaves in Africa lest Whites be forced to live alongside freed Blacks at home, is portrayed by Unger as a virtuous enterprise, and the naming of the Liberian capital after Monroe, a great honor.

And if eliding the truth isn't enough to place Monroe on a pedestal, Unger tries to further elevate Monroe by denigrating nearly everyone else. Monroe gallantly "stepped aside" to allow Madison to become Jefferson's Secretary of State, when there's zero evidence that Madison wasn't always Jefferson's first choice. As president, Unger claims Madison was "incompetent," and desperately groveled and pleaded with Monroe to become his Secretary of State. Unger then ludicrously states that Madison effectively checked out altogether, ceding all presidential authority to Monroe, who "spent almost twenty-four hours a day in a frenzy of activity" while "Madison had lost all credibility as a national leader, and Monroe was acting as the nation's commander in chief and president." The diplomatic service of Monroe's own Secretary of State, John Quincy Adams, is denigrated as "five years of 'dinners, balls, parades, receptions'" (in an unattributed quote), and Unger flatly dismisses Adams' contributions to the Monroe Doctrine, for which serious historians credit him as being absolutely instrumental, if they don't outright credit him as the author.

Oh, and if anyone ever dared to criticize Monroe's imperious, aloof wife - like the "catty Louisa Adams," in Unger's sexist description - it was only because they were jealous "of her beauty, of her exquisite (and expensive) taste in clothes and furnishings, and of her refined manners and superb education."

(After reading some other reviews, I'm adding this paragraph to note that other reviewers have cited a description of members of Congress rising to cheer, some "trembling with awe" at the mere sight of President Monroe, as seeming a bit over the top and too vivid to be true. And one sharp-eyed reviewer pointed out that it is, indeed, too vivid to be true. Monroe did not "str(i)de into Congress to deliver his seventh annual message to that body" on December 2, 1823 at all - the State of the Union message, at that time, was delivered in writing. Unger presumably assumed the State of the Union was delivered in person, and proceeded to invent this scene out of whole cloth.)

Let it be said that I have nothing against James Monroe. He has an amazing life story, from fighting in the Revolutionary War, to his personal relationships with every president from Washington to Jackson. I, too, believe he is underappreciated and we are all better off for his patriotic service. But it's possible to honor and appreciate someone without deifying them; to acknowledge their faults and missteps alongside their successes. Tim McGrath does just this, in his far-superior recent book, "James Monroe: A Life," which I would suggest anyone pick up instead of spending any time on Unger's superficial, misleading piece of hero worship.

[Natalie · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was looking for a book to read on James Monroe and this was at the top of my list because I love Unger's book on Lafayette. Unfortunately it wasn't available at the library and I wasn't willing to shell out $15-20 for it. Imagine my delight when it came up on one of Audible's $5 sales. Huzzah!

I didn't know much about James Monroe before heading into this work, so I felt I learned quite a bit. I learned that he is much more than his famous doctrine.

One of the things I loved the most was the closeness of the Monroe and his family. So many of these famous men in history had affairs so it's nice to meet one who seemed to truly loved his wife. When she passed away he went home and burned all her papers. His daughter said they couldn't find a scarp of paper that she wrote on. The Monroes were also tightknit with their daughters and I liked learning about their relationships.

I read a book about James Madison last year and didn't leave with a favorable opinion of him. The word that came to mind was "sniveling." It would appear that Unger felt the same way. He did not have anything good to say about Madison. From the way Unger described it, it seemed that Monroe was treated pretty badly by Madison. Unger also made it seem that Monroe was running a lot of things behind the scenes while Madison was President. Madison asked Monroe to come help him on the cabinet.

Monroe's first term as president was a huge success. He managed to unite the country and stall the extreme partisan politics for a moment. It came back with a vengeance during his second term and left him powerless to enact any memorable policies.

Similarly to the title, this is the "last founding father" I had to read about.

[Dianne Durante]

I disliked James Monroe (POTUS 1817-1825) when I met him while researching the Reynolds Affair (http://diannedurantewriter.com/archiv...). But I've decided to read a biography of each of the United States presidents in order, and I resolved to try to look at Monroe objectively. Unger's description of him as "the last Founding Father" made me hopeful. Unfortunately, I quickly came to dislike Unger even more than I disliked Monroe. For example: Unger's prologue states that "Washington's three successors - John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison - were mere caretaker presidents" (p. 2). Biographers do get attached to their subjects, but such statements made it a struggle to read Unger. My takeaways from the bio:
1) Monroe, like Madison, was a politician rather than an executive: he appointed people because of the party they belonged to rather than because they could to the job superlatively well.
2) Monroe didn't stick to his principles. In September 1814, soon after British troops burned the Capitol and the White House, Monroe was named Madison's secretary of War pro tem. "Monroe scrapped the republican principles of his youth and drew up a plan to draft a standing army of 100,000 men, raise their rates of pay, and exempt those who found recruits to serve as substitutes. Even as a young man, Monroe had never clung obstinately to any political position if he recognized it to be contrary to the nation's interests." (p. 249). What's the point of winning the war if you don't preserve the individual liberties that the country stands for?
3) Monroe deserves credit for helping to open more of the future continental U.S. to American settlers. In 1819, by the Adams-Onís Treaty, Spain ceded Florida and all claims to the Pacific Northwest, in exchange for a promise that the U.S. would not settle Texas and the Southwest. The Treaty of 1818 fixed the northern border between the U.S. and Canada as far west as the Rockies: British and Americans were no longer fighting in the Midwest (p. 294). During Monroe's administration, some 40 treaties were signed with the Indians, so settlers west of the Appalachians were no longer in danger from Indian attacks. The Russo-American Treaty of 1824 kept the Russians out of the Pacific Northwest (p. 312). The Monroe Doctrine (1824) was the natural outgrowth of Monroe's push to clear the present continental U.S. for settlement: "The American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintain, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers." (p. 350)
4. Monroe was financially irresponsible. Without a profitable plantation or an established law practice to bring in steady revenue, he was continually in debt ... yet he continued to buy expensive homes (in Virginia, Paris, and Washington), expensive furnishings, and expensive gowns for his wife. When he left office he was $75,000 in debt - a huge amount at the time.
I still don't like the man.
On to John Quincy Adams!

[Brittany · Rating 4 out of 5]

Every year, for the last five years, I’ve listened to a presidential biography. Some have been very interesting & well written (Adams) and some have been tedious & almost impossible to get through (Madison). This book about Monroe falls somewhere in the middle - I found myself wanting to listen to it, though, which for me & nonfiction, is a very good sign.
About halfway through I caught myself thinking “wow, Monroe was amazing! Why don’t I know more about him?!” And then I read some reviews written by other historians and realized that Unger might be a bit of a Monroe super-fan, which helped me read the second half more critically.
Either way, he was still a pretty a fascinating character in history - a war hero & all-star ambassador, he began his presidency by running unopposed and as the people’s champion, but by the end of his two terms, he was viewed more as a relic of an old time, the last founding father, indeed.
Some of the most interesting bits of this book were about his wife, Elizabeth, who went on her own & rescued the wife of Lafayette from a French prison after the revolution!
I’d recommend this one, just be aware that it comes with some rose-colored glasses.

[Richard Bray · Rating 2 out of 5]

Harlow Giles Unger’s James Monroe biography, THE LAST FOUNDING FATHER: JAMES MONROE AND A NATION’S CALL TO GREATNESS, reads less like a biology and more like a sacred tomb for acolytes to use in worshipping the do-no-wrong object of their devotion.

The parts where Unger is simply relaying the events that happened are well done and quite readable, but all too often, he offers opinions designed to glorify Monroe and his wife beyond all reason.

By Unger’s description, Monroe was preceded by three presidents in John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, who “were mere caretaker presidents who left the nation bankrupt, its people deeply divided, its borders under attack (and) its its capital city in ashes.” Even worse, the 35 years after Monroe’s presidency were led by presidents who were “self-serving, politically ambitions successors” who undermined the national unity he created and led the country into Civil War.

Unger describes Jefferson’s choosing of Madison as his secretary of state over Monroe as Monroe “stepping aside,” rather than being overlooked in favor of Madison, a close and well-respected friend of Jefferson in his own right. Perhaps not coincidentally, Unger reserves much of his vitriol for Madison, claiming that when Monroe served in Madison’s cabinet, it was Monroe who took the reins of the country, especially in the wake of the British attack on Washington. Later, he doesn’t appear to recognize the irony of his response when he brings up accusations that John Quincy Adams had actually crafted the Monroe doctrine:

The assertion that Adams authored the Monroe Doctrine is not only untrue, it borders on the ludicrous by implying that President Monroe was little more than a puppet manipulated by another’s hand. Such assertions show little insight into the presidency itself and the type of man who aspires to and assumes that office; indeed, they denigrate the character, the intellect, the intensity, and the sense of power that drive American presidents.

Each time Unger mentions Madison, he makes certain to belittle the fourth president, referring to him as “incompetent,” and making frequent references to Madison’s well-documented health problems and his short stature. When comparing the foreign policy experience of the two presidents, he says:

Monroe’s many years as a minister overseas had taught him diplomacy as a chesslike game of subtle moves, each fraught with nuanced, ripple effects that can accrue to the advantage or disadvantage of either side. Madison’s years in a nation of unsophisticated frontiersmen had taught him diplomacy as a game akin to the new card craze of Slap Jack.

At another point:

… the president [Madison] seemed impotent, with no command of his armed forces, no credit with Congress, and little influence over the American people. His sickly Lilliputian stature did little to inspire confidence. Everything he said or did only alienated more Americans.

When Monroe makes his seventh annual address to Congress, Unger says that some members trembled with awe as they watch him make his way down the aisle, a description that again feels over the top; I would have loved to see a source there so it seemed less a product of Unger’s overactive, awestruck imagination.

If possible, Unger seems to go even further overboard in defense of Monroe’s wife, Elizabeth:

Washington gossips accused the Monroes – especially Elizabeth – of transforming the White House into a European court. Through no fault of her own, she became the target of mean-spirited attacks, born largely of envy – of her beauty, of her exquisite (and expensive) taste in clothes and furnishings, and of her refined manners and superb education.

What Unger wants you to understand is that not only was Monroe the awesomest president who ever presidented, but he also had the hottest and most perfect wife ever. People who disliked her didn’t have any genuine motivation for their feels — they were simply jealous!

Now, I don’t point all this out to demean Monroe or his wife — I bought this book specifically to learn more about him and his strengths as an American president, and Unger’s comparisons of Monroe to George Washington were indeed eye-opening. But over the course of the book, Unger’s descriptions of Monroe got in the way of the story of Monroe’s life, and made it difficult for me to trust Unger’s accounting of the events in Monroe’s life.

According to this book, everything great that happened, from the Louisiana Purchase to the conclusion of the War of 1812, was a product of Monroe’s greatness despite the perpetual idiocy that surrounded him.

A more nuanced view of Monroe’s life would have been far more satisfying. I have no doubt of his accomplishments or his strengths, but to really understand this president, I also would have liked to learn about his weaknesses and regrets. Unfortunately, this isn’t the book for that type of insight.

[J. · Rating 2 out of 5]

Hyperbole and inaccuracies abound. Hyperbole, I can forgive, inaccuracies I cannot. Monroe in this account, like a Dean Koontz character, can seem to do no wrong. I took this on because I had no time currently to read the biography by Harry Ammon, which is reportedly the best written about the man to date. Unger here makes Monroe out to nearly be the greatest President in our nation's history. True, he was a Revolutionary War hero and implemented the Monroe Doctrine, which was essentially the realistic end date of new nation's struggle for independence and signaled America's presence as a true World power. But, he did have some serious faults, which assisted in crippling the new nation after the first two Presidents and Franklin and Hamilton gave it a foundation. Unger mentions that Monroe expressed his belief that an embargo would help thwart the British tyranny over the seas, and then blames Jefferson for the disaster the embargo created with the American economy after it was actually implemented, and makes no more mention that Monroe suggested it as well. Unger suggests how affronted Monroe felt when Hamilton accused him of leaking information about his illicit extramarital affair, but fails to mention that Hamilton, although prone to exaggeration and drama, was proven after his death to be a very honorable and truthful individual. Meaning, if Hamilton believed he was betrayed by Monroe, he probably was, and there is evidence to show that Monroe did just that. Unger does get right the fact that Monroe did protest, but I think at the time he "doth protest too much" in the words of Shakespeare. As well, here we have no mention that Monroe was, if I am correct, at first against Hamilton's creation of a National Bank to address (in part) America's need for financing loans for national emergencies. This is an important fact to leave out because Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe (mostly Jefferson) effectively dissolved the National Bank when they influenced the government not to renew the Bank's charter. What happened. The War of 1812 happened, and oh crap, now we have no money to pay for this "National Emergency". I'm sure Hamilton would have felt vindicated. But, in actuality, Hamilton, the man that he was, would never have let this happen.

I guess the bottom line is that I need to read Ammon's account, and you should too. I give this two stars only because I finished it and the writing is decent. Any book I give a one star to would be one that I was unable to finish. So far, Dean Koontz tops that list. Overall, skip this account, read others for a true perspective of our history. I'll let you know what I think of Ammon when I get the time to drift through his nearly 600 page volume.

[Steven Peterson · Rating 3 out of 5]

A readable biography of President James Monroe, the last of the Virginia Dynasty (Washington, Jefferson, and Madison). This work makes a strong case that he was an able political leader and a capable President. People probably need to know more about Monroe, and this book would be an aid for those not knowing much about him. The book is a fairly quick read.

It traces the usual arc of a biography--from his family's background to his youth to his actions during the Revolutionary War to his public service (culminating in the presidency), and his post-Presidential career. In the process, we learn much about his personal life--his devoted relationship to his wife Elizabeth, the somewhat more painful relationship with his brothers, his perpetual flirtation with financial ruin (as with Thomas Jefferson, for instance).

The book gives us a good sense of his political rise. For the most part, he was allied with James Madison and Thomas Jefferson, but he did have some falling out with Madison. Interestingly enough, one of his better friends was John Marshall, who had very different political views from Monroe. Nonetheless, they remained close over their lifetimes.

Some problems with this volume: It treats Monroe as if he rose above other actors of the time and is rather noncritical of him; the author is very hard on people like Madison and William Crawford, among others. The negativity, I think, works against the forward momentum of the book. Surely, Madison has his problems as did Jefferson as President. But this book treats them as rather one dimensional. In addition, I sometimes think we learn more about Monroe the person and his family rather than about his accomplishments, his policies, and so on.

Nonetheless, a well written work on a President about whom we should know more.

[Doreen Petersen · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really loved this book. To me James Madison was a just and honorable man and president. He gave his all for his country. What I find disturbing is the way subsequent politicians have perverted his legacy. I would definitely recommend this book.

[Brian Pate · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting and fast-paced. Very pro-Monroe biography.

Unger's thesis seems to be that Monroe is the rightful successor to Washington. He minimizes Monroe's three predecessors by calling them "mere caretaker presidents who left the nation bankrupt, its people deeply divided, its borders under attack, its capital city in ashes" (p. 2). Unger repeatedly points out similarities between Monroe and Washington (e.g., pp. 263, 268, 314). In short, he believes that America was the "nation [Monroe] had inherited from George Washington" (p. 293).

But then Unger really annoyed me when he responded to those who assert that JQA really authored the Monroe Doctrine: "Such assertions show little insight into the presidency itself and the type of man who aspires to and assumes that office; indeed, they denigrate the character, the intellect, the intensity, and the sense of power that drive American presidents" (p. 313). But that is exactly what Unger claimed regarding Madison's presidency. He said that Monroe had been the "de facto president and commander in chief for nearly two years" while serving under Madison (p. 259).

One more thing...I got very tired of Unger's overused "all but" sentence construction (he uses it 56x according to my google books search). For example, Madison "winced at the destruction that surrounded him and all but shrank behind Monroe at the approach of angry citizens" (p. 246). Really? How do we know that?

[John Brackbill · Rating 3 out of 5]

I listened to this on the audio book format.

James Monroe was a loyal man, a family man, and a good friend. He remains influential today through the used and misused "Monroe" doctrine and he has forever left his stamp on American given his part in securing the vast territories that make up much of our nation today. The effort of Monroe to unite the nation and his success in that was impressive. Reading this made me wish we were in an era that had a presidents that brought the people together in that way again rather than divided.

It may have been the times that I listened to it or that I was comparing it with Thomas Jefferson
by R.B. Bernstein which I also recently listened to on audio book, but I did not find this biography totally captivating. Especially at the beginning I had a hard time seeing the line of thinking and progression that Unger was taking in telling the story of Monroe. I would have been interested to also hear more about Monroe's faith and if and how that played a part in his political career. Noticeably, there was little critical analysis offered by Unger.

Nevertheless, I am glad I listened to this book and found that as it progressed it got better and better.

[Christopher · Rating 3 out of 5]

A biography should never be a bland recitation of facts. It's a literary art form, not journalism. You're naive if you think you're not going to get an author's spin on things.

However...

As other Goodreads reviewers have accurately observed, Unger's take on James Monroe too often crosses the line from otherwise well-researched, well-written storytelling into fawning (and often embarrassing) Fanboyism. The greatest of Unger's sins? His assertion that Adams, Jefferson, and Madison were merely "caretaker presidents" before Monroe arrived, picked up Washington's mantle, and got something the hell done.

That's a bold claim.

I mean, I liked this book and truly admire Monroe's many accomplishments. He assumed more public posts than any other American in history: state legislator, U.S. congressman, U.S. senator, ambassador to France, ambassador to Britain, minister to Spain, four-term governor of Virginia, U.S. Secretary of State, U.S. Secretary of War, and two-term president.

But if he was really All That, you'd think he would have warranted at least a MENTION in the libretto of "Hamilton."

[Larry Bassett · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is pretty effusive about the expansion of the United States. James Monroe was eager to make the country a one party political system in the book suggest that he had some success in bringing the parties together. The book is a bit giddy about the good feelings in the country. The biggest loser according to the book was the president who preceded James Monroe, that is James Madison who is portrayed as incompetent. In fact the book claims that James Monroe was the defacto president for the last two years of Madison's term.

Monroe usurped the congressional responsibility for declaring war with Andrew Jackson's attacks on Spain in Florida. I am anxious to read the biography of Jackson.

The Monroe doctrine is given some coverage at the end of the book but it is not very extensive and seems not to be very objective other than suggesting the presidents have used the doctrine inappropriately for many years. The issues of slavery and the relationship with the Native Americans is only given cursory coverage. Monroe was another of the slave owners.

[Lindsay Chervinsky · Rating 1 out of 5]

I literally could not finish this book. I always make my very best effort to finish, out of respect for the time and effort the author invested, but I just couldn't stomach any more. All historical events are somewhat subject to interpretation, but Unger takes subjectivity to a whole new level. For example, when discussing Monroe's time as Ambassador to France, he extols Monroe's efforts and said that he followed his instructions to the letter and did he job perfectly. Sounds good on paper, but most historians will tell you that Monroe's actions would probably be considered treason today. There is absolutely no mention of his failures or limitations and simply drums up his recall to the influence of his political enemies. After about 100 pages I was so disgusted, I put the book away and vow not to open it again.

[Joe · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting book. Monroe was apparently quite petty. He was a different times angry with George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Aaron Burr, Alexander Hamilton and likely many more. I think he only ended up as president because no one wanted it at the time. This book painted a very rosy picture of the man but I don't think it was really objective. None of his feuds were ever his fault which is likely not the case. Ok, but not a real honest assessment.

[Tim · Rating 4 out of 5]

Every author is partial (or not) to their subject in some way, but it’s extraordinary how much Unger loves Monroe, sometimes to the detriment of its subject. Points off to the narrator who can’t say Monticello correctly.

[Chandler · Rating 1 out of 5]

When it comes to the Presidency of James Monroe, things look pretty good on the surface. We have the beginning of the Era of Good Feelings, with the economy expanding, and westward expansion opening up new land opportunities. Monroe was elected to the Presidency by crushing margins, and it seemed like he was doing well. However, if you look just under the beguiled surface, there is trouble brewing on the horizon. This is the admission of Missouri into the Union. This was an issue because it once again brought up the condition of slavery. Those who wanted to have control in the south wanted to have it enter as a slave state, and those in the north wanted it to be kept free. The resulting compromise, where Mane entered as a free state, and Missouri as a slave state, was called the Missouri compromise. It was a temporary solution, at best.

Then there was the potentially nasty issue of an international incident with Spain, Britain, and the US. Seminole Indians had been conducting raids on US settlements in Georgia, only to run back into Florida controlled by Spain. Monroe sends General Andrew Jackson in to the southern part of the US to protect the citizens there. Jackson gets tired of this, and marches into Florida, and captures and hangs British privateers who were helping the Native Americans. Thankfully, this three sided international incident resulted in the annexation of Florida to the United States, instead of an armed conflict.

Then there was what would come to be called the Monroe Doctrine. This was part of Monroe’s State of the Union address in 1823. In it, he states an umtimatdum: That any foreign power cannot settle in side the Northern Hemisphere, and that the United States will do whatever it can to stop them from doing so. It becomes a defining moment in Monroe’s Presidency, yet he was not the original author. It was written by his Secretary of State John Quincy Adams. Better still, it was not even recognized as the Monroe Doctrine until the 1850’s. This makes Monroe’s Presidency one of those that people tend to forget. With no major political crisis or scandals, nor any major political triumphs, it is easy to see why he tends to take a back seat to those like Washington, Jefferson, or even Jackson.

===============================================================
Well, I think that, so far, this is the worst presidential biography I have read since I did the biography of Thomas Jefferson by R.B. Bernstein. For those of you who do not know, I have made a bit of a new years resolution to read one major biography of every U.S. President. Up until now, the worst of this was the Thomas Jefferson book mentioned above. This was because that, although it did explain a few things about Thomas Jefferson, it was filled with a great many writing about basic Revolutionary era facts that I already knew. I had thought that I had seen the worst of it when I read that book, but now I have stumbled upon something else, something far more insulting to the world of literary Presidential biographies: a book that is filled with such bias that I wondered if it was my fault that I was viewing it harshly. Was I not understanding this book because I had read the superb works of McCullough and Ellis? No. Was it because that I had read the excellently detailed works of Chaney that I was imposing these expectations unfairly upon Unger? No. I have found, after reading this book, that, at best, Unger has left us with insignificant dinner part facts about Monroe, and, at worst, has made up events that simply did not happen.

This book begins with a huge display of professional bias, where Unger states that the previous Presidents after Washington- Adams, Jefferson, and Madison- were all mere placeholders until Monroe took power, and managed to turn the nation around from the brink of collapse. This was something that I personally found hard to swallow. After all, these Presidents that Unger casts aside did a great many things. Adams, for example, managed to create the Navy, and Jefferson managed to double the landmass of the United States for pennies on the dollar. Madison taught us the hard way that in the real world, foreign issues could not be ignored ( unlike what Washington wanted in his farewell address). To so casually dismiss all that they had done to get Monroe to the Presidency is something that had me suspicious as to what Unger was doing.

And the terrible treatment of the Presidential predecessors doesn’t stop there. All throughout the book, there are little side comments and hints at Unger’s contempt for the past leaders. He calls Adams old and fat, Jefferson’s Monticello gaudy and flamboyant, and Madison an incompetent fool as a President. Especially after reading major works on each of these men, these side comments stuck out to me like a sore thumb, and slowly work to show the inherent bias that Unger has for anyone that isn’t Monroe or Washington.

This leads to how Unger displays Monroe himself, which is to say that Unger treat him more like a prophet than an actual human being. In this narrative, Monroe has no faults, he creates no issues during his political career, and, indeed, he is never to blame if things go wrong in his life. It is always someone else's fault, say a political appointee, or a wayward brother, but never his fault, no mam. This is especially true when it comes into a key revolation that a reader may not know while reading this book: Monroe was a slave owner. He owned a small number of slaves in an attempt to become part of the Virginia Dynasty, like Jefferson, whom he so deeply admired. Yet, Unger makes absolutely no mention of this. In fact, the only way that one would recognize Monroe as a slave owner is if one were paying attention to a quote by Monroe that Unger left in the book. In it, Monroe casually mentions that he sold off some slaves to pay off some of his many debts. Other than this, slaves are referred to a private servants, and never by their actual name. Now I understand that those people who aspired to be in the rich planter elite needed to hold these slaves, and, of course this is wrong, but I feel that it is almost more wrong not to address this fact to the reader. What is the author, and by extension, the reader, to make of this information? How should this shape our feelings toward Monroe? A good author should take not only the best of his or her subject, but also the worst. McCullough did this in John Adams by showing us how, at the time, the Alien and Sedition Acts seemed like a logical course of action, while a 21st reader may not agree with it. Lynn Cheney makes a point that going to war with Britain in 1812 may not have been the best idea in hindsight, but at the time, it made the most sense because it was the only card we had left to play, even if we were foolish to do so. Every biography tries to show both the positives and the negatives of their subjects and this one should be no different. But Unger, instead, refuses to do this because he simply idolizes Monroe to the point that one even wonders if he was a real person.

If one would think that that is the worst Unger does to Monroe, then they would be wrong. Unger also has a habit of making things up. In my copey of the text on page 314, Unger paints this vivid picture:

“ On December 2, 1823, Monroe strode into Congress to deliver his seventh annual message to that body. He had aged noticeably- still tall and fit, but his hair had grayed and deep worry lines had etched his face. Still wearing knee breeches, silk hose, and buckle-top shoes, while his audience wore ankle-length trousers, he seemed out of place--out of the distant past, come to ensure his own legacy. Members of Congress stood to applaud- and cheer- some of them trembling with awe as they watched him make his way down the aisle- The Last of the Founding Fathers.”

Pretty moving little moment right? Except for the fact that it never happened! With every source I could find on the topic of the State of the Union, from blog posts by seemingly random people and official government pages, Monroe never gave the State of the Union himself. All of the sources state that the State of The Union (which wasn’t even called this until about the 1940’s) was given by a clerk to read to Congress. Washington and Adams read them to congress, but it was discontinued by Jefferson, who stated that it seemed too monarchical (but more than likely was done because he did not have a good public speaking voice). It was usually written by the President, or a speech writer, and given to a clerk to read out to congress. It was done this way until Wilson began reading them in person in 1913. So this whole scene, with the clapping, and the trembling was completely made up! (If anyone can find a source that says something different, please let me know.)

It is this fact that makes me give this book a 1 star rating. I don’t mind if you seem to really idolize your subject, but making things up because they fit in with your fantasy of what history was like is inexcusable. I am reading these books to ultimately teach to my students, and it is ‘facts’ like those above that throw everything I have learned into a negative light. How can I trust anything I have read from this novel? This makes me extremely disappointed in this author. The interesting thing is, I own Unger’s book on John Quincy Adams, the next President after Monroe. Considering my feelings on the Monroe biography, will I actually read it? Perhaps, if only to see what he says about Adams and the Monroe Doctrine. In this book, he states that Adams had nothing to do with it, and Monroe did the work, telling off historians who assert the opposite claim in the process. Regardless, when I decide to get to John Quincy, I am going to take a good long look at Unger before I read another word of his. In the meantime, stay away from this book. It is insulting to the work of history as a whole.

[Brian Willis · Rating 3 out of 5]

This would be the book if you are looking to read a bio of every President; however, as several reviewers have stated, this hagiography sometimes ignores historical consensus at the expense of resituating Monroe as a "great" President, when in fact he rode the Jeffersonian Republican coattails into office and presided over a one party nation.

Those reading about the founding of the independent American republic through the 1820s will find new perspectives here, as most of the other Founders were more centrally located within those struggles. All other accounts mention Monroe's involvement almost as a footnote, as if dutifully recognizing a future President was at Valley Forge or injured at Brandywine or part of the hyper partisan machinations of the Jeffersonian Republicans.

Unger mostly ignores Monroe's partisanship and self-aggrandizement in order to remind us that he was the "last Founding Father", as if that is an inherently and implicitly uncomplicated label for which we should be glad. Monroe had zero to do with the foundation of the government, a soldier who bunkered with John Marshall, Washington, and Hamilton at Valley Forge and received wounds in service. That's it. That makes him a "Founding Father", which is just a way of saying "the last of the Revolutionary generation to be elected to the White House".

I was mainly in this read to cover the Presidential years, which weren't incredibly exciting. Monroe initiated the first war in American history without the approval of Congress, condoning Andrew Jackson's expelling of the Seminoles from Florida without consultation and violating a treaty with Spain in the process. His most important achievement - the Monroe Doctrine - has long held to be composed by John Quincy Adams, though Unger insists it was Monroe without citations or documentation. The Panic of 1819 - a financial crisis caused by reckless speculation of banks and which certainly needed regulation - was apparently not as bad as all historians have claimed according to Unger, but only because it suits the narrative of Monroe as an extreme libertarian.

I'm glad I read it, but I don't walk away impressed by Monroe more than when I started. It appears we actually have him to think for negotiating the Louisiana Purchase, but he was not exceptional other than as the first politician to assimilate the cloak of Washington and using his uncanny likeness to GW to cultivate a cult of the Revolutionary ideal. A good, fairly quick read, but not mind blowing. Recommended if you need that bio of Monroe, though a good section in an anthology or larger history book of the period, such as "What Hath God Wrought"'s chapter on Monroe, would probably serve just as well.

[William · Rating 3 out of 5]

Another Jemmy becomes president and gets a book written about it for me to read and share my impressions with ya.

Remember the last Jemmy book I said that that Jemmy was called 5'6" this Jemmy book says the previous Jemmy (Madison) was only 5'0". I think every presidential subject is the apple of his biographer's eye who can see no fault in him and only faults in the others.

I'll call this Jemmy Monroe so to avoid confusion. Monroe got bled in the war of independence and he wanted to lead but there just weren't enough opportunities for every would be general so he went to law school instead. He went to France to represent his country and then he got fired. I felt bad for Monroe he didn't deserve to lose his job just because he was a Francophile (an incurable condition in his day.) According to this book he owned slaves but it glosses over how he acquired them and how he treated them. He hung some slaves that tried to rebel but didn't even get a shot fired. I lost a lot of respect for Monroe on this one I tell ya. This was a cowardly deed.

He sure loved his wife and she got burned in a fire. I felt bad for the lady. When she died he wanted to go with her. It was sad. If you are reading this and didn't know his wife died I am sorry for spoiling it for you. I won't annoy you by telling you what became of him. (It too was sad though just sayin.)

Read this book if you like tall Jemmys who sometimes did noble things and enjoyed building empires.

[Tamara York · Rating 4 out of 5]

James Monroe was more interesting than I expected! Orphaned at 16 with a “smaller” Virginia farm (800 acres), he pretty much made his own way in the world working his way up through education and the military, fighting under Washington. He was minister to France and orchestrated the Louisiana Purchase. Serving his second term as president, he wrote the Monroe Doctrine basically telling Europe to keep their colonization out of the Americas. He was the third former president to die on July 4th, along with Jefferson and Adams.