(2004)Very good biography in very readable style. Pretty much stays within span of 1753 to his death in 1799.

58-- His Excellency George Washington, by Joseph J. Ellis (read 4 May 2023) Though I have read a lot of books about George Washington, including Freeman's seven volume biography, I guess I've forgotten much since this book seemed refreshingly new and was great to read. The author makes many judgmental comments, not all complimentary to Washington (though most are). The author's comments on Jefferson are nearly all adverse and I wonder what he had to say about him ln his book American Sphinx which book I read in 2020, when I was young yet. ( )

This is an excellent biography of George Washington that is long enough (272 pages) to grasp both the story of his life and his role in American history without penetrating into levels of detail that would make it a major tome. First published in 2004, the book is based factually, according to the author, Joseph Ellis, largely on the then-new comprehensive edition of Washington’s official correspondence. In terms of theme, Ellis says he was highly influenced by Marcus Cunliffe’s interpretation of Washington in George Washington: Man and Monument. Ellis’ main purpose is to penetrate beyond the myths and portraits of Washington to understand the man's character and how that character related to his role in history. In this the author is successful, and the reader leaves this book with a greater understanding of the real Washington and his importance in American history.

Washington was famous for his self-control, but Ellis picks up on a theme of the eulogy by Gouvernor Morris that Washington had very strong emotions that required such self-control if he were to achieve his objectives. Ellis links this self-control to Washington’s desire to control the world in which he acted, e.g., the administration of Mount Vernon and his far-flung properties, the conduct of the War of Independence and his two terms as first President of the United States. While Washington did not have the high level of education enjoyed by some of the other founders, his early experiences in war as a young man and in managing his estates formed his philosophical outlook. He was a realist who thought that individuals and nations acted to pursue their interests, not abstract ideals. Thus, he was not surprised that the British did not accept the many American proposals for conciliation between the colonies and Great Britain, and he fully expected Native Americans to resist white settlement on their lands. (As President, he tried to set aside permanent safe zones for the Cherokees and other tribes, but these promises were broken by Andrew Jackson). As President, he also refused to bend to the popular will to be pro-French or pro-British but rather always supported a neutralist policy that would give the United States time to grow into a major power. He foresaw that war, especially with Great Britain in the 1790’s, could have destroyed the fragile new republic. And while he appreciated many of the ideals of the revolution, his own personal opposition to the British Empire was driven in large part by the adverse economic consequences of the imperial system for American colonists (including his own estates) and his resentment at Americans being treated like second-class citizens by the British. (The appellation “American” for the colonists was originated by the British as a disparaging term for provincial settlers on the far-western edge of the British Empire.)

Washington committed himself to the personal risks and potential glory of the revolution when, on June 15, 1775, at the age of 43, he accepted his unanimous selection by the Continental Congress to become commander-in-chief. Despite his insistence that as commander-in-chief he was subordinate to the people and their representatives, the Continental Congress, he inevitably became the symbol of revolution and a quasi-king as a replacement figure for George III in the eyes of the American revolutionaries. His recognition of civilian authority did not prevent his well-known frustrations with the weakness of the Continental Congress, in particular its abject failure to support the Continental Army with necessary resources, including paying the troops. (While he acknowledged that militias contributed to victories ((such as Saratoga)), he was under no illusion that volunteers, who could disappear on very short notice, could actually win the war. His concern with the shortage of manpower overcame his initial reluctance to recruit African-Americans into the Army. There was no segregation in the army; the U.S. Army would not be integrated again until the Korean War.) This experience seared into his brain the strong belief that the new nation could not succeed without a strong central government, including a strong executive, regardless of how the anti-governmental ideals of the “spirit of 76” were interpreted. Desiring a decisive victory, Washington’s first inclination was to attack the British aggressively. He had a tendency to develop complex battle plans that were nearly impossible to implement. The revolutionary cause was saved from this initial rashness by the strategic and tactical mistakes of the British, and eventually Washington learned the “Fabian” technique of war, i.e., never risk the Army in battle but rather be ready to retreat after imposing glancing losses on the enemy, the so-called “War of Posts.” The hardships at Valley Forge were the crucial event of the war because Valley Forge created the standing army that could persevere until victory. According to Ellis, more important than Washington’s spotty record as a general was his insistence that the Army be inoculated against smallpox, which otherwise could have destroyed it. (As a young man, Washington survived a smallpox infection he got in Barbados and thus was immune.)

Washington was generally pessimistic about the prospects for American victory given British resources, command of the sea, and experienced soldiers. The French entry in the war after the victory at Saratoga also initially disappointed him because France did not immediately challenge the British for naval superiority in American waters, and thus made Washington's desire for a decisive battle at New York impossible. While the British were fighting General Greene in the Carolinas, the French General Rochambeau began to encourage Washington to move the Army south to Virginia. Eventually, Washington gave up his stubborn insistence on a battle in New York, and when Rochambeau arranged for the French Navy to enter the Chesapeake Bay, Washington clearly saw the opportunity to defeat Cornwallis and led the combined armies south to the decisive battle at Yorktown. (Washington’s stubbornness may have contributed in one respect to the success at Yorktown: the British General Henry Clinton, who commanded the forces in New York, intercepted a letter in which Washington still declared that New York was the main _target of the Continental Army, and this may have contributed to Clinton’s fateful decision not to assist Cornwallis.) Ellis declares that Yorktown was the most consequential battle in American history.

With the war won the, fears arose that Washington might use the Army to make himself king. Washington thought the Army should be maintained until peace was officially declared but made it clear that he would not seize power. According to Ellis, when George III learned of this, he was heard to say: “If Washington resisted the monarchic mantle and retired, . . . he would be the greatest man in the world.” Washington’s officers thought differently and organized the “Newburgh Conspiracy” to give Washington dictatorial power. Washington rejected this “last temptation;” in an eloquent speech to his officers, he stated that “any attempted coup by the army was simultaneously a repudiation of the principles for which they had all been fighting and an assault on his [Washington’s] own integrity.” He made a dramatic farewell to the Army, his “patriotic band of brothers,” and symbolically gave up his sword.

Despite his refusal to submit to authoritarian temptations, Washington was an ambitious man who not only expected to lead his country in war and in peace, but also wanted that leadership ultimately to support his own reputation with posterity. Unlike other major figures of history who used success in war or politics to aggrandize their personal power, he recognized the need to give up his power when it was the right the proper thing to do for his country and for his reputation with posterity. Many of his actions were driven by his consolidation of his view of his reputation with his interpretation of what was good for his country. He came to see slavery as both economically inefficient and morally repugnant, but his realism held him back from calling publicly for its termination. His hope was that over time it would wither away. For various reasons, he was also unsuccessful in freeing his slaves during his lifetime. But he was definitive in his will that the slaves at Mount Vernon should be freed upon the dearth of his wife and, to the extent necessary, should be provided economic support (e.g., for the elderly).

Washington was like other men and women who have ambitions, emotions and flaws and make mistakes. This was especially true of his military record. The greatness of Washington was that he could rise above these human characteristics to identify his life with the objectives, as he saw them, of the thirteen colonies and in so doing establish the unity of the new nation. In this achievement, Ellis regards him as the greatest US President. ( )

A fascinating, complex, man who lead at the front. ( )

Joseph Ellis does excellent research but is not a very good writer. If you can get past the latter, his books are well worth reading. ( )

I realized as I read this book how little I actually knew about George Washington. I feel this book gave me a good overview of his life. He played a lot of things close to his chest, and Martha destroyed all their correspondence when he died, so it still seems hard to really know him, but I think this author makes some pretty good guesses. How amazing to be front and center in such an important time, and of course he knew it so he worked hard to cultivate his personality and memory, but not in the way a lot of folks would have - he was quite wise with most of his decisions. Very good read. ( )

Sometimes it is hard to have a vision of what it must have been like at the birth of our country. It is even harder to imagine that these people...Washington, Franklin, Jefferson, Hamilton were real. I found the book very insightful and learned quite a bit about Washington. I found the book very compelling but I am not sure it was the writing as much as the subject :) ( )

I hate history books that are dry and "just the facts ma'am!" HIS EXCELLENCY:GEORGE WASHINGTON BY JOSEPH J ELLIS is perfect! Mr.Ellis has buried himself into the Washington letters,journals and everything he could get his hands on, to come up with this book. Well written,with plenty of documentation of his sources, it is NOT dry reading! Some of the facts about Washington I knew from other books I have read and some not. Mr.Ellis has put a lot of years into research and come up with a very good picture of HIS EXCELLENCY : GEORGE WASHINGTON. ( )

A great, if somewhat short, book on the elusive George Washington.

Ellis' main objective is to find the man beneath the myth, to clear the vines from the statue. He does this well, the only problem being that Washington was so calm, so self-controlled, that his image and his person are often hard to distinguish from one another. Either way, its hard to draw any conclusions regarding accuracy, since this is the only book on this era that I've read; I have no real point of reference.

As to the writing, Ellis can write a great sentence, and make a great point. He writes in a scholarly manner, but not so much that it becomes tedious to read. Every now and then a sentence baffled me, and I truly had to read it a few times before I could understand it, but besides such small incidents Ellis' writing is marvelously clear.

The book gives a brief, if somewhat clipped, picture of Washington's life, first as an officer, then as the commander-in-chief of the Continental Army, leader of the constitutional convention, and finally, as the first president of the United States. He was practical where most Founding Fathers were idealistic, and had a life so incredibly stacked with activity that I find it impressive that he didn't drop dead at 50 like most of the males in his family. He managed to stand above everything, as a sort of overseer of his age. Perhaps that's why even though the book was about George himself, it read more like an overview of the times; sometimes it is hard to remember that he was a person, since so much of what we know of him comes through formal letters, bizarre rumors, and idealized images. What a pity that his wife burned all their correspondence; the letters would have probably helped us paint a more human portrait of Washington. Regardless of all this, he truly was a visionary, with an at times (not always) stunningly clear judgement, and without him the U.S. would have probably never been formed, lacking the necessary unifier that people loved and revered regardless of ideology or partisanship.

His Excellency is a near perfect introduction to the life and times of President George Washington. Joseph J. Ellis masterfully condenses the life of an extraordinary revolutionary leader in under 300 pages. This book provides an overview of the life and times of George Washington without getting too bogged down in the details. The only issue is that if you are not a student of the revolutionary period in American History you may need to exercise your search skills in order to remind yourself of various battles, treaties and historical figures that did not stick to your brain pan after high school.

One of the interesting points I did not remember from earlier study of this period in history was that political corruption was already in full swing at the genesis of our democracy. Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton were both playing the system, the people and the president to further their personal agendas. This may not be news to others, but for some reason I thought our founding fathers were a bit more honorable. The topic of slavery is a prevailing topic throughout the book. There is much discussion of emancipation and dissolving slavery, but my takeaway here is that though morally wrong, slavery was economically important and would have to be dealt with by future leaders. It is very difficult to comprehend this type of thinking in this day and age.

This was a great re-introduction to the Revolutionary period and Ellis has sparked my interest enough to dive deeper and learn more about the enigmatic General Washington. I highly recommend His Excellency for those looking to learn more about our founding fathers. ( )

An excellent introduction to Washington, providing a decent look at his entire life and an understanding of his legacy. Washington is a huge subject in American history and in this case, the author veers away from thoroughness and details to offer an easy to read, concise look at Washington's life. Focusing on broad themes, this book serves as a good introduction for those new to the subject and I hope to follow this book with more on Washington. ( )

Great biography. It does a great job of going over George Washington's life. And helping to understand him. ( )

After reading several books on the American Revolution and Founding Fathers that were written in a more academic style, "His Excellency" was a breath of fresh air. It was a pleasure to read in large part because of Joseph Ellis' more relaxed writing style.

As this is the first book I read about Washington, I cannot compare it to others on the same subject. What I can do is report that I made good use of my highlighter as there was so much interesting content. While "His Excellency" is a rather short book (considering the subject) it's packed with great information that I felt did a great job introducing Washington's personality and actions. I also enjoyed the few instances where Ellis would point out how important it is for us to consider decisions made based on the context of when they're made, rather than letting our current political, social, and global environment cloud our decisions or presumptions.

I would strongly encourage this book as a great introduction to our first president. ( )

Surprised by what I did not know about Washington. what a man! ( )

This short biography of Washington presents a thoughtful portrayal of his accomplishments and, most important, his character. It gives an excellent of the currents and ideas of the times in the late colonial and early independence years. The deep respect held by Washington’s contemporaries for him, and the reverence accorded him throughout the 19th century has faded somewhat in our modern era, not so much by revisionist history but by the passage of time. There are nearly countless biographical works on Washington, but this one, made enjoyable by Ellis’s fluid and clear writing style, is as good a book to gain insights into the man as any preceding it.

Washington like all consequential figures was a man of contrasts. He was highly ambitious and desired advancement and greater esteem in the patrician society of mid-18th century Virginia. His family, while in the upper class of the Virginia planters, was not of the top rank. Washington knew that he would need to gain attention if his status among the elites was to rise. While he was intelligent and literate he was not on the lofty intellectual plane of his contemporaries like Jefferson, Randolph, Mason and the much younger Madison and Hamilton. Washington knew that he must succeed in three dimensions if he was to secure his social rank: economically, militarily and through a strength of character that garnered the respect of others.

Like others of his class the mark of wealth was land; Washington never ceased in his goal of obtaining additional land. Washington recognized that the key to expanding land holdings lay over the mountains beyond the Ohio and Cumberland Rivers. Much of his time in his younger years was devoted to surveying the undeveloped land across the Alleghenies and acquiring ownership or rights to possess this land. While the Virginia aristocracy glanced largely toward England and Europe, Washington knew that the future of America lay westward. Washington’s economic position advanced substantially when he married the widowed Martha Custis who possessed one of the greatest estates in the Tidewater. His management of the estate was the principal preoccupation of his adult years.

Washington gained his reputation in the military arena from his service in the French and Indian War. He was called on to lead expeditions against the French in present day northwestern Pennsylvania. His participation in several engagements was not unalloyed success, but he did gain widespread regard as a military leader, such that he was the clear choice to head the fight against the British at the onset of the War for Independence. One must conclude that his record in the Revolutionary War was mixed at best and, especially in the early years, he was saved from his headstrong offensive strategy only by the lack of aggressive follow through by his British counterparts. As the war progressed Washington adopted a more Fabian strategy of preserving his forces to fight another day; he seemed to understand that the American cause could be won by the two major advantages the country held: space and time. The entry of the French into the fight for independence was, of course, a major factor in the ultimate success of the Americans.

Washington’s third asset in securing his place of esteem in the nation was his character. In the most primal sense his physical bearing brought the respect of others. He was tall and large for his time and many who saw him were awed by his physicality. Beyond this advantage was his demeanor, his image of being above the common fray.

Washington had a keen desire to secure his place in history. He was a fervent patriot and had a vivid idea of what should be done for the thirteen states to become a nation. His reputation among his countrymen was so great that he could have easily become a Napoleon-like emperor, a new monarch for the new country. His revulsion for monarchy and his respect for the republican values emerging from the liberty movement made the choice of securing personal power impossible for him to envisage. In some sense what Washington did not do became as significant a part of his legacy as what he did. That is, he repeatedly stepped down from power at the times he might have perpetuated it. He resigned his commission after the war. He responded to the call of country twice thereafter when he accepted the chair of the constitutional convention and to become the first president of the United States. His determination to refuse a third term (and what could, if he had lived, been a lifetime sinecure) set the precedent for time-limited executive leadership ever after. His unswerving resistance to seeking and holding power was of great value in the political tone of the new nation, but was also seen by Washington as the most fruitful way to ensure his place in history.

Ellis’s book provides interesting insights into two aspects of Washington’s life and service. His time as president saw the emergence of bitter political rivalries that created the party system. The intrigues of the arch enemies Jefferson and Hamilton are especially interesting; one must conclude that Jefferson’s disloyalty to the president is quite reprehensible. The second issue is Washington’s worries about slavery. His and Martha’s estate had hundreds of slaves and Washington concluded that slavery should not continue both because it was an economic burden on the plantation and because of personal qualms about the morality of slavery. He also sensed the inevitability that slavery would be a source of discord among the sections of the nation. He equivocated on the practicality of emancipating his slaves and the problem was compounded because many of the slaves were owned by Martha and hence not his to free. This issue would, of course, fester for the 60 years following Washington’s death in late 1799.
( ( )

Few names conjure up a vision of American history like that of George Washington. His personage is so well known that his personal history has beef fraught with myth and folklore. Who hasn't heard the story of a young George and the cherry tree? In His Excellency biographer and historian Joseph J. Ellis attempts to shed the myth and tell us the truth about the most famous man in American history.

I found this book to be very readable, it provided all the facts without become dry, but nor did it ever stray to the narrative as has become popular recently. The emphasis was very clearly placed on his time fighting in first The French and Indian War and second as the Commander in Chief if the American forces throughout the Revolution. We are provided copious details of his life as both a private and public man during this time, complete with excerpts from his personal communications. Another strong point of the biography was the details regarding his evolving opinions regarding slavery from a man who had no concerns about the institution to a man who granted them their freedom following his and his wife's deaths.

Where I felt the book was lacking was in regards to his two terms as President following the failure of the Articles of Confederation and the establishment of the federal government under the Constitution. I felt more attention could have been played to his accomplishments and failures during this time. I would say a full two thirds of the book was devoted to his life and military career before he took office. While I have read other books that fully detail Washington's Presidency, I think a complete biography really should pay equal attention to both stages of his life.

Overall this is a very good biography and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to anyone interested in learning more about George Washington. For those who wish to expand their knowledge base after completing this book, Ellis complied a very thorough collection of notes and citations at the end of the book. ( )

What makes this biography of Washington stand out for me is Ellis' attempt to look into the psychology of the man. What formational events made him into a leader, cognizant of his own place in history, yet able to surrender power gracefully? What made him into the man who was idolized in his own time? The emphasis on Washington's commitment to civilian leadership of government was made several times, as was his recognition of the necessity of a strong central government, in opposition to "Spirit of 76" ideals. Would we have been a very different nation (or nations?) without Washington's role in the 1790s? I loved the attempt to see into the mind of Washington. However, without more documentation of his personal life and thoughts, at times the writing devolved into conjecture--interesting to read but surely open to disagreement by others. If your knowledge of the early years of American nationhood has been formed by high school classes and watching "1776" this book will bring a new perspective on many of the events and personalities of the time. ( )

"Benjamin Franklin was wiser than Washington; Alexander Hamilton was more brilliant; John Adams was better read; Thomas Jefferson was more intellectually sophisticated; James Madison was more politically astute. Yet each and all of these prominent figures acknowledged that Washington was their unquestioned superior." (pg xiv) And in this "modest-sized book about a massive historical subject," Joseph Ellis looks at why Washington was so highly regarded, both by his contemporaries and by history.

Ellis astutely points out that many others (such as Cromwell, Napoleon, Lenin, Mao, and Castro) were pivotal in orchestrating successful revolutions but only Washington declined to assume power in a military dictatorship (pg 139). And perhaps Washington's greatest trait was understanding that stepping aside would enhance the way he was viewed by posterity far greater than simply assuming power. He was always ambitious, looking for ways to integrate himself into Virginia society as a younger man, but he also knew when to exercise restraint and keep himself above the fray.

As the key figure of the American Revolution he kept up the struggle even when all odds were against him - flagging support among the populace, poor condition of the Continental Army, lack of support from Congress, the supremacy of British strategy and control of the seas, French reluctance to provide assistance. And yet such experience taught him the importance of a strong federal government and guided his role as President of the new nation. There were no prior examples to draw from or precedent to follow, and although his own lack of a formal education was a constant embarrassment to him, he intuitively knew how to utilize the strengths of others and manage the competing ambitions of those around him in setting the nation on a path to stability.

Ellis hasn't exactly written a biography in the classic sense, although he does chronicle Washington's life, but it's enhanced by a deep character study of this important man. And few are as adept at bringing history's characters to life in such an insightful way and putting the reader into their shoes. It was in strong contrast to John Ferling's The Ascent of George Washington. Where Ferling looks at a events with a critical eye enhanced with 200 years of historical hindsight, Ellis sees beyond the failings to the motivations and greater social customs of the day and makes the history personal in a way no one else does. Although the book was a little slow starting it was so packed with valuable insight that it merits a close reading. I highly recommend it. ( )

"Benjamin Franklin was wiser than Washington; Alexander Hamilton was more brilliant; John Adams was better read; Thomas Jefferson was more intellectually sophisticated; James Madison was more politically astute. Yet each and all of these prominent figures acknowledged that Washington was their unquestioned superior." (pg xiv) And in this "modest-sized book about a massive historical subject," Joseph Ellis looks at why Washington was so highly regarded, both by his contemporaries and by history.

Ellis astutely points out that many others (such as Cromwell, Napoleon, Lenin, Mao, and Castro) were pivotal in orchestrating successful revolutions but only Washington declined to assume power in a military dictatorship (pg 139). And perhaps Washington's greatest trait was understanding that stepping aside would enhance the way he was viewed by posterity far greater than simply assuming power. He was always ambitious, looking for ways to integrate himself into Virginia society as a younger man, but he also knew when to exercise restraint and keep himself above the fray.

As the key figure of the American Revolution he kept up the struggle even when all odds were against him - flagging support among the populace, poor condition of the Continental Army, lack of support from Congress, the supremacy of British strategy and control of the seas, French reluctance to provide assistance. And yet such experience taught him the importance of a strong federal government and guided his role as President of the new nation. There were no prior examples to draw from or precedent to follow, and although his own lack of a formal education was a constant embarrassment to him, he intuitively knew how to utilize the strengths of others and manage the competing ambitions of those around him in setting the nation on a path to stability.

Ellis hasn't exactly written a biography in the classic sense, although he does chronicle Washington's life, but it's enhanced by a deep character study of this important man. And few are as adept at bringing history's characters to life in such an insightful way and putting the reader into their shoes. It was in strong contrast to John Ferling's The Ascent of George Washington. Where Ferling looks at a events with a critical eye enhanced with 200 years of historical hindsight, Ellis sees beyond the failings to the motivations and greater social customs of the day and makes the history personal in a way no one else does. Although the book was a little slow starting it was so packed with valuable insight that it merits a close reading. I highly recommend it. ( )

"Benjamin Franklin was wiser than Washington; Alexander Hamilton was more brilliant; John Adams was better read; Thomas Jefferson was more intellectually sophisticated; James Madison was more politically astute. Yet each and all of these prominent figures acknowledged that Washington was their unquestioned superior." (pg xiv) And in this "modest-sized book about a massive historical subject," Joseph Ellis looks at why Washington was so highly regarded, both by his contemporaries and by history.

Ellis astutely points out that many others (such as Cromwell, Napoleon, Lenin, Mao, and Castro) were pivotal in orchestrating successful revolutions but only Washington declined to assume power in a military dictatorship (pg 139). And perhaps Washington's greatest trait was understanding that stepping aside would enhance the way he was viewed by posterity far greater than simply assuming power. He was always ambitious, looking for ways to integrate himself into Virginia society as a younger man, but he also knew when to exercise restraint and keep himself above the fray.

As the key figure of the American Revolution he kept up the struggle even when all odds were against him - flagging support among the populace, poor condition of the Continental Army, lack of support from Congress, the supremacy of British strategy and control of the seas, French reluctance to provide assistance. And yet such experience taught him the importance of a strong federal government and guided his role as President of the new nation. There were no prior examples to draw from or precedent to follow, and although his own lack of a formal education was a constant embarrassment to him, he intuitively knew how to utilize the strengths of others and manage the competing ambitions of those around him in setting the nation on a path to stability.

Ellis hasn't exactly written a biography in the classic sense, although he does chronicle Washington's life, but it's enhanced by a deep character study of this important man. And few are as adept at bringing history's characters to life in such an insightful way and putting the reader into their shoes. It was in strong contrast to John Ferling's The Ascent of George Washington. Where Ferling looks at a events with a critical eye enhanced with 200 years of historical hindsight, Ellis sees beyond the failings to the motivations and greater social customs of the day and makes the history personal in a way no one else does. Although the book was a little slow starting it was so packed with valuable insight that it merits a close reading. I highly recommend it. ( )

Forever remembered as the first president of the United States, George Washington is often a man that is greatly misunderstood. I love how the author chose to title this book with the title that Washington absolutely despised. The more I know about this man, the more I am intrigued. ( )

This is a really well-done biography of George Washington. It suffers from the central defect of all Washington biographies - the complete destruction of his private correspondence by his wife, Martha, who wanted his privacy respected. She got her wish, but at the expense of history.

Washington was a very quiet, reserved character who was unreservedly admired and respected by his contemporaries. He had his critics, and made his mistakes, but overall, he really deserves the plaudits that were heaped on him. In particular, his decision to step away from public life, both after winning the Revolutionary War and after serving two terms as president, are almost unique in world history, and served the nascent US well. Ellis shows how he was shaped by his childhood and his early experiences of frontier warfare, and how his own sense of honor was the driving force of his life.

It was very interesting to read the degree to which the financial structure of the planter class of Virginia and the south was based on slavery and also unsustainable. Ellis sketches how the large families were often driven into debt and bankruptcy due to this, and shows how fear of this very real fate marked the political defense of slavery by southern politicians, particularly Thomas Jefferson. Washington, perhaps because he was not really part of this class (his social origins were a step lower), recognized early on that this was a trap and worked to diversify his plantations. He came to believe that slavery was wrong, and struggled to free his own slaves, but financial and legal realities made it difficult. Ellis speculates that Martha, wealthy in her own right, and through estates and slaves still legally belonging to her first husband's family (although she had lifetime use of them), may have opposed Washington in this regard, which would help explain why his will freed the slaves on her eventual death.

Highly recommended. ( )

It's a difficult task to contain in a relatively small volume the story of a man involved in so many defining events in American history. The author does it by concentrating on the character of a man. You can't really write Washington's bio without going into the historical details, but author strikes a fine balance between biographical narrative and historical background. It is really not so much American history book, but rather portrait of a man. ( )

Ellis is a good historian, but he has an annoying tendency to speculate on motives even when he admits there is no evidential basis for it, as part of what he apparently takes to be a charming conversational style. ( )

Ellis took on a huge job: distill the essence of Washington the man into a short volume for those who want to know more without having to wade through one of the multi-volume biographies. And, at least in my humble amateur historian point of view, he succeeded. I feel like a have a very personal understanding of this larger than life figure. What did I miss? I wanted to know more about his relationship with Martha and his children but Ellis has little evidence since Martha destroyed all their correspondence. Or was he simply more interested in the political world that Washington both helped to create but then watched become increasingly more partisan? After all, that probably is the interesting historical story and I found myself yet again musing, as I do whenever I read American history or biography, about how little has changed in terms of American politics. ( )