My problem with these societies, is that most all of their stuff is highly suspect. What Rodney did is not exceptional in the context of what many of his peers did. They were average men in extraordinary times, who rose to exceptional demands and performed well. They were the right men, in the right place at the right time. To make too much more of it is to engage in childish myth building and idol worship.
Adams was as much if not more of a brain behind the movement. Madison is up there. I believe Jefferson to be the most highly overrated founder. He was brilliant, but early on his true influence was not very substantial. When the Continental Congress first met he was a young, shy, and not very well known outside of the Virginia aristocracy.
John Adams: A Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law. His Thoughts on Government and more... Adams was a rock star at the Convention and in England .. this was acknowledged to be true.
I agree on the society thing but that was the most comprehensive history I could find online. I had read all of this on him in history class, many eons ago. Heck i might still have the books packed in a box somewhere.
I agree on the society thing but that was the most comprehensive history I could find online. I had read all of this on him in history class, many eons ago. Heck i might still have the books packed in a box somewhere.
Having Indian blood and conversant on ALL events that led up to the American Revolution means I have mixed feelings over that period in time.........
The French and the British sought to protect native lands from colonial encroachment, the British Crown forbade movement into the Ohio Valley a move that infuriated the colonists as they had their eye on the Ohio for quite a while.
cool! get them books.
The French had a different view, they weren't as aggressive in their "colonization" of the Americas, they saw the Natives as trading partners and Canada was never that profitable except with the fur trade which was very profitable.I agree on the society thing but that was the most comprehensive history I could find online. I had read all of this on him in history class, many eons ago. Heck i might still have the books packed in a box somewhere.
Having Indian blood and conversant on ALL events that led up to the American Revolution means I have mixed feelings over that period in time.........
The French and the British sought to protect native lands from colonial encroachment, the British Crown forbade movement into the Ohio Valley a move that infuriated the colonists as they had their eye on the Ohio for quite a while.
The history of peoples moving in on one another is the history of mankind. The native American population (grew up believing we had some..not 100% sure) was going to be run over no matter what. Look at England? Look at what happened to the people who lived there prior to the anglo saxon invasions. It's human history. I doubt the French or the British would in the end have allowed the native inhabitants to keep such valuable property. Forced contracts, trickery, outright theft is inevitable in a situation like the native populations found themselves in. All over the world and all throughout history the same kind of thing has been repeated. Even the natives Europeans found living in the plains at the time of expansion are said to have pushed previous populations out. Human nature can be ugly
What of the Tories in colonial America who didn't go along? They built up what the rebels took. They had their freedoms and liberties trampled over in the name of -- freedom and liberties.
In the end we are all one -- humankind, and our battles are family squabbles fought out on a larger stage
The French were horrible colonials...Algeria for one.The French had a different view, they weren't as aggressive in their "colonization" of the Americas, they saw the Natives as trading partners and Canada was never that profitable except with the fur trade which was very profitable.I agree on the society thing but that was the most comprehensive history I could find online. I had read all of this on him in history class, many eons ago. Heck i might still have the books packed in a box somewhere.
Having Indian blood and conversant on ALL events that led up to the American Revolution means I have mixed feelings over that period in time.........
The French and the British sought to protect native lands from colonial encroachment, the British Crown forbade movement into the Ohio Valley a move that infuriated the colonists as they had their eye on the Ohio for quite a while.
The history of peoples moving in on one another is the history of mankind. The native American population (grew up believing we had some..not 100% sure) was going to be run over no matter what. Look at England? Look at what happened to the people who lived there prior to the anglo saxon invasions. It's human history. I doubt the French or the British would in the end have allowed the native inhabitants to keep such valuable property. Forced contracts, trickery, outright theft is inevitable in a situation like the native populations found themselves in. All over the world and all throughout history the same kind of thing has been repeated. Even the natives Europeans found living in the plains at the time of expansion are said to have pushed previous populations out. Human nature can be ugly
What of the Tories in colonial America who didn't go along? They built up what the rebels took. They had their freedoms and liberties trampled over in the name of -- freedom and liberties.
In the end we are all one -- humankind, and our battles are family squabbles fought out on a larger stage
Oh I'm sure over time that probably would have changed as I too am extremely aware of the constant movement of peoples throughout history taking land from those who had inhabited it for generations.
Washington: Jefferson also criticized Washington -- but in the very Jefferson way -- snidely and from behind a facade. Washington was not as popular with other leaders as popular history and myth leads people to believe. He was a unifying force in that one was needed and he fit the bill. His personality and honor, integrity, and virtue served him and the floundering nation well. But his flaws were many and quite obvious to those leaders who knew him. But he was needed -- the role if not the man -- he was needed.
Washington was called the one indispensable man of the Revolutionary generation (coined by Jefferson). No one disagreed with him.No victory over the British....no Constitutional Convention...and no Presidency as we know it without him.
Madison is called the Father of the Constitution and with good reason. He put forth the Virginia Plan that was largely adopted into what is now our current system of Government. One of the main authors of the Federalist Papers (along with Hamilton and to a much lesser degree John Jay). A key supporter of the Bill of Rights. A leading voice in the early Congress.
Jefferson where to begin. Declaration of Independence is probably the greatest political paper in history. A major figure in advocating for Religious Freedom....(See Statutes for Religious Freedom: Virginia). Founder of the University of Virginia....Louisiana Purchase.....you get the idea.
Monroe: Revolutionary War hero. Wounded and nearly died in battle. Served at Valley Forge with Washington. Crossed the Delaware. Negotiated the Louisiana Purchase. One of the best Secretary of States in U.S. History. Formulated the Monroe Doctrine which is still U.S. Policy. Only man to serve two cabinet positions at the same time.
Hamilton: Revolutionary war hero. Main author of the Federalist Papers. Financial genius. Saw America as a manufacturing power long before anyone else.
Franklin....brought France into the war on the side of America. Without France, we probably lose. Brilliant writer and thinker.
Was he indispensable? Probably not. Was the role he played needed? As far as we can tell -- most likely. Most likely, not most definitely
Washington is rated by most historians as a top 5 President. He undoubtedly was the major figure in helping to defeat the British. The Constitutional Convention would likely not have happened or passed without his gravitas.
Washington: Jefferson also criticized Washington -- but in the very Jefferson way -- snidely and from behind a facade. Washington was not as popular with other leaders as popular history and myth leads people to believe. He was a unifying force in that one was needed and he fit the bill. His personality and honor, integrity, and virtue served him and the floundering nation well. But his flaws were many and quite obvious to those leaders who knew him. But he was needed -- the role if not the man -- he was needed.
Washington was called the one indispensable man of the Revolutionary generation (coined by Jefferson). No one disagreed with him.
Madison is called the Father of the Constitution and with good reason. He put forth the Virginia Plan that was largely adopted into what is now our current system of Government. One of the main authors of the Federalist Papers (along with Hamilton and to a much lesser degree John Jay). A key supporter of the Bill of Rights. A leading voice in the early Congress.
Jefferson where to begin. Declaration of Independence is probably the greatest political paper in history. A major figure in advocating for Religious Freedom....(See Statutes for Religious Freedom: Virginia). Founder of the University of Virginia....Louisiana Purchase.....you get the idea.
Monroe: Revolutionary War hero. Wounded and nearly died in battle. Served at Valley Forge with Washington. Crossed the Delaware. Negotiated the Louisiana Purchase. One of the best Secretary of States in U.S. History. Formulated the Monroe Doctrine which is still U.S. Policy. Only man to serve two cabinet positions at the same time.
Hamilton: Revolutionary war hero. Main author of the Federalist Papers. Financial genius. Saw America as a manufacturing power long before anyone else.
Franklin....brought France into the war on the side of America. Without France, we probably lose. Brilliant writer and thinker.
Was he indispensable? Probably not. Was the role he played needed? As far as we can tell -- most likely. Most likely, not most definitely
Biased....but not completely unfair.
Pretty good resume I'd say.
Of course, his physical courage and bravery is unquestioned. It's one thing to defend freedom with your words....it's entirely another to do so with bullets flying around your head. Hence, one of the factors in my rating Monroe and Hamilton so highly.
What's funny about that is France was winning the war on the European continent so England decided to move their prosecution of the conflict to the colonies, probably the best move they ever made towards winning the war. Also in the resultant treaty France got to keep New Orleans and their sugar producing colonies in the Caribbean, those colonies provided the French more riches in one year than Canada had provided in a decade. Also the treaty gave Spain everything west of the Mississippi though they gave "Louisiana" back to the French with the provision that if France ever sells/cedes Louisiana Spain would have first dibs on it, they refused to recognize the sale of the Louisiana territory to the US for this reason, they saw the sale as illegitimate.
Hamilton, an extremely ambitious man, wanted command of the Continental Army and fully expected to be named as its Commander in Chief, he was dumbstruck when Washington was named. Washington had been sitting in the sessions of the Continental Congress the whole time (as an observer) in military uniform and while he never said he wanted the command verbally, it was quite plain to all he wanted it. While Washington had his detractors he was eventually chosen primarily because he was a Virginian and would bind the southern colonies more closely to the "New England rebellion".Washington: Jefferson also criticized Washington -- but in the very Jefferson way -- snidely and from behind a facade. Washington was not as popular with other leaders as popular history and myth leads people to believe. He was a unifying force in that one was needed and he fit the bill. His personality and honor, integrity, and virtue served him and the floundering nation well. But his flaws were many and quite obvious to those leaders who knew him. But he was needed -- the role if not the man -- he was needed.
Washington was called the one indispensable man of the Revolutionary generation (coined by Jefferson). No one disagreed with him.
Madison is called the Father of the Constitution and with good reason. He put forth the Virginia Plan that was largely adopted into what is now our current system of Government. One of the main authors of the Federalist Papers (along with Hamilton and to a much lesser degree John Jay). A key supporter of the Bill of Rights. A leading voice in the early Congress.
Jefferson where to begin. Declaration of Independence is probably the greatest political paper in history. A major figure in advocating for Religious Freedom....(See Statutes for Religious Freedom: Virginia). Founder of the University of Virginia....Louisiana Purchase.....you get the idea.
Monroe: Revolutionary War hero. Wounded and nearly died in battle. Served at Valley Forge with Washington. Crossed the Delaware. Negotiated the Louisiana Purchase. One of the best Secretary of States in U.S. History. Formulated the Monroe Doctrine which is still U.S. Policy. Only man to serve two cabinet positions at the same time.
Hamilton: Revolutionary war hero. Main author of the Federalist Papers. Financial genius. Saw America as a manufacturing power long before anyone else.
Franklin....brought France into the war on the side of America. Without France, we probably lose. Brilliant writer and thinker.
Was he indispensable? Probably not. Was the role he played needed? As far as we can tell -- most likely. Most likely, not most definitely
Biased....but not completely unfair.
Pretty good resume I'd say.
Of course, his physical courage and bravery is unquestioned. It's one thing to defend freedom with your words....it's entirely another to do so with bullets flying around your head. Hence, one of the factors in my rating Monroe and Hamilton so highly.
Washington: Jefferson also criticized Washington -- but in the very Jefferson way -- snidely and from behind a facade. Washington was not as popular with other leaders as popular history and myth leads people to believe. He was a unifying force in that one was needed and he fit the bill. His personality and honor, integrity, and virtue served him and the floundering nation well. But his flaws were many and quite obvious to those leaders who knew him. But he was needed -- the role if not the man -- he was needed.
Washington was called the one indispensable man of the Revolutionary generation (coined by Jefferson). No one disagreed with him.
Madison is called the Father of the Constitution and with good reason. He put forth the Virginia Plan that was largely adopted into what is now our current system of Government. One of the main authors of the Federalist Papers (along with Hamilton and to a much lesser degree John Jay). A key supporter of the Bill of Rights. A leading voice in the early Congress.
Jefferson where to begin. Declaration of Independence is probably the greatest political paper in history. A major figure in advocating for Religious Freedom....(See Statutes for Religious Freedom: Virginia). Founder of the University of Virginia....Louisiana Purchase.....you get the idea.
Monroe: Revolutionary War hero. Wounded and nearly died in battle. Served at Valley Forge with Washington. Crossed the Delaware. Negotiated the Louisiana Purchase. One of the best Secretary of States in U.S. History. Formulated the Monroe Doctrine which is still U.S. Policy. Only man to serve two cabinet positions at the same time.
Hamilton: Revolutionary war hero. Main author of the Federalist Papers. Financial genius. Saw America as a manufacturing power long before anyone else.
Franklin....brought France into the war on the side of America. Without France, we probably lose. Brilliant writer and thinker.
Was he indispensable? Probably not. Was the role he played needed? As far as we can tell -- most likely. Most likely, not most definitely
Biased....but not completely unfair.
Pretty good resume I'd say.
Of course, his physical courage and bravery is unquestioned. It's one thing to defend freedom with your words....it's entirely another to do so with bullets flying around your head. Hence, one of the factors in my rating Monroe and Hamilton so highly.
I visited James Monroes home over the weekend. They said he took a bullet to the neck after crossing the Delaware and the doctor stitched it up and he kept fighting. He carried the bullet the rest of his life
The Louisiana Purchase was also his idea and he sold Jefferson on the idea
