What do you think?
Rate this book
American Lion: Andrew Jackson in the White House
The definitive biography of a larger-than-life president who defied norms, divided a nation, and changed Washington forever
Andrew Jackson, his intimate circle of friends, and his tumultuous times are at the heart of this remarkable book about the man who rose from nothing to create the modern presidency. Beloved and hated, venerated and reviled, Andrew Jackson was an orphan who fought his way to the pinnacle of power, bending the nation to his will in the cause of democracy. Jackson's election in 1828 ushered in a new and lasting era in which the people, not distant elites, were the guiding force in American politics. Democracy made its stand in the Jackson years, and he gave voice to the hopes and the fears of a restless, changing nation facing challenging times at home and threats abroad. To tell the saga of Jackson's presidency, acclaimed author Jon Meacham goes inside the Jackson White House. Drawing on newly discovered family letters and papers, he details the human drama-the family, the women, and the inner circle of advisers- that shaped Jackson's private world through years of storm and victory.
One of our most significant yet dimly recalled presidents, Jackson was a battle-hardened warrior, the founder of the Democratic Party, and the architect of the presidency as we know it. His story is one of violence, sex, courage, and tragedy. With his powerful persona, his evident bravery, and his mystical connection to the people, Jackson moved the White House from the periphery of government to the center of national action, articulating a vision of change that challenged entrenched interests to heed the popular will- or face his formidable wrath. The greatest of the presidents who have followed Jackson in the White House-from Lincoln to Theodore Roosevelt to FDR to Truman-have found inspiration in his example, and virtue in his vision.
Jackson was the most contradictory of men. The architect of the removal of Indians from their native lands, he was warmly sentimental and risked everything to give more power to ordinary citizens. He was, in short, a lot like his country: alternately kind and vicious, brilliant and blind; and a man who fought a lifelong war to keep the republic safe-no matter what it took.
Andrew Jackson, his intimate circle of friends, and his tumultuous times are at the heart of this remarkable book about the man who rose from nothing to create the modern presidency. Beloved and hated, venerated and reviled, Andrew Jackson was an orphan who fought his way to the pinnacle of power, bending the nation to his will in the cause of democracy. Jackson's election in 1828 ushered in a new and lasting era in which the people, not distant elites, were the guiding force in American politics. Democracy made its stand in the Jackson years, and he gave voice to the hopes and the fears of a restless, changing nation facing challenging times at home and threats abroad. To tell the saga of Jackson's presidency, acclaimed author Jon Meacham goes inside the Jackson White House. Drawing on newly discovered family letters and papers, he details the human drama-the family, the women, and the inner circle of advisers- that shaped Jackson's private world through years of storm and victory.
One of our most significant yet dimly recalled presidents, Jackson was a battle-hardened warrior, the founder of the Democratic Party, and the architect of the presidency as we know it. His story is one of violence, sex, courage, and tragedy. With his powerful persona, his evident bravery, and his mystical connection to the people, Jackson moved the White House from the periphery of government to the center of national action, articulating a vision of change that challenged entrenched interests to heed the popular will- or face his formidable wrath. The greatest of the presidents who have followed Jackson in the White House-from Lincoln to Theodore Roosevelt to FDR to Truman-have found inspiration in his example, and virtue in his vision.
Jackson was the most contradictory of men. The architect of the removal of Indians from their native lands, he was warmly sentimental and risked everything to give more power to ordinary citizens. He was, in short, a lot like his country: alternately kind and vicious, brilliant and blind; and a man who fought a lifelong war to keep the republic safe-no matter what it took.
483 pages, Hardcover
First published November 11, 2008
About the author
Jon Meacham
65 books2,811 followersJon Meacham is the editor of Newsweek, a Pulitzer Prize winning bestselling author and a commentator on politics, history, and religious faith in America.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 2,106 reviews
July 20, 2020
My mouth agape, I could not believe what I had just heard. “What?”
“You heard me, Jackson was a genocidal murderer and should not be praised.”
It was the early 1990s, I was a young recent college grad, having been born and raised around Nashville, Tennessee and this was the first time in my life I had ever heard anyone speak of Andrew Jackson with anything short of admiration and respect.
This was the first, but by no means the last time I would hear criticisms of him or his presidency.
Many of the negative reviews of the book seem to be more about a dislike of Jackson himself rather than an appraisal of author Jon Meacham’s fine work. Correctly, Meacham provides in this excellent biography, well written and thoroughly researched, an objective picture of the subject and his times, illustrating successes, failures, strengths and weaknesses. Meacham’s history is about Jackson, mostly of his presidency, but also of the Jacksonian era, and a thoughtful exploration of how this time formed a piece of our larger national history.
Growing up near Nashville, we all went on field trips to Jackson’s home, The Hermitage. Jackson’s name, likeness and presence was and still is a big part of the middle Tennessee landscape, with locations, streets and parks named for or about him. The legend of Old Hickory is a source of pride for many Tennesseans.
But I would come to understand that the gaunt but erect figure cast shadows across many graves and there were many, then and now, who saw him not as a hero, but as villain.
Jon Meacham, who won the Pulitzer Prize for this work, writes a history that is sympathetic to the seventh president, but he is no apologist. Jackson was a controversial figure, even in his day, and his rise to the presidency was a source of much consternation to the existing elites; he having risen from obscurity in the western wilderness and a self-styled champion of the masses. His mercurial, truculent nature and his early days as a gambler, horse racer, whiskey drinker, brawler and duelist did little to assuage his contemporary critics. The scandal involving his beloved wife would haunt him throughout most of their life together, and even into his presidency after her death.
Meacham spends time examining Jackson’s lifelong war with Native Americans, especially against the Creek, Seminole and Cherokee nations. To Meacham’s credit, and one of the finer points in this book, he presents detailed evidence of the struggle, of Jackson’s frequently contradictory feelings towards the Indian nations, and of Jackson’s later vehement prejudice. The author provides objective views of both sides, and offers explanations and theories of how Jackson came to his darkest moments on the Trail of Tears and how these dogmas would shape policy for decades later.
“Great presidents are not always good men.”
Meacham describes how Jackson took Washington by storm, on the wave of enormous popular support, but he was antagonistic towards the Eastern elite, who in their turn felt that Jackson was little more than a western savage who had disrupted legitimate power. Expanding popular democracy while also extending the power of the executive beyond what any of his six predecessors had, Jackson was nonetheless a polarizing figure in the nation and in the capital. The Washington that Meacham illustrates is not too far from what we see today, home to bitter rivalries, binary partisanship and intrigue.
Many casual readers of American history may not know, but there was a very real threat of civil war thirty years before war actually broke out. Meacham’s chapters on this event, 1831 to 1833, were some of the best in the book and he paints florid portraits of the players in this dramatic time: Jackson, Calhoun, Webster and Clay were on the center stage and Meacham leaves for the reader to decide if Jackson’s strong stance saved the union or only deferred the inevitable for a later day.
The Jackson that Meacham describes is a complicated person, a ferocious son of Irish immigrants and of the frontier, growing up in violence that was never far from the surface of his demeanor. Yet Jackson was also capable of deep affection and fierce loyalties, and he had a large role in forming the modern presidency as it is even today.
Whether one loves or hates Jackson, Meacham’s book is an important narrative in our history and provides a well-balanced exploration of an important time in the American story.
“You heard me, Jackson was a genocidal murderer and should not be praised.”
It was the early 1990s, I was a young recent college grad, having been born and raised around Nashville, Tennessee and this was the first time in my life I had ever heard anyone speak of Andrew Jackson with anything short of admiration and respect.
This was the first, but by no means the last time I would hear criticisms of him or his presidency.
Many of the negative reviews of the book seem to be more about a dislike of Jackson himself rather than an appraisal of author Jon Meacham’s fine work. Correctly, Meacham provides in this excellent biography, well written and thoroughly researched, an objective picture of the subject and his times, illustrating successes, failures, strengths and weaknesses. Meacham’s history is about Jackson, mostly of his presidency, but also of the Jacksonian era, and a thoughtful exploration of how this time formed a piece of our larger national history.
Growing up near Nashville, we all went on field trips to Jackson’s home, The Hermitage. Jackson’s name, likeness and presence was and still is a big part of the middle Tennessee landscape, with locations, streets and parks named for or about him. The legend of Old Hickory is a source of pride for many Tennesseans.
But I would come to understand that the gaunt but erect figure cast shadows across many graves and there were many, then and now, who saw him not as a hero, but as villain.
Jon Meacham, who won the Pulitzer Prize for this work, writes a history that is sympathetic to the seventh president, but he is no apologist. Jackson was a controversial figure, even in his day, and his rise to the presidency was a source of much consternation to the existing elites; he having risen from obscurity in the western wilderness and a self-styled champion of the masses. His mercurial, truculent nature and his early days as a gambler, horse racer, whiskey drinker, brawler and duelist did little to assuage his contemporary critics. The scandal involving his beloved wife would haunt him throughout most of their life together, and even into his presidency after her death.
Meacham spends time examining Jackson’s lifelong war with Native Americans, especially against the Creek, Seminole and Cherokee nations. To Meacham’s credit, and one of the finer points in this book, he presents detailed evidence of the struggle, of Jackson’s frequently contradictory feelings towards the Indian nations, and of Jackson’s later vehement prejudice. The author provides objective views of both sides, and offers explanations and theories of how Jackson came to his darkest moments on the Trail of Tears and how these dogmas would shape policy for decades later.
“Great presidents are not always good men.”
Meacham describes how Jackson took Washington by storm, on the wave of enormous popular support, but he was antagonistic towards the Eastern elite, who in their turn felt that Jackson was little more than a western savage who had disrupted legitimate power. Expanding popular democracy while also extending the power of the executive beyond what any of his six predecessors had, Jackson was nonetheless a polarizing figure in the nation and in the capital. The Washington that Meacham illustrates is not too far from what we see today, home to bitter rivalries, binary partisanship and intrigue.
Many casual readers of American history may not know, but there was a very real threat of civil war thirty years before war actually broke out. Meacham’s chapters on this event, 1831 to 1833, were some of the best in the book and he paints florid portraits of the players in this dramatic time: Jackson, Calhoun, Webster and Clay were on the center stage and Meacham leaves for the reader to decide if Jackson’s strong stance saved the union or only deferred the inevitable for a later day.
The Jackson that Meacham describes is a complicated person, a ferocious son of Irish immigrants and of the frontier, growing up in violence that was never far from the surface of his demeanor. Yet Jackson was also capable of deep affection and fierce loyalties, and he had a large role in forming the modern presidency as it is even today.
Whether one loves or hates Jackson, Meacham’s book is an important narrative in our history and provides a well-balanced exploration of an important time in the American story.
March 24, 2016
I think this book confused people. They were expecting a McCullough-esque hardcore biography of everything Jackson did EVER. Not so. As Meacham himself states in his Author's note, he was going for a biographical portrait of Jackson's time in the White House. And on that account, this is an excellent book. It gives a great picture of the tumult surrounding Jackson's two terms, the things that made him tick, and the decisions that defined his presidency. No, it didn't really tell us all about Andrew Jackson's childhood, or go into minute details about the deaths of his family. That's not the point. Instead, American Lion wants to make you understand Jackson the myth, Jackson the People's President, and how that Jackson managed to bend the Executive Power of our nation to his will. It shows why Lincoln, despite being opposite of Jackson in almost all his beliefs, would turn to Jackson in the country's greatest time of need--just before the Civil War. Andrew Jackson was hard in a lot of ways, but he loved the Union and he loved the people. Jackson's presidency was the first time that the office was seen in our modern light--as a strong office with its own power instead of merely a puppet of the Congress. American Lion is a refreshing look at 19th century American politics. (If you think the mud-slinging in current political contests is bad, just take a look at Jackson's two runs for the White House.) We owe a lot of who we are as a country to Andrew Jackson's years in power.
February 12, 2014
A terrible book about a horrible man written by a coward. I know that sounds harsh but there's no other way to describe it. The book claims to be only about his years in the White House. It isn't. Frequently, Meacham cherry picks and subsequently white washes Jackson's past sins in an effort to show him as a complicated hero.
Jackson wasn't complicated. He was maybe one of the simplest presidents America ever had. Here are some simple facts:
1) His greatest military victory was the Battle of New Orleans. Unbeknownst to Jackson, it took place approximately 14 days after the War of 1812 was over. Therefore, at best, the victory was a tragedy.
2) Later, while still serving in the military, without any orders to do so, seized what is now Florida for America. Florida had been owned by Spain, a sovereign nation. Jackson should have been charged for any and all lives lost during this illegal conflict as a war criminal.
3) Fought against the National Banking system simply because he lacked the cognitive capacity to understand it.
4) His legacy on Native American removal/massacre/war is one of the saddest in all of American history. He was truly a monster.
I went into this book knowing very little about Jackson and if I had remained confined to what was printed in the book I would still know very little. With this work, Meacham really tried to re-write history. He would tell tiny snippets of all the issues I listed about but only enough so that the reader wouldn't figure out the truth. This is unacceptable. I realize that many biographers admire their subjects...that's frequently why they take on the project in the first place. But as a historian, it is his duty to present the facts. Let the reader know the good and the bad and let us decide if he was a monster or a hero.
I would like to think Meacham didn't include the necessary facts because he is incompetent but I fear that it was all purposeful propaganda garbage. The vast majority of the book was super boring. Here's my impression of 75% of the book: "How dare you, sir!" "No, how dare you, sir!" with lots of "hrumphs" thrown in for good measure.
Please avoid this work at all costs and if you see Jon Meacham call him foul names for me. An hour on Wikipedia will give you all you need on this jerk.
Jackson wasn't complicated. He was maybe one of the simplest presidents America ever had. Here are some simple facts:
1) His greatest military victory was the Battle of New Orleans. Unbeknownst to Jackson, it took place approximately 14 days after the War of 1812 was over. Therefore, at best, the victory was a tragedy.
2) Later, while still serving in the military, without any orders to do so, seized what is now Florida for America. Florida had been owned by Spain, a sovereign nation. Jackson should have been charged for any and all lives lost during this illegal conflict as a war criminal.
3) Fought against the National Banking system simply because he lacked the cognitive capacity to understand it.
4) His legacy on Native American removal/massacre/war is one of the saddest in all of American history. He was truly a monster.
I went into this book knowing very little about Jackson and if I had remained confined to what was printed in the book I would still know very little. With this work, Meacham really tried to re-write history. He would tell tiny snippets of all the issues I listed about but only enough so that the reader wouldn't figure out the truth. This is unacceptable. I realize that many biographers admire their subjects...that's frequently why they take on the project in the first place. But as a historian, it is his duty to present the facts. Let the reader know the good and the bad and let us decide if he was a monster or a hero.
I would like to think Meacham didn't include the necessary facts because he is incompetent but I fear that it was all purposeful propaganda garbage. The vast majority of the book was super boring. Here's my impression of 75% of the book: "How dare you, sir!" "No, how dare you, sir!" with lots of "hrumphs" thrown in for good measure.
Please avoid this work at all costs and if you see Jon Meacham call him foul names for me. An hour on Wikipedia will give you all you need on this jerk.
June 1, 2018
Jon Meacham won a Pulitzer Prize for this biography of Andrew Jackson, America's seventh president. Jackson was certainly an intriguing subject. He's known as an advocate for the "common man" and for fighting against corruption, but he is also known for owning slaves and for supporting the removal of native Americans from their lands. Jackson was a man of his time, to be sure.
When I learned the author was coming to my city to do a reading for his latest book, The Soul of America, I prepared for the event by reading Jon Meacham's books about Andrew Jackson and Thomas Jefferson. Reading the biographies of Jackson and Jefferson back to back provided some interesting insights into America's founding and early decades. It's amazing how issues Jackson discussed and acted on back in the 1830s are still relevant today.
This is an incredibly detailed biography. The amount of time dedicated to what's known as the Petticoat Affair became a bit tedious to listen to on a long road trip, but overall, I'm glad I read this book and learned more about the complicated character of Jackson. Recommended for fans of history.
Personal Note:
I finished American Lion on a Friday evening while driving to Nashville, Tennessee. Jackson's family home, called The Hermitage, sits just outside Nashville and I was able to visit it on a beautiful Saturday morning. In the visitor center, guests can watch an introductory film about Andrew Jackson. Guess who was interviewed in the film? Jon Meacham. After watching it, I leaned over to my traveling companion and said, "That 20-minute film basically summarized the 400-page book I just read."
I'm still glad I read it. And if you're ever in Nashville, I do recommend visiting Jackson's home.
Opening Passage
"It looked like war. In his rooms on the second floor of the White House, in the flickering light of candles and oil lamps, President Andrew Jackson was furious and full of fight. He had just been reelected to a second term as America's seventh president, and South Carolina was defying him. He hated it, for he believed to his core that the state was about to destroy the nation. For Jackson, the crisis was not only political. It was personal. Four hundred and fifty miles down the Atlantic seaboard from Washington, in Charleston, radicals were raising an army to defend South Carolina's right to nullify federal laws it chose not to accept — the first step, Jackson believed, toward secession, and the destruction of the Union. 'I expect to hear soon that a civil war of extermination has commenced,' Jackson said, musing about arresting the Southern leaders and then hanging them."
When I learned the author was coming to my city to do a reading for his latest book, The Soul of America, I prepared for the event by reading Jon Meacham's books about Andrew Jackson and Thomas Jefferson. Reading the biographies of Jackson and Jefferson back to back provided some interesting insights into America's founding and early decades. It's amazing how issues Jackson discussed and acted on back in the 1830s are still relevant today.
This is an incredibly detailed biography. The amount of time dedicated to what's known as the Petticoat Affair became a bit tedious to listen to on a long road trip, but overall, I'm glad I read this book and learned more about the complicated character of Jackson. Recommended for fans of history.
Personal Note:
I finished American Lion on a Friday evening while driving to Nashville, Tennessee. Jackson's family home, called The Hermitage, sits just outside Nashville and I was able to visit it on a beautiful Saturday morning. In the visitor center, guests can watch an introductory film about Andrew Jackson. Guess who was interviewed in the film? Jon Meacham. After watching it, I leaned over to my traveling companion and said, "That 20-minute film basically summarized the 400-page book I just read."
I'm still glad I read it. And if you're ever in Nashville, I do recommend visiting Jackson's home.
Opening Passage
"It looked like war. In his rooms on the second floor of the White House, in the flickering light of candles and oil lamps, President Andrew Jackson was furious and full of fight. He had just been reelected to a second term as America's seventh president, and South Carolina was defying him. He hated it, for he believed to his core that the state was about to destroy the nation. For Jackson, the crisis was not only political. It was personal. Four hundred and fifty miles down the Atlantic seaboard from Washington, in Charleston, radicals were raising an army to defend South Carolina's right to nullify federal laws it chose not to accept — the first step, Jackson believed, toward secession, and the destruction of the Union. 'I expect to hear soon that a civil war of extermination has commenced,' Jackson said, musing about arresting the Southern leaders and then hanging them."
February 29, 2020
"Jackson was a transformative president in part because he had a transcendent personality"
- Jon Meacham, American Lion
A solid history of a complicated man. One of the more influential Presidents, Jackson can and should be both praised and condemned. In many ways, he epitomized our young nation. Problematic, in the extreme, in regards to Native Americans and slaves, energetic, complicated, narcissistic, driven, and not to be trifled with. Jackson is often revered by Presidents who want to appear both populist and strong. Jackson, however, is no Trump. With obvious blind spots (Slavery and Natives) he typically acted according to an inner guide. He felt our nation needed a stronger executive to protect the people from the tyranny of bureaucracy and moneyed interests. He was brutal to anyone who stood in his way.
Meacham doesn't shy away from Jackson's failings, but also spends a bit too much time (in my opinion) in dealing with Jackson's family. After reading a bunch of Caro, I was afraid I would be severely disappointed with Meacham (like I was with the most recent Walter Isaacson book, Leonardo da Vinci). It was, however, much better than I expected.
- Jon Meacham, American Lion
A solid history of a complicated man. One of the more influential Presidents, Jackson can and should be both praised and condemned. In many ways, he epitomized our young nation. Problematic, in the extreme, in regards to Native Americans and slaves, energetic, complicated, narcissistic, driven, and not to be trifled with. Jackson is often revered by Presidents who want to appear both populist and strong. Jackson, however, is no Trump. With obvious blind spots (Slavery and Natives) he typically acted according to an inner guide. He felt our nation needed a stronger executive to protect the people from the tyranny of bureaucracy and moneyed interests. He was brutal to anyone who stood in his way.
Meacham doesn't shy away from Jackson's failings, but also spends a bit too much time (in my opinion) in dealing with Jackson's family. After reading a bunch of Caro, I was afraid I would be severely disappointed with Meacham (like I was with the most recent Walter Isaacson book, Leonardo da Vinci). It was, however, much better than I expected.
February 27, 2020
“Not all great presidents were always good.”
I purchased “American Lion” after a November 2016 visit to the Hermitage (Jackson’s plantation outside Nashville, Tennessee). Growing up a history buff I had known a lot about Andrew Jackson, but had largely ignored him after my teenage years. That 2016 visit, and the realization that it reminded me of-that there is indeed “nothing new under the sun”, rekindled my interest.
As I read the book, as when I was at the Hermitage, the parallels to modern times are many. That is always the case with the past. It is interesting that President Trump had a portrait of Andrew Jackson installed in the Oval Office. I could quote many things the one said that many would easily attribute to the other. They are similar in many aspects, as are the reactions to their presidencies. Both were the end of the world, according to some of their peers, and both seem to have some real strengths and some real weaknesses as people and leaders. I had to grimace as I read about the issue of Indian removal during Jackson’s time. It was an issue he was for, and there were many voracious opponents to it, many of them who had been ardent supporters…until it was Jackson’s policy. Then they were against it. Change the issue from Indian removal to border wall, same deal. I am not commenting on either policy, only on the fact that political foes changed views on it when it made good opposition.
As previously mentioned, there is nothing new under the sun. Politically motivated impeachment, arguments about separation of church and state and the role of religion in the body politic, issues of race being used as political cudgels, monetary policy and tariffs, populism vs. the political establishment. It could be today, except it is the years before and just after 1830.
It is why I refuse to get bent out of shape about much. Ain’t none of it really new.
The text focuses mainly on the years of Jackson’s two terms, and there was quite a bit that I knew only on the surface level, or not at all. Jackson’s ugliness and bad polices get a lot of attention, Indian removal, etc. But there was more to the man, there always is, and his Nullification Proclamation is a great piece of American presidential history I knew little about. Delivered on Dec. 10th 1832, it was Jackson’s ardent defense of the Union and of a federal government and its appropriate powers. It affected every major administration that followed it, and it was brilliant. Jon Meacham (the author) says of Jackson, “He was rather, the great politician of his time, if success in politics is measured by the affirmation of a majority of the people in real time, and by the shadow one casts after leaving the stage.”
I love history, but there were times I was not fully engaged with this text. The problem is not the subject matter. Andrew Jackson is a good story. It was the writing and presentation, something did not click for me. At times Mr. Meacham seems a little too fan boyish. I am not sure if the text is too uncritical? He does not absolve Jackson of his sins and contradictions, I just wish he had looked at them a little more. They are worth examining.
Andrew Jackson was an important American figure. I appreciate any effort to see him in the context of his time, and I do feel that “American Lion” tries to accomplish that. I am glad I read it.
I leave off with something that Jackson said that I think is indicative of many great leaders, past and present- “Always take all the time to reflect that circumstances permit, but when the time for action has come, stop thinking.”
I purchased “American Lion” after a November 2016 visit to the Hermitage (Jackson’s plantation outside Nashville, Tennessee). Growing up a history buff I had known a lot about Andrew Jackson, but had largely ignored him after my teenage years. That 2016 visit, and the realization that it reminded me of-that there is indeed “nothing new under the sun”, rekindled my interest.
As I read the book, as when I was at the Hermitage, the parallels to modern times are many. That is always the case with the past. It is interesting that President Trump had a portrait of Andrew Jackson installed in the Oval Office. I could quote many things the one said that many would easily attribute to the other. They are similar in many aspects, as are the reactions to their presidencies. Both were the end of the world, according to some of their peers, and both seem to have some real strengths and some real weaknesses as people and leaders. I had to grimace as I read about the issue of Indian removal during Jackson’s time. It was an issue he was for, and there were many voracious opponents to it, many of them who had been ardent supporters…until it was Jackson’s policy. Then they were against it. Change the issue from Indian removal to border wall, same deal. I am not commenting on either policy, only on the fact that political foes changed views on it when it made good opposition.
As previously mentioned, there is nothing new under the sun. Politically motivated impeachment, arguments about separation of church and state and the role of religion in the body politic, issues of race being used as political cudgels, monetary policy and tariffs, populism vs. the political establishment. It could be today, except it is the years before and just after 1830.
It is why I refuse to get bent out of shape about much. Ain’t none of it really new.
The text focuses mainly on the years of Jackson’s two terms, and there was quite a bit that I knew only on the surface level, or not at all. Jackson’s ugliness and bad polices get a lot of attention, Indian removal, etc. But there was more to the man, there always is, and his Nullification Proclamation is a great piece of American presidential history I knew little about. Delivered on Dec. 10th 1832, it was Jackson’s ardent defense of the Union and of a federal government and its appropriate powers. It affected every major administration that followed it, and it was brilliant. Jon Meacham (the author) says of Jackson, “He was rather, the great politician of his time, if success in politics is measured by the affirmation of a majority of the people in real time, and by the shadow one casts after leaving the stage.”
I love history, but there were times I was not fully engaged with this text. The problem is not the subject matter. Andrew Jackson is a good story. It was the writing and presentation, something did not click for me. At times Mr. Meacham seems a little too fan boyish. I am not sure if the text is too uncritical? He does not absolve Jackson of his sins and contradictions, I just wish he had looked at them a little more. They are worth examining.
Andrew Jackson was an important American figure. I appreciate any effort to see him in the context of his time, and I do feel that “American Lion” tries to accomplish that. I am glad I read it.
I leave off with something that Jackson said that I think is indicative of many great leaders, past and present- “Always take all the time to reflect that circumstances permit, but when the time for action has come, stop thinking.”
October 3, 2023
I read this on the heels of H.W. Brands’ Jackson biography Andrew Jackson: His Life and Times. The Meacham book is different from a biography as it focuses on the Presidential years.
I enjoyed this more than the Brands book. Meacham did a great job presenting a full picture about what he was like, what motivated him, and his philosophy of governing.
What Exactly Was His Philosophy?
There some seeming contradictions with Jackson, but Meacham helped to put his philosophy into an overall framework that was generally consistent (though whether it was “good” is another matter).
He amassed more power for himself and the Presidency but was still at heart a “limited government” kind of guy. Meacham explains that Andrew Jackson has a limited government view in line with his Jeffersonian Democratic-Republican roots, but he also felt that when the Federal government exercised power, the Presidency should have more of a voice. You can think of the battle being the Presidency vs Congress & the Supreme Court, more than about the size and scope of the government. This helps explain how he is both behind the "power grabbing" acts of beginning the Spoils System to entrench the federal bureaucracy with people more supportive of him, and ignoring Supreme Court rulings he didn’t like, but is also behind the "limited government" acts of destroying the National Bank and vigilantly paying off the National Debt.
Another Jackson puzzle: He was a devoted Unionist, but also sometimes acted to defend “state’s rights”. Few things motivated Andrew Jackson more than preserving and strengthening the Union, and few things angered him more than threats of succession. However, he was not interested in moving more power from the states to the Union. And in fact, since he was pro-slavery, he defended things like South Carolina suppressing abolitionist writings. But while he supported states making their own decisions on items he viewed as in their purview, when South Carolina decided to nullify the tariff law and threaten succession, he fought relentlessly.
Jackson is viewed by himself and his fans as a champion of the weak against the powerful, but he also supported slavery and the forced expulsion of Native Americans from their lands. Andrew Jackson would fight for all he is worth for people he viewed as part of his circle. But Jackson viewed blacks and Native Americans as “them” and not “us”. He wasn’t sadistic, and in fact in his own paternalistic mind he was doing what he thought was best for those groups. But, if they were in the way of what he wanted for white Americans, he would ruthlessly trample over them. I think this lens helps explain how in certain respects you can consider him courageous and selfless, but also understand why many would consider this an ignorant and offensive way to look at him.
Theodore Frelinghuysen and Andrew Jackson’s Indian Removal Policy
Meacham summarizes Jackson’s views on the treatment of Native Americans to be on the “extreme end of mainstream”. I think this is too forgiving. There were many others who had similar views, but Jackson was not just a “product of his times”. He was a leader that *created* those views and implemented those actions. One of the things I’d like to remember from this book is being introduced to Theodore Frelinghuysen, a Senator from New Jersey. Frelinghuysen argued valiantly and eloquently against the Indian Removal Act, and even wrote: “… where the Indian always has been, he enjoys an absolute right still to be, in free exercise of his own modes of thought, government, and conduct.” Freelinghuysen’s views were in the minority, but were not an outlier, so people of the time like Jackson can’t just say they didn’t know any better. As Meacham argues, “there is nothing redemptive about Jackson’s Indian policy”. Also, while the removal actions couldn’t have been done “humanely”, Meacham argues it could have been done in a less inhumane way, and Jackson failed to even do that.
Like Him or Not, He Usually Won
Jackson won almost all of the political battles he fought during his presidency. Two things stood out after reading Meacham. One, he was a very cunning tactician. Even though he was quick to anger, and his temper was legendary, he would plan out his actions, and he was a very good strategist. And two, he was relentless. Once he decided he was going to fight for something, he would give everything he has, and wouldn’t rest until his opponent was destroyed. It’s a shame he wasn’t on the side of Angels more often.
The Petticoat Affair
Meacham wrote a lot about the Petticoat Affair. If you don’t know it, a short summary: salacious rumors swirled around Margaret Eaton, the wife of the Secretary of War. She was also rather outspoken, giving people another possible reason to dislike her. But, Jackson defended her, perhaps sympathizing with her due to his own experiences of salacious rumors about his own wife. Some of the cabinet wives refused to call on her at her home or receive her in their own homes, which was a *huge* deal back then. It divided Jackson’s whole Cabinet and made dealing with day-to-day affairs very challenging. You might find that Meacham over-covered this, but I liked it. It helped paint a picture of what life was like back then, and showed women were important in shaping events, even though they often had to act behind the scenes. Also, it was quite entertaining!
I enjoyed this more than the Brands book. Meacham did a great job presenting a full picture about what he was like, what motivated him, and his philosophy of governing.
What Exactly Was His Philosophy?
There some seeming contradictions with Jackson, but Meacham helped to put his philosophy into an overall framework that was generally consistent (though whether it was “good” is another matter).
He amassed more power for himself and the Presidency but was still at heart a “limited government” kind of guy. Meacham explains that Andrew Jackson has a limited government view in line with his Jeffersonian Democratic-Republican roots, but he also felt that when the Federal government exercised power, the Presidency should have more of a voice. You can think of the battle being the Presidency vs Congress & the Supreme Court, more than about the size and scope of the government. This helps explain how he is both behind the "power grabbing" acts of beginning the Spoils System to entrench the federal bureaucracy with people more supportive of him, and ignoring Supreme Court rulings he didn’t like, but is also behind the "limited government" acts of destroying the National Bank and vigilantly paying off the National Debt.
Another Jackson puzzle: He was a devoted Unionist, but also sometimes acted to defend “state’s rights”. Few things motivated Andrew Jackson more than preserving and strengthening the Union, and few things angered him more than threats of succession. However, he was not interested in moving more power from the states to the Union. And in fact, since he was pro-slavery, he defended things like South Carolina suppressing abolitionist writings. But while he supported states making their own decisions on items he viewed as in their purview, when South Carolina decided to nullify the tariff law and threaten succession, he fought relentlessly.
Jackson is viewed by himself and his fans as a champion of the weak against the powerful, but he also supported slavery and the forced expulsion of Native Americans from their lands. Andrew Jackson would fight for all he is worth for people he viewed as part of his circle. But Jackson viewed blacks and Native Americans as “them” and not “us”. He wasn’t sadistic, and in fact in his own paternalistic mind he was doing what he thought was best for those groups. But, if they were in the way of what he wanted for white Americans, he would ruthlessly trample over them. I think this lens helps explain how in certain respects you can consider him courageous and selfless, but also understand why many would consider this an ignorant and offensive way to look at him.
Theodore Frelinghuysen and Andrew Jackson’s Indian Removal Policy
Meacham summarizes Jackson’s views on the treatment of Native Americans to be on the “extreme end of mainstream”. I think this is too forgiving. There were many others who had similar views, but Jackson was not just a “product of his times”. He was a leader that *created* those views and implemented those actions. One of the things I’d like to remember from this book is being introduced to Theodore Frelinghuysen, a Senator from New Jersey. Frelinghuysen argued valiantly and eloquently against the Indian Removal Act, and even wrote: “… where the Indian always has been, he enjoys an absolute right still to be, in free exercise of his own modes of thought, government, and conduct.” Freelinghuysen’s views were in the minority, but were not an outlier, so people of the time like Jackson can’t just say they didn’t know any better. As Meacham argues, “there is nothing redemptive about Jackson’s Indian policy”. Also, while the removal actions couldn’t have been done “humanely”, Meacham argues it could have been done in a less inhumane way, and Jackson failed to even do that.
Like Him or Not, He Usually Won
Jackson won almost all of the political battles he fought during his presidency. Two things stood out after reading Meacham. One, he was a very cunning tactician. Even though he was quick to anger, and his temper was legendary, he would plan out his actions, and he was a very good strategist. And two, he was relentless. Once he decided he was going to fight for something, he would give everything he has, and wouldn’t rest until his opponent was destroyed. It’s a shame he wasn’t on the side of Angels more often.
The Petticoat Affair
Meacham wrote a lot about the Petticoat Affair. If you don’t know it, a short summary: salacious rumors swirled around Margaret Eaton, the wife of the Secretary of War. She was also rather outspoken, giving people another possible reason to dislike her. But, Jackson defended her, perhaps sympathizing with her due to his own experiences of salacious rumors about his own wife. Some of the cabinet wives refused to call on her at her home or receive her in their own homes, which was a *huge* deal back then. It divided Jackson’s whole Cabinet and made dealing with day-to-day affairs very challenging. You might find that Meacham over-covered this, but I liked it. It helped paint a picture of what life was like back then, and showed women were important in shaping events, even though they often had to act behind the scenes. Also, it was quite entertaining!
July 15, 2019
Um, did you know Andrew Jackson was a huge badass? He was also sort of a jerk. And he invented the Democratic party basically. Plus he was not very cool to the Native Americans.
March 21, 2018
"History has been ransacked to find examples of tyrants sufficiently odious to illustrate him by comparison. Language has been tortured to find epithets sufficiently strong to paint him in description. Imagination has been exhausted in her efforts to deck him with revolting and inhuman attributes. tyrant, despot, usurper; destroyer of the liberties of his country; rash ignorant, imbecile; endangering the public peace with all foreign nations; destroying domestic prosperity at home..."
While some of you may be assuming I have quoted a contemporary political commentator, and our current political climate has certainly taken on the dizzying aspects of a three ringed circus, I am in fact quoting Thomas Hart Benton, a devoted partisan to Andrew Jackson who is describing "Old Hickory's" enemies, of which there was no shortage.
Surprisingly, thirty years earlier, during the War of 1812, Benton was one of those enemies who got into such a fierce altercation with then General Jackson, that they tried to kill each other in a duel.
Ron Meacham's excellent biography of one of our most controversial presidents does not record Jackson's life before becoming the seventh president of the United States but starts with his first years after becoming president. This is perhaps a pity because those years are quite spectacular and give valuable context to how Jackson became the sort of president he was, but one will have to go to Robert Remini's more thorough Life of Andrew Jackson.
But we see the drama, the color, and Jackson's legacy. We also see how nullification and secession was broiling in the South back in the 1830s. We also are given clearer understanding as to what caused those feelings of succession. Slavery was not actually on the table then since only a few Christian missionaries and abolitionists (also Christian) were the only outspoken opponents of slavery.
What the South decried was they considered to be unfair taxation of their produce. This may or may not be valid, but one will have to go to another source of information because neither Meacham nor Remini provide enough to allow the reader to form a conclusion as to whether the taxes on Southern goods was fair or not.
We do know, according to Meacham that Jackson made some concessions and partially lowered the tax rate but not to the satisfaction of the South, nor John C. Calhoun, Jackson's former vice president.
Yes, Jackson had two vice presidents because the first, Calhoun, turned on him and decided to run a bid for the presidency against him. Van Buren became Jackson's second president and also the nation's succeeding president.
What is one to make of Andrew Jackson? We know about the Trail of Tears enforced by him. His documents show that he saw clear incompatibility with the Native and American cultures but insisted that if the American Indians conformed to American society they could keep their land and stay. This was a false promise. The Indians that chose to stay and conform soon found themselves thrust on to the Trail to the West. Certainly a blot on our history.
Yet Jackson adopted an Indian boy and raised him for many years (until the boy in teenage years became ill and died).
Jackson was not against slavery. He had slaves and he did not free them when he died. But he was vehemently against secession. He passionately believed in the Federation.
In fact he firmly believed so much in the Federation and that as president he was the Federation. The people had elected him. He represented their interests and nothing was going to interfere with that. He apparently did not believe that members of the House or Senate represented the people because he made a record number of executive orders, setting the ground work for later presidents.
He destroyed the National Bank for this reason. He believed that a private bank was corrupt and would exploit the people. As the people's spokesman he acted believing that everything he did was in the American citizen's interest. How he possessed this special knowledge of the will of the people he never explained and often it seemed as though he confused his personal will with the people's will. As a result he had the habit of ram-rodding over anyone that conflicted with his intentions.
The main legacy Jackson left was the groundwork for the Democratic Party as we know it today. He firmly believed it was the government's job to provide for and protect the people.
It was under Jackson's presidency that Texas became encouraged to join the Union. Stephen F. Austin pleaded with Jackson to send in troops and protect the U.S. citizens living inside the Texas territory from the marauding Mexican gangs that were over running American cattle farms and General Santa Ana who was determined to make Texas a part of Mexico. Jackson inexorably reminded Austin that Texas was not a part of the United States and therefore was not entitled to U.S. protection. The Battle of the Alamo was a pivotal moment in Texas history that led to Texas becoming a member of the United States of America.
Towards the end of his life, Jackson experienced a kind of conversion. He had always considered himself a Christian, although he refused to join a church because he thought the leader of the country should be religiously neutral. However, there was a radical change in his attitude and beliefs towards the end of his life. He joined a church and on his death bed gathered his family and slaves around them.
"'God will take of you for me.' He was speaking not only to his relations and the children, but to the slaves who had gathered in the room to mark the end. Jackson said: 'Do not cry; I hope to meet you all in Heaven- yes, all in Heaven, white and black.'.
Near death, Jackson sought comfort in the promises of the faith he had embraced in retirement. 'My conversation is for you all,' he said and then renewed his talk of the world to come. ' Christ has no respect to color,' Jackson said. 'I am in God and God is in me....'"
As are most people, Jackson was a complicated person, but, love him or hate him, one cannot deny that he set in motion significant events that propelled us to the country as we know it today.
While some of you may be assuming I have quoted a contemporary political commentator, and our current political climate has certainly taken on the dizzying aspects of a three ringed circus, I am in fact quoting Thomas Hart Benton, a devoted partisan to Andrew Jackson who is describing "Old Hickory's" enemies, of which there was no shortage.
Surprisingly, thirty years earlier, during the War of 1812, Benton was one of those enemies who got into such a fierce altercation with then General Jackson, that they tried to kill each other in a duel.
Ron Meacham's excellent biography of one of our most controversial presidents does not record Jackson's life before becoming the seventh president of the United States but starts with his first years after becoming president. This is perhaps a pity because those years are quite spectacular and give valuable context to how Jackson became the sort of president he was, but one will have to go to Robert Remini's more thorough Life of Andrew Jackson.
But we see the drama, the color, and Jackson's legacy. We also see how nullification and secession was broiling in the South back in the 1830s. We also are given clearer understanding as to what caused those feelings of succession. Slavery was not actually on the table then since only a few Christian missionaries and abolitionists (also Christian) were the only outspoken opponents of slavery.
What the South decried was they considered to be unfair taxation of their produce. This may or may not be valid, but one will have to go to another source of information because neither Meacham nor Remini provide enough to allow the reader to form a conclusion as to whether the taxes on Southern goods was fair or not.
We do know, according to Meacham that Jackson made some concessions and partially lowered the tax rate but not to the satisfaction of the South, nor John C. Calhoun, Jackson's former vice president.
Yes, Jackson had two vice presidents because the first, Calhoun, turned on him and decided to run a bid for the presidency against him. Van Buren became Jackson's second president and also the nation's succeeding president.
What is one to make of Andrew Jackson? We know about the Trail of Tears enforced by him. His documents show that he saw clear incompatibility with the Native and American cultures but insisted that if the American Indians conformed to American society they could keep their land and stay. This was a false promise. The Indians that chose to stay and conform soon found themselves thrust on to the Trail to the West. Certainly a blot on our history.
Yet Jackson adopted an Indian boy and raised him for many years (until the boy in teenage years became ill and died).
Jackson was not against slavery. He had slaves and he did not free them when he died. But he was vehemently against secession. He passionately believed in the Federation.
In fact he firmly believed so much in the Federation and that as president he was the Federation. The people had elected him. He represented their interests and nothing was going to interfere with that. He apparently did not believe that members of the House or Senate represented the people because he made a record number of executive orders, setting the ground work for later presidents.
He destroyed the National Bank for this reason. He believed that a private bank was corrupt and would exploit the people. As the people's spokesman he acted believing that everything he did was in the American citizen's interest. How he possessed this special knowledge of the will of the people he never explained and often it seemed as though he confused his personal will with the people's will. As a result he had the habit of ram-rodding over anyone that conflicted with his intentions.
The main legacy Jackson left was the groundwork for the Democratic Party as we know it today. He firmly believed it was the government's job to provide for and protect the people.
It was under Jackson's presidency that Texas became encouraged to join the Union. Stephen F. Austin pleaded with Jackson to send in troops and protect the U.S. citizens living inside the Texas territory from the marauding Mexican gangs that were over running American cattle farms and General Santa Ana who was determined to make Texas a part of Mexico. Jackson inexorably reminded Austin that Texas was not a part of the United States and therefore was not entitled to U.S. protection. The Battle of the Alamo was a pivotal moment in Texas history that led to Texas becoming a member of the United States of America.
Towards the end of his life, Jackson experienced a kind of conversion. He had always considered himself a Christian, although he refused to join a church because he thought the leader of the country should be religiously neutral. However, there was a radical change in his attitude and beliefs towards the end of his life. He joined a church and on his death bed gathered his family and slaves around them.
"'God will take of you for me.' He was speaking not only to his relations and the children, but to the slaves who had gathered in the room to mark the end. Jackson said: 'Do not cry; I hope to meet you all in Heaven- yes, all in Heaven, white and black.'.
Near death, Jackson sought comfort in the promises of the faith he had embraced in retirement. 'My conversation is for you all,' he said and then renewed his talk of the world to come. ' Christ has no respect to color,' Jackson said. 'I am in God and God is in me....'"
As are most people, Jackson was a complicated person, but, love him or hate him, one cannot deny that he set in motion significant events that propelled us to the country as we know it today.
April 29, 2021
I am no fan of Andrew Jackson. I am also not a fan of Thomas Jefferson but Jefferson's opinion that Jackson was unqualified to be president is one that I could agree with, at least prior to reading this book. What I am is a fan of Jon Meacham and I was curious as to why somebody like Meacham would have written about a man like Jackson. Meacham is a Tennessee native but I have a hard time believing that this book was simply a function of favorite son loyalty. In order to satisfy my curiosity I decided to read the book.
The book is limited to the 8 years Jackson spent in the White House but with some brief childhood and background material offered as well. Since Jackson's rise to the presidency is based almost exclusively on his military exploits at New Orleans during the War of 1812 whatever is worth knowing about Jackson occurred during the years of his presidency. Because of its limited scope, while biographical, this book it is not what many would consider a complete biography but I think that point is arguable in this case. What Meacham gives the reader is a view of Jackson's character and motivations. Whether you decide to like Jackson or not will probably depend upon what he did in his 8 years of power and why he did what he did. The three major events of Jackson's presidency were the Indian Removal, the Southern Nullification movement, and the destruction of the National Bank. Meacham deals thoroughly with all three of these events as well as the details of Jackson's White House family which is crucial to gaining an understanding of this man. Understanding Jackson is what the reader can acquire from reading this book and while you may not agree with what Jackson did understanding why he did it does seem to mitigate the action.
Jackson seem to get universal criticism for the Indian Removal and its harshness. My reading of our relations with Native Americans has me concluding that if Jackson hadn't done it somebody else would have and it might have been worse. What is hard to accept are the conditions of the removal that resulted in about 25% of the participants dying along the way. Jackson could have provided for a more humane relocation but did not which, as Meacham notes, was contrary to the image of paternalism that Jackson relished and promoted both as to the Indians as well as the American people in general. Meacham seems hard pressed to understand how a man that considered himself a father figure and protector of the Indians could not only expel them but do so under such brutal and cruel conditions.
Jackson's handling of the Nullification controversy clearly establishes him as a staunch defender of the Union more than 25 years before the Civil War. While he was believed to be an explosive and hotheaded person with no patience with opposition he exercised incredible wisdom and restraint and prevented the outbreak of violence at a time when our Union might not have been able to endure it. For this Jackson doesn't get enough credit. That he was able to exercise this manner of behavior is probably, in great part, due to the family that he surrounded himself with while in the White House. His wife died just after his election and he came to Washington while still in mourning. He and his wife Rachel had no children of their own so Jackson brought members of his wife's family to live with him in the White House. His 21 year old recently married niece Emily acted as his hostess while her husband, Andrew Jackson Donelson, was Jackson's personal secretary and would probably be considered his chief of staff in today's presidency. These young people along with their children and other family members provided a calming and anchoring effect on the president that he craved and valued. Meacham goes to some length to stress the importance of family to Jackson and how this concept dominated his political views and decisions. The family may also have reinforced . Jackson's domineering personality as he was the head of this family and criticism or opposition to his leadership was considered betrayal. All the members of this family understood this and catered to this man's every wish and desire in order to maintain harmony for all concerned.
I am still not a fan of Jackson. I particularly do not like his belief that all three branches of government were entitled to form their own opinions of the meaning of the Constitution and to act accordingly. Such an opinion would have led to chaos and rendered the Supreme Court a meaningless advisory body at a time when its authority had already been established by John Marshall. It was interesting to learn, however, that Marshall became an admirer of Jackson's following the Nullification matter. I don't think this book will change many opinions but it may temper some. What this book will provide is an interesting treatment of a critical part of our history in the hands of an interesting and controversial president. Enjoy.
The book is limited to the 8 years Jackson spent in the White House but with some brief childhood and background material offered as well. Since Jackson's rise to the presidency is based almost exclusively on his military exploits at New Orleans during the War of 1812 whatever is worth knowing about Jackson occurred during the years of his presidency. Because of its limited scope, while biographical, this book it is not what many would consider a complete biography but I think that point is arguable in this case. What Meacham gives the reader is a view of Jackson's character and motivations. Whether you decide to like Jackson or not will probably depend upon what he did in his 8 years of power and why he did what he did. The three major events of Jackson's presidency were the Indian Removal, the Southern Nullification movement, and the destruction of the National Bank. Meacham deals thoroughly with all three of these events as well as the details of Jackson's White House family which is crucial to gaining an understanding of this man. Understanding Jackson is what the reader can acquire from reading this book and while you may not agree with what Jackson did understanding why he did it does seem to mitigate the action.
Jackson seem to get universal criticism for the Indian Removal and its harshness. My reading of our relations with Native Americans has me concluding that if Jackson hadn't done it somebody else would have and it might have been worse. What is hard to accept are the conditions of the removal that resulted in about 25% of the participants dying along the way. Jackson could have provided for a more humane relocation but did not which, as Meacham notes, was contrary to the image of paternalism that Jackson relished and promoted both as to the Indians as well as the American people in general. Meacham seems hard pressed to understand how a man that considered himself a father figure and protector of the Indians could not only expel them but do so under such brutal and cruel conditions.
Jackson's handling of the Nullification controversy clearly establishes him as a staunch defender of the Union more than 25 years before the Civil War. While he was believed to be an explosive and hotheaded person with no patience with opposition he exercised incredible wisdom and restraint and prevented the outbreak of violence at a time when our Union might not have been able to endure it. For this Jackson doesn't get enough credit. That he was able to exercise this manner of behavior is probably, in great part, due to the family that he surrounded himself with while in the White House. His wife died just after his election and he came to Washington while still in mourning. He and his wife Rachel had no children of their own so Jackson brought members of his wife's family to live with him in the White House. His 21 year old recently married niece Emily acted as his hostess while her husband, Andrew Jackson Donelson, was Jackson's personal secretary and would probably be considered his chief of staff in today's presidency. These young people along with their children and other family members provided a calming and anchoring effect on the president that he craved and valued. Meacham goes to some length to stress the importance of family to Jackson and how this concept dominated his political views and decisions. The family may also have reinforced . Jackson's domineering personality as he was the head of this family and criticism or opposition to his leadership was considered betrayal. All the members of this family understood this and catered to this man's every wish and desire in order to maintain harmony for all concerned.
I am still not a fan of Jackson. I particularly do not like his belief that all three branches of government were entitled to form their own opinions of the meaning of the Constitution and to act accordingly. Such an opinion would have led to chaos and rendered the Supreme Court a meaningless advisory body at a time when its authority had already been established by John Marshall. It was interesting to learn, however, that Marshall became an admirer of Jackson's following the Nullification matter. I don't think this book will change many opinions but it may temper some. What this book will provide is an interesting treatment of a critical part of our history in the hands of an interesting and controversial president. Enjoy.
September 1, 2018
I was hoping this would be a bit more critical, but it was a hagiography of a very complicated and problematic president. Meacham does not let him getaway with his treatment of the Native Americans or his slaves (the latter he barely even talks about). There is this assumption in the book that the territorial expansions were all good. I don't think anyone would come out and say that the ends justify the means, but while Jackson is critiqued for his treatment of the natives or Mexicans inhabiting the land, ultimately he's revered for securing the land. How can we separate the two? Same with the expansion of slavery. He kept the union together for longer, but at what cost to human lives? Yes, at the time many people did not care about the lives of black slaves and native americans and we have evolved. Kind of--first of all, lots of people at the time knew it was wrong and said so publicly. And two, why not take our more accurate perspective now and tell the story right?
PREFERRED SYNOPSIS:
"Jackson pretended to be a man of the people, but he thought only white men were people. This was a convenient belief because it allowed Jackson to murder Native Americans and pillage their land and continue to promote the bondage of African Americans--two of the cruelest acts of our government. Jackson and his allies (which included most American men in the government north and south) knew this was wrong, but they cared more about power and land so they used arguments about racial inferiority and divine right to justify their cruel and self-serving actions. We should study the lives of men like Jackson in order to make sure we never lionize such men again and in so doing enable cruelty."
Note: I was most interested in his bank war and there's quite a bit in here on that, but that also diminishes the stupidity of what Jackson did. Reading this made me see Jackson in a new more favorable light, which I think was the point. Trump is no Jackson. And I grant that times were very different with regards to accepting violence and saving the union at all costs. But even compared to the standards of the time, Jackson was cruel and power-hungry. Still, I do appreciate how tenuous the Republic was and how much it needed a brute like Jackson to hold it together.
PREFERRED SYNOPSIS:
"Jackson pretended to be a man of the people, but he thought only white men were people. This was a convenient belief because it allowed Jackson to murder Native Americans and pillage their land and continue to promote the bondage of African Americans--two of the cruelest acts of our government. Jackson and his allies (which included most American men in the government north and south) knew this was wrong, but they cared more about power and land so they used arguments about racial inferiority and divine right to justify their cruel and self-serving actions. We should study the lives of men like Jackson in order to make sure we never lionize such men again and in so doing enable cruelty."
Note: I was most interested in his bank war and there's quite a bit in here on that, but that also diminishes the stupidity of what Jackson did. Reading this made me see Jackson in a new more favorable light, which I think was the point. Trump is no Jackson. And I grant that times were very different with regards to accepting violence and saving the union at all costs. But even compared to the standards of the time, Jackson was cruel and power-hungry. Still, I do appreciate how tenuous the Republic was and how much it needed a brute like Jackson to hold it together.
November 9, 2020
Jackson had his faults, but he was a true American hero and patriot. The book was very well done. Recommended.
October 20, 2015
In a further exploration of the lives of those who helped shape early America, I turned back to biographer Jon Meacham and his depiction of Andrew Jackson. I thoroughly enjoying the author's depiction of Thomas Jefferson in a similar piece and hoped to leave with as much knowledge of this lesser known figure. The seventh President of the United States, Jackson broke many early precedents and his two-terms in office opened the door to a new era in presidential politics, bringing the commoner's views to the forefront. Throughout this biographical piece, Meacham presents Jackson as a man who differed greatly from his predecessors and certainly paved the way for future commanders-in-chief. Jackson is seen as a man from humble beginnings, with little interest in the status quo, and who sought to quell early internal insurrection. While not a typical biography that thoroughly traces the man's life from cradle to grave, Meacham does a wonderful job working through the White House years of Andrew Jackson, peppering the narrative with flashbacks and poignant backstories to better depict those eight years as America's political leader. Not to be missed by those who enjoy succinct biographies as well as the reader who finds learning to be an eternal gift in non-fiction.
Andrew Jackson was the first president to come from humble means, which caused quite a stir amongst those who opposed him. Not from an aristocratic background or schooled at the few prestigious schools America had to offer, Jackson grew up in Tennessee and developed a passion for his country. He became well-versed in Bible teachings and used his religious upbringing to guide him throughout his life. Jackson served in the House of Representatives briefly and the Senate for a short time as well, before becoming a judge and serving the people of Tennessee. When he sought the presidency in 1824, Jackson emerged as a man of the people who challenged the elite, locking horns with John Quincy Adams and only losing when the election went to the House of Representatives after the Electoral College could not determine a winner. Over the next four years, Jackson deflected numerous criticisms to his character and communicated his ideas so effectively that he stunned many by toppling Adams in the '28 election. However, nothing proved more ostracizing than the death of his wife Rachel immediately following his victory. Jackson was forced to serve without this most useful rudder, but had extended family to balance things, having no natural offspring. Meacham argues that Jackson adopted the American people as his family, serving them effectively and caring for them as a father. That Jackson broke the preconceptions forged by his six predecessors is by no means the only thing that differentiated Jackson from the 'presidents of the 13 colonies', but it certainly paved the way for some of his other unique attributes that Meacham presents in the book.
A lack of interest in simply serving in the footsteps of those who came before him serves as the second key trait Meacham presents related to Jackson's character. Jackson ascended to the White House and began breaking some of the societal norms that had become custom in Washington. As Meacham discusses throughout, Jackson sought not only to be president, but to transform the role and serve the people who elected him, a vow mentioned above. When Jackson reached the White House, universal male suffrage (at least for Caucasians) had been acquired, opening up an electorate with a variety of needs. Rather than catering to the rich, Jackson pushed ideas through Congress and led the country with the entire populace in mind. He was the first president to use the constitutional veto of legislation, much to the chagrin of Congress. Jackson did not apologise, but chose to defend his right as entrenched in the US Constitution, using only the tools at his disposal. Meacham cites that numerous future presidents mentioned Jackson's use of the veto to pave the way for a more active and involved executive branch, allowing the president to play a political role as the sole representative of all the people. Additionally, Meacham discusses Jackson's struggles with Cabinet dissent, to the point that he removed a fair number ahead of his reelection bid, most prominently Vice-President John C. Calhoun. Used effectively in 1828 to secure the South, Calhoun became too outspoken in the latter years of Jackson's first term in office and tried to bring the president to his knees for daring to flex his muscle against South Carolina. Jackson did not stand idly by and chose not act summarily, removing those who would have turned Brutus on him and forged ahead into a reelection campaign to renew his support by the American people. In an effort to act free of outside influence, Jackson made some decisions that drew ire of Congress to the point of being censured in a controversial vote. Meacham shows throughout the text that Jackson used his simple upbringing to challenge the status quo, which tried to shackle the Commander-in-Chief into more of a ceremonial role, at least as it related to the domestic policy agenda. That Jackson would have none of it should be no surprise to the reader.
Jackson had not only a domestic and international agenda to complete during his two terms as president, but also tried to quell two major internal issues. During the years of his first term, Jackson tried to address the question of Indian habitation within American states and territories. While Washington and the early administrations had bound themselves to the treaties signed with the Indian population, Jackson did not hold that these documents were sufficient and moved to remove Indian territorial claims while wiping out their settlements west of the Mississippi. Jackson's vehemence would not be deterred and would not permit the free-standing and autonomous rule of the Indian populations. While hindsight offers this as a blatant assimilation technique, Jackson did not stand down when challenged. While Meacham does not speculate how this decision changed modern interaction between the government and Indian population, it is interesting to see how Jackson's actions might have quelled future land clashes. The other major issue Jackson handled was state-control over the slavery issue, with South Carolina as a litmus test. Jackson pushed to keep the state from overstepping its power, going so far as to offer a constitutional interpretation that pitted Jackson against South Carolina. As mentioned above, this became the battleground on which he and John C. Calhoun fought, which extended into the second term and would pave the way for Lincoln's stand. Jackson's ideas sparked the early split within the states that did lead to the Civil War. Southern ideas were not accepted in Jackson's White House, which he made no qualms about stating publicly. In order to preserve the Union, Jackson felt he would do anything to bring the South, read: South Carolina, into line. While he did not bring about the destruction of the Union during his time in office, Jackson's views on these two issues did perforate the bonds Washington and his subsequent five presidents had in place before 1828.
Meacham tackles the presidency of Andrew Jackson with such vigour that the reader cannot help but be enthralled with what there is to learn. A man who, as the title suggests, came roaring into office and tried to change the acceptable norms. Jackson challenged Congress and presidential precedent, using the Constitution as his guidebook. Meacham is thorough in his research and weaves a wonderful narrative that follows a wonderful chronology, with poignant flashbacks to fill in gaps the story does not thoroughly discuss. While not a David McCullough biography, from cradle to grave, Meacham uses an eight-year period packed with dramatic occurrences and political fervour that there is no need to spend chapters and sections inculcating the general themes that so clearly emerge from the narrative. Jackson secured victory by being the (first) people's president and would not hand over the reins to anyone who tried to neuter what the people wanted. He utilised his cabinet and surrounded himself with strong men (and even a few women) who shaped the country in the mid-nineteenth century. His legacy, while someone with which I was not aware before discovering this book, is one of forging new ground within the rules laid out by the Founding Fathers. Meacham illustrates that Jackson never shied away from defending his beliefs to the core, but always opened his mind to alternatives, should they be persuasive and well-grounded.
Kudos Mr. Meacham for this wonderful biographical piece, which taught as much as it entertained me. I thoroughly enjoyed everything you had to offer and look forward to exploring more of your work, when time permits.
Like/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at:
http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/
Andrew Jackson was the first president to come from humble means, which caused quite a stir amongst those who opposed him. Not from an aristocratic background or schooled at the few prestigious schools America had to offer, Jackson grew up in Tennessee and developed a passion for his country. He became well-versed in Bible teachings and used his religious upbringing to guide him throughout his life. Jackson served in the House of Representatives briefly and the Senate for a short time as well, before becoming a judge and serving the people of Tennessee. When he sought the presidency in 1824, Jackson emerged as a man of the people who challenged the elite, locking horns with John Quincy Adams and only losing when the election went to the House of Representatives after the Electoral College could not determine a winner. Over the next four years, Jackson deflected numerous criticisms to his character and communicated his ideas so effectively that he stunned many by toppling Adams in the '28 election. However, nothing proved more ostracizing than the death of his wife Rachel immediately following his victory. Jackson was forced to serve without this most useful rudder, but had extended family to balance things, having no natural offspring. Meacham argues that Jackson adopted the American people as his family, serving them effectively and caring for them as a father. That Jackson broke the preconceptions forged by his six predecessors is by no means the only thing that differentiated Jackson from the 'presidents of the 13 colonies', but it certainly paved the way for some of his other unique attributes that Meacham presents in the book.
A lack of interest in simply serving in the footsteps of those who came before him serves as the second key trait Meacham presents related to Jackson's character. Jackson ascended to the White House and began breaking some of the societal norms that had become custom in Washington. As Meacham discusses throughout, Jackson sought not only to be president, but to transform the role and serve the people who elected him, a vow mentioned above. When Jackson reached the White House, universal male suffrage (at least for Caucasians) had been acquired, opening up an electorate with a variety of needs. Rather than catering to the rich, Jackson pushed ideas through Congress and led the country with the entire populace in mind. He was the first president to use the constitutional veto of legislation, much to the chagrin of Congress. Jackson did not apologise, but chose to defend his right as entrenched in the US Constitution, using only the tools at his disposal. Meacham cites that numerous future presidents mentioned Jackson's use of the veto to pave the way for a more active and involved executive branch, allowing the president to play a political role as the sole representative of all the people. Additionally, Meacham discusses Jackson's struggles with Cabinet dissent, to the point that he removed a fair number ahead of his reelection bid, most prominently Vice-President John C. Calhoun. Used effectively in 1828 to secure the South, Calhoun became too outspoken in the latter years of Jackson's first term in office and tried to bring the president to his knees for daring to flex his muscle against South Carolina. Jackson did not stand idly by and chose not act summarily, removing those who would have turned Brutus on him and forged ahead into a reelection campaign to renew his support by the American people. In an effort to act free of outside influence, Jackson made some decisions that drew ire of Congress to the point of being censured in a controversial vote. Meacham shows throughout the text that Jackson used his simple upbringing to challenge the status quo, which tried to shackle the Commander-in-Chief into more of a ceremonial role, at least as it related to the domestic policy agenda. That Jackson would have none of it should be no surprise to the reader.
Jackson had not only a domestic and international agenda to complete during his two terms as president, but also tried to quell two major internal issues. During the years of his first term, Jackson tried to address the question of Indian habitation within American states and territories. While Washington and the early administrations had bound themselves to the treaties signed with the Indian population, Jackson did not hold that these documents were sufficient and moved to remove Indian territorial claims while wiping out their settlements west of the Mississippi. Jackson's vehemence would not be deterred and would not permit the free-standing and autonomous rule of the Indian populations. While hindsight offers this as a blatant assimilation technique, Jackson did not stand down when challenged. While Meacham does not speculate how this decision changed modern interaction between the government and Indian population, it is interesting to see how Jackson's actions might have quelled future land clashes. The other major issue Jackson handled was state-control over the slavery issue, with South Carolina as a litmus test. Jackson pushed to keep the state from overstepping its power, going so far as to offer a constitutional interpretation that pitted Jackson against South Carolina. As mentioned above, this became the battleground on which he and John C. Calhoun fought, which extended into the second term and would pave the way for Lincoln's stand. Jackson's ideas sparked the early split within the states that did lead to the Civil War. Southern ideas were not accepted in Jackson's White House, which he made no qualms about stating publicly. In order to preserve the Union, Jackson felt he would do anything to bring the South, read: South Carolina, into line. While he did not bring about the destruction of the Union during his time in office, Jackson's views on these two issues did perforate the bonds Washington and his subsequent five presidents had in place before 1828.
Meacham tackles the presidency of Andrew Jackson with such vigour that the reader cannot help but be enthralled with what there is to learn. A man who, as the title suggests, came roaring into office and tried to change the acceptable norms. Jackson challenged Congress and presidential precedent, using the Constitution as his guidebook. Meacham is thorough in his research and weaves a wonderful narrative that follows a wonderful chronology, with poignant flashbacks to fill in gaps the story does not thoroughly discuss. While not a David McCullough biography, from cradle to grave, Meacham uses an eight-year period packed with dramatic occurrences and political fervour that there is no need to spend chapters and sections inculcating the general themes that so clearly emerge from the narrative. Jackson secured victory by being the (first) people's president and would not hand over the reins to anyone who tried to neuter what the people wanted. He utilised his cabinet and surrounded himself with strong men (and even a few women) who shaped the country in the mid-nineteenth century. His legacy, while someone with which I was not aware before discovering this book, is one of forging new ground within the rules laid out by the Founding Fathers. Meacham illustrates that Jackson never shied away from defending his beliefs to the core, but always opened his mind to alternatives, should they be persuasive and well-grounded.
Kudos Mr. Meacham for this wonderful biographical piece, which taught as much as it entertained me. I thoroughly enjoyed everything you had to offer and look forward to exploring more of your work, when time permits.
Like/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at:
http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/
November 14, 2019
Jackson usually is praised for his vision of the presidency and commitment to the Federal Union, while simultaneously lamented for his demagoguery and racism. Meacham takes these subjects on without reservation. In Meacham's account, Jackson is at his very best while staring down the threat to the union posed by the Nullification Movement which arose in South Carolina and was championed by John C. Calhoun, Jackson's vice president. (Times were different.) He is at his worst when orchestrating the removal of the native american populations of Georgia and Alabama to regions west of the Mississippi River. And his demogoguery blossoms into full blown megalomania when he convinces himself that he is acting in the best interests of the indians, indeed, as their protecting father -- even as he subjected them to the horrors of a 19th century 'ethnic cleansing'.
Meacham explores some of the effects of Jackson's populism on the quality of political discourse during his first election. Taking his case to the people, particularly the roughened voters of the emerging western states, Jackson had no compunction about dispensing with lofty rhetoric in favor of a "telling it like it is" style that appealed to what Easterners considered the vulgar west. Jackson was accused, with some justification, of manipulating "the rabble" in order to achieve his political goals. The election was capped by a rowdy party in the White House after his inauguration. Meacham's depiction of the aftermath of this celebration reminds one of the morning after a particularly drunken frat party combined with a whiskey-fueled, saloon shoot'em up, which did nothing to calm the fears of the establishment that the voters had elected a barbarian as president.
Meacham is entertaining in his description of the petticoat wars of Jackson's first administration and the bitter fight over the national bank that dominated the early part of his second administration. While not offering anything highly original on this subject (as far as I can tell as a first time reader on Jackson), Meacham details how Jackson's vision of the role of the presidency was instrumental in re-defining and strengthening the executive branch of government against fears, deeply seated in the pre-war experience with King George, that the emergence of a strong president would undermine the American democracy.
Meacham keeps the psychoanalysis of Jackson to a minimum, but does occasionally explain Jackson's motivations in psychological terms. For example, as an orphan, Jackson is depicted as acting to create a stable household for himself. Similarly, he is described as understanding his role as President to be a father figure to the people and a bulwark against the rich and privileged. To his credit, Meacham does not overdo this sort of thing, and his restraint in this regard contributes to the pleasure of reading his book, for which he won the Pulitzer Prize.
I might also say that this book focuses on Jackson's years in the White House, 1829 to 1836. It is a compliment to Meacham that I now want to locate a good biography describing Jackson's years before the White House. One suspects those years, when Jackson fought duels, Indian wars, the Battle of New Orleans and may have committed bigamy, will make the White House years look dull as mashed potatoes in comparison. But there is nothing dull about Meacham's book. It is a very fine biography and an engrossing introduction to a complicated and important subject.
Meacham explores some of the effects of Jackson's populism on the quality of political discourse during his first election. Taking his case to the people, particularly the roughened voters of the emerging western states, Jackson had no compunction about dispensing with lofty rhetoric in favor of a "telling it like it is" style that appealed to what Easterners considered the vulgar west. Jackson was accused, with some justification, of manipulating "the rabble" in order to achieve his political goals. The election was capped by a rowdy party in the White House after his inauguration. Meacham's depiction of the aftermath of this celebration reminds one of the morning after a particularly drunken frat party combined with a whiskey-fueled, saloon shoot'em up, which did nothing to calm the fears of the establishment that the voters had elected a barbarian as president.
Meacham is entertaining in his description of the petticoat wars of Jackson's first administration and the bitter fight over the national bank that dominated the early part of his second administration. While not offering anything highly original on this subject (as far as I can tell as a first time reader on Jackson), Meacham details how Jackson's vision of the role of the presidency was instrumental in re-defining and strengthening the executive branch of government against fears, deeply seated in the pre-war experience with King George, that the emergence of a strong president would undermine the American democracy.
Meacham keeps the psychoanalysis of Jackson to a minimum, but does occasionally explain Jackson's motivations in psychological terms. For example, as an orphan, Jackson is depicted as acting to create a stable household for himself. Similarly, he is described as understanding his role as President to be a father figure to the people and a bulwark against the rich and privileged. To his credit, Meacham does not overdo this sort of thing, and his restraint in this regard contributes to the pleasure of reading his book, for which he won the Pulitzer Prize.
I might also say that this book focuses on Jackson's years in the White House, 1829 to 1836. It is a compliment to Meacham that I now want to locate a good biography describing Jackson's years before the White House. One suspects those years, when Jackson fought duels, Indian wars, the Battle of New Orleans and may have committed bigamy, will make the White House years look dull as mashed potatoes in comparison. But there is nothing dull about Meacham's book. It is a very fine biography and an engrossing introduction to a complicated and important subject.
October 13, 2020
I like Jon Meacham better than I do Andrew Jackson. Other reviewers here on Goodreads have said all the important things that I would say and more about his book, “American Lion”. Anyway here’s my 2 cents worth:
Jackson was not one of the greatest presidents, in my opinion. Even so, he was a stubborn leader with fixed views; and like most absolutists, he would not recant and forged ahead with his determined programs, thereby saving the Presidency and ultimately the nation as the future would prove.
He was dead wrong on Indian removal, which affected my own ancestors in Mississippi and Alabama. Even many of his contemporaries in the affected states disagreed with his Indian policy.
He faced down the Know-Nothings and similar stiff-necks, who for me at least made these decades of American history so boring that it’s a wonder that I’m still interested. Hence, the reason we must read this book, which fills in a gap of our ignorance of what was going on between the Revolution and the Civil War.
He stood firm against the Clay and Calhoun factions in Congress, proving to me at least how delinquent South Carolina and their Southern allies were in their traitorous undermining of federal democracy as intended by the geniuses who formed the Constitution.
He could have but did not take a stand on slavery in that he had slaves, sometimes punishing them severely for running away, but he really thought they were created equal and should be freed. (You can say a thing but not do a thing; but Meacham explains with his usual thorough scholarship how Jackson really meant this.)
The star that Jackson followed was the Union with the people in charge—and nothing less. If it hadn’t been for Jackson, Meacham suggests, Abraham Lincoln as we know him may never have been able to truly save the Union. Fortunately, Lincoln studied Jackson’s presidency closely.
Jackson was a brave man and would take no insult from even the very powerful French, who almost got ready to invade the US due to Jackson’s insistence that they had to repay a large debt to this country, which they had refused to do.
He was too concerned with his family for a world leader at that time. As Meacham describes it, there was a whole passel of competing females pulling at each other’s bonnet strings that it just became too frustrating for Jackson and consequently for the reader. Yet, this perspective—especially, brings out the real humanity of Andrew Jackson.
Jackson was not one of the greatest presidents, in my opinion. Even so, he was a stubborn leader with fixed views; and like most absolutists, he would not recant and forged ahead with his determined programs, thereby saving the Presidency and ultimately the nation as the future would prove.
He was dead wrong on Indian removal, which affected my own ancestors in Mississippi and Alabama. Even many of his contemporaries in the affected states disagreed with his Indian policy.
He faced down the Know-Nothings and similar stiff-necks, who for me at least made these decades of American history so boring that it’s a wonder that I’m still interested. Hence, the reason we must read this book, which fills in a gap of our ignorance of what was going on between the Revolution and the Civil War.
He stood firm against the Clay and Calhoun factions in Congress, proving to me at least how delinquent South Carolina and their Southern allies were in their traitorous undermining of federal democracy as intended by the geniuses who formed the Constitution.
He could have but did not take a stand on slavery in that he had slaves, sometimes punishing them severely for running away, but he really thought they were created equal and should be freed. (You can say a thing but not do a thing; but Meacham explains with his usual thorough scholarship how Jackson really meant this.)
The star that Jackson followed was the Union with the people in charge—and nothing less. If it hadn’t been for Jackson, Meacham suggests, Abraham Lincoln as we know him may never have been able to truly save the Union. Fortunately, Lincoln studied Jackson’s presidency closely.
Jackson was a brave man and would take no insult from even the very powerful French, who almost got ready to invade the US due to Jackson’s insistence that they had to repay a large debt to this country, which they had refused to do.
He was too concerned with his family for a world leader at that time. As Meacham describes it, there was a whole passel of competing females pulling at each other’s bonnet strings that it just became too frustrating for Jackson and consequently for the reader. Yet, this perspective—especially, brings out the real humanity of Andrew Jackson.
June 17, 2016
I am at odds as to how to rate this book. Andrew Jackson is a President who doesn't get a lot of attention in the overall scheme of things. Most people remember him from the Battle of New Orleans in the War of 1812 but don't seem to know much about his Presidency.........and a lot was happening during his eight years as the seventh POTUS.
The book concentrates solely on his years in the White House with limited information about his background and what shaped his personality and ideas. The author made it clear by his title that this book was a history of his years in the White House but I felt that the reader needed a little more background on the man himself to understand his political positions and his undying faith to the Union. The American Civil War was boiling in the background, especially in South Carolina and the whole states' rights and Nullification issue were major to his presidency. But the "Petticoat Affair" takes up way too much of the narrative and seems, to the modern day eye, rather ridiculous. The writing runs the gamut from dry as dust to extremely interesting and informative, so it is hard to know where to put this book on a rating scale. I, for the most part, enjoyed it and think it is worth a read by those who are interested in Jackson. For others, I'm not so sure.
The book concentrates solely on his years in the White House with limited information about his background and what shaped his personality and ideas. The author made it clear by his title that this book was a history of his years in the White House but I felt that the reader needed a little more background on the man himself to understand his political positions and his undying faith to the Union. The American Civil War was boiling in the background, especially in South Carolina and the whole states' rights and Nullification issue were major to his presidency. But the "Petticoat Affair" takes up way too much of the narrative and seems, to the modern day eye, rather ridiculous. The writing runs the gamut from dry as dust to extremely interesting and informative, so it is hard to know where to put this book on a rating scale. I, for the most part, enjoyed it and think it is worth a read by those who are interested in Jackson. For others, I'm not so sure.
July 5, 2014
When you try and tackle a subject as complicated as Andrew Jackson, and limit a book to just his presidency, it's just impossible to properly portray the man in the White House. So for those who have never read Marquis James or Robert Remini's multi-volume depiction of Jackson, the first 180 pages of this book read like a season story arch of a prime time soap opera. The "Eaton Affair" was a very central topic of Jackson's first term of presidency, but to understand why it was such a central focus, you need to know more about Jackson and his hard-line approach to loyalty (especially to a wife) - and Meacham just isn't able to explain Jackson's pre-White House years in just a few paragraphs. I've spoken to a couple of people about this book (one of which just gave up after 100 pages) and they warned me that it was very hard to get into the story. And I can see why - the portrayal of events makes it look like all of Washington was in a choke-hold by Margaret Eaton and Emily Donelson. It took me 3 weeks to slog through these pages and 3 days to read the remainder of the book.
The second half of the book (occurring right around the point of the Cabinet purge) is much more interesting and engaging. There were a lot of really interesting Americans at that time (Clay, Webster, Calhoun, Van Buren) - all of them somewhat in the shadow of Jackson's limelight. For any Civil War buffs, Meacham's several chapters on the Nullification Crisis are well done and show clearly just how strong the state rights issues were (lead by South Carolina) - and how Jackson's handling of the Crisis pushed back the inevitable War 30 years.
If you're looking for a single volume on Jackson, Remini's concise "Andrew Jackson" gives a good overall picture. If you are willing to invest 1000 pages to the subject pick up Marquis James' Pulitzer winning two volume treatment of Jackson (available also as free PDF download if you can't find it second hand).
The second half of the book (occurring right around the point of the Cabinet purge) is much more interesting and engaging. There were a lot of really interesting Americans at that time (Clay, Webster, Calhoun, Van Buren) - all of them somewhat in the shadow of Jackson's limelight. For any Civil War buffs, Meacham's several chapters on the Nullification Crisis are well done and show clearly just how strong the state rights issues were (lead by South Carolina) - and how Jackson's handling of the Crisis pushed back the inevitable War 30 years.
If you're looking for a single volume on Jackson, Remini's concise "Andrew Jackson" gives a good overall picture. If you are willing to invest 1000 pages to the subject pick up Marquis James' Pulitzer winning two volume treatment of Jackson (available also as free PDF download if you can't find it second hand).
February 13, 2017
OK here's the bottom line: I listened to this book in the audible format and it was dull enough on occasion that I dozed off. Not too often and not too long but it did happen!
I decided to read this book now in an effort to understand Mr. Trump's apparent admiration for Andrew Jackson. Other Goodreads reviews are mixed.
Jackson was yet another president who owned slaves. And he was yet another president who pushed the Native Americans aggressively out of their home territory. I finished the book not knowing quite what to think about him. 30 years before the Civil War the country was on the verge of splitting up but Jackson somehow kept it together. The story of that era is told in quite great detail. While Jackson was trying to keep the Union together his vice president Calhoun was trying to pull South Carolina out.
Jackson was only the seventh president of the US. He was way back in the 1830s. His house burned down during that time and quite a few of his papers were destroyed. That evidently has made accurately establishing his history somewhat complicated. This book relies on personal and family letters for much of the information. At the end of the book the author talks about obtaining access to some of the material for the first time.
Reading this book at the beginning of the Trump presidency was fascinating. I quoted quite a few paragraphs that seem to reflect Trump politics. Check them out and see what you think. The vitriol against Jackson may have rivaled that against Trump. And yet the author seems to come down on a fairly positive view of Jackson.
There seems to be some debate about how accurately the author has presented the subject. One third of the book is footnotes which surely is one way the author is trying to say believe me. But the author also acknowledges that many of his sources were the papers and letters of the people and family immediately surrounding Jackson. It would be logical that those people might see the man in a most friendly light. He is portrayed as a family man and this is carried even to the extent of him feeling the people of the nation were his family. Much is made of the fact that he was an orphan and was always creating images of family and had family and children living with him in the White House.
I decided to read this book now in an effort to understand Mr. Trump's apparent admiration for Andrew Jackson. Other Goodreads reviews are mixed.
Jackson was yet another president who owned slaves. And he was yet another president who pushed the Native Americans aggressively out of their home territory. I finished the book not knowing quite what to think about him. 30 years before the Civil War the country was on the verge of splitting up but Jackson somehow kept it together. The story of that era is told in quite great detail. While Jackson was trying to keep the Union together his vice president Calhoun was trying to pull South Carolina out.
Jackson was only the seventh president of the US. He was way back in the 1830s. His house burned down during that time and quite a few of his papers were destroyed. That evidently has made accurately establishing his history somewhat complicated. This book relies on personal and family letters for much of the information. At the end of the book the author talks about obtaining access to some of the material for the first time.
Reading this book at the beginning of the Trump presidency was fascinating. I quoted quite a few paragraphs that seem to reflect Trump politics. Check them out and see what you think. The vitriol against Jackson may have rivaled that against Trump. And yet the author seems to come down on a fairly positive view of Jackson.
There seems to be some debate about how accurately the author has presented the subject. One third of the book is footnotes which surely is one way the author is trying to say believe me. But the author also acknowledges that many of his sources were the papers and letters of the people and family immediately surrounding Jackson. It would be logical that those people might see the man in a most friendly light. He is portrayed as a family man and this is carried even to the extent of him feeling the people of the nation were his family. Much is made of the fact that he was an orphan and was always creating images of family and had family and children living with him in the White House.
October 31, 2017
Given current events, this book is timely to read. Jackson did some terrible things, most particularly the treatment of Native Americans. But he also kept the Union together in the face of huge dissent. Of course, that only delayed the Civil War and kept another generation in chains.
The big takeaway is that no matter his faults, his primary concern was for the country and the people. If only modern politicians would do so, rather than focusing on their own enrichment and egos.
The big takeaway is that no matter his faults, his primary concern was for the country and the people. If only modern politicians would do so, rather than focusing on their own enrichment and egos.
August 6, 2023
"Jackson had many faults, but he was devotedly attached to the Union, and he had no thought of fear when it came to defending his country....With the exception of Washinton and Lincoln, no man left a deeper mark on American history; and though there is much in his career to condemn, yet all true lovers of America can unite in paying hearty respect to a man who was a true American, who served his country valiantly on the field of battle against a foreign foe, and who upheld with the most staunch devotion the cause of the great Federal Union.."
-Teddy Roosevelt
Teddy Roosevelt's summation of Andrew Jackson is truly a superb encapsulation of his life. At once admirable, yet capable of some acts that are anything but. Andrew Jackson had grown up poor. He rose to prominence during his battle for New Orleans. During his Presidency, he left an office far more powerful and, yet, more responsive to the mood of the people. President Jackson was a very strong advocate of the Union and of the common citizens. Yet, he supported Slavery and was responsible for the Cherokee Trail of Tears. As with most people, a complex man.
Jon Meacham's excellent biography details all these aspects of President Jackson. It is also full of interesting politics that I was unaware of, such as the diplomatic conflict over the Eaton family and how that affected his Cabinet choices.
Jackson's time saw the American nation grow in power and expand into new areas. While he was for American expansion, he was opposed to the concept of a central US bank. His epic political showdowns with Henry Clay and John Calhoun are also excellently described.
A complex and hardly perfect, Meacham's balanced history is an excellent read for anyone interested in this most important President who did so much to establish the modern United States.
-Teddy Roosevelt
Teddy Roosevelt's summation of Andrew Jackson is truly a superb encapsulation of his life. At once admirable, yet capable of some acts that are anything but. Andrew Jackson had grown up poor. He rose to prominence during his battle for New Orleans. During his Presidency, he left an office far more powerful and, yet, more responsive to the mood of the people. President Jackson was a very strong advocate of the Union and of the common citizens. Yet, he supported Slavery and was responsible for the Cherokee Trail of Tears. As with most people, a complex man.
Jon Meacham's excellent biography details all these aspects of President Jackson. It is also full of interesting politics that I was unaware of, such as the diplomatic conflict over the Eaton family and how that affected his Cabinet choices.
Jackson's time saw the American nation grow in power and expand into new areas. While he was for American expansion, he was opposed to the concept of a central US bank. His epic political showdowns with Henry Clay and John Calhoun are also excellently described.
A complex and hardly perfect, Meacham's balanced history is an excellent read for anyone interested in this most important President who did so much to establish the modern United States.
January 15, 2021
This biography was a bit too obsessed with its subject in my opinion. Jackson, for all his "saving the Union" discourse, was instrumental in pushing a southern slavery agenda and destroying the American Indians that remained west of the Mississippi, and this book mentions these things in passing and not in depth. On the other hand, we get excruciating details about his personal relationships (although relatively little discussion of the Kitchen Cabinet.) I think that Meacham spent too much time in the middle of Jackson's terms as President.
I wonder whether Remini's biography is a bit more well-balanced across all of Jackson's life and less gushing in admiration for this powerful but very controversial President.
I wonder whether Remini's biography is a bit more well-balanced across all of Jackson's life and less gushing in admiration for this powerful but very controversial President.
December 5, 2008
While a terrifically thorough listing of the era's political issues and the personalities clashing over them, the examination left much to be desired. The substance falls victim to a regular temptation among American authors writing American history. Meacham's approach only acknowledges in passing the character flaws of his subject while amplifying the qualities and deeds that would make Jackson a hero to many. For instance, Jackson's unrepentant slave-ownership and his role in devastating generations of Native Americans is mentioned, but not explored to the degree these positions deserve.
Blind nationalism makes a poor substitute for history, and American Lion is no exception.
Blind nationalism makes a poor substitute for history, and American Lion is no exception.
December 24, 2017
I am on a quest to read at least one book about each of the 45 presidents. (Yes, even Trump).
I learned alot about Jackson as I read this.
Rather than enumerate what I learned, please read this book to find out for yourself.
This book primarily covers the years of Jackson's presidency 1829 - 1837.
I was happy to learn about the more personal aspects of Jackson's life.
Some of what happened during his presidency was not quite so engaging. (Good, but just a litany of facts of what happened).
Suffice it to say, Jon Meacham is an engaging and excellent writer.
I hope to read more about Jackson.
3.75 stars
I learned alot about Jackson as I read this.
Rather than enumerate what I learned, please read this book to find out for yourself.
This book primarily covers the years of Jackson's presidency 1829 - 1837.
I was happy to learn about the more personal aspects of Jackson's life.
Some of what happened during his presidency was not quite so engaging. (Good, but just a litany of facts of what happened).
Suffice it to say, Jon Meacham is an engaging and excellent writer.
I hope to read more about Jackson.
3.75 stars
November 17, 2018
American Lion is a biography on Andrew Jackson, the seventh president of the United States. There is not much detail on Jackson’s life before his presidency; it mostly focuses on his two terms in office.
I learned a lot about this period of American history. There were many firsts and much drama that occurred during Jackson’s presidency: the petticoat affair, the longest Indian war, the first president to be physically attacked, and the list goes on. I didn’t feel like I got to know Jackson as a person, however, because this book mostly focuses on what is happening around him and not so much on Jackson himself.
The writing style was dry and verbose, making it difficult for me to stay engaged. Overall this was just an okay read.
I learned a lot about this period of American history. There were many firsts and much drama that occurred during Jackson’s presidency: the petticoat affair, the longest Indian war, the first president to be physically attacked, and the list goes on. I didn’t feel like I got to know Jackson as a person, however, because this book mostly focuses on what is happening around him and not so much on Jackson himself.
The writing style was dry and verbose, making it difficult for me to stay engaged. Overall this was just an okay read.
June 15, 2017
Andrew Jackson is a difficult biographical subject; he lived during a difficult time and dealt with difficult issues in a difficult manner. Things were never easy with Jackson. He viewed life as a struggle and lived virtually every day of his life that way. And if one looks at the major issues facing America from the Revolutionary to the Civil War, Jackson was seemingly directly or indirectly involved in all of them, so framing his life is not a simple task. Meacham has provided us with a very focused and readable bio of this man – specifically his Presidency.
This narrative rarely wanders from Jackson’s direct realm, i.e. his White House and “family” residing there, even though many of his actions and decisions were far reaching in both time and place, including the demise of the National Bank and its Chairman, the forced removal of Native Americans from their homes, the threatened secession of South Carolina and a near war with France. The author chronicles these decisions and policies through direct quotes from letters, speeches and other direct correspondence of Jackson’s and his intimates and at times reads almost as a diary. This is not an academic bio so there isn’t much analysis or historical perspective which keeps the book at a very readable 350+ pages.
The author also delves into Jackson’s personal life, (inseparable from his public persona), including the death of his wife soon after his election to the Presidency, the back and forth relationship with both his adopted son Andrew Jr. – Jackson had no biological children – and Jackson’s nephew and his wife, Andrew and Emily Donelson. Meacham also spends a lot of time, maybe too much so, on the “Eaton Affair”. Jackson’s longtime friend and his Secretary of War, John Eaton, married a woman of “questionable virtues”. How one felt about Mrs. Eaton divided Jackson’s administration and family for over two years and reads at times like a soap opera, but was a very real contest of wills for President Jackson.
Meacham’s book is a very good place to start if you find Jackson a somewhat distant and unknown historical figure. Just understand what makes this book work is also its fault – the lack of breadth and analysis. Personally I think another 30-50 pages on how Jackson revolutionized the Presidency would have helped. Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt and FDR all relied on Jackson’s tenure as a model for many of their policies. Fortuitously for us armchair historians H.W. Brands has written another very readable bio on Jackson, (published in 2005), which covers Jackson’s life in detail up to his Presidency and makes a very good “companion” book to this one. And for you serious minded folks Robert Remini’s 3 volume bio is still the place to go for the whole Jackson story. Arthur Schlesinger’s The Age of Jackson will also help fill in the gaps but I have to admit it’s been a few years since I read that one.
This narrative rarely wanders from Jackson’s direct realm, i.e. his White House and “family” residing there, even though many of his actions and decisions were far reaching in both time and place, including the demise of the National Bank and its Chairman, the forced removal of Native Americans from their homes, the threatened secession of South Carolina and a near war with France. The author chronicles these decisions and policies through direct quotes from letters, speeches and other direct correspondence of Jackson’s and his intimates and at times reads almost as a diary. This is not an academic bio so there isn’t much analysis or historical perspective which keeps the book at a very readable 350+ pages.
The author also delves into Jackson’s personal life, (inseparable from his public persona), including the death of his wife soon after his election to the Presidency, the back and forth relationship with both his adopted son Andrew Jr. – Jackson had no biological children – and Jackson’s nephew and his wife, Andrew and Emily Donelson. Meacham also spends a lot of time, maybe too much so, on the “Eaton Affair”. Jackson’s longtime friend and his Secretary of War, John Eaton, married a woman of “questionable virtues”. How one felt about Mrs. Eaton divided Jackson’s administration and family for over two years and reads at times like a soap opera, but was a very real contest of wills for President Jackson.
Meacham’s book is a very good place to start if you find Jackson a somewhat distant and unknown historical figure. Just understand what makes this book work is also its fault – the lack of breadth and analysis. Personally I think another 30-50 pages on how Jackson revolutionized the Presidency would have helped. Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt and FDR all relied on Jackson’s tenure as a model for many of their policies. Fortuitously for us armchair historians H.W. Brands has written another very readable bio on Jackson, (published in 2005), which covers Jackson’s life in detail up to his Presidency and makes a very good “companion” book to this one. And for you serious minded folks Robert Remini’s 3 volume bio is still the place to go for the whole Jackson story. Arthur Schlesinger’s The Age of Jackson will also help fill in the gaps but I have to admit it’s been a few years since I read that one.
October 26, 2020
Know going into this that the book's subtitle is "Andrew Jackson in the White House." And there's nothing wrong with that - the book's focus is on Jackson's presidency, not his life story. So this isn't one-stop-shopping on all things Jackson, but a specific look at President Jackson.
So this may not be the best "first book" or "only book" to read on Andrew Jackson. But his life is too big to fit into a single book, so why read just one? "American Lion" works as a great companion to a more straightforward biography like "Andrew Jackson: His Life and Times" by H.W. Brands. That book gives you the full life story, with a comparatively brief overview of Jackson's presidency, while Meacham goes into fuller detail on the White House years.
Yes, formative events in Jackson's life prior to his presidency are skimmed over in Meacham's book. But so too are major events and characters in Jackson's presidency skimmed over in Brands' book. Key people like Jackson's nephew Andrew Jackson Donelson, and niece Emily Donelson, who was Jackson's de facto First Lady, are mentioned in passing in Brands' book but are main characters in Meacham's.
The book is based largely on various caches of previously-unpublished letters, which help to flesh out the thoughts, feelings and relationships of the main characters. That said, it seems Meacham is determined to wring as much out of these letters as possible. Just because many, many people wrote many, many things about the Eaton affair, for example, doesn't mean we need many, many chapters about the Eaton affair. But that's what we get. So Meacham can put the cart before the horse at times, letting his source material dictate his content instead of judiciously picking and choosing from it to supplement his storytelling.
But overall, taken for what it is - a biographical portrait of Jackson as president, not an academic analysis and not a full life story - American Lion is a satisfying, enjoyable and informative read. If it leaves you wanting more, well, that's a good thing.
So this may not be the best "first book" or "only book" to read on Andrew Jackson. But his life is too big to fit into a single book, so why read just one? "American Lion" works as a great companion to a more straightforward biography like "Andrew Jackson: His Life and Times" by H.W. Brands. That book gives you the full life story, with a comparatively brief overview of Jackson's presidency, while Meacham goes into fuller detail on the White House years.
Yes, formative events in Jackson's life prior to his presidency are skimmed over in Meacham's book. But so too are major events and characters in Jackson's presidency skimmed over in Brands' book. Key people like Jackson's nephew Andrew Jackson Donelson, and niece Emily Donelson, who was Jackson's de facto First Lady, are mentioned in passing in Brands' book but are main characters in Meacham's.
The book is based largely on various caches of previously-unpublished letters, which help to flesh out the thoughts, feelings and relationships of the main characters. That said, it seems Meacham is determined to wring as much out of these letters as possible. Just because many, many people wrote many, many things about the Eaton affair, for example, doesn't mean we need many, many chapters about the Eaton affair. But that's what we get. So Meacham can put the cart before the horse at times, letting his source material dictate his content instead of judiciously picking and choosing from it to supplement his storytelling.
But overall, taken for what it is - a biographical portrait of Jackson as president, not an academic analysis and not a full life story - American Lion is a satisfying, enjoyable and informative read. If it leaves you wanting more, well, that's a good thing.
October 23, 2009
STATEMENT: I received a free copy of this book thru the GoodReads site to review.
Well, Mr Meacham has done an excellent job researching Andrew Jackson as well as the culture and history surrounding his time in the White House. I cannot fault him in his research... and his book did impress upon me the amount of knowledge that he has acquired on the subject.
However, I was not a fan of the book. I had to force myself to persevere thru its reading. I found it dull, but more importantly, I felt that he tried to include too much information. He tried to include "dirt" as well as personal decisions that Jackson had to face during his presidency, but because he tries to cover such a wide range, we are left with only superficial scratchings on most of it.
I think if he had concentrated on just one of the issues, like the issue of a Federal Bank or perhaps on some of the social scandals regarding his "adopted" family, then the book would be far better.
Instead, it becomes hard to follow as characters in the book come and go, with only occasional passages to describe them. There is no depth. It reads like a cliff notes version of a book.
This book came highly rated, with lauds from the New York Times and other media outlets. I'm thinking it is only because of recent pop histories like 1776 this book received such honors. I was disappointed.
Well, Mr Meacham has done an excellent job researching Andrew Jackson as well as the culture and history surrounding his time in the White House. I cannot fault him in his research... and his book did impress upon me the amount of knowledge that he has acquired on the subject.
However, I was not a fan of the book. I had to force myself to persevere thru its reading. I found it dull, but more importantly, I felt that he tried to include too much information. He tried to include "dirt" as well as personal decisions that Jackson had to face during his presidency, but because he tries to cover such a wide range, we are left with only superficial scratchings on most of it.
I think if he had concentrated on just one of the issues, like the issue of a Federal Bank or perhaps on some of the social scandals regarding his "adopted" family, then the book would be far better.
Instead, it becomes hard to follow as characters in the book come and go, with only occasional passages to describe them. There is no depth. It reads like a cliff notes version of a book.
This book came highly rated, with lauds from the New York Times and other media outlets. I'm thinking it is only because of recent pop histories like 1776 this book received such honors. I was disappointed.
December 22, 2019
I loved this book and I loved this president! Andrew Jackson, I may say considered himself a god. Others after him have also felt the same way. Am talking about President Trump. Reading this books has made me realise how alike these two are. In fact, I noticed that some people refer to Trump as the 21st century Jackson.
Andrew Jackson considered himself the brain of America. Father of the country. The protector of the Union. Though he was never considered divine, the common people deified him. His image was exalted and this gave him the courage to seek for more and more power. Whether this was just his arrogant presumption or madness on his part is debatable. He lacked restraint and made great enemies including congress. I admired his indifference to congress and his painnful belief that no institution should come between the president and the people. His harshness and suspicions led him to seek for absolute power.
Andrew Jackson considered himself the brain of America. Father of the country. The protector of the Union. Though he was never considered divine, the common people deified him. His image was exalted and this gave him the courage to seek for more and more power. Whether this was just his arrogant presumption or madness on his part is debatable. He lacked restraint and made great enemies including congress. I admired his indifference to congress and his painnful belief that no institution should come between the president and the people. His harshness and suspicions led him to seek for absolute power.
September 19, 2018
A mini biography of Jackson's time as president. I have come to admire what good he did accomplish, although his beliefs in Indian removal and slavery will always mark him as an imperfect man.
February 15, 2022
First read in 2009. Re-read in 2022 as part of my goal to read a biography of every president. This book is primarily focused on Jackson’s time in the White House, with only a cursory review of his pre and post presidential life. The book does a really good job exploring Jackson’s character, world view, and vision for the country. The Eaton Affair, the battle over the bank of the United States, the nullification crisis, and his Indian removal polices are all covered in great detail. While Jackson was incredibly popular in his own era (and remained so for most of the history of the Democratic Party) he is viewed with more circumspection today. The author clearly acknowledges Jackson’s many faults, but doesn’t get bogged down harping on them. He largely presents a generally positive account of Jackson in his attempt to explain to the modern reader the transformative nature of the Jackson presidency and his impact on the country for generations to come. 4 stars.
What follows are my notes on the book:
Jackson lost his mother and brothers during the Revolutionary War. Suffering those losses at a young age he saw his life and the life of his country as one. It formed in his mind a sacred duty to preserve the union, even if it cost his life (xix). He was one of America’s most important, controversial, and misunderstood presidents. He expanded the powers of the presidency in ways that none of his six predecessors had. He was the first president from among uneducated commoners and the first to use a large circle of private advisors (his Kitchen Cabinet). Prior to Jackson, power tended toward the political and financial elites, after him power was more diffuse. (xx).
He was a man of contradictions. A champion of democracy for the poorest whites, he was an unrepentant slaveholder. He was responsible for the removal of Indian tribes, yet adopted an Indian orphan as his own son. He as the vociferous opponent of a national bank, yet a staunch defender of the Federal government (against the nullifiers/secessionist). He achieved great things while committing grievous sins (xxi).
His wife Rachel died shortly after his election. He would bring a close inner circle with him to Washington, principally Andrew and Emily Donelson. His political rivals were all formidable men: John C. Calhoun, Henry Clay, & John Quincy Adams. Jackson benefited from the expansion of ordinary voters (turnout rose from 27% to 57%), overturning the founder’s longstanding fears of democracy and their checks against popular will (i.e. Electoral College). In the 4-way race in 1824, Jackson led the popular vote, but the Jackson lost when the runoff vote went to the House of Representatives. Jackson forever viewed the results as a corrupt bargain between Adams and Clay (45). Thereafter his belief in the virtue of the great majority and himself as the enactor of their will would be his driving force.
In his own mind, he was restoring Jeffersonian Republicanism against the Federalist power brokers. In 1828, he won 56% of the popular vote (178-83 in Electoral College). Clay thought there was “no greater calamity” than his victory. His Cabinet picks were considered underwhelming (including Van Buren at State, Eaton at War, & Ingham at Treasury). He believed the government was suffering from a crisis of corruption (in order to profit elites at the expense of the many) (52).
The major issues he faced in his two terms:
- He was intent on dismantling the federal establishment that concentrated power (i.e. the Bank which was not subject to public control).
- The early test of his authority when SC attempted to nullify federal law after the Tariff of Abominations that slammed southern farmers.
- The removal of Indians west of the Mississippi (he believed coexistence impossible and based on his wartime experiences believed their removal was necessary to defend the country’s borders.
- He viewed debt as a moral evil that placed power in the hands of creditors, consequently he argued against internal improvements (canals, roads, etc).
His first inaugural was purposely vague so as to preserve capital as he assessed the depth of affection from the large crowd assembled. He did however promise “reform” of political abuses. After the succession of Madison, Monroe, and Adams this was the first true turnover of power and he sought to remove the unfaithful or incompetent government employees. The White House reception was chaotic (often described as an unruly mob or rabble) (61).
Jackson found comfort in the presence of his extended family that understood his wants and needs. Unfortunately, they were to clash with the Eaton wing of the Jackson clique. Secretary Eaton’s marriage to Margaret O’Neale (with her questionable sexual virtue) was viewed with abhorrence by respectable society (67). Jackson, seeing parallels to attacks on his late wife’s virtue, let his instincts take over and defended the Eatons. Emily and the other ladies refused to call on her…in an insane twist of fate, this feud would impact the future of the presidency (68).
As an old, sick wounded warrior, many expected Jackson to be a 1-term president. Based on this, Clay, Calhoun, and Van Buren took different approaches to improve their own paths to the presidency. Calhoun was aggressive and combative, becoming THE proponent of nullification, which Jackson viewed as a mortal threat to the Union. The subtle Van Buren backed Jackson (especially on the Eaton drama).
Jackson began clearing the corrupt “Augean Stable,” installing a government to execute his will, much to the consternation of his political enemies. While previous administrations removed in the single digits, Jackson replaced 919 people (82).
Jackson wanted to do for the South what previous generations did for the North: push Indians farther West. He would not tolerate competing sovereignties within the nation. Jackson was direct with the tribes, submit to state law or leave. The Southern states were eager for vast tracts of land in GA, FL, AL, MS, and TN. Speaking as their “Great Father” he genuinely believed he was acting in the Indian’s best interests. Additionally, he often viewed Indians as allies of hostile powers Spain and Britain along the US frontier (93). When Indians killed white settlers, he tended to see England or Spain pulling strings.
Margaret Eaton’s wreaked havoc for the Administration. Eaton refused to resign and Jackson wouldn’t back down his support. Emily and Margaret were in open warfare. On the steamboat Potomac Emily was 8 months pregnant and fainted. Margaret went to help but was spurned and furious. A series of Washington parties made the Eaton situation even more unpleasant.
Jackson’s feud with Biddle and the bank escalated quickly. Biddle did not answer to Jackson and refused to tolerate any interference in the concerns of the bank (103). While technically correct, Jackson had two courses open to him: 1) remove the government’s deposits and 2) deny a renewal of the bank charter. Biddle did not believe Jackson would do either. He was wrong.
He believed himself the defender of liberties of the people, his opponents saw his executive action as prelude to dictatorship. In his first annual message to Congress, Jackson proposed amending the Constitution to give the president a 6 year term based off the popular vote (120). In another passage, he advocated voluntary emigration of Indians (any who chose to remain would be subject to US laws). The sanctity of the Union was his top concern, and the continuing presence of Indians were viewed as a threat (123).
In 1830, the Cabinet nearly cracked up over the Eaton Affair. In a short lived compromise, Jackson would not press for their social inclusion if they agreed not to further gossip.
At an 1830 dinner celebrating Jefferson’s birthday (attended by many nullifiers), Jackson toasted “Our Union – it must be preserved.” Vice President Calhoun followed up “The Union – next to our liberty most dear.” This finally rent the veil and foreshadowed Jackson’s future victories (136).
Jackson’s 1830 veto of numerous interstate internal improvements flummoxed his opponents. Past presidents vetoed bills on Constitutional grounds while Jackson wielded the veto as a weapon to achieve his desired policy goals. Previous presidents vetoed more than the previous six presidents combined. (140).
Jackson ignored previous treaties with Indians but their supporters in Congress did not. In 1830, Jackson and his supporters overturned decades on Indian-policy approving the Indian removal bill. The Eaton affair had reached its nadir, and Jackson sent Andrew and Emily back to TN, but this only exacerbated the feud and bitterness of all involved. Jackson invited various Indian tribes to TN but only the Chickasaws came. They agreed to his terms to head West. It was Tocqueville who recorded the terrors of their removal. The Supreme Court took up the Indian case, but John Marshall essentially refused to acknowledge them as a foreign nation and let them succumb to their fate (152).
The Donelson’s were in anguish during their TN exile and it spilled over in local politics. Jackson was determined to exert control over his household. The Donelsons were equally determined not to give in.
In 1830, Jackson reached new heights of popularity as Francis Blair’s gift for rhetoric and invective promoted Jackson’s politics in his newspaper the Globe. Jackson attacked nullification publicly but floated options for compromise on the tariff.
In 1831, Van Buren’s resignation triggered a series of events that would extricate Jackson from the tangled scandals hindering his administration (171). Eaton would resign to run for a TN Senate seat. This restructured the cabinet and removed the chief thorn in his political and personal life. The cabinet purge did not bring peace to Eaton (he even attempted to duel for treasury sec Ingham over slights). The Donelsons’ return to DC restored peace to Jackson’s domestic life.
Political intrigue grew in the run up to the 1832 election season. Calhoun was the tie breaking vote that rejected Van Buren’s appointment to the UK. Calhoun had finally bested Van Buren, but it would backfire in the long run, placing Van Buren in contention for the VP nomination (and ultimately the presidency (193)).
In 1832, Biddle applied for an early re-charter of the bank, thinking a veto would hurt Jackson at the polls. It was a terrible mistake, the bank wouldn’t kill Jackson, he would kill the bank (201). His veto was one of the most significant in history, establishing the presidency as a source of leadership that didn’t merely bow to Congress. His veto message was good politics as it identified him forever with the aspiring (and now voting) masses.
Jackson responded swiftly to the outbreak of the Black Hawk War and bloodshed in IL. He was slower or refused to enforce Supreme Court decisions that favored the Indians in GA.
Changes to the tariff failed to appease SC, and Calhoun and the SC legislature were moving to formally nullify the law.
Clay suffered from a terrible case of overconfidence in the coming election. He played by the old rules (against campaigning) while Jackson forces promoted his cause through Hickory Clubs, parades, songs, etc. Jackson won overwhelmingly (55% to 37% popular; 219-49 electoral votes). 7 days later, SC nullified the Tariff of 1832 (220). Jackson embarked on his mission to save the union without appearing tyrannical. Calhoun believed any violence would draw other Southern states into SC’s orbit. In his annual message, he kept his temper and proposed tariff reductions since the national debt was being paid off. JQ Adams thought it capitulation to the nullifiers. Instead, Jackson’s move seemed diplomatic and isolated SC radicals. Meanwhile he secretly made military preparations behind the scenes (226).
In his 1832 proclamation, he was more fierce, stating emphatically that disunion by force is treason. Calhoun elected to the Senate where he continued to fight Jackson. John Marshall, no alarmist, took the prospect of disunion seriously. The early weeks of 1833 were tense. The tariff reform bill was moving through Congress which would remove the proximate cause of the crisis. Jackson appeared to be pleasing neither side and Calhoun was feeling confident. In January, Jackson made his next move pushing a Force Bill, asking Congress to give him explicit permission to use the military against fellow Americans (239).
Jackson was in a tough position. He was trying to cut the tariff to appease the South, but feared alienating the North in doing so. His request to approve the use of force risked he might drive moderate southerners into Calhoun’s camp. Many feared the bill would create a military dictator. Clay began searching for a compromise before it was too late. What emerged was the Compromise of 1833 in which there was tariff reform for the South, a Force Bill for the nationalists, and distribution of public land revenues for the West (Jackson vetoed the last measure). It was a combination carrot and stick approach. The author argues that Jackson was the prime player in this drama, not just a trigger happy warrior that was saved by Clay. Jackson projected strength while looking for a way out (246).
After the inauguration, the president was aboard a steamboat when a disgruntled navy officer assaulted him, the first such assassination attempt.
While Jackson won reelection and had vetoed the bank charter, US funds remained in its vault. Jackson looked for way to destroy the bank now and decided to remove the federal deposits. The one obstacle was his new treasury secretary William Duane who refused. Jackson published his decision in the Globe and fired Duane in order to carry it out.
Biddle retaliated by calling in loans and restricting credit to create a popular backlash against Jackson. This created economic havoc. Petitions flowed into the White House begging Jackson for relief. Jackson rebuffed them harshly. In March, Jackson was censured for removing the deposits. But Biddle’s play only solidified Jackson’s arguments against the bank (i.e. that Biddle held too much power as a non-elected official and could abuse it). In 1834, the House voted to move the funds to state banks giving Jackson a huge victory.
Abroad, France was declined to honor its financial obligations to pay the US $5M debt it owed. In his annual message to Congress, Jackson asked for an embargo and a law approving reprisals on French property. France recalled its minister, but they had misjudged American sentiment. Even JQ Adams was siding with Jackson against French condescension. The UK stepped in to mediate and resolved it quickly. The French accepted conciliatory remarks by Jackson and France would pay its debt.
Jackson’s victories spawned the creation of the Whig Party who opposed his monarchical tendencies.
In January 1835, Jackson paid off the national debt. Returning from a funeral, a man twice fired pistols at Jackson (two separate guns misfired). Both guns later proved functional adding a providential mystique to Jackson’s escape. Though his attacker was insane, Jackson believed his political foes tried to assassinate him (299).
In 1835, Jackson sought to curb growing abolitionist sentiment. He asked Congress for a law to prevent Anti-Slavery Society tracts from being circulated or mailed to Southern states as they may incite insurrection. Thought he bill failed, Jackson tacitly allowed the suppression of antislavery mailings.
Jackson set up Van Buren to succeed him in 1836 and the Democratic convention duly nominated him. His opponents painted Jackson as a king-making hypocrite.
It was a tense year. Jackson dispatched a failed envoy to purchase Texas for $5M. Santa Anna was putting down revolt in Texas as American volunteers joined the cause. Another conflict, the 7-year Second Seminole War was also beginning. In Georgia, Cherokee removal continued in order to meet the 1838 deadline (the year after Jackson left office).
In 1835, Congress implemented a gag rule to prevent discussion of emancipation of slaves in DC. JQ Adams became its most vocal opponent.
Texas declared its independence and Santa Anna stormed the Alamo. Jackson officially maintained US neutrality.
Emily Donelson grew terribly sick with tuberculosis. She died at age 29, her husband not at her side because he was helping Jackson.
Van Buren narrowly won the presidency. Jackson had one last fight…to erase the bank deposit removal censure by the Senate. Jackson’s allies succeeded in expunging it from the record.
At the Hermitage, Jackson grew more religious in his later life. A financial panic, followed by depression struck the country months after he left office. There is much historical debate over how much Jackson’s policies contributed to the hard times. He passed away in 1845 at age 78.
What follows are my notes on the book:
Jackson lost his mother and brothers during the Revolutionary War. Suffering those losses at a young age he saw his life and the life of his country as one. It formed in his mind a sacred duty to preserve the union, even if it cost his life (xix). He was one of America’s most important, controversial, and misunderstood presidents. He expanded the powers of the presidency in ways that none of his six predecessors had. He was the first president from among uneducated commoners and the first to use a large circle of private advisors (his Kitchen Cabinet). Prior to Jackson, power tended toward the political and financial elites, after him power was more diffuse. (xx).
He was a man of contradictions. A champion of democracy for the poorest whites, he was an unrepentant slaveholder. He was responsible for the removal of Indian tribes, yet adopted an Indian orphan as his own son. He as the vociferous opponent of a national bank, yet a staunch defender of the Federal government (against the nullifiers/secessionist). He achieved great things while committing grievous sins (xxi).
His wife Rachel died shortly after his election. He would bring a close inner circle with him to Washington, principally Andrew and Emily Donelson. His political rivals were all formidable men: John C. Calhoun, Henry Clay, & John Quincy Adams. Jackson benefited from the expansion of ordinary voters (turnout rose from 27% to 57%), overturning the founder’s longstanding fears of democracy and their checks against popular will (i.e. Electoral College). In the 4-way race in 1824, Jackson led the popular vote, but the Jackson lost when the runoff vote went to the House of Representatives. Jackson forever viewed the results as a corrupt bargain between Adams and Clay (45). Thereafter his belief in the virtue of the great majority and himself as the enactor of their will would be his driving force.
In his own mind, he was restoring Jeffersonian Republicanism against the Federalist power brokers. In 1828, he won 56% of the popular vote (178-83 in Electoral College). Clay thought there was “no greater calamity” than his victory. His Cabinet picks were considered underwhelming (including Van Buren at State, Eaton at War, & Ingham at Treasury). He believed the government was suffering from a crisis of corruption (in order to profit elites at the expense of the many) (52).
The major issues he faced in his two terms:
- He was intent on dismantling the federal establishment that concentrated power (i.e. the Bank which was not subject to public control).
- The early test of his authority when SC attempted to nullify federal law after the Tariff of Abominations that slammed southern farmers.
- The removal of Indians west of the Mississippi (he believed coexistence impossible and based on his wartime experiences believed their removal was necessary to defend the country’s borders.
- He viewed debt as a moral evil that placed power in the hands of creditors, consequently he argued against internal improvements (canals, roads, etc).
His first inaugural was purposely vague so as to preserve capital as he assessed the depth of affection from the large crowd assembled. He did however promise “reform” of political abuses. After the succession of Madison, Monroe, and Adams this was the first true turnover of power and he sought to remove the unfaithful or incompetent government employees. The White House reception was chaotic (often described as an unruly mob or rabble) (61).
Jackson found comfort in the presence of his extended family that understood his wants and needs. Unfortunately, they were to clash with the Eaton wing of the Jackson clique. Secretary Eaton’s marriage to Margaret O’Neale (with her questionable sexual virtue) was viewed with abhorrence by respectable society (67). Jackson, seeing parallels to attacks on his late wife’s virtue, let his instincts take over and defended the Eatons. Emily and the other ladies refused to call on her…in an insane twist of fate, this feud would impact the future of the presidency (68).
As an old, sick wounded warrior, many expected Jackson to be a 1-term president. Based on this, Clay, Calhoun, and Van Buren took different approaches to improve their own paths to the presidency. Calhoun was aggressive and combative, becoming THE proponent of nullification, which Jackson viewed as a mortal threat to the Union. The subtle Van Buren backed Jackson (especially on the Eaton drama).
Jackson began clearing the corrupt “Augean Stable,” installing a government to execute his will, much to the consternation of his political enemies. While previous administrations removed in the single digits, Jackson replaced 919 people (82).
Jackson wanted to do for the South what previous generations did for the North: push Indians farther West. He would not tolerate competing sovereignties within the nation. Jackson was direct with the tribes, submit to state law or leave. The Southern states were eager for vast tracts of land in GA, FL, AL, MS, and TN. Speaking as their “Great Father” he genuinely believed he was acting in the Indian’s best interests. Additionally, he often viewed Indians as allies of hostile powers Spain and Britain along the US frontier (93). When Indians killed white settlers, he tended to see England or Spain pulling strings.
Margaret Eaton’s wreaked havoc for the Administration. Eaton refused to resign and Jackson wouldn’t back down his support. Emily and Margaret were in open warfare. On the steamboat Potomac Emily was 8 months pregnant and fainted. Margaret went to help but was spurned and furious. A series of Washington parties made the Eaton situation even more unpleasant.
Jackson’s feud with Biddle and the bank escalated quickly. Biddle did not answer to Jackson and refused to tolerate any interference in the concerns of the bank (103). While technically correct, Jackson had two courses open to him: 1) remove the government’s deposits and 2) deny a renewal of the bank charter. Biddle did not believe Jackson would do either. He was wrong.
He believed himself the defender of liberties of the people, his opponents saw his executive action as prelude to dictatorship. In his first annual message to Congress, Jackson proposed amending the Constitution to give the president a 6 year term based off the popular vote (120). In another passage, he advocated voluntary emigration of Indians (any who chose to remain would be subject to US laws). The sanctity of the Union was his top concern, and the continuing presence of Indians were viewed as a threat (123).
In 1830, the Cabinet nearly cracked up over the Eaton Affair. In a short lived compromise, Jackson would not press for their social inclusion if they agreed not to further gossip.
At an 1830 dinner celebrating Jefferson’s birthday (attended by many nullifiers), Jackson toasted “Our Union – it must be preserved.” Vice President Calhoun followed up “The Union – next to our liberty most dear.” This finally rent the veil and foreshadowed Jackson’s future victories (136).
Jackson’s 1830 veto of numerous interstate internal improvements flummoxed his opponents. Past presidents vetoed bills on Constitutional grounds while Jackson wielded the veto as a weapon to achieve his desired policy goals. Previous presidents vetoed more than the previous six presidents combined. (140).
Jackson ignored previous treaties with Indians but their supporters in Congress did not. In 1830, Jackson and his supporters overturned decades on Indian-policy approving the Indian removal bill. The Eaton affair had reached its nadir, and Jackson sent Andrew and Emily back to TN, but this only exacerbated the feud and bitterness of all involved. Jackson invited various Indian tribes to TN but only the Chickasaws came. They agreed to his terms to head West. It was Tocqueville who recorded the terrors of their removal. The Supreme Court took up the Indian case, but John Marshall essentially refused to acknowledge them as a foreign nation and let them succumb to their fate (152).
The Donelson’s were in anguish during their TN exile and it spilled over in local politics. Jackson was determined to exert control over his household. The Donelsons were equally determined not to give in.
In 1830, Jackson reached new heights of popularity as Francis Blair’s gift for rhetoric and invective promoted Jackson’s politics in his newspaper the Globe. Jackson attacked nullification publicly but floated options for compromise on the tariff.
In 1831, Van Buren’s resignation triggered a series of events that would extricate Jackson from the tangled scandals hindering his administration (171). Eaton would resign to run for a TN Senate seat. This restructured the cabinet and removed the chief thorn in his political and personal life. The cabinet purge did not bring peace to Eaton (he even attempted to duel for treasury sec Ingham over slights). The Donelsons’ return to DC restored peace to Jackson’s domestic life.
Political intrigue grew in the run up to the 1832 election season. Calhoun was the tie breaking vote that rejected Van Buren’s appointment to the UK. Calhoun had finally bested Van Buren, but it would backfire in the long run, placing Van Buren in contention for the VP nomination (and ultimately the presidency (193)).
In 1832, Biddle applied for an early re-charter of the bank, thinking a veto would hurt Jackson at the polls. It was a terrible mistake, the bank wouldn’t kill Jackson, he would kill the bank (201). His veto was one of the most significant in history, establishing the presidency as a source of leadership that didn’t merely bow to Congress. His veto message was good politics as it identified him forever with the aspiring (and now voting) masses.
Jackson responded swiftly to the outbreak of the Black Hawk War and bloodshed in IL. He was slower or refused to enforce Supreme Court decisions that favored the Indians in GA.
Changes to the tariff failed to appease SC, and Calhoun and the SC legislature were moving to formally nullify the law.
Clay suffered from a terrible case of overconfidence in the coming election. He played by the old rules (against campaigning) while Jackson forces promoted his cause through Hickory Clubs, parades, songs, etc. Jackson won overwhelmingly (55% to 37% popular; 219-49 electoral votes). 7 days later, SC nullified the Tariff of 1832 (220). Jackson embarked on his mission to save the union without appearing tyrannical. Calhoun believed any violence would draw other Southern states into SC’s orbit. In his annual message, he kept his temper and proposed tariff reductions since the national debt was being paid off. JQ Adams thought it capitulation to the nullifiers. Instead, Jackson’s move seemed diplomatic and isolated SC radicals. Meanwhile he secretly made military preparations behind the scenes (226).
In his 1832 proclamation, he was more fierce, stating emphatically that disunion by force is treason. Calhoun elected to the Senate where he continued to fight Jackson. John Marshall, no alarmist, took the prospect of disunion seriously. The early weeks of 1833 were tense. The tariff reform bill was moving through Congress which would remove the proximate cause of the crisis. Jackson appeared to be pleasing neither side and Calhoun was feeling confident. In January, Jackson made his next move pushing a Force Bill, asking Congress to give him explicit permission to use the military against fellow Americans (239).
Jackson was in a tough position. He was trying to cut the tariff to appease the South, but feared alienating the North in doing so. His request to approve the use of force risked he might drive moderate southerners into Calhoun’s camp. Many feared the bill would create a military dictator. Clay began searching for a compromise before it was too late. What emerged was the Compromise of 1833 in which there was tariff reform for the South, a Force Bill for the nationalists, and distribution of public land revenues for the West (Jackson vetoed the last measure). It was a combination carrot and stick approach. The author argues that Jackson was the prime player in this drama, not just a trigger happy warrior that was saved by Clay. Jackson projected strength while looking for a way out (246).
After the inauguration, the president was aboard a steamboat when a disgruntled navy officer assaulted him, the first such assassination attempt.
While Jackson won reelection and had vetoed the bank charter, US funds remained in its vault. Jackson looked for way to destroy the bank now and decided to remove the federal deposits. The one obstacle was his new treasury secretary William Duane who refused. Jackson published his decision in the Globe and fired Duane in order to carry it out.
Biddle retaliated by calling in loans and restricting credit to create a popular backlash against Jackson. This created economic havoc. Petitions flowed into the White House begging Jackson for relief. Jackson rebuffed them harshly. In March, Jackson was censured for removing the deposits. But Biddle’s play only solidified Jackson’s arguments against the bank (i.e. that Biddle held too much power as a non-elected official and could abuse it). In 1834, the House voted to move the funds to state banks giving Jackson a huge victory.
Abroad, France was declined to honor its financial obligations to pay the US $5M debt it owed. In his annual message to Congress, Jackson asked for an embargo and a law approving reprisals on French property. France recalled its minister, but they had misjudged American sentiment. Even JQ Adams was siding with Jackson against French condescension. The UK stepped in to mediate and resolved it quickly. The French accepted conciliatory remarks by Jackson and France would pay its debt.
Jackson’s victories spawned the creation of the Whig Party who opposed his monarchical tendencies.
In January 1835, Jackson paid off the national debt. Returning from a funeral, a man twice fired pistols at Jackson (two separate guns misfired). Both guns later proved functional adding a providential mystique to Jackson’s escape. Though his attacker was insane, Jackson believed his political foes tried to assassinate him (299).
In 1835, Jackson sought to curb growing abolitionist sentiment. He asked Congress for a law to prevent Anti-Slavery Society tracts from being circulated or mailed to Southern states as they may incite insurrection. Thought he bill failed, Jackson tacitly allowed the suppression of antislavery mailings.
Jackson set up Van Buren to succeed him in 1836 and the Democratic convention duly nominated him. His opponents painted Jackson as a king-making hypocrite.
It was a tense year. Jackson dispatched a failed envoy to purchase Texas for $5M. Santa Anna was putting down revolt in Texas as American volunteers joined the cause. Another conflict, the 7-year Second Seminole War was also beginning. In Georgia, Cherokee removal continued in order to meet the 1838 deadline (the year after Jackson left office).
In 1835, Congress implemented a gag rule to prevent discussion of emancipation of slaves in DC. JQ Adams became its most vocal opponent.
Texas declared its independence and Santa Anna stormed the Alamo. Jackson officially maintained US neutrality.
Emily Donelson grew terribly sick with tuberculosis. She died at age 29, her husband not at her side because he was helping Jackson.
Van Buren narrowly won the presidency. Jackson had one last fight…to erase the bank deposit removal censure by the Senate. Jackson’s allies succeeded in expunging it from the record.
At the Hermitage, Jackson grew more religious in his later life. A financial panic, followed by depression struck the country months after he left office. There is much historical debate over how much Jackson’s policies contributed to the hard times. He passed away in 1845 at age 78.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 2,106 reviews