Throughout much of human history, leaders of nations were the children of leaders of nations. Nearly 230 years ago, a radical notion was advanced in a document that would help to form a new republic: that all men are created equal. Many of those American colonists who declared themselves independent of their king wanted not only to limit the power of the executive but to be sure that they had the ability to choose who that executive would be, rather than to have it pass from father to son. Thus, "only three of the first eight presidents produced potential successors, [and] only three of those sons were considered presidential timber." Two of them were named Adams, and one of them would actually become president.

In America's First Dynasty, Richard Brookhiser uses just under 220 pages to paint compelling biographies of four successive generations of a family from 1735 through 1918, an unusually active one that included two presidents of the United States, a public servant of the republic and his state, and a writer. These men lived through tumultuous and eventful times and played roles in them.

The text appears to be well-researched and is quite readable. Quite a lot of history was packed into a very small number of pages; readers with a good understanding of the times and concurrent history will find their understanding of these characters enhanced. Readers who do not know much of the concurrent history might feel rushed.

In groups of three chapters, each of the subjects is considered. Beginning with John Adams, we're introduced to him already in service of his country, at a dinner party in France. We follow him through the highlights of his professional career, and into retirement. We're suddenly focusing on his son John Quincy, as his career starts at an early age with his father, and how he differs from his brothers, who fall prey to the snare of alcohol. John Quincy himself was distinguished, even becoming president, but (much like his father) was hampered by his distaste for political parties and the method of serving in public office.

Charles Francis Adams married well and held various public offices throughout his career, even running as a candidate for Vice-President on the Free-Soil party ticket. Most of his public life was in state and then federal legislature, followed by a diplomatic appointment by Abraham Lincoln. Brookhiser points out that it is in the family of Charles Francis that the family tendency toward alcoholism is broken.

Henry Adams apparently had no taste for public life, preferring instead to become a writer. Much of the biographical sketch focuses on the creation of his best-known work, The Education of Henry Adams. With only his lineage and his wife's suicide to frame the work, we're left wondering what else Henry did. Perhaps this was Brookhiser's intention: to focus on that which each of the subjects left behind for posterity.

Indeed, after the biographical sketches, we're given several more brief chapters that discuss the family habit of keeping a diary and the writing of history. Brookhiser then attempts to frame much of what we have read, discussing such matters as dynasty and legacy. I found the discussion a bit strange because while various Adamses were clearly concerned with the matter of greatness-returning to the question of who are great men-I was under no impression that the Adamses themselves were much concerned with the legacy of the family. I saw only that they were like every other family, wanting what is best for their children, hoping that they will be of good character and do well for themselves.

Putting the discussion in terms of dynasty might not be so strange when viewed through the lens of history. The fact is that John Adams was there from the founding of the country, and his family remained prominent in American life into the twentieth century. Had Henry fathered children, perhaps the

The old style of biography was much like theatre criticism. The more cleverly you could trash the subject, the more you were -- or felt yourself to be -- a winner. When personality peculiarities made subjects as vulnerable to witticism as John Adams' was, we got decades of historical biographers trying to out-acidify the likes of Bernard Shaw. This style had faded significantly by the time David McCullough wrote a biography of John Adams that was unabashedly laudatory...an open fan letter...clear hero worship!

From Brookhiser's race through four members of the Adams family I learned only two things for sure.
1. The Adams's irritate him.
2. The old adage that "the things you criticize most in others are usually your own worst fault" appears to be true.

The author's rancor calls and raises the rancor he attributes to his subjects. Reading it was an unpleasant experience with little to no redeeming informational or ideational value for anyone but the author's therapist.

"America` First Dynasty" by Richard Brookhiser. Sub-titled: "The Adamses, 1713-1918".
Understandably, this book concentrates on the two presidents, John Adams and John Quincy Adams. Their contributions as one-term presidents help to establish democracy in the nascent United States. Brookhiser notes that the two Adamses were the first presidents not from Virginia. Much of what John Adams did became precedents for later presidents.

It appears to me that the author makes the tacit assumption that the reader has a fairly good knowledge of American history, so he casually introduces lesser know subjects, such as the "Know Nothing Party " (Native American Party) and the anti-Masonic efforts in upstate New York. This, of course, leads you to things that you want to examine further, but, on the other hand, inhibits the free-flow of the book.

I think that the author is stretching to consider Charles Francis or even Henry Adams as "greats" who were continuing the Adams "dynasty". I did, however, enjoy Brookhiser's "book review" approach to "The Education of Henry Adams" and Henry's book on Mont St. Michel. Perhaps the next book by Brookhiser would be the comparison of the contributions of the Adamses, the Harrisons, the Roosevelts and the Bushes: all presidents who related by blood.

I listened to the seven tapes as I commuted around Boston; excellent reading by Dan Cashman. It is appropriate to note the name of the town of Haverhill is pronounced as HAV AAAA rill by the natives.. The reader sounded it out and said Have Er Hill, which is logical but not the way it is said in Massachusetts. Further, the hometown of the Adamses , Quincy, is said as "QuinZZZy".

I've read all of Richard Brookhiser's biographies of the Founding Fathers (Washington, Hamilton, Morris) and I've enjoyed them all, but I liked this one the least. Brookhiser writes very well and his observations on the character of his subjects are always revealing. He shows how often the best quality in a biographer is not polished prose or research skills, but judgment.

In his book on the four generations of Adams, however, Brookhiser overreaches. Had he kept his focus on the men, this would have been a fine if undistinguished book. But Brookhiser appears to be trying to say something about families, American dynasties, and the difficulties of sustaining greatness. What he wanted to say, I could never quite figure out. The wonderful aphoristic quality of Brookhiser's prose -- that makes him so good when writing some sharp and brief observation -- fails him when he must sustain an argument.

An example of this is when Brookhiser writes in his introduction of the contradiction of an egalitarian society having so many political family dynasties, from the Adamses to Bushes. In noting this, he writes "[An American political dynasty] is the tribute democracy pays to aristocracy." This sounds very nice, but it's meaningless. Most of Brookhiser's comments on the significance of American political dynasties and how the Adamses were able to sustain their greatness fall along this line.

Thankfully, most of this book is on the Adamses, and it is when writing on them that Brookhiser shines. Still, the bad ideas -- even though they don't make up a substantial part of the book -- hang over it. Brookhiser is always interesting when writing about a person, but is not at his best when trying to come up with a conceptual framework to make sense of it all.

I just completed America's First Dynasty by Richard Brookhiser, a book about the Adamses of Braintree, Massachusetts. Specifically the book covers the lives of John Adams, his brilliant son, John Quincy, his grandson, Charles Francis and his great-grandson, Henry.

From the author of the marvelous book, Founding Father, a terrific biography of George Washington, I found First Dynasty to be flat and lacking. I recently read both McCulloch's biography, John Adams, and Nagel's John Quincy Adams and recommend that all interested students of the Adamses should bypass Brookhiser's volume and stick with the full biographies, both of which offer a complete look at this family that was so essential to the founding and beginnings of America.

A book as brief as Brookhiser's simply cannot and did not do the subject appropriate justice. The fact remains, as well, that while John and John Quincy lived lives and made contributions of considerable significance, the other two Adamses, Charles Francis and Henry are largely forgettable. This is especially true of Henry Adams.