History

First Principles: What America's Founders Learned from the Greeks and Romans and How That Shaped Our Country

First Principles: What America's Founders Learned from the Greeks and Romans and How That Shaped Our Country

  • Downloads：8368
  • Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
  • Create Date：2021-11-11 06:51:26
  • Update Date：2025-09-06
  • Status：finish
  • Author：Thomas E. Ricks
  • ISBN：0062997467
  • Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
  • Download

Summary

"Ricks knocks it out of the park with this jewel of a book。 On every page I learned something new。 Read it every night if you want to restore your faith in our country。" — James Mattis， General， U。S。 Marines （ret。） & 26th Secretary of Defense 

Now in paperback， Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and #1 New York Times bestselling author Thomas E。 Ricks offers a revelatory new book about the founding fathers， examining their educations and， in particular， their devotion to the ancient Greek and Roman classics—and how that influence would shape their ideals and the new American nation。

On the morning after the 2016 presidential election， Thomas Ricks awoke with a few questions on his mind: What kind of nation did we now have？ Is it what was designed or intended by the nation’s founders？ Trying to get as close to the source as he could， Ricks decided to go back and read the philosophy and literature that shaped the founders’ thinking， and the letters they wrote to each other debating these crucial works—among them the Iliad， Plutarch’s Lives， and the works of Xenophon， Epicurus， Aristotle， Cato， and Cicero。 For though much attention has been paid the influence of English political philosophers， like John Locke， closer to their own era， the founders were far more immersed in the literature of the ancient world。

The first four American presidents came to their classical knowledge differently。 Washington absorbed it mainly from the elite culture of his day; Adams from the laws and rhetoric of Rome; Jefferson immersed himself in classical philosophy， especially Epicureanism; and Madison， both a groundbreaking researcher and a deft politician， spent years studying the ancient world like a political scientist。 Each of their experiences， and distinctive learning， played an essential role in the formation of the United States。 In examining how and what they studied， looking at them in the unusual light of the classical world， Ricks is able to draw arresting and fresh portraits of men we thought we knew。

First Principles follows these four members of the Revolutionary generation from their youths to their adult lives， as they grappled with questions of independence， and forming and keeping a new nation。 In doing so， Ricks interprets not only the effect of the ancient world on each man， and how that shaped our constitution and government， but offers startling new insights into these legendary leaders。

Download

Reviews

Heather ，

Really liked this book。 Things I changed my mind about: virtue （by old definition of public service） is not enough to make democracy work。 Sooner or later， people need an incentive to keep acting out in behalf of the greater good （Revolutionary army couldn't work for free forever。 Interesting comparisons to covid-19）。 A lot of founding fathers believed political parties would destroy democracy， but Madison recognized they were a crucial key to ensuring freedom。 Really liked this book。 Things I changed my mind about: virtue （by old definition of public service） is not enough to make democracy work。 Sooner or later， people need an incentive to keep acting out in behalf of the greater good （Revolutionary army couldn't work for free forever。 Interesting comparisons to covid-19）。 A lot of founding fathers believed political parties would destroy democracy， but Madison recognized they were a crucial key to ensuring freedom。 。。。more

Marc Minnick ，

Thomas E。Ricks，US military historian for the New York Times Book Review writes an excellent analysis of the first four Presidents and the principles and life experiences that shaped their philosophical beliefs about governing a new Nation-State。 Washington， the only president with military experience， Adams， the resolute Federalist， abhorrent of slavery， Jefferson， the Epicurean Romantic， Francophile and author of the Declaration of Independence， and lastly Madison， the brilliant over all in the Thomas E。Ricks，US military historian for the New York Times Book Review writes an excellent analysis of the first four Presidents and the principles and life experiences that shaped their philosophical beliefs about governing a new Nation-State。 Washington， the only president with military experience， Adams， the resolute Federalist， abhorrent of slavery， Jefferson， the Epicurean Romantic， Francophile and author of the Declaration of Independence， and lastly Madison， the brilliant over all in the art of politics， not to mention the Author of our current constitution。 I especially was drawn to the fact that our nation in many ways borrowed the fundamentals of good government from the Roman and Greeks， hopefully not to repeat their mistakes 。。。more

Norjak ，

3。5

Steve Gross ，

interesting focus on the classical backgrounds of the Founders。 Wanders a bit and sometimes doesn't do a good job of explaining the basics。 My greatest concern was the author dumping on Trump in the Introduction （and Afterword）， exposing his left-wing bias， all of which was completely unnecessary to his points。Also， I suspect he ignored the influence of the Bible， particularly the Hebrew bible， on the Founder's thoughts。 interesting focus on the classical backgrounds of the Founders。 Wanders a bit and sometimes doesn't do a good job of explaining the basics。 My greatest concern was the author dumping on Trump in the Introduction （and Afterword）， exposing his left-wing bias， all of which was completely unnecessary to his points。Also， I suspect he ignored the influence of the Bible， particularly the Hebrew bible， on the Founder's thoughts。 。。。more

Luminaria ，

The author seems to have their own bias， which is honestly fine up until they use their bias and state things as facts because of it。 I managed to read the prologue， and right away I realized this was going to be an issue with this book。 The author brought up an incident and twisted it to paint the image he wanted - this being George Washington's teeth。 They claimed that these were pulled from slaves against their will。 No such records of this exist。 In fact， all we have on Washington's teeth is The author seems to have their own bias， which is honestly fine up until they use their bias and state things as facts because of it。 I managed to read the prologue， and right away I realized this was going to be an issue with this book。 The author brought up an incident and twisted it to paint the image he wanted - this being George Washington's teeth。 They claimed that these were pulled from slaves against their will。 No such records of this exist。 In fact， all we have on Washington's teeth is the records they do come from slaves。 Nothing more or less。 Not pleased to open the book and right away be met with a stretched situation to fit the picture the author wanted， especially when it is one on analyzing our founding fathers' philosophies。 It makes me wonder what else is being stretched or twisted to fit what narrative the author wants to portray。 。。。more

Francesca Lee ，

Things you never knew about the Founding Father

Elie Harriett ，

Good book but goes a bit too far and meanders by the epilogue。 The book is a very good reading list for what the founders would have had in mind

Laurie ，

I love the premise of tying the decisions and actions of our country's founders and early 19th-century leaders to the intellectual movements of their era。 Though this book did fill in several gaps in my understanding of the times， it didn't quite deliver on the tie to classicism。 I learned less about Greek and Roman thought than I'd expected。 Furthermore， the book would be more credible had the author stuck to history （ancient and early-American）， and left out his opinions about our modern day " I love the premise of tying the decisions and actions of our country's founders and early 19th-century leaders to the intellectual movements of their era。 Though this book did fill in several gaps in my understanding of the times， it didn't quite deliver on the tie to classicism。 I learned less about Greek and Roman thought than I'd expected。 Furthermore， the book would be more credible had the author stuck to history （ancient and early-American）， and left out his opinions about our modern day "problems" （found primarily but not exclusively in the Epilogue， "What We Can Do"）。 Sadly， he seems mired in left-wing group-think about Donald Trump。 Enough， already。 Please， Mr。 Ricks， stick to the topic -- history yes， 21st century political bashing， no。 It made me question the validity of the rest of the book。 。。。more

Jeff ，

Very good read about the education of our first 4 presidents。 Mr。 Ricks shows how the classical Greeks & Romans and the enlightenment influenced these founders from fighting the British to creating a nation。 Their education and development are all through our constitution。 The concept of freedom has changed certainly changed since 1787。 Today's proponents of the founders' intent would do well to read Mr。 Ricks' book。 Very good read about the education of our first 4 presidents。 Mr。 Ricks shows how the classical Greeks & Romans and the enlightenment influenced these founders from fighting the British to creating a nation。 Their education and development are all through our constitution。 The concept of freedom has changed certainly changed since 1787。 Today's proponents of the founders' intent would do well to read Mr。 Ricks' book。 。。。more

Rhonda ，

DNF It wasn't my cup of tea， but the history buffs in my book club loved it。 DNF It wasn't my cup of tea， but the history buffs in my book club loved it。 。。。more

Deb W ，

This is a must read for every American。 It's so pithy that I decided to buy the book so I can pour over it again and take notes。 This is a must read for every American。 It's so pithy that I decided to buy the book so I can pour over it again and take notes。 。。。more

Danny Higgins ，

Enjoyed the first half， the second half meanders。He establishes the environment in which these people where taught in， and the intricacies towards explaining that are truly some of the best I have read。When the book reaches “in practice” it falls off， but maybe that is the point: do we really know if it works？

Mark Monson ，

Great review of bedrock American principles and where they originated。 A thinly veiled （or not veiled at all） attack on Trump and his supporters。 Discusses topics we should address as a nation， in a readable manner。 Leans left， but not so much that he falls over。

Larry ，

Didn't finish。 Was turned off by the preface and some of the other reviews on here， outlining the misleading terminology/redefinitions。 Didn't finish。 Was turned off by the preface and some of the other reviews on here， outlining the misleading terminology/redefinitions。 。。。more

Ron Riggs ，

Good intellectual history from a WOK authorAn interesting and informative history about the individuals who founded our country written from the point of view of a WOK elitist author。

Kate Schwarz ，

Thomas Ricks traces the lives of our country's founders and explains that what they read， who they idolized， and what early lessons they learned shaped their thinking and directly affected their contributions to the Revolution and the writing of the Constitution。 Really fascinating！Things I want to remember from the book:"Finally， it is important to note that their classical knowledge ultimately steered the founders wrong on three crucial issues: First， on whether the new nation could subsist on Thomas Ricks traces the lives of our country's founders and explains that what they read， who they idolized， and what early lessons they learned shaped their thinking and directly affected their contributions to the Revolution and the writing of the Constitution。 Really fascinating！Things I want to remember from the book:"Finally， it is important to note that their classical knowledge ultimately steered the founders wrong on three crucial issues: First， on whether the new nation could subsist on 'public virtue，' relying on those in power to act in self-restraint on those in power to act for the common good and not their personal interest， a proposition that would be tested almost instantly during the war for independence。 Second， on party politics， which the classical writers taught them to regard as unnatural and abhorrent。 Their misunderstanding of partisanship or faction as they tended to call it， nearly wrecked the new republic in the 1790s。 Third， and most troubling， was their acceptance of human bondage， which would prove disastrous to the nation they designed。 Often seeing it as part of the natural social order， they wrote it into the fundamental law of the nation and so sustained a system that was deeply inhumane and rested on a foundation of physical and sexual abuse， including torture。"G Washington's early lessons could be distilled into some general maxims: Know yourself， and know those you are fighting。 Study the terrain， and make it your friend （As circumstances change， be ready to change views and abandon assumptions。 Listen to dissenters and know how to weigh alternatives）。 He had worked with indigenous allies， and had engaged with diplomacy with the tribes around him。 G Washington learned many lessons fighting in the French and Indian War that he applied later to the Revolutionary War: "First， he had seen the French appear to be on the cusp of victory in the war only to lose years later。 Second， he had witnessed an army of British regulars shattered in a battle by a people born in North America。 Third， he had seen in Braddock's spectacular failure what can happen to a general who disregards informed advice and fails to adapt his approach to the circumstances。 Most of all， he had seen that he himself could recover from stinging personal defeat， and that they key role of a general is sometimes not to win but merely keep his army alive。 His conclusion as a commander was that discipline is the soul of an army。" Washington's practical lessons from the frontier were crucial。"No civil rules are to be obeyed when they enjoin things inconsistent with the commands of God; indeed， such resistance to such authority was a duty not a crime" was a key lesson in one of Mahou's （sp？） most famous sermon--read and studied by John Adams。"Adams drafted an essay on power that restated ancient Greek views on government: That monarchy degenerates into despotism， aristocracy into oligarchy， and democracy into anarchy。""They knew they were venturing into a new world， politically。 What sort of society did they want？ How would a modern republic work， and how could they try to ensure its survival？ Could a republic on the scale of the 13 colonies even be governable， given the relatively small size of the ancient city-states？ 。。。 Could the Americans devise a national republic that could last？ There were very few answers available， especially from recent history。 Instead， they reached back to the classical world。 They would apply the lessons they saw in the experience of the Roman Republic and beyond that， the Greek cities。 It would prove a distant and hazy guide， but it was the only one they had。" 。。。more

Christopher ，

An enlightening and insightful look at the way Classical Greek and Roman history， philosophy， literature， and culture influenced the founders of the United States， inspired a revolution， and helped shape the new nation。

Elizabeth Dodge ，

I learned a lot from this book。 Not just the effect of the classics on Washington， Adams & Jefferson but about the classics themselves and how much they were a part of an educated person during the founding fathers time。

Tyson Gaylord ，

This book provides a great look into how and way America was created。 I loved how much the Stoics played into the thinking of The Declaration of Independence and US Constitution。 The generally don't read history， however， I thoroughly enjoyed this。 This book provides a great look into how and way America was created。 I loved how much the Stoics played into the thinking of The Declaration of Independence and US Constitution。 The generally don't read history， however， I thoroughly enjoyed this。 。。。more

Josef Gottlieb ，

Classical IdealsIn "First Principles，" Thomas Ricks explores the ideas America's Founding Fathers took from the Greco-Roman world。 He details their classical educations， as well as the observable applications of ideas from figures such as Cicero， Cato， and Cincinnatus。 Ricks uses Founders Online as his predominant source， and for good reason， as it is an extensive collection of writing from the Founding period。 The thesis of "First Principles" is an important one。 Ricks identifies his impetus fo Classical IdealsIn "First Principles，" Thomas Ricks explores the ideas America's Founding Fathers took from the Greco-Roman world。 He details their classical educations， as well as the observable applications of ideas from figures such as Cicero， Cato， and Cincinnatus。 Ricks uses Founders Online as his predominant source， and for good reason， as it is an extensive collection of writing from the Founding period。 The thesis of "First Principles" is an important one。 Ricks identifies his impetus for writing it as the election of President Trump， though the 45th commander-in-chief is hardly the first to forget the classical ideals of the early United States， nor is he the only （or even most egregious） violator of their sense of virtue。 Overall， however， it is a worthwhile read。 。。。more

Tom Gruda ，

A grest bookA great short history of the founding fathers 。 Filled with anecdotes I hadn't heard before。 Could not put down。 A grest bookA great short history of the founding fathers 。 Filled with anecdotes I hadn't heard before。 Could not put down。 。。。more

Jalen ，

I learned a number of interesting things about the founding fathers， so this was not a complete waste of time， but as several other reviewers have noted， the author 1。） mostly fails to deliver on his title and 2。） forces the entire narrative through a progressivist revisionism。This latter point becomes almost unbearable in the second half of the work。 I should not have been surprised given the clearly biased， and frankly， irresponsible claims made in the prologue。 Here the author asserts his fee I learned a number of interesting things about the founding fathers， so this was not a complete waste of time， but as several other reviewers have noted， the author 1。） mostly fails to deliver on his title and 2。） forces the entire narrative through a progressivist revisionism。This latter point becomes almost unbearable in the second half of the work。 I should not have been surprised given the clearly biased， and frankly， irresponsible claims made in the prologue。 Here the author asserts his feelings and makes some very broad assumptions about the 2016 election without carefully considering the deeper underlying causes for its outcome， as one might expect from a serious scholar of political history。 He next asserts， without giving any evidence， that one party in America countenances "white supremacy。" This is just lazy and disingenuous。 Alas， all too predictable condescension and ignorant disdain from the Ivy League "cognoscenti。" This should have been a red flag， but I gave him the benefit of the doubt and pressed on anyway。The writing is passable and somewhat engaging in places， and I learned a few things I did not know about the founders， but the author does not really seem to possess deep knowledge of the classics and he never quite delivers on the title of the book。 He is mostly just retelling the story of the nascent stages of our country， and then peppering in references the founders made to classical authors。 The main lines of the story are accurate， even inspiring in places， and it was nice to review again。 However， with the exception of his analysis of Madison and the Athenian league， he does not really show how the Ancients affected the founders thinking with any serious depth。 Washington was like a noble Roman （who didn't already know of the comparisons with Cincinnatus？）， Adams liked Cicero， Jefferson preferred the Greek temperament， etc。， and then he frequently makes loose connections like， "such and such a book was on his shelf， so he may have read it。" This was disappointing and I expected a bit more based on the title and description of the work。Of course， everyone writes from their own perspective—and despite what some may claim—it is not really possible to avoid prejudice entirely。 I would argue that this isn’t even desirable。 However， the author so blatantly attempts to mold the narrative in favor of the modern perspective， that he is unable to give a careful and balanced view of the founders。Again， with the exception of Madison--and Washington to some degree， since he was so remarkably virtuous it is almost impossible for anyone to honestly disparage him—the author dwells so much and so frequently on the founders failures， shortcomings， insecurities， and mutual infighting， that one is generally left with the impression that they were mostly a bunch of brash， arrogant， hypocrites。 He also somehow manages to work the problem of slavery into nearly every chapter and then concludes the whole work with this issue as the overarching criteria of judgment on the founders and the early history of America。 All of this is extremely irritating and makes me doubt the sincerity and scholarly merit of the author。Chattel slavery is grossly immoral and a shameful blight upon our country。 I have no problem with an author pointing this out or writing an entire work on the Founders and their obvious hypocrisy on this issue。 My complaint is not that the author repeatedly addresses these issues， but that he seems to assume that “we moderns， with our Enlightened values and respect for human dignity， can blithely and easily sit in judgment， and even be baffled， by such apparent hypocrisy。” The book is suffused with this disingenuous naïveté and progressivist ideology。 Almost as though we haven’t just witnessed the most violent and inhumane last 100 or so years in all of human history。 It is terrible to own another human being。 It is equally-if not more terrible-to rape， sell， round up like cattle and gas， abort， and obliterate by nuclear holocaust another human being。 We’re all hypocrites and for anyone to presume they would have so obviously taken the high road is not only asinine， but also extremely dangerous。 We got enough virtue-signaling during the summer of 2020， no need to pile it on further。 This agenda distorts the author’s assessment of the Founders and causes him to drift repeatedly from the point and purpose of the work。Finally， this book has once again confirmed my admiration and respect for Washington， as well as my utter distaste and dislike for Jefferson。 Anyone of his intellectual capacity who “hates” Plato’s Republic and is incapable of seeing why it is one the greatest works ever written is not to be trusted。 。。。more

Joseph Adelizzi， Jr。 ，

The smooth-flowing， well-supported， thought-provoking work First Principles by Thomas E。 Ricks is a riveting examination of the impact of ancient Greece and Rome on 4 founding fathers: Washington， Adams， Jefferson， and Madison。 First Principles was difficult for me to read， and judging by my description of the work， I presume the fault lies with me。 I’ve been a fan of John Adams for years， but Thomas E。 Ricks clearly is not， and that’s why this was a difficult read for me。 Ricks has few positive The smooth-flowing， well-supported， thought-provoking work First Principles by Thomas E。 Ricks is a riveting examination of the impact of ancient Greece and Rome on 4 founding fathers: Washington， Adams， Jefferson， and Madison。 First Principles was difficult for me to read， and judging by my description of the work， I presume the fault lies with me。 I’ve been a fan of John Adams for years， but Thomas E。 Ricks clearly is not， and that’s why this was a difficult read for me。 Ricks has few positive things to say about Adams， and I know other historians share this negative view。 Indeed， Adams’ personality is mocked in at least two theatrical productions I can think of。 However， I’ve read many biographies of founding fathers， and so far I’ve found no one who outpaces Adams for life-long commitment to personal integrity。 Dr。 Benjamin Rush is a close second。 Critics might say Adams and Rush， as evinced in their exchanged letters， fed each other’s insecurities; I concede that to be true。 Also， by no means am I saying Adams， or Rush， was infallible。 Far from it。 But when it comes to embodying the 18th century concept of “virtue” as defined by Ricks， I don’t think finer personifications could be found。Read Ricks’ First Principles。 It is an excellent examination of the concepts and history which motivated the founding fathers to do great things， and some not so great things。 Then when you finish， maybe check out John Adams， and possibly Benjamin Rush。 I have no doubt they’d appreciate your efforts。 。。。more

Mark ，

I'm not sure the author stayed entire on-point to his book's subtitle， but at times he did emphasize how the founders' thinking evolved （especially in the half-generation between Madison/Hamilton and the rest） away from more purely Greek & Roman governmental models into something else。 I'm not sure the author stayed entire on-point to his book's subtitle， but at times he did emphasize how the founders' thinking evolved （especially in the half-generation between Madison/Hamilton and the rest） away from more purely Greek & Roman governmental models into something else。 。。。more

Katherine ，

There’s almost no reason for this book to exist。 Maybe for someone who never has and never will read a biography of Washington， Adams， Jefferson， or Madison？ But then why would you read this book？ It’s not that it’s a bad book， or poorly written， it’s just that it’s completely unnecessary。 Long story short， I was just as excited to start it as I was disappointed reading it。 It’s random vignettes， at best， of four founders， tangentially related to their education in the classics。 The second star There’s almost no reason for this book to exist。 Maybe for someone who never has and never will read a biography of Washington， Adams， Jefferson， or Madison？ But then why would you read this book？ It’s not that it’s a bad book， or poorly written， it’s just that it’s completely unnecessary。 Long story short， I was just as excited to start it as I was disappointed reading it。 It’s random vignettes， at best， of four founders， tangentially related to their education in the classics。 The second star is for providing a brief overview of the classics themselves。 The author starts the book with the equivalent of “I woke up after the election of 2016， the sky had fallen on my head， and I no longer recognised where I live”。 For an historian， such overdramatised histrionics are ludicrous at best。 He then went on a journey of self discovery to find out “how we got here”。 Which， again， made me roll my eyes。 Rome hasn’t fallen to the Goths， Mehmet II isn’t strolling through the last vestige of Byzantium， the Turks aren’t slaughtering your family as you watch on， the Germans haven’t just goose stepped through Paris。 A peaceful transfer of power for a high elected office happened to some dude you don’t like， just like every four years since the beginning of the US。 If you can’t handle that without going into a tizzy， you should go into plumbing， not history。In any case， long and unnecessary personal preface about his existential crisis aside， the book offered little new information for anyone who’s read any early founder biographies。 I was hoping it’d go into detail about some of the figures represented by the colonial writers when writing as “Cato”， “Caractacus”， etc。， tying the theme of what they’re writing to the ancient persona or author they are using as a pseudonym。 Alas， it was only four founders， and even fewer Greco Roman figures that the author went into detail with。 It could have been such a great book。 Such a phenomenal and useful addition to the canon。 And instead， it was an obviously intelligent man turning what should have been a scholarly diary into a book that overpromises， and is “exceptional reading” only for non-scholars， and those who have read little to nothing about the founders。 。。。more

Mike ，

Audio

Daniel DeLappe ，

Poorly researched and written。 Barely readable。 Just don’t。

Danny ，

this book lets you know what was on the minds of our earliest presidents and our founding fathers。 it shows what philosophies and moral compasses they followed and what problems the encountered in making America of that time。 In the end America is always evolving and changing with the times。 this book also tells the hardships of its citizens and founding fathers as those changes occur。

Stephanie ，

This was an interesting read， detailing how the educations of the founding fathers shaped our nation。 That education was primarily in the classics， with a boost from the Scottish Enlightenment。 Ricks goes on to explain how and why classicism fell out of favor in American culture， and he ends with advice for how to make America more American again。 （Spoiler alert: It has to do with reviving a sense of public spirit， what the founders called "virtue。"） This was an interesting read， detailing how the educations of the founding fathers shaped our nation。 That education was primarily in the classics， with a boost from the Scottish Enlightenment。 Ricks goes on to explain how and why classicism fell out of favor in American culture， and he ends with advice for how to make America more American again。 （Spoiler alert: It has to do with reviving a sense of public spirit， what the founders called "virtue。"） 。。。more

Cyrus ，

Started off as kind of a dry recitation of facts， with some flair of sensationalism to try to keep engagement and build to a larger point。 But the second half of the book was really transportive and enjoyable retelling of a well-worn story。 I found reading this book in the early morning to be really enjoyable， and informative。 For a well-studied non-fiction， the book had narrative arc and character-driven to guide us through what you might assume would be pretty dry material。 I think it struck t Started off as kind of a dry recitation of facts， with some flair of sensationalism to try to keep engagement and build to a larger point。 But the second half of the book was really transportive and enjoyable retelling of a well-worn story。 I found reading this book in the early morning to be really enjoyable， and informative。 For a well-studied non-fiction， the book had narrative arc and character-driven to guide us through what you might assume would be pretty dry material。 I think it struck the balance between an over-sensationalized "nonficton" like Malcolm Gladwell and an dry dissertation really nicely。 If I wished for something it'd be of a more pluralistic view that showed more diversity in the founding generation， more appendix with longer excerpts from primary sources， and cutting the first third of the book in half （kind of felt like that's where the project started， then the author had some trouble letting go of all the material as the book evolved）。 Of course this doesn't stand alone as a definitive anthology of the Revolution， but it's great as a part of a balanced diet and a very fun read to boot。 。。。more

Reference

google book https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=First Principles: What America's Founders Learned from the Greeks and Romans and How That Shaped Our Country

hathitrust digital library https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/ls?q1=First Principles: What America's Founders Learned from the Greeks and Romans and How That Shaped Our Country&field1=ocr&a=srchls&ft=ft&lmt=ft

The British Library https://bll01.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/search?query=any,contains,First Principles: What America's Founders Learned from the Greeks and Romans and How That Shaped Our Country&tab=LibraryCatalog&search_scope=Not_BL_Suppress&vid=44BL_INST:BLL01&lang=en&offset=0