You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
93 reviews for:
Eliza Hamilton: The Extraordinary Life and Times of the Wife of Alexander Hamilton
Tilar J. Mazzeo
3.86 AVERAGE
93 reviews for:
Eliza Hamilton: The Extraordinary Life and Times of the Wife of Alexander Hamilton
Tilar J. Mazzeo
3.86 AVERAGE
informative
medium-paced
The scholarship in this book is really great. I have two major complaints. First, while the beginning and end of the book are solely focused on Eliza, the majority of the middle is actually focused on Alexander Hamilton’s actions; both as told in, and in a contradictory way to, the musical Hamilton. Second, the author’s thesis in this book does not analyze Eliza’s life as a woman at the turn of the century and revolutionary war, but yet again turns its focus to Alexander Hamilton’s actions.
It’s incredibly well written, but I was expecting and hoping for a biography more centralized on the titular figure.
It’s incredibly well written, but I was expecting and hoping for a biography more centralized on the titular figure.
adventurous
challenging
informative
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced
I was so excited when I found out about this book. A biography for Elizabeth Schuyler Hamilton? Anyone who has any liking for Hamilton would no doubt be over the moon for such a thing. In this case, though, I was profoundly disappointed with what I found. Shoddy research, poor editing, and and crappy writing and general made reading this book an exercise in pain. I wanted to bash my head against the wall in sheer frustration from the first page to the last.
First and foremost is the writer's theory that the affair between Alexander Hamilton and Maria Reynolds never happened and that it was a cover up for financial improprieties committed by Hamilton at the behest of his wife's family. Um... what? Seriously? Several other people have already torn this idea apart in their own reviews, so I won't go over every single hole that can be poked in the theory. Instead, I just ask where is the actual evidence? Hamilton's conduct within the Treasury was investigated multiple times both during his tenure and after he left office. No evidence was ever found. Even Albert Gallatin, who was Thomas Jefferson's Secretary of the Treasury and absolutely *no* fan of Hamilton's, tore the Treasury apart looking for proof at Jefferson's behest and found nothing. There was no hint at all that Hamilton did anything wrong, and Gallatin admitted as much (much to Jefferson's supposed disappointment).
Hamilton's opponents were all claiming that the affair was a cover story. Well, of course they would! An affair, while reprehensible, would not in itself bring Hamilton down. But insider trading? Yeah, that would do it. And really, the author's assertion that she came to this conclusion simply because she could not imagine "the Eliza she knew" would stay with Hamilton if he truly had betrayed her? Um, hate to break it to you, but it happened all the time in that time period. Heck, it happens now. People make the choice to stay with an unfaithful partner all the time, for their own individual reasons. In Eliza's case, while divorce was technically an option (since divorce was permitted in New York for cases of adultery), it would have been an enormous scandal, something Eliza was keen to avoid. Not to mention, if she went through and sought a divorce, she would have lost everything, including her children. Even judges who hated Hamilton would not have upended the tradition of the time that kept children under the aegis of their father, since the father was better able to provide for them than the mother. If she divorced Hamilton, Eliza would have been left with nothing. That alone offers an explanation of why she wouldn't have left him after the affair and his publication of the gory details of it.
And honestly, if Hamilton was profiting off of his position, where did his ill-gotten gains go? He left public service poorer than when he went in, and spent the next several years trying to rebuild the family's finances. He then used a lot of that money to finance the construction of the family home, The Grange, and ended up leaving Eliza neck-deep in debt when he was killed. And Phillip Schuyler was also supposed to have benefited, and yet he couldn't afford to pay off his kid's gambling debts? Not to mention, he also died with very little to leave his children (almost no cash, just land - which was promptly sold). None of this makes one lick of sense.
In addition to this, there are the errors. The claim that Eliza had waited fifty-five years to be reunited with Hamilton? Uh, he died in 1804. Eliza died in 1854. That is fifty years. Basic math here, people. Claiming that Eliza Hamilton Holly was "twice a widow"? Since when? She married Sydney Holly, and that's it. Don't even get me started on the family tree provided in the first pages of the book. *eyeroll*
Then there's the writing. When I started reading this, I was immediately disappointed to find the whole damn thing written in a fictionalized style. One of the reviewers says that it "reads like a novel". That isn't exactly something I want to hear when it comes to a biography. I don't mind when it's a paragraph or two, when the author wants to 'set the stage' or something, but to have the whole thing read like a really bad historical novel was deeply disappointing.
By the time I got to the part I had been looking forward to the most, Eliza's life *after* Hamilton, I was disappointed to find it so short, only about fifty-odd pages. WTF? This is a biography of Elizabeth Schuyler Hamilton, and yet nearly half of her life only takes up a tiny fraction of the book? And given the shoddiness of the rest of the book, I didn't feel like I could trust anything said in this section either, though I was desperate to learn more about Eliza's relationships with her kids in those later years.
Please, someone actually make a serious attempt to write this woman's life story. One that doesn't consider blogs on the Internet credible resources.
First and foremost is the writer's theory that the affair between Alexander Hamilton and Maria Reynolds never happened and that it was a cover up for financial improprieties committed by Hamilton at the behest of his wife's family. Um... what? Seriously? Several other people have already torn this idea apart in their own reviews, so I won't go over every single hole that can be poked in the theory. Instead, I just ask where is the actual evidence? Hamilton's conduct within the Treasury was investigated multiple times both during his tenure and after he left office. No evidence was ever found. Even Albert Gallatin, who was Thomas Jefferson's Secretary of the Treasury and absolutely *no* fan of Hamilton's, tore the Treasury apart looking for proof at Jefferson's behest and found nothing. There was no hint at all that Hamilton did anything wrong, and Gallatin admitted as much (much to Jefferson's supposed disappointment).
Hamilton's opponents were all claiming that the affair was a cover story. Well, of course they would! An affair, while reprehensible, would not in itself bring Hamilton down. But insider trading? Yeah, that would do it. And really, the author's assertion that she came to this conclusion simply because she could not imagine "the Eliza she knew" would stay with Hamilton if he truly had betrayed her? Um, hate to break it to you, but it happened all the time in that time period. Heck, it happens now. People make the choice to stay with an unfaithful partner all the time, for their own individual reasons. In Eliza's case, while divorce was technically an option (since divorce was permitted in New York for cases of adultery), it would have been an enormous scandal, something Eliza was keen to avoid. Not to mention, if she went through and sought a divorce, she would have lost everything, including her children. Even judges who hated Hamilton would not have upended the tradition of the time that kept children under the aegis of their father, since the father was better able to provide for them than the mother. If she divorced Hamilton, Eliza would have been left with nothing. That alone offers an explanation of why she wouldn't have left him after the affair and his publication of the gory details of it.
And honestly, if Hamilton was profiting off of his position, where did his ill-gotten gains go? He left public service poorer than when he went in, and spent the next several years trying to rebuild the family's finances. He then used a lot of that money to finance the construction of the family home, The Grange, and ended up leaving Eliza neck-deep in debt when he was killed. And Phillip Schuyler was also supposed to have benefited, and yet he couldn't afford to pay off his kid's gambling debts? Not to mention, he also died with very little to leave his children (almost no cash, just land - which was promptly sold). None of this makes one lick of sense.
In addition to this, there are the errors. The claim that Eliza had waited fifty-five years to be reunited with Hamilton? Uh, he died in 1804. Eliza died in 1854. That is fifty years. Basic math here, people. Claiming that Eliza Hamilton Holly was "twice a widow"? Since when? She married Sydney Holly, and that's it. Don't even get me started on the family tree provided in the first pages of the book. *eyeroll*
Then there's the writing. When I started reading this, I was immediately disappointed to find the whole damn thing written in a fictionalized style. One of the reviewers says that it "reads like a novel". That isn't exactly something I want to hear when it comes to a biography. I don't mind when it's a paragraph or two, when the author wants to 'set the stage' or something, but to have the whole thing read like a really bad historical novel was deeply disappointing.
By the time I got to the part I had been looking forward to the most, Eliza's life *after* Hamilton, I was disappointed to find it so short, only about fifty-odd pages. WTF? This is a biography of Elizabeth Schuyler Hamilton, and yet nearly half of her life only takes up a tiny fraction of the book? And given the shoddiness of the rest of the book, I didn't feel like I could trust anything said in this section either, though I was desperate to learn more about Eliza's relationships with her kids in those later years.
Please, someone actually make a serious attempt to write this woman's life story. One that doesn't consider blogs on the Internet credible resources.
informative
slow-paced
It was a an interesting read overall. A biography that was written more like fiction (also included a lot of fiction). Luckily the reviews warned me that it was more of a novel than a biography so I wasn't as annoyed. But this also made it easier to get through. There wasn't really much of the "extraordinary" focused on until the last chapters of the book. Up until then I felt like she was the typical wife of her times. Suffering the birth of lots of children and death of a few. Having to deal with her husband's wants and needs over her own. Feeling small compared to those around her. And smiling through it. It wasn't until Alexander's death that she became her own person. I wish more had been focused on her long life after Alexander. I learned some things and I finished the book without feeling like I suffered through it. So that's something.
emotional
informative
slow-paced
3.5 Stars
I enjoyed learning more about Eliza Hamilton's life that I didn't already know about. I also enjoyed the section of the book that talked about the Reynolds Pamphlet and the controversy over that during its time period.
I enjoyed learning more about Eliza Hamilton's life that I didn't already know about. I also enjoyed the section of the book that talked about the Reynolds Pamphlet and the controversy over that during its time period.
Well written. Interesting life story, especially her life after Alexander died.