The Virginia Dynasty: Four Presidents and the Creation of the American Nation

This is probably Lynne Cheney\’s best work — I cannot put it down and it brings into focus some of the people and personalities that contributed to the formation of our country. I have learned so much from reading this book. Well done, indeed.

This is a masterpiece of historical story-telling. Cheney manages to tell the story of a half-century of our nation\’s history through the close-up personal reactions and interactions, character strengths and short-comings, loves found and loves lost, friendships firm and friendships broken of four of our nation\’s founders, who all lived within what we would call driving-distance of each other. Always focusing on particular incidents with vivid detail, she manages still to convey the larger action taking place as a new nation is founded and secures its footing. I learned many things I had never read anywhere else. It is almost as if we were all sitting around the fireplace and hearing the stories told by someone who had been there.

Dr. Cheney is the first to point out that her doctorate is in English and not history. So, that being the case, \”The Virginia Dynasty\” is not deeply-researched history for academics, but a well-crafted historical tale for the layman. The book is essentially a history of the United States\’ first half century, told through the lens of the Virginians who made up four out of the five of our first presidents. It\’s quite the challenge to compress 50 years of history into about 350 pages, so major events are not always described in great depth, nor do you necessarily get great insight into the lives and minds of the book\’s protagonists. But Dr. Cheney is a wonderful storyteller, and reels you in from the very first sentences in the prologue, in which she describes sticking a compass into a designated spot on a map of Virginia, drawing a circle, and recognizing that \”from this small expanse of land… came four of the nation\’s first five presidents.\” From there, what is basically a quadruple biography unfurls. Events must be described to set the scene and propel the story forward, but the book is at its best when it focuses on the various relationships among the four men as they crossed paths and sometimes crossed swords – from Gen. George Washington and Lt. James Monroe\’s parallel experiences in the Revolutionary War, to James Madison and Thomas Jefferson\’s close political partnership, to the seemingly perpetually-petulant James Monroe\’s hot-and-cold relationship with everyone, and Washington\’s eventual estrangement from them all. I wouldn\’t necessarily say there\’s anything new here for anyone already familiar with the individuals\’ life stories. Those who aren\’t familiar, will learn something new; those who are, may still enjoy the journey. That said, the two most problematic parts of the book, in my estimation, occur in the prologue and the epilogue. In the prologue, after setting the scene with the compass-on-a-map-of-Virginia story, she doesn\’t go on to lay out a thorough argument as to why our country produced a \”Virginia Dynasty\” and not, say, a \”New Hampshire Dynasty\” or \”North Carolina Dynasty.\” Was it a coincidence that four of our first five presidents happened to be from Virginia? Were there men just as worthy in other parts of the country that just didn\’t benefit from the symbiotic relationships these four individuals had? She does point out that Virginia was the largest colony, while also \”on the periphery of civilization,\” which together gave its citizens both the ability to question authority, and the prominence to become leaders of the eventual effort to assert their own authority. But this thesis is never really expanded upon after its introduction; the book just settles into its story without revisiting the question of \”why Virginia?\” The second criticism has to do with the epilogue, which is the only part of the book that really deals with slavery in any meaningful way, and even then, it\’s not too thorough. Jefferson gets the most scrutiny on the topic of slavery these days, and she does touch on the topic as it relates to him earlier in the book. But the other men were slaveowners too, and especially in the current climate, any story of Washington, Madison and Monroe\’s lives ought to dig a little deeper into the contrast between the Founding Fathers who fought for freedom, but owned slaves nonetheless. The epilogue explores how each came to terms – or didn\’t – with slavery in their final years, but not in great depth, and doing so in the epilogue feels a bit too little, too late. In all, though, this is a well-written if not deeply analytical tale. It\’s not as thorough and thought-provoking as a full biography of any one of these men would be, but it is an enjoyable work of popular history. I say this having read Dr. Cheney\’s earlier biography of James Madison, which I also found to be not as thorough and analytical as it could have been; I think a book like this one, which focuses on more characters and a broader theme, is simply more suited to her style than a biography of a single individual. But for those who might not pick up a full biography of any of these four Founders, \”The Virginia Dynasty\” is an engaging way to tell the story of the early days of our country – not with a dizzying array of names and dates, but through a tight focus on the lives, personalities and relationships of four individuals who together had a great influence in creating the country we know today.

I enjoyed the book. It was easy to read and provided some new information for me. Virginia did have a dynasty for a number of years and after Monroe\’s last term, Virginia did not elect another chief executive until Wilson. This is by no means trying to attack a founding father, but of the four mentioned here, Monroe was the weak link. Part of this problem is the fact that Jefferson and Madison were superb in their endeavors. America was very lucky to have such scholars watching after our fate as a nation Monroe had an education that could not challenge Madison or Jefferson. and in many ways, I look on him more like an Aaron Burr. Just a personal opinion. Overall, the book was good. Thanks to you Lynne.

An overall well written and informative book, though a bit too effusive of Jefferson, in my opinion. However, there was one glaring oversight that would lead an unaware reader to draw an incorrect conclusion of very important historic events. In Chapter Seven, when Jefferson becomes President, the book speaks of the events surrounding the “Midnight Appointments,” The Judiciary Acts of 1801 & 1802, and the events that culminate in Marbury v. Madison. This section of the chapter does broadly reference Marbury v. Madison, the concept of Judicial Review, and its impact on the Supreme Courts role in the Constitutional order, but it leaves out naming the law that the ruling was based on – the Judiciary Act of 1789. This is important because it was the Judiciary Act of 1789 which granted the Supreme Court the power to issue ‘Writs of Mandamus,’ which was a power outside of the Supreme Court’s Constitutional charge of the Court. Not only is this the provision of the law Marbury was using to pursue his case, but it is also ultimately what Chief Justice Marshall used to argue the premise of judicial review and the part of the law that was ruled unconstitutional. More specifically, the way the chapter is written would lead a reader to think that the law being struck down in Marbury v. Madison would have been either the Judiciary Act of 1801 or 1802, which is incorrect. I understand that this may be more a point of trivia rather than an earth shattering revelation, but when outlining a foundational concept of Constitutional interpretation, the facts should be clear and correct.

Galaxyaudiobook Member Benefit

- Able to comment

- List watched audiobooks

- List favorite audiobooks

- Bookmark will only available for Galaxyaudiobook member