The History Book Club discussion

Jerome wrote: "Question: Why do you think the states quarreled so much?"

Jerome, the states had been akin to separate countries - they not only had their own governments, but also diverging cultures and histories. For example, the crown had granted much of the land in the South while the North had been settled originally by highly religious individuals escaping persecution. You could see how the descendent societies of those two groups might not see eye to eye on everything.

Add that to the issues I mentioned above: lack of communication, mobility, common culture, etc. With all of these differences, no wonder the states fought for their own self interests rather than view themselves as part of a larger homogenous nation.

Jack wrote: "Logan, another few questions for you. Regarding your decision to right on Washington's choices regarding trying military and civilian traitors, what compelled you to cover that material? Also, th..."

Jack, I am psychic. Haha! In reality, I had no idea we would end up with all of this divisive controversy over Manning, Snowden, and others that would leave us arguing over "who are the patriots and who are the traitors? What is just?" I thought this was such an interesting aspect of our history that lacked adequate attention. It is not always so easy to distinguish between the patriots and traitors - let alone figure out how to properly try them.

I covered the attacks on the Seneca because I think they demonstrate a powerful (and almost completely overlooked) aspect of Washington's understanding of what it meant to be the American Commander in Chief

One of the main contributions of this book to current scholarship is that demarcation line between American citizens vs. foreign nationals. Washington's treatment of the Seneca versus his approach to Loyalists is deeply telling.

Question:Was the central government strong enough?

Hi Logan,
I'm confused on the "shot heard round the world" (pg 56)
If I remember the story right, it was a sentry and a group of 5 or so redcoats. A misfire set it off but I don't remember it being a 1000 redcoats. Am I confusing this as the Boston Massacre?
Thank you!

Great question Chantal. Thanks so much and don't forget to bold the work "question" right before your actual question, just to highlight it, make it easy to read. You can see Jerome's on message 110.

Question Your frequently cited sources section gives a good sense of what sources were the most useful to you in writing the book. As you did research, what were your favorite sources?

< b > before the Q in question and with no spaces and then after the : < / b > also with no spaces.

Question:How about Ethan Allen for your next project?

I did it! I feel so smart!

Well done, Tomi.

Ditto

Try #2 Hi Logan,
I'm confused on the "shot heard round the world"(pg 56) If I remember the story right, it was a sentry and a group of 5 or so redcoats. A misfire set it off but I don't remember it being a 1000 redcoats.

Question Am I confusing this as the Boston Massacre?
Thank you!

Jerome wrote: "Question:Was the central government strong enough?"

Good question - what do you think? Forgive me from playing off the quote of a Brit (Churchill), but I think the Founders formed “the worst form of government, except for all the others”

Chantal wrote: "Hi Logan,
I'm confused on the "shot heard round the world" (pg 56)
If I remember the story right, it was a sentry and a group of 5 or so redcoats. A misfire set it off but I don't remember it bei..."

Hi Chantal, that sounds like the Boston Massacre of 1770 when one British sentry and 8 redcoat reinforcements fired upon a crowd of colonists. John Adams wrote that "foundation of American independence was laid" on that fateful day.

Tomi wrote: "Question:How about Ethan Allen for your next project?"

Hi Tomi, I love that idea. I am seriously considering it but want to finish reading Randall's book first to see if he left much new to be told! Has anyone read it yet?

Ethan Allen: His Life and Times by Willard Sterne Randall

Mark wrote: "Question Your frequently cited sources section gives a good sense of what sources were the most useful to you in writing the book. As you did research, what were your favorite sources?"

Hi Mark,

My favorite source was the Papers of George Washington. They are completely fascinating and so thorough. A main reason why I was able to find new material that you do not see in other books is because of the University of Virginia's Papers of George Washington Project. Their team is doing a tremendous job of collecting Washington's writings from all over the world and digitizing them in one location. Letters that had previously been lost/inaccessible are now available for inquisitive eyes like ours.

Logan wrote: "Tomi wrote: "Question:How about Ethan Allen for your next project?"

Hi Tomi, I love that idea. I am seriously considering it but want to finish reading Randall's book first to see if he left much ..."

Good try on the citation Logan and very very close.

by Willard Sterne Randall (no photo)

No, I have not read it yet - let us know how you like it.

Logan wrote: "Mark wrote: "Question Your frequently cited sources section gives a good sense of what sources were the most useful to you in writing the book. As you did research, what were your favorite sources..."

by George Washington

These are multi-volume sets of books published by The University of Virginia.

Additionally here are some links:

http://gwpapers.virginia.edu/index.html

http://rotunda.upress.virginia.edu/fo...

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/gwhtml/

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_me...

http://www.mountvernon.org/educationa...

http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/3112/

Bentley wrote: "Logan wrote: "Tomi wrote: "Question:How about Ethan Allen for your next project?"

Hi Tomi, I love that idea. I am seriously considering it but want to finish reading Randall's book first to see if..."

I will get it one of these days! Thanks Bentley!

You are doing terrific - just giving a little help and you are very welcome.

Question: I am fascinated by the smallpox inoculations....Logan, was the general public aware of this issue, and were inoculations available to them at this time? And what were the risks and complications besides several weeks of recovery?

Doreen wrote: "Question: I am fascinated by the smallpox inoculations....Logan, was the general public aware of this issue, and were inoculations available to them at this time? And what were the risks and compli..."

Me too, Doreen. A funny little story about this section - I was at the rehearsal dinner for my friend's wedding in late April 2011, and a bunch of my friends were asking how the book was coming along. I responded, "well, I finished the proposal but have been too caught up on a few other projects to write much since." They asked, "well, when is the full manuscript due?" I responded, "not until July 15th." They yelled, "Logan! That is only two and a half months away!" So that night before the wedding, I was in my hotel room writing this section. And for the next two and a half months, I cranked out the initial draft. I needed that kick from my friends.

But back to smallpox - while the general public largely knew about inoculations, there was much mistrust and false information circling. Just look at how many people are skeptical of vaccinations today and imagine people's thoughts back then when medicine was so primitive (and often dangerous - remember, doctors killed Washington by trying to treat his infection with leaches!). Many, including political leaders and even some doctors, believed smallpox inoculations spread the disease.

The inoculation was somewhat dangerous because if administered incorrectly, it could spread the disease. Even when administered properly, some people contradicted the full-blown version, so when administered incorrectly, it could be quite deadly.

But the main problem was the potential transmission during those weeks of recovery. Most inoculations were successful and the patient only received the mild form, but that mild form could still be spread. If someone came into contact with an inoculated patient during that time, he or she could contract the deadly case and spread it like wildfire. It was a terrible disease and Washington handled it amazingly.

Libby wrote: "Theme: age/ageism, pp. 35-36. Reference to Franklin in is eighties and age span of those sent to The Convention: "Their ages ranged from an impetuous 26-year-old veteran names Jonathan Dayton to..."

Hi Libby, I hope I was not being ageist myself! I mentioned age often merely as a common descriptive characteristic that might help readers to better know the majorbplayers. I have an Irish Mother who guards knowledge of her actual age ferociously so I know better than to be so focused on age in day to day living.

But back then, yes, age was a factor. They viewed older men as wiser, hence the age restrictions in the Constitution for the offices.

At the same time, people did not live as long so their representatives were often younger than ours now. Imagine us electing a 26 year old to help a amend our Constitution! Men like Madison and Hamilton were surpsigingly young for the responsibilities entrusted to them. But that was more because they had fewer older men and were willing to give younger ones a chance (it was not that they preferred the young over the old).

I was looking at another book on the presidency and the constitution:

by Edward S. Corwin (no photo)

Corwin cites an interesting book regarding Lincoln and the use of commander-in-chief powers in wartime. Whiting states that the constitution gives the president, in a time of war, powers that range over the entire country and no constitutional limitations.

Question: Did you read the following book and if so, what were your thoughts on it?

by William Whiting (no photo)

Jodi wrote: "Hi, Logan,

I am curious about domestic relations (in the most literal sense of the word) following the Revolution. In this (past) week's chapters, you talked about how involved some of the America..."

Thank you, Jodi - the spank-for-coffee was one of my favorite scenes! Women were viewed as a crucial component of the American Republic.

Sexism pervaded the era, of course, and women's role was generally confined to the home (they could not vote, did not typically receive the education of their male counterparts, were expected to do the cooking and cleaning, etc.). But within the domestic sphere, many women carried great influence. Politically speaking, women were seen as crucial to educating and instilling American values in the next generation.

Vis a vis their husbands, the relationships varied according to the individuals. Often, women were seen as meek and meant to support the "man of the house," but this was far from universal. I came across many women who played powerful roles. Just look at Peggy Arnold and her role in Benedict's plot.

Many of the leading Founders' writings reflect great respected for their wives' opinions intellect (e.g. George and Martha Washington, James and Dolly Madison, John and Abigail Adams).

I highly recommend you check out the letters between Abigail and John Adams. Their writings depict a tremendously loving relationship of mutual admiration.

John Adams
Abigail Adams

Libby wrote: "CH 9: American Fortitude: "Drunk with confidence--and booze--after his triumph, Allen began lobbying Congress to expand the war, writing, 'I will lay my wife on it, that with fifteen men, and a p..."

Guilty as charged, Libby - in life, I am a bit of a jokester and it comes out in my writing.

In this quote, Allen is saying something akin to when people today "swear on their kids" to convey how strongly that believe in the truth of their statement. He was not literally betting his wife since white women of the time were not subject to barter. As I summarized in my response to Jodi a few minutes ago, white women were citizens (disfranchised citizens, but citizens still). The same could not be said for African-American men and women, who could indeed be bartered.

I am happy you caught that line from Allen because I thought it was very funny that he was swearing by her life - but Congress did not realize that he did not like his wife very much!

Ethan Allen

Bryan wrote: "I was looking at another book on the presidency and the constitution:

by Edward S. Corwin (no photo)

Corwin cites an interesting ..."

Bryan, I have not read this book, but would like to. Lincoln is a completely fascinating man and president.

I was speaking with John Witt (he is at Yale with me and wrote a great book, Lincoln's Code) about how much Lincoln expanded the powers of the Presidency beyond what Washington envisioned. Some argue that some of Lincoln's actions were therefore unconstitutional since the Constitution was meant to guard citizens' rights from Presidential encroachment. It is a very interesting and - even after all the years - it remains a controversial episode in American history. I would like to read this book and recommend you also check out Witt's Lincoln's Code.

John Fabian Witt

Libby wrote: "Chapter 14, Pages 115-116--Excellent treatment of historical English language dialectology. The author handled this topic so well that I wish he delved into more of it.

Question:. Given the afore..."

Thank you, Libby, I am very happy to hear you enjoyed it. Interestingly, my line editor tried to convince me to remove that section. I agree that it is a bit of a tangent but felt that it was so interesting that is worth it. I wanted to get into it more, but I was already pushing it just getting that small part in so I was unable.

I would love to write a book on language and think that is an excellent idea. I had not considered it - but I am now! People often take language for granted but it profoundly shapes how we view ourselves and others as it constantly evolves throughout history.

Question: Would you say the time period dating from the end of the colonies through the American Revolution to formation of the American Government is your "favorite" era in United States history? Could you see yourself trying to write a book about a totally different time period?

Logan, Mr. Witt came to my workplace to give a talk. I will add this to my TBR pile; it looks good.

by John Fabian Witt

Craig wrote: "Question: Would you say the time period dating from the end of the colonies through the American Revolution to formation of the American Government is your "favorite" era in United States history?..."

Hi Craig, yes, this is definitely my favorite era. It is just such an amazing collection of brilliant men and women who fortuitously came together to beat the odds and found our great nation. I think we have so much to learn from them.

My next book will likely be on the same era but I am definitely open to others. I have been getting interested in WWII and the greatest generation lately so that has been in the back of my mind too.

Do you have any other suggestions for my next project? What periods most interest you?

Logan,

You could do a whole series on Presidential Constitutional violations (of course, your first book for the most part predates the Constitution...) which would open up many other eras and American leaders.

I personally don't have a "favorite" era but am also fascinated by Jacksonian Democracy, the Civil War, the Gilded Age, and wartime decisions during most of the 20th Century global conflicts, all of which lend themselves well to that overall theme.

Question: With the opening this weekend of the new George Washington Library at Mount Vernon do you feel future research projects on Washington will be expanded?

New York Times story on the library opening - http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/29/us/...

Libby wrote: "Reference Point: Chapter 21, Pages 182-183--Given Clinton's desire to trump Howe, one can see that his own greed proved ineffective for the overall British cause. One could only wonder what type ..."

Excellent insight, Libby - Clinton was not a "team player." I found numerous references to his quarrelsome demeanor (he quarreled with most of the people around him, as evidenced by his underlings' letters in which they negatively describe his personality) and jealousy over Howe's position. He believed that he was a more capable leader than Howe - something he was not afraid to make known in his conversations and writings.

For his part, Howe fed Clinton's animosity with the somewhat dismissive manner in which he treated him. As someone who yearned to show off his greatness, Clinton was enraged at being brushed aside by someone he believed too conciliatory and less competent.

I think you make a great point - had Clinton put the British military before his own ambition, the British may have won.

Craig wrote: "Question: With the opening this weekend of the new George Washington Library at Mount Vernon do you feel future research projects on Washington will be expanded?

New York Times story on the librar..."

I sure hope so, Craig. After all of these years it is incredible how much more we have to learn from Washington. We are still collecting information on him and this library is a tremendous asset to our scholarship. Its tremendous resources will be provide excellent fodder for further discussion and learning.

I went to the George Washington Library for a sneak peak reception on September 10th and it is beautiful. I highly encourage everyone to visit if they ever find themselves in the area.

I cannot help but tell a quick story about my visit: I walked in and met the director. When I said my name, he instantly said "Blood of Tyrants!" I was stunned. He continued, "Yes, we love your book. It is getting great reviews from our Mount Vernon folk." My jaw hit the floor - I was incredibly happy to hear this. I could not stop smiling like an idiot.

As I thanked him, he kindly pointed towards the entry that I had breezed past. I walked over to the bookshelf of "must read" books on display and there it was - Blood of Tyrants right as you walk in the main entrance.

As soon as I thought I was alone, I starting taking pictures of the display. Apparently no photography is allowed because a security guard ran over to me to ask me to stop. I said, "but I wrote that" and she looked at me like I was nuts, then laughed and said "okay fine." I was almost the first person removed from the George Washington Library. What a great night!

Great story. Thanks for sharing.

I'm happy for you Logan. If the Mt. Vernon folks like it, then you stand in good company. Congrats.

Hi Logan- thank you so much for being so involved in the Q&A and other threads. It's a real treat to have the author so active and willing to answer questions and share their insights.

I've been reading the Q&A and realize some of my Q's are being A'ed through other members (haha). However, I wanted to convey that I've had a unique experience I've wanted to share with you.
I teach History at a local campus and am right now teaching a Constitutional History course. I have used part of your book in class (my students thought the cover was awesome by the way) and talked about how the Founders were influenced by Washington's example while drafting the role and powers of the executive branch. It seems to "click" with them about how they were able to create a fairly strong executive, despite the fears of such that were clearly abundant in their minds. I really appreciate that argument in your book and the way I am able to use it in the classroom with students. These aren't history majors, but I want them to have an appreciation for history and an understanding of it's relevance to them and understanding their present and how to use the past to perhaps help guide their future.

So here is my Question:
I like to bring in outside sources and such in the classroom, and wonder if there was something that you learned from writing this book that you could convey to students (I'll read it to them, but I'm sure everyone here would like to know as well) to explain why Washington and his example and influence are still relevant to them today?

John wrote: "Hi Logan- thank you so much for being so involved in the Q&A and other threads. It's a real treat to have the author so active and willing to answer questions and share their insights.

I've been ..."

John, I love hearing this! This really makes my day because it is exactly what I hoped for. I did not have the opportunity to learn from someone like you, so a lot of the history I learned in school did not click for me. I am very proud if this book helped your students appreciate the importance of history.

And that is great to hear about the cover - I agonized over it. I rejected the first few the publisher proposed and even ran a poll among my friends to decide. I am nothing if not obsessive.

I am not sure if you have made it to the Epilogue yet since we are still reading along with the club, but I included in there a little primer on Constitutional interpretation that might be of interest. I try to make the point that this history is important because 1. these were brilliant people who dealt with (and largely overcame) dilemmas we still face today, so we would be wise to learn from them, and 2. even if we are not wise enough to do that out of our own volition, our legal system calls for it. Regarding point 2, I try hard not to preach or take a side in the whole "originalism" debate. I merely point out the fact that this history is used - to varying degrees - by most judges and scholars and therefore history impacts our laws whether we like it or not. I am happy to discuss further.

Thanks Logan! No - I haven't made it to the Epilogue yet, as I am trying to keep pace with the group.
In two weeks we look at the Executive in depth and the Presidents in general. One of the things I typically discuss is the "precedents" that President Washington left when he was essentially helping to "create" the office through his daily actions. This is why I think your valuable - as I can demonstrate how students can go beyond the textbook and dive into other sources and books and letters and journals and make it come alive.

My biggest challenge I think is getting them to shake off preconceived notions or prejudices they developed in Secondary eductation or in general that History is boring and just dates, wars and maps with no relevance to them personally. When they make a personal connection or see how they can understand why the present is what it is by looking at the past, I see it "click" for them.

I want to bring up your points above in our discussion in two weeks, and what is discussed further. I wish my students could jump in like this with a Q&A, although Im not sure what kind of Qs they would devise! (haha) But if you wouldn't mind taking it a step further and ellaborate perhaps on this further Question:
One of the common complaints one might hear is about how these "dead rich white guys" are irrelevant and why should they care to learn about them. I give some answers, but what would you add beyond the points mentioned above. Whywhat do you think we can learn from historical figures, such as Washington, and make it relevant to us? How did Washington "click" for you, for example?

Congratulations Logan for “Blood of Tyrants” being nominated for a Pulitzer!!!!

Question: Briefly, how does it feel?

Wow- Congratulations!

The 2014 finalists were announced? I thought they don't award those until the spring?

John wrote: "Thanks Logan! No - I haven't made it to the Epilogue yet, as I am trying to keep pace with the group.
In two weeks we look at the Executive in depth and the Presidents in general. One of the things..."

Hi John, I will PM you - that will take a bit of a conversation! One we should definitely have have you have had a chance to read the Epilogue since I think that will answer some.

That would be great- I hate to take up your time, but would be grateful for sure. Please PM me at your convenience and I can send my email if that's easier. I appreciate any outside insight and look forward to hearing from you. Sometimes students appreciate hearing from other sources, historians rather than just me and the textbook. (Don't tell on me, but I'm gonna make sure to read the epilogue before my next lecture/class)

Mark wrote: "Congratulations Logan for “Blood of Tyrants” being nominated for a Pulitzer!!!!

Question: Briefly, how does it feel?"

Thank you Mark and John! It feels surreal. I am shocked and appalled Haha.

Craig, one of the nominees - they are not at the finalist stage for a few more months.

Hi Libby, some countries (like Greece) still have them but the they were mostly eliminated in the United States in the mid 1800s. As bankruptcy law developed, the states began restricting imprisonment for civil debts. Imprisonment for private debts was eliminated federally in 1833 and the states followed suit over the next few decades.

Even today, however, people are sent to prison for matters concerning certain criminal justice debts. But they just go to regular old prison.

As a nerdy side note, although I never focused on bankruptcy in my legal practice, I wrote a law journal article comparing modern bankruptcy to Rembrandt's in the 17th Century. It is intentionally academic (dry!) but in case you are interested: http://www.law.fsu.edu/journals/trans....

Friends, I cannot believe we are finishing. You have all been such a tremendous part of my book launch experience - I feel like we were all in it together! I could not imagine a better group of people to share it with.

Your fascinating thoughts have wowed me throughout and I feel humbled by your words. I appreciate your very kind reviews - all those stars make the hard work that went into this book worth it and I especially love your insights. I feel a bond with each of you and encourage you to friend me here, so that we can continue to keep in touch.

I am traveling the country and would love to meet everyone who participated in our discussions - I am in the middle of a Kentucky/Tennessee/Virginia trip now and then will be in New York later this week, Connecticut next week, then North and South Carolina (see you soon John!) in November. I am also putting together trips to speak in Utah and Massachusetts and would love to meet each of you as I add other locations. Please let me know where we are.

Thank you, my new friends, I share your love of history and appreciate your help spreading the word about Blood of Tyrants. Please reach out with any idea! I would love to hear from you.

A huge thank you to Bentley for making this all happen! The History Book club is a treasure and your efforts are so greatly appreciated.

And a very warm thank you to Bryan, Christopher, and Jerome for your tremendous moderation and insights. I feel blown away by your knowledge of the era and hope for the chance to work with you more in the future. I am sending you personal messages and we will definitely remain in touch.

Thank you Logan for such kind words. I want to thank you for your efforts to keep engaged with all of us as we read your book. Great job.

Logan, I just missed you in Tennessee. Was there a few weeks ago. Guess I will have to try for Utah -- the closest place on your tour list so far.

Thanks for the insights on GW. Enjoyed the read and discussion.