#Princeton University Library

[thinkingimages]

Lewis Carroll (Charles Lutwidge Dodgson). Album I. Little Red Riding-Hood. Princeton University Library

[princetonarchives]

Headline from the Daily Princetonian, January 17, 2005

[ancientpansy]

Portrait of Sylvia Beach. 1923

Founder of Shakespeare and Company

an English language bookstore and lending library.

Painter: Paul-Émile Bécat

[costarringyourlocallibrary]

The exterior of the East Pyne Building (formerly Pyne Library) at Princeton University (Princeton, NJ) in Christopher Nolan's Oppenheimer (2023).

[garadinervi]

Toni Morrison, «THE BOOK WORLD is quite serious…», (broadside), Friends of the Princeton University Library, Princeton, NJ, 2005 [Between the Covers, Gloucester City, NJ]

«THE BOOK WORLD is quite serious. Its real life is about creating and producing and distributing knowledge; about making it possible for the entitled as well as the dispossessed to experience one's own mind dancing with another's; about making sure that the environment in which this work is done is welcoming, supportive. It is making sure that no encroachment of private wealth, government control, or cultural expedience can interfere with what gets written or published. That no conglomerate or political wing uses its force to still inquiry or to reaffirm rule.» ― From: The Dancing Mind: On the Occasion of Her Acceptance of the National Book Foundation Medal for Distinguished Contribution to American Letters on the Sixth of November, 1996 (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1996) Printed for the Friends of the Princeton University Library, The Lure of the Library: The Friends at 75, On the occasion of the dinner following Toni Morrison's lecture, 3 April 2005, "Overdue: A Writer's Debt; A Reader's Interest."

[archivist-dragonfly]

Book 530

The Embodied Image: Chinese Calligraphy from the John B. Elliot Collection

Robert E. Harrist, Jr. and Wen C. Fong, et al.

The Art Museum, Princeton University / Harry N. Abrams, Inc. 1999

Published to accompany a traveling exhibit between 1999-2001, this book presents highlights from Princeton University’s John B. Elliot Collection, one of the most comprehensive collections of Chinese calligraphy outside of Asia. With works dating from the fourth through the twentieth centuries, the collection illustrates the extraordinary variety of formats and styles that makes shu-fa—“the way of writing”—so visually stunning. Arguing, through presentation and nine scholarly essays, that calligraphy is integral to Chinese culture, this is a beautifully organized and composed book, filled with nearly 500 images to enrich the soul.

[marcial-r0jas]

I believe that art is the highest expression of the human spirit.

I believe that we yearn to transcend the merely finite and ephemeral; to participate in something mysterious and communal called “culture” —and that this yearning is as strong in our species as the yearning to reproduce the species. 

Through the local or regional, through our individual voices, we work to create art that will speak to others who know nothing of us. In our very obliqueness to one another, an unexpected intimacy is born.

The individual voice is the communal voice.

The regional voice is the universal voice.

—Joyce Carol Oates.

[mariacallous]

A man checked out dozens of books on Jewish history and other marginalized topics from a public library in a heavily Jewish Cleveland suburb before filming himself apparently setting fire to them, local authorities said.

Local Jewish leaders decried the incident at the Beachwood Public Library, appearing alongside other interfaith leaders at a press conference Monday outside a local church to denounce the burnings.

“Whoever perpetuated the idea that you can burn us out of Cleveland, deport us out of Cleveland, deny our ideas or press us and frighten us, picked the wrong community,” Rabbi Robert Nosanchuk of Congregation Mishkan Or, a Reform synagogue in Beachwood, said at the press conference.

The books the man burned included a copy of “The Diary of Anne Frank” and a title dealing with “Jewish Solidarity,” a researcher with Princeton University’s Bridging Divides Initiative told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. The Princeton lab, which tracks political violence, first flagged the man’s video with the library after seeing it on the social network X.

The researcher, who requested anonymity owing to the nature of the group’s work, described the book selection as “something that you would expect of someone that is going into the library and trying to get books about Jewish authors and the Holocaust and everything.” In addition, the man had also burned books related to Black and LGBTQ topics.

“I think the act of targeting these materials, burning them, carries specific threatening connotations with it,” the researcher noted.

The Princeton lab had first seen the video on an account affiliated with the white-supremacist group White Lives Matter Ohio, which appeared to have since removed it. Local media also reported that material related to the burnings had made its way to the social network Gab, which is popular with extremists. JTA could not independently locate the video; local clergy told media they were deliberately not circulating it, in an effort to tamp down on its influence.

The book-burning incident appeared to be an unusual local manifestation of a simmering culture war over books reflecting diversity, one that has occasionally ensnared Jewish books and has lately been folded into the Trump administration’s push against diversity initiatives.

[eco-diary-by-poli]

Teenage Beatrix Potter with her pet mouse Xarifa, 1885 (Princeton University Library, Rare Books and Special Collections) @abwwia

[all-things-are-nothing-to-me]

[princetonarchives]

Though unrecognizable to us now, this was one of the suggested plans for Princeton University's main campus library ca. 1945, found in Firestone Architectural Drawings Collection (AC411), Box 1. For reference, this is how the library actually turned out:

Firestone Library, ca. 1950s. Historical Photograph Collection, Grounds and Buildings Series (AC111), Box AD04, No 8323.

G. B. Moment, Class of 1928, had this to say on April 17, 1936 about the future campus library, after suggesting that Princeton avoid more Gothic architecture in favor of something more modern:

The library itself would then stand as a monument to the renunciation of sentimentality and sham and obscurantism and at the same time proclaim the spirit (rather than the letter) of the cathedral builders themselves who constructed to the highest that they knew, both conceptually and technically, rather than, with a debilitating combination of cowardice, indolence, and lack of vision, produce competent reproductions of the signatures of past ages.

[foone]

So a thing I learned about recently is the Testerian catechisms.

They're a set of documents designed to teach Christianity to the native americans of what's now Mexico, from the 16th to 19th centuries.

And they look like this. It's a sort of comic book-looking thing. They're written in an alternating line order, switching from left-to-right to right-to-left on each line.

One of the interesting things about this is that while they were definitely created to be a sort of reinforcement of Christian doctrine through visual elements, there's also aspects of this being a writing system, not just a set of icons. There's descriptions of how to use this to write non-native words, by combining sounds.

There's also debate about how much these were just used by the Spanish to teach Christianity and how much they were used by the natives. Some of the the symbols seem to have pre-Hispanic influences, and may have been written by native authors at the instruction of the spanish missionaries, rather than solely being a missionary invention.

There's one specific document, the Catecismo pictórico Otomí, which we have a translation/decoding for/of. This is from many years after it was created so it's not certain how accurate it is.

There's a lot of information on them in this article in The Princeton University Library Chronicle: Testerian Hieroglyphs: Language, Colonization, and Conversion in Colonial Mexico, by Elena A. Schneider (2007).

[wintfleur]

𝓒OSMIC LOVE

aka iris’s profile

━━━ ❛ I took the stars from our eyes and then i made a map

ꪆ୧ BASICS .ᐟ

name: iris elle auclair 

nicknames:

rissy (close friends) 

izzy (friends) 

ellie (family) 

bambi (brothers) 

birthday and zodiac: november 13th 2003, scorpio 

age: 21

location: 

paris, france (born) 

montreal, québec canada (former) 

new jersey, united states (currently) 

ꪆ୧ APPEARANCE  .ᐟ

eye color: green 

glasses? iris does not need glasses, but she does like wearing non-prescription glasses as an accessory, finding ways to match them with her outfits. 

hair color: dark brown 

hair styles: iris usually likes to keep her hair down at mid-back length, either it at her natural wave or straightened. But she likes to put her hair up in a ponytail or bun to get her hair out of her face, often putting her hair in one or 2 braids – even in low pigtails. 

skin tone: ivory 

height: 5’4 

scars: none 

piercing(s): both of her front lobes, bellybutton 

tattoo(s): none 

face claim: elizabrowne_

ꪆ୧ ABOUT  .ᐟ

personality: iris has a charming and sweet personality, she’s on the quieter side but despite that her presence is strong, people just naturally gravitate to her. She’s been described as someone you can always count on, someone who you can talk to for hours about anything. Iris's spirit animal is a deer, she's someone who is gentle, kind, loving and innocent. She can also be very playful and energetic, she loves to tease her friends and family. She prioritizes her intelligence and learning new things, and she loves finding new ways to express herself through art and writing. Just overall a very sweet and smart girl.  

good traits: creative, kind, comforting, warm hearted, organized, charming, helpful 

bad traits: self critical, people pleaser, often over works herself, clumsy 

quirks: gets stressed when her things aren't organized, says random facts, rants when excited, doodles on anything, hums to herself a lot, taps her nails on things, switches between french and english when she gets excited or overwhelmed, always fixing her hair 

likes: snoopy, getting her nails done, going on walks, rain, studying, library, deep cleaning her apartment, reading the newspaper, cloudy weather, autumn, stephanie soo’s youtube channels, collecting snoopy related things, miffy, horseback riding, crocheting, playing guitar 

dislikes: feeling sweaty, people disrespecting the people she loves, her neighbor across the hall, being the center of attention, overly crowded places 

hobbies: reading, baking, cooking, journaling, chess, scrapbooking, photography, guitar, coloring, golf, stitching, dancing

fears: snakes, drowning, heights 

strengths: creative, quick to help when needed, detailed and organized, hardworking, kind, multitasking 

weaknesses: not good at speaking up for herself, perfectionism, her anemia 

languages spoken: english (fluent) french (fluent) korean (learning)

occupation/profession: a student at princeton university ; majoring in journalism and history, works at her aunt's bakery 

ambition/dream: to live a long and happy life 

current concern: learning how to skate 

currently listening to: never let me go – florence + the machine 

ꪆ୧ RELATIONSHIPS  .ᐟ

parents:

louis auclair

gabrielle auclair (nee’ braun)  

sibling(s):

arthur auclair 

hugo auclair 

close relatives: iris’s closest relative is her paternal aunt, aunt opal. 

best friends: louis hofmann, ethan yoon, lara myers, bailey bass 

friends: louis partridge, blanca soler, lily chee, luke’s friends and brothers, charlotte seo, and more 

love interest: luke hughes 

pet(s):  a male brown British shorthair cat named, moose 

ꪆ୧ MORE .ᐟ

scent: in the words of her closest friends and family ‘sweet and comforting’ she either smells like flowers or warm pastries or her signature perfume chanel number 5. Her scent is very welcoming and lingering, not overwhelming at all. Her comforting scent goes perfectly with her warm personality. 

outfits: iris has a very large wardrobe. A few staple items in her wardrobe is; mini skirts of any style, boots of any kind, sweaters, and short dresses. She really takes her time in picking her outfits, she loves expressing herself through them. She's known to have a great sense of style, always looking her best. Here is a link to her wardrobe. 

accessories: iris doesn't like to over-accessorize with her outfits,  but she has a ton of different accessories. She loves changing bags, and having cute little pins, keychains etc on them. She loves wearing glasses and sunglasses, scarves, earmuffs, gloves, leg and arm warmers etc. using them to make her outfit look the best.

jewelry: iris doesn't have a favorite between gold or silver, she loves both. The only new jewelry iris gets is from gifts. She prefers getting jewelry from thrift shops, through her family etc. She loves jewelry with gemstones/crystals. She likes to layer necklaces, wear multiple rings and bracelets at a time. 

makeup:  iris doesn't really use a lot of makeup. Mostly just her eyelashes, eyeliner, a little bit of eyeshadow, some blush, and then her lips. Sometimes she likes to add some highlighter on her nose, cheeks, and in the corner of her eyes. Its very ‘natural makeup’. 

sexuality: bisexual 

health issues?  iris has severe anemia 

ꪆ୧ FAVORITES .ᐟ

food(s): potatoes, muffins, chicken wings, macaroni and cheese, soups, any pastry really 

drink(s): cherry limeade, hot chocolate, arnold palmers, coffee

color(s): browns & reds 

animal(s): deer, bunnies & cats 

bands and artist: imogen heap, laufey, hozier, florence + the machine, creed, clairo 

show(s): gilmore girls, the walking dead, kim possible, the snoopy show, stranger things, the last of us 

movie(s): harry potter, lord of the rings, inception, twilight, scooby doo 

person: luke hughes n moose 

ꪆ୧ BACKGROUND .ᐟ

a heir to his fathers business, louis auclair, meets a new inspiring fashion designer, gabrielle braun, during a party in france – which was the start of their relationship. After 2 years of dating they got married. Living in a beautiful château in France. 

in 1998 they had their first son, arthur. And then in 2001 they had their second son, hugo.

and then in 2003, they had their last child and first daughter, iris. 

when iris was 5 her parents put her in ballet  and made her start golf lessons, doing competitions/tournaments for them both. She was naturally talented at them both – she stopped dancing at 16 and continued to golf competitively until she was 18.  

iris and her family moved to montreal, quebec for 2 years, because of her fathers work. from when she was 12 to 13. 

iris lived in France with her family until she turned 18, moving to New Jersey for college, having been accepted into princeton. 

she lived in a dorm for her first year at Princeton before moving into her own apartment. 

ꪆ୧ FUN FACTS  .ᐟ

iris is very family oriented, very close with her family. 

iris is known to not be a very good skater, her clumsiness not helping at all! 

she was a child model and modeled all throughout her teenage years, but stopped in 2021. 

iris has a love hate relationship with scary movies/shows, she cant watch them alone or in the dark 

iris works at her aunt opal’s famous bakery in New jersey. 

she has a obsession with playing minecraft & stardew valley 

moose (her cat) is 4 years old, he's her baby

iris has always been a big fan of anything apocalyptic/dystopian, her family and friends teasing her for being a nerd about it. 

iris prefers rainy/forecast over sunny weather

iris has a big sweet tooth, especially for candy, she always has a good collection of sweets in her apartment. 

iris is an excellent cook/baker. She loves trying new recipes, and she loves cooking for others! 

she loves making meals and treats for her neighbors. She has a great relationship with all of them besides her neighbor Emily, who for some reason hates iris. She's extremely petty and rude to Iris, but is ‘nice’ to her in front of others. 

iris and her close knit group of friends love having little hang outs every week, either at her apartment or they go out to do something together, usually to their favorite bar or go to karaoke. 

iris is at the top of all of her classes, she's very passantie about learning. 

iris absolutely loves thrift shopping 

she always has her headphones with her, listening to music or an audiobook 

her favorite Disney movie is Lemonade Mouth, the soundtrack is one of her favorite albums and she could recite the whole movie if she wanted to. 

her best friends are extremely protective of her, she's the baby of the group! 

iris has a huge collection of vinyl’s, most of them being from her father who gave them to her. 

has been told a few times that she has an old soul. 

She writes in her journal every single day. 

her favorite things in her apartment are ceiling to floor bookshelves, her brick wall and her large windows. 

iris gets sick easily

has never passed out because of her anemia but does have to get iron infusions every once in a while. 

she likes to keep up with dancing, going to the dance studio to rent out a room every other week. and she still likes to go golfing. 

iris is very popular on pinterest, spotify and tiktok. 

when she gets stressed out she likes to do puzzles or color. 

iris’s main instagram is @/iris_auclair 

iris’s private instagram is @/snoopybrainss

iris’s private twitter is @/snoopybrains

ꪆ୧ VISUALS  .ᐟ

ꪆ୧ POSTS N MORE  .ᐟ

iris_auclair just posted !

liked by dylanduke25, trevorzegras, nicohischier and more

🏷️ lhughes_06, laramyersss, baileybass, ethan_yoon

🎵: hella good - no doubt

iris_auclair friends night out 🍻

view all comments

jackhughes why am I never invited to these things 😕

iris_auclair ur like….old 😕

laramyersss my ears are still ringing from you and ethan’s singing

iris_auclair I’ll never be able to talk the same 😩

ethan_yoon JEALOUSY TURNING SAINTS INTO THE SEA 🎤

louishofmann looks like fun ❤️

iris_auclair I’m already planning the night out when you come to visit!!

OfficialGabrielleAuclair oh my darling girl you look beautiful. Your father says to answer his texts, he sent a meme? what is that?

hugoAuclair LMAO MA 😭

OfficialGabrielleAuclair Do not ‘lmao’ me Hugo.

iris_auclair I answered him maman 😭

OfficialGabrielleAuclair why are you guys crying?

markestapa look at that handsome man 😍

iris_auclair oh I’m looking 😵‍💫

ethan_yoon awe thanks guys 🤓

markestapa who’s gonna tell him…

username that pic of luke….oh I fell to my knees 😍

username BAILEY IS GLOWING 🤭

username name a more iconic friend group 🧏‍♀️

iris_auclair mystery inc!

baileybass ethan is a freak for chasing us with that sword.

ethan_yoon you weren’t having fun?

iris_auclair no eth we weren’t 😭

edwards.73 my invite must have got lost in the mail huh

lhughes_06 sorry bro, sent it to the wrong ethan

iris_auclair LUKE 😭

Arthurauclair that’s a lot of alcohol 🤨

iris_auclair lara is an alcoholic

laramyersss IRIS WTF 😭 everyone knows I don’t drink

iris_auclair I PANICKED 🤷🏻‍♀️

louispartridge taking a flight rn just so I can be at the next one

iris_auclair next one is at Ethan’s!

louispartridge actually I think I’m busy

ethan_yoon louis ur literally in love with me shut up ✋

username I love how Iris’s friends are all so close with Luke

username Iris you look so pretty

username can Luke fight?

lhughes_06 I can and will ✋

lhughes_06 how are you so good at cards??

iris_auclair arthur taught me and then made me go against the old people at the park to get candy

lhughes_06 so he used you….

iris_auclair big brothers am I right?

lhughes_06 ur the prettiest to ever exist 🤩

iris_auclair wrong because that’s actually you my love 💗

roro’s note. IRIS MY LOVEEE ☹️ I feel like out of all my ocs she’s definitely the most like me, I really hope you guys like her!! Please send in some asks mwah 💋

𝓶y 𝓵ove 𝓶ine 𝓪ll 𝓶ine 𝓶.list

˖ ་ taglist : @winterbarnesblog @toasttt11 @cixrosie @iceflwers @lesrflms @bunbunbl0gs @lovings4turn

©️WINTFLEUR ; you can't copy, translate, reproduce, repost my fic, use my plot or layout.

[publius-library]

Hamilton: The Energetic Founder by R.B. Bernstein- A Book Review by a Teenage Know-It-All

In general, when an author refers to the Founding Fathers as "The Founding Guys" in the dedication page of his novel, my hopes are set pretty high from the get-go. I found this book while taking shelter in the Harvard Bookstore after a particularly distressing bus ride with my mother, so my judgment could have been clouded, but I actually don't regret this purchase.

Bernstein's book is short, concise, and comprehensive. While you may not be bored to death with every available anecdote about Alexander Hamilton as some authors (who will remain nameless until later) would want you to be, someone with limited knowledge of the bastard founder would be substantially educated after reading this easy 100 page read (not including the preface or epilogue).

Preface and Acknowledgments

You could not pay me to read anyone's preface or acknowledgments unless it is under 20 words. Bernstein's was not, so it won't be included in my review or in my household.

Chapter 1: Life

Early Life

I hate to say it, and you hate to hear it, but Bernstein's novel has very minimal footnotes (not at the bottom of the page, can't slip that past me), only being used for direct citations. So, there is no telling where he got the birthyear of 1758 for Hamilton because it's not cited. However, to his credit, he refers to an ambiguous "latest major biographer", and I admire anyone who does not invoke the name of the devil.

When it comes to the argument about Hamilton's birth year/age, it depends largely on which sources you believe are more credible, as well as which explanation for the discrepancy between them that you believe is most viable. It also depends on whether or not you believe Hamilton, who continuously used the 1757 year that has been considered truth by many. However, this was only used by Hamilton after his college years, and that is an important distinction.

On April 6, 1771, a teenage Alexander Hamilton submitted a poem to the Royal Danish American Gazette and, wanting to seem just a little older than he was, he summarized himself as "...a youth about seventeen..." Doing some simple math with an overqualified calculator and the knowledge that Hamilton was an insecure 16 year old, we can calculate from those numbers that Hamilton was born in 1755.

Source: Founders Online, Alexander Hamilton Papers: Alexander Hamilton to Royal Danish American Gazette, 6 April 1771. This document also includes Hamilton's first recorded poem, which is very interesting and a worthwhile read to understand his developmental years.

When Hamilton arrived in the continental British colonies in 1773, the age he gave in the above letter would put him in Boston Harbor at the age of 18- far to old for college in this time period. The exact age of entry and graduation is not precise, but it can be estimated that students would enter in their early teens (around 13-14) and graduate before they turned 17. That makes an 18 year old Hamilton far behind his would-be graduating class.

Source: University of Pennsylvania, Penn Libraries, "Penn in the 18th Century: Student Life". I thoroughly enjoyed this article, and it answered some more questions about what exactly college entailed in the 1700s, which is far different to the modern system as there was very little organized educational systems outside of these colleges and universities.

The running theory among recent historians is that Hamilton aged himself down two years (changing his birth year from 1755 to 1757) in order to apply to the College of New Jersey (modern day Princeton), which was the obvious path for him given that he was living in New Jersey and had several alumnus as mentors. Of course, we all know the story of him being denied access to Princeton after requesting an advanced curriculum*, so this detail of the age-change could fit into this attempt to get into the school on his terms. Since 1757 was now his documented birth year, it makes sense that he would continue to use that year throughout his life, as to not confuse his family, friends, and colleagues.

*According to Hercules Mulligan, Hamilton wanted to advance through the standard curriculum "with as much rapidity as his exertions would enable him to do. Dr. Witherspoon [President of the College of New Jersey] listened with great attention to so unusual a proposition from so young a person and replied that he had not the sole power to determine that but he would submit the request to the trustees who would decide." (Source: Alexander Hamilton by Ron Chernow; The William and Mary Quarterly, April 1947). Hamilton remedied this by applying to King's College (modern Columbia) and was enrolled as a special student who was tutored privately and audited necessary lectures as according to the president, Dr. Miles Cooper.

Despite all this, I have never come across 1758 as a possible birth year for Hamilton- nor have I 1754 or 1756. The issue is decidedly between 1755 or 1757, and Bernstein's lack of citations does not wholly reflect badly on his credibility, but it is disappointing because it just leaves me wondering where he got those numbers from.

The American Revolutionary War

The book does generally suffer from this lack of citation/elaboration for the sake of clarity, particularly in instances like on page 5, where Bernstein writes, "After months of organizing and training his artillery company, which he financed with the remainder of the funds meant to pay for his college education..." I have not seen any other documentation that Hamilton financed his artillery company with his educational funds, so knowing where this statement comes from would be greatly beneficial, but any citation that might elaborate on this does not exist.

There are also issues with Bernstein's timeline, along with a few dates being off (such as claiming Hamilton was invited to Washington's military staff in March 1777, when that was actually when he appeared on the payroll, and had actually been invited after the Battle of Princeton in January 1777), but it is especially noticeable when there seems to be some overlap in his novel between Hamilton's service as an artillery captain and as an aide-de-camp.

The HMS Asia was a British warship that blockaded the port of New York Harbor in August 1775, and fired upon the city. At the time, Hamilton and his friend Hercules Mulligan were serving in a makeshift militia company composed of college students called the Hearts of Oak. The following account details Hamilton's involvement in this event, which I consider the beginning of his military aspirations:

"The Asia fired upon the city, and I recollect well that Mr. Hamilton was there, for I was engaged in hauling off one of the cannon when Mr. H. came up and gave me his musket to hold and he took hold of the rope...I told him where I had left [the musket] and he went for it notwithstanding [that] the firing continued, with as much unconcern as if the vessel had not been there." -Hercules Mulligan on the Attack of the HMS Asia

Source: Hercules Mulligan: Confidential Correspondent of General George Washington - A Son of Liberty in the American War of Independence by Michael J. O'Brien

Through his connection to Alexander McDougall, who was forming a New York regiment to resist the British army, Hamilton was able to be recommended on February 23 to the New York Provincial Congress as a "...Capt. of a Company of Artillery." Hamilton received the formal assignment to this position on March 14, 1776, and maintained that post until he was offered a spot on George Washington's staff on January 20, 1777, and the appointment was confirmed on March 1, 1777.

Source: Alexander Hamilton: Youth to Maturity 1755-1788 by Broadus Mitchell

The job requirements of one of Washington's aides-de-camp were extensive, and included nearly every administrative duty that went along with running an army- from writing out orders to delivering them, from monitoring troops to rallying them in battle, the aides were official extensions of the Commander-in-Chief. Very often, skilled riders with military experience (as well as exceptional nagging ability) such as Hamilton were sent on small raiding missions, given a few men under their command to destroy or pillage supply stores. However, this does not constitute actually commanding a detachment, so Hamilton did not do this as Bernstein claims. The only time he did while under Washington's direct command was during the Battle of Yorktown in 1781, but by that time, he had long since quit Washington's office due to frustrations with the man in charge.

Source George Washington's Indispensable Men by Arthur S. Lefkowitz

This discrepancy is not a major flaw in Bernstein's retelling by any means, but it is one example of how the overall timeline of chapter one is a little muddled, which may confuse someone who does not have a nearly encyclopedic knowledge of Alexander Hamilton's life like some of you weirdos on the internet (not me, obviously).

Political Career

Moving out of the war and into the Constitutional Era (1786-89), Bernstein includes the almost mandatory anecdote of Hamilton's infamous six hour speech* during the Constitutional Convention (though he claims it was between three and six hours, though all sources I've seen have said it was six). Bernstein describes the speech as such:

"Taking the floor, he gave a speech between three and six hours in length. He mocked the Articles of Confederation and the delegates' plans to fix them. Instead, he described his own plan for a truly national government that would have reduced the states to administrative districts and vested the general government with sweeping national powers. Unfortunately for Hamilton, his proposal remained only a proposal. He could only declaim and argue, for Yates and Lansing would not support his proposal on behalf of New York, nor would anybody else in the Convention, not even Madison," (Bernstein 11).

And all of this is absolutely correct- however, it misses the point. Hamilton's plan, which was everything Bernstein said it was, was so distinctly Hamilton that even the man himself was well aware that he was not likeable enough for it to pass. Though Hamilton put effort into his plan and had faith that it would be successful, it was far too close to a monarchy to appease the Convention (especially with whisperings of uprisings blowing across the Atlantic from Paris by this time).

Instead, Hamilton continued to give his speech delivering his proposal in order to push the radicals behind the New Jersey Plan to consider the moderate nature of the Virginia Plan, which Hamilton and his comrade Madison favored. The Virginia Plan was essentially a modified version of the British government model, which is distinctly Hamiltonian, even though Madison claims the credit. Hamilton had his reservations about the final draft- but so did Madison. They were teammates at this point, as contrasting to their later relationship that might be. Hamilton would not propose a contrary plan if he genuinely believed it could succeed; he had temporary lapses in political judgment frequently, but this was one of those golden moments where he seemed quite intelligent.

*Hamilton's speech was given about half a month after the Virginia Plan was first proposed, and three days after the New Jersey Plan. So although it was not especially late in the game, that changes when you consider that Hamilton had not spoken in support of either of the plans at all. Hamilton did criticize the Virginia plan ("And what even is the Virginia Plan, but democracy checked by democracy, or pork with a little change of the sauce?" Miracle at Philadelphia: The Story of the Constitutional Convention, May to September 1787 by Catherine Drinker Bowen), so there is an argument that he was offering an alternative plan, but it's overall effect was to lend support to the Virginia Plan, as well as damaging Hamilton's reputation by igniting rumors of British sympathies.

There is very little to critique with Bernstein's retelling of the Washington administration, aside from a few strange descriptions and excessive brevity, but this era in American history is so excessive, and not everyone can write a King James Bible sized treatise on just Federalist 1-5.

This, however, does benefit benefit Bernstein when he discusses the Reynolds Affair. It is the sort of subject you want to dedicate time and words to, exploring the multiple perspectives and dynamics, if you're going to go in depth on it at all. Bernstein's retelling is simple, delicate, and careful, respecting all parties, especially the women.*

*Unlike some less comprehendible authors, Bernstein is not aggressively sexist against the women in Hamilton's life- starting with Rachael Fawcett (his spelling, again, not cited; Rachel's name has many spellings and variations so this is not especially egregious). He speaks of her respectfully and factually, which I shouldn't be happy about, but that's what we've come to here. I'll get into the larger consequences of brevity in a similar area later in the review, but you should know that I don't entirely approve of how much he skips over Hamilton's relationships with women, but to be fair, that would probably taken 100 pages on its own.

The Last Few Years

Again, there isn't too much to say here except for a few notes and interpretation differences between Bernstein and I. Firstly, on the issue of Washington's death, Bernstein writes of Hamilton's response to the sad news, "It does suggest, however, that Hamilton was so moved by Washington's death, which ended a close personal and political partnership spanning nearly twenty-five years, that he did not heed his own choice of words, a tendency that affected him throughout 1800," (24).

The instance where Hamilton "did not heed his own choice of words" was when Hamilton wrote to Tobias Lear, "Perhaps no man in this community has equal cause with myself to deplore the loss [of Washington]."

I think Bernstein's interpretation of this is a little dramatic; the expression that someone's feelings were the most intense or profound was a common saying in the 18th century western society, and can be seen in many letters regarding friends or extended family, where the person writing is definitely not the most affected by the loss. It is the deep expression of grief, not a legitimate claim that Hamilton's grief supersedes all others'. I only think this worth mentioning because it slightly misconstrues Hamilton's character, and it's important to avoid that.

Source: Founders Online, Hamilton Papers: Alexander Hamilton to Tobias Lear, 2 January 1800

The Duel

Overall, there are few portrayals of the 1804 Hamilton/Burr Duel that don't horribly disfigure the intentions of one of the parties involved. In his book, Bernstein picks Burr as the scapegoat, and chooses the route of claiming that Burr was simply looking for anyone he could point his pistol at, shouting unreasonable demands at Hamilton who respectfully raised a hand to silence him and gloriously took to the field.

Of course, the duel is an especially complex issue, which Bernstein dedicates a chapter to, so I will reserve my interpretation until then, but it's clear that his biography is strictly anti-Burr, which taking sides is not the most accurate way to approach the matter of a duel- or anything in historical politics, if I'm being fully honest with you.

Chapter 2: Revolution and Politics and Chapter 3: Law and Constitutionalism

As the heading implies, chapter two focuses on the two revolutions during Hamilton's lifetime (American and French, chronologically) and the impact they had on his politics. Now, while reading this, I admit I was increasingly frustrated that details about Hamilton's life that would have helped the brevity issues in chapter one were found in the following chapters, I can see the vision, and will accept it. The author's retellings of these events are very well, so I have little to disagree with, so I'll be discussing what I do disagree with, and what I thought he handled well.

Of course, as the champion of not giving Hamilton too much credit, I'm going to critique Bernstein for referring to Hamilton as "Washington's principle aide" on page 34. I fought Chernow on this, so I'll be fighting Bernstein on this. Hamilton, while a very valuable asset in Washington's staff, was not literally or figuratively his "principle" aide-de-camp.

The literal title goes to Washington's military secretaries, which, during most of Hamilton's tenure on his staff, was Robert Hanson Harrison. The figurative title falls to Tench Tilghman, who served for longer than Hamilton in, arguably, more capacities. Hamilton's skills were in politics and organization, as well as military maneuvers, so he was most often picked for interactions with congressmen and foreign representatives, as well as raids, foraging parties, and bookkeeping. Tilghman, however, filled in wherever was necessary from 1776 to 1781. The philosophy of "credit where credit is due" dictates that these men be given the title of "principle" aide before Hamilton, who only has the advantage of being louder and more famous.

Source: George Washington's Indispensable Men by Arthur S. Lefkowitz

One thing I think could have warranted a mention was Hamilton's paranoia towards mob rule. Of course, Hamilton's political theory of preventing both majority and minority rule are necessary to mention, as they are interwoven in both The Federalist and the Constitution itself, which can be pinned down as the best models for (most of) Hamilton's political philosophies.

However, Hamilton's fear of the mob dates back to before the French Revolution, where it really kicked up and paired well with Adams' Alien and Sedition Acts. These are major historical events that Bernstein does not neglect, however he could have gone a little deeper on this. Hamilton's fear of the mob can be traced back to his childhood in the Caribbean, where the fear of slave uprisings was implanted in every citizen's head, especially if they were raised in the area. This fear motivated Hamilton's actions in the aforementioned Dr. Miles Cooper incident, regardless of how you spell Miles/Myles, which was before both major revolutions, so it is a topic worth exploring.

There was a third revolution that Bernstein does not discuss: the Haitian Revolution in 1791. The results of this revolution was the founding of the country of Haiti, and the liberation of the island's enslaved people, who went on to govern the new country. This was, as you can imagine, every white person's nightmare at the time, especially if they were up to date on the recent occurrences in France, where the violence was increasing by the day. Hamilton's only references throughout his correspondence (that I could find) were in regards to a French fleet arriving in what is now Haiti, and "...the late disturbances in those Islands..." so unfortunately, we do not know his exact thought on that event. However, there is much to be speculated and discussed, given that this revolution occurred so close to his birthplace, and I think that the mention of this could have given this chapter of Bernstein's novel a new perspective that we don't normally see in a Hamilton biography.

Source: Alexander Hamilton by Ron Chernow; Founders Online, Alexander Hamilton Papers: Alexander Hamilton’s Final Version of the Report on the Subject of Manufactures, 5 December 1791, Alexander Hamilton to George Washington, 5 November 1796

One continuous pattern throughout the book is the idea that Hamilton had a fully "American" or "federal" perspective; that his priorities were dedicated to the entire country's interests, rather than to one particular state or region, (Bernstein 42, 66). This is, unlike most things in this novel, wholly untrue. Hamilton, although he would very much appreciate this statement, was very often biased towards the interests of New York as well as that of the upper merchant class of that state. Though he was not scheming to convert the whole American economy to being run by bankers and merchants like Jefferson claimed, he did still lean towards the class which he belonged until he was unable to maintain that position. In general, Bernstein is very kind to Hamilton, which is charitable, but inaccurate at times.

Bernstein is very talented at summarizing Hamilton's political philosophies, specifically when he describes Hamilton's four basic principles as being "...popular sovereignty, energetic government, checks and balances, and federalism," (Bernstein 40). These are themes that are abundant in Hamilton's political actions, and are espoused in The Federalist and other major publications of his, as well as the Constitution- because they mimic the foundations of the British government. Bernstein is clearly an incredible academic and historian who is greatly worthy of respect and a wonderful source for descriptions such as these.

Note: I included these two chapters in with each other since they're largely interlinked and I didn't have anything noteworthy to say about chapter three that I didn't already say about chapter two. That isn't to say that chapter three isn't noteworthy, but it stands on its own, in my opinion.

Chapter 4: Political Economy and Public Administration

For the two areas where we can see Hamilton's greatest accomplishments, Bernstein does an exceptional job at discussing his actions and motivations, as well as his conflicts with political rivals. My favorite sentence in particular can be found on page 74:

"Even at those times when most Americans have turned to worship at the ideological shrine of Thomas Jefferson, students of public administration have devoted close, admiring attention to Hamilton's thought and work." -Bernstein

I just really like it.

Another thing I really like was Bernstein's categorizing of the factors that went into Hamilton's view on the national economy, as well as his explanation (Bernstein 75-76). I'll include a summary here so those who do not have the means to buy his book can still appreciate his genius here.

Unity: authority organized from top down; keeping all government officials on the same page to execute orders from the top dog exactly as they were meant to be executed

Duration: the system in place would have to remain in place for an extended period of time in order to be properly incorporated, but the time period must also be short enough to ensure the efficiency of government

Adequacy: the government must have enough power to be able to actually execute the policies it puts in place, but cannot have too much that it infringes on the states' or individuals government given or fundamental rights

Responsibility: every official was responsible to the department and nation when executing policy, and must conduct themselves in a manner consistent with the overall public administration

This categorization is effective in that it does not leave anything wanting- the reader is able to fully understand what went into Hamilton's thinking- but it is also concise enough that it does not bore you with 100 pages of doing over every. single. Federalist. paper. So, I appreciate Bernstein's mercy.

Chapter 5: War and Peace and Chapter 6: Honor and Dueling

Note: For chapter 5, I again had nothing to say, though I did write notes; however, they were only my typical complaints about having to read about my favorite subject in the world. That being said, there is more to chapter 6.

Bernstein categorizes (once more) the men of this generation into two groups: gentlemen of extreme politeness and gentlemen of the sword. These classifications are based on a man's response to a conflict or insult. Gentlemen of extreme politeness, like Jefferson or Madison, who, when in the face of conflict, do whatever they can to avoid open warfare with diplomatic responses according to an unwritten code of the Enlightenment Era. Gentlemen of the sword, however, shoot each other.

I would not say that 18th century western gentlemen were quite so black and white as this description, but I'll roll with it. So, we have gentlemen of extreme politeness (Jefferson, Madison, the Randolphs, the Livingstons) and then the gentlemen of the sword (Hamilton, Burr, Monroe...) Who else? I don't know, because Bernstein does not mention this name once:

John Laurens.

I made a post mentioning "Laurens erasure" in July, and I swore off arguing whether or not historical figures were queer a long time ago, but the entire exclusion of John Laurens from a Hamilton biography feels sinful, so I cannot let it stand. Even if he is a footnote, he deserves to be mentioned in Hamilton's life story, not only for the personal relationship they had, but for the role he played in the development of Hamilton's view of class distinctions.

John Laurens came from an extremely prestigious family of South Carolina, a colony founded for the purpose of making money for the British Empire. Alexander Hamilton's background contrasts this, as he was raised a poor bastard on an island where there were only the very rich and the severely impoverished, no in-between. This seems to have caused tension between Laurens and Hamilton at various points, but by the end of the relationship, Hamilton had joined the bourgeoisie that Laurens was born into, and this marks a significant shift in his attitudes towards various social issues.

Source: Founders Online, Hamilton Papers: Alexander Hamilton to John Laurens, 8 January 1780

More specifically to the topic at hand, John Laurens provided Hamilton with his first personal exposure to dueling (aside from the duels that occurred in his Caribbean childhood*), when Laurens dueled Major General Charles Lee in 1778, and Hamilton acted as his second. You'd think that this would warrant a footnote, but, as we've established, Bernstein does not believe in those unless it is a direct citation.

Source: Alexander Hamilton by Ron Chernow (pg. 18*) ; John Laurens and the American Revolution by Gregory D. Massey

Laurens and the honor culture we're discussing are inherently intertwined, and he's even further intertwined with Hamilton (usually in a military cot, I presume). It was the 18th century concept of "honor" that motivated Laurens to join the army, duel, and die in battle. It was honor that united Hamilton and Laurens, and it was Laurens who taught Hamilton the ins and outs of being an Enlightened, American gentleman with honor. Without John Laurens, Alexander would not have been Hamilton.

Now that I've said why Laurens should be mentioned, why shouldn't he? Brevity is one reason, and we've established that's very important to Bernstein, however I don't think it's good enough. Laurens would have prompted another question that Bernstein either didn't have time for or didn't have the answers for: were they gay? Well, I have the answers, but not the time, so we'll save that for another day. For now, tsk tsk, Bernstein.

Of course, Bernstein discusses the 1804 duel between Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr. Bernstein doesn't say anything particularly extraordinary about this event, and neither will I, because everything has already been said about it that could have been said (probably, if you can find something original, please grace my ears with it). However, the particular narrative that Bernstein leans into is problematic in one particular way, and that is demonstrated in this excerpt:

"There are a few salient points about how this honor dispute escalated- or deteriorated- into a duel. First, what if Burr had gone first to cooper to ask what Hamilton's "despicable opinion" had been... Second, Burr's choice to confront Hamilton rather than [Reverend Charles] Cooper suggests how ready he was to accept a duel as the only way to resolve his dispute with Hamilton and vindicate his honor. Third had Burr been that ready to risk a duel, Hamilton could not have avoided it," (96).

For some context, Burr cited his reason for challenging Hamilton as being a letter between Reverend Charles Cooper and General Philip Schuyler that was published in the Albany Argus in which Cooper wrote, "I could detail to you a still more despicable opinion which General Hamilton has expressed of Mister Burr."

This is problematic in that it entirely pins the blame on Burr, and poses Hamilton as the victim. This is something fairly common, and the most common bias among historians, but it is simply not possible. There is never one complete villain, and Burr certainly wasn't someone who could be described as such. Not even Hamilton thought that, which says something.

To address Bernstein's first point, I don't see how reaching out to Cooper would have benefitted either Burr or Hamilton. If he had, and the "more despicable opinion" had been as bad as implied, the fault still would have lied with Hamilton. There would be no reason for Burr to fault Cooper for this, as Cooper did not say that he agreed with Hamilton's opinion of Burr; it was entirely attributed to Hamilton. (Even if it was implied that Cooper did agree, he could more easily frame it to Burr that this wasn't the case).

Additionally, the reason why Burr was concerned with this "more despicable opinion" is due to several rumors going around about him, some that were objectively vile, such as him having an incestuous relationship with his daughter. The specific instance cited by Cooper was something Hamilton said at the city tavern, discouraging others from voting for Burr. It is a common misconception that this is what motivated Burr to challenge Hamilton, but in actuality, it is the implication, and Hamilton's failure to deny, that Hamilton was guilty of spreading such horrible, false rumors against Burr.

Source: Founders Online, "Enclosure: Charles D. Cooper to Philip Schuyler", 23 April 1804; "The two men were often invited to dinner parties hosted by leading New York politicians, businessmen and even each other. During those years, Burr was widowed and lived with his daughter and husband. Hamilton reportedly suggested Burr committed incest with his daughter. Enraged, the Vice President challenged the Treasury Secretary to a duel in Weehawken, N.J. Hamilton was mortally wounded, dying a day later. Hamilton’s death destroyed Burr’s political career," North Coast Current, "Historically Speaking: The Forgotten Man- Aaron Burr"

The lack of acknowledgment of Burr's perspective contributes to this larger perspective that Burr was a malicious, conniving person, and it lacks empathy and understanding, while also showing poor critical thinking skills. Historians are human, and therefore can never be entirely unbiased, but there is a responsibility in this field to be open to all sides, and to provide the reader with enough information to take a different side than the one given by the author. I feel this was lacking in Bernstein's analysis of the duel, but he is absolutely not unique in this. This is partly why I dislike discussing the duel so much because when this occurs in a more opinionated work, such as Alexander Hamilton by Ron Chernow, it is simply frustrating. But, I digress.

Conclusion

Overall, I'd highly recommend this biography for someone seeking to start their investigation of Hamilton's life. Bernstein does a very good job of providing a simple, succinct resource that makes the factual evidence of Hamilton's life very easily accessible due to his book's brevity, but this feature does also limit the perspective you get from giving this book. In reality, this isn't very different from any other history book, at least in my perspective. I believe that this is a genre of literature that should be cross-referenced, and you should keep reading to seek what the whole truth is. The best thing about it is that that "whole truth" is not attainable by one person, and that makes history an inherently social art; you need to work with other people to fully understand. Read other people's work, question other people's opinions, have a discussion. In conclusion, keep reading.

[readingsquotes]

"In the name of keeping students safe, you bring the NYPD on campus to break up a peaceful encampment, thereby endangering hundreds of student protesters—many of whom are Jewish students and students of color—and the campus community at large. Given the NYPD’s racist record, the fact that you would subject Black, Latinx, Arab and South Asian students to police repression suggests that you are either unaware or indifferent to the trauma our communities have experienced with the police. And your administration’s decision to evict students from their dorms, strip them of their meal cards, and have them charged with trespassing is nothing less than vindictive. After taking their tuition and fees, you render them houseless and potentially food insecure. How does this make students safe? As president, you must be well aware of the number of financially vulnerable students enrolled at Columbia.

In the name of keeping students safe, you suspend chapters of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) and Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) for organizing a peaceful protest in order to draw attention to Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza and its escalation of violence in the West Bank. When two students attacked an antiwar rally on the steps of Low Memorial Library on January 19 by dousing the assembled with a foul-smelling chemical agent, sending several people to the hospital, what did you do to keep students safe? The assailants were not arrested, and although Columbia’s interim provost announced that they were banned from campus soon after the attacks, the decision to suspend them was made public just a few days ago. Instead, you brought the NYPD to campus to suppress a follow-up protest organized to call attention to the attack.

When Mohsen Mahdawi, a Palestinian student, received death threats from someone involved in a counterprotest, no one called for an investigation or took affirmative steps to keep him safe. And when will you release a statement expressing deep sympathy for all of your Palestinian students who have lost family and friends to Israel’s military onslaught?

...

I need not say much else. You’ve been condemned by your faculty, by the majority of students, and by scholars and human rights activists around the world. You are keeping no one safe, except for your donors, trustees, and Columbia’s endowment. Among these same trustees and donors are persons who have vowed to punish these students by blocking them from future employment.

...

Sadly, you are not alone in turning to state repression to silence students. The presidents of Yale, Princeton, Emory, the University of Southern California, the University of Texas at Austin, the Ohio State University, the University of Pittsburgh, and Emerson, among others, have also called the police against nonviolent protests and encampments. This is a dark day for U.S. higher education, especially at a time when right-wing extremists are waging war on academic freedom and all manner of critical studies.

[mimi-0007]

First Lady's education.

Mrs. Barbara Bush graduated from Yale University, where she was a member of Kappa Alpha Theta, with a bachelor of arts degree in Humanities and earned a Master in Public Administration from Harvard Kennedy School as a fellow with the Center for Public Leadership

Mrs. Hilary Clinton--ellesley College years. In 1965, Rodham enrolled at Wellesley College, where she majored in political science. During her first year, she was president of the Wellesley Young Republicans.

Mrs. Laura Bush--- Born in Midland, Texas, Bush graduated from Southern Methodist University in 1968 with a bachelor's degree in education, and took a job as a second grade teacher. After attaining her master's degree in library science at the University of Texas at Austin, she was employed as a librarian.

Mrs. Michele Obama--‐he majored in sociology and minored in African-American studies, graduating cum laude with a Bachelor of Arts in 1985 after completing a 99-page senior thesis titled Princeton-Educated Blacks and the Black Community under the supervision of Walter Wallace.

Mrs. Jill Biden--- Biden has a bachelor's degree in English from the University of Delaware and master's degrees in education and English from West Chester University and Villanova University, and returned to the University of Delaware for a doctoral degree in education

Mrs. Melanie Trump--- Melania Trump didn't receive a college degree in design and architecture at the university in Ljubljana, Slovenia, which her biography in the Republican National Convention program claims she had obtained.