Paul Aron (1) (1956–)

Typically I find books like these to be full of one and a half page synopses of events that have been so belabored that there can be absolutely nothing interesting left to know about them. This book surprised me as, while most of the events were typical overly-done and belabored ones, I learned something new, sometimes many new things, from each one. The anecdotes were well written and interesting with lengthy bibliographical info for each event. I felt like this could be a really good book show more for launching research on any of the given subjects. I'm glad I read it! show less

One comes away from "Founding Feuds: The Rivalries, Clashes, and Conflicts That Forged a Nation," almost with the belief that our typically-sainted Founding Fathers were really nothing more than a bunch of cantankerous, ambitious self-aggrandizers who were easy to take offense and ever-ready to aim their acid tongues at their opponents, not caring even if their vitriol spilled over into character assassination.

Of course, if anyone has read David Mccullough's celebrated biography of John show more Adams or Ron Chernow's equally honored biography of Alexander Hamilton, he would know that both of them could be difficult men. But Thomas Paine? George Washington? Thomas Jefferson???

Indeed, of all portrayed in the book, Jefferson probably comes off looking the worst, if for no other reason that in the popular mind the author of the Declaration of Independence is thought to have himself been the living embodiment of all the ideals contained therein--fairness, equality, the elevation of the common man. No, it turns out, Jefferson was no saint. He was just a man--a man very good at passive-aggression, and sometimes not even very passive.

By the length and detail of the footnotes, "Founding Feuds" is a well-researched book. Its drawback is that it focuses on such a number of conflicts that arose among the leaders of our early republic that the author cannot give much more of snapshot of any one of them. Certainly, he cannot fill in all the complexities of relationship that finally led Aaron Burr to duel Alexander Hamilton, as Chernow does in his biography; nor can he detail the immense complexities of the Adam-Jefferson "first friends, then enemies, then reconciled friends again" relationship.

But Paul Aron states up-front that he has an agenda in presenting this book. If those of us today are discouraged by the extreme negativity and personal attacks exhibited in contemporary discourse, we should be aware that nothing new is happening here. The broadsides that were published by one antagonist against another in America's beginnings as a nation were as nasty as any we see today--it's just that two hundred years ago, communications were poor and few saw what was written in the papers of the times. What effect might there have been if Hamilton had had Facebook, or if Jefferson could tweet?

And the fact of the matter is that, as much as our political forefathers could show the heat of their anger and brandish a cutting word, their cantankerousness and their ambition is not what simply defined them. They fought as hard as they did for their viewpoints as they contested with their contemporaries because, in the end, they cared for their country and what it might become. Jefferson, for instance, championed rule by the people, while Adams saw the need to maintain order. America lives between the tensions of its competing ideals, and the fact that each ideal had its champions--as loudly as they sometimes disagreed--made the country stronger because of it. show less

I'm a fan of historical mysteries, and with Stonehenge, the legend of King Arthur, the Easter Island statues, and a whole lot more, this book covers a lot in a short time.

I really like the format of Unsolved Mysteries of History. Aron gives a short description of each topic and then briefly goes into the findings of archaeologists and historians who have tried to explain or solve these mysteries. He keeps it objective, listing arguments for and against various theories of these popular show more mysteries. What I appreciated is that he doesn't try to solve these mysteries -- don't go into this book looking for concrete resolutions about whether or not King Arthur really existed. Instead, after giving a brief overview of the topic, he gives a list of works for further reading, if you're interested, and explains what each work is about.

This book is well-written, and each entry is relatively short. This means that if you're not so interested in the Easter Island statues, you can still read a few pages on them and learn something new. If you're really interested in Stonehenge, Aron gives you lists of works that will further your knowledge. It's a win-win! For those who are at all interested in historical mysteries, definitely check this book out. show less

Its an intriguing notion, looking back at some of the questions that historians have pondered....unfortunately, it makes for a somewhat unsatisfactory reading experience, as it can't really give any definitive answers on anything. Plus, it looks at many mysteries, so it can't really spend too much time on any single one.