Book Description

The bitter and protracted struggle between President Thomas Jefferson and Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall defined the basic constitutional relationship between the executive and judicial branches of government. More than one hundred fifty years later, their clashes still reverberate in constitutional debates and political battles.

In this dramatic and fully accessible account of these titans of the early republic and their fiercely held ideas, James F. Simon brings to life the early history of the nation and sheds new light on the highly charged battle to balance the powers of the federal government and the rights of the states. A fascinating look at two of the nation's greatest statesmen and shrewdest politicians, What Kind of Nation presents a cogent, unbiased assessment of their lasting impact on American government. ... Read more

Reviews (21)

Solid But Not Deep
This book is written for a broad audience and aimed at exploring one of the oldest and most persistent problems in American history; the proper role of the Federal Government. Simon frames this book as a conflict between Jefferson, representing those who supported a weaker central government and emphasized the importance of individual states, and John Marshall, the great Chief Justice who led the Supreme Court to establish its critical role as arbiter of constitutional questions. The Marshall court's work strengthened the importance not only of the Supreme Court but of the Federal Government in general. This is not a new story, indeed, most of what Simon describes is the standard understanding of this period of our history. Simon is a good writer who describes the politics and legal issues quite well. His description and analysis of the behavior of the Marshall court is shrewd, emphasizing Marshall's careful attention to both politics and crucial legal issues. For example, it is clear that Marshall worked very hard to maintain unanimity among the justices, even for difficult decisions. Similarly, many of his important decisions were crafted to simultaneously achieve the goal of establishing his brand of moderate Federalism while avoiding inflammatory political consequences. Readers will finish this book with an increased appreciation for Marshall's considerable intellect and remarkable political skills. Beyond this, the book is disappointing in terms of explaining the wellsprings of these conflicts and important aspects of the debate. I think the emphasis on the rivalry between Jefferson and Marshall, which Simon probably chose as a framing device, actually tends to limit understanding of the nature of this conflict. While I respect Simon's desire to produce a relatively concise and accessible book, some aspects deserve enlargement. For example, Jefferson found the Court's tendency to rely on Common Law traditions irksome, believing the Court should have been more deferential to the wished of state legislatures. Does this represent a conflict between individuals like Jefferson whose primary intellectual influences came from the British Enlightenment versus a legal culture that grew up in the shadow of the great British Common Law theorists? To what extent did individual experience of the Revolution influence subsequent political positions? Jefferson spent the war as governor of Virginia or abroad. Marshall, in contrast, was an officer in the Continental Army and experienced in very concrete ways the inadequacies of the confederation government that preceded the establishment of our present constitution. This book is a good point of departure for individuals unfamiliar with this period of our history but further reading will be needed for anyone who really wishes to understand our early history. I recommend the The Age of Federalism by Elkins and McKitrick, a superb treatment of the Federalist period, as a starting point.

Thomas Jefferson as Adversary
On a recent vacation to Colonial Williamsburg and Monticello, my 14-year-old nephew commented that Thomas Jefferson didn't get along with Alexander Hamilton. The four adults accompanying him replied patronizingly that Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr certainly didn't get along, but didn't remember anything between Hamilton and Jefferson...

Of course, my nephew was absolutely correct. In an effort to rectify my obvious educational deficiency, I immediately embarked on a reading plan which led me to "What Kind of Nation", where I discovered that Thomas Jefferson also didn't along with John Marshall, the fourth Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.

By the time I got to this book I had a pretty good feel for the politics of the period, having read "Founding Brothers" by Joseph Ellis, "Founding Father: Rediscovering George Washington" by Richard Brookhiser, "Alexander Hamilton: American" by Richard Brookhiser and "James Madison" by Garry Wills. I believe this background helped me to maximize my enjoyment of "What Kind of Nation" because I was able to focus on Marshall's brilliance and perseverance in establishing the authority of the Supreme Court on an equal footing with the executive and legislative branches of the federal government. Jefferson's antics were amusing, but old news. The way that Marshall dealt with Jefferson who was, after all, the President of the United States during the first 8 years of Marshall's 34 years as Chief Justice, is fascinating.

James Simon does a great job of telling the story without getting overly technical with the legal side of things. I think he strikes just the right balance, so that the lay reader (i.e., non-lawyer) can appreciate the significance of Marshall's extraordinary accomplishments.

One of America's great rivlaries
In all great conflicts, North vs. South, Ali vs. Fraser, Lakers vs. Celtics, and Jefferson vs. Marshall, it is difficult to remain neutral and unbiased. Simon clearly sides with John Marshall in the epic struggle between our nations Third President and Fourth Chief Justice, but Simon's partiality to Marshall does not detract from the accuracy of this book.

Readers will come away with a solid understanding of what fueled the fire of this great relationship of adversaries. Using myself as an example, I strongly disagreed with the SCOTUS' recent ruling against the Texas sodomy law in Lawrence v. Texas, and though I still disagree with the decision, I now clearly understand how Marshall set the precedent for SCOTUS to be the final arbiter for all things judicial and clearly placed the state courts into the role of subservient.

At times, this book is rather dry, but Simon successfully imparts a good flow of information. This book isn't for everyone, but is essential reading for the pre-law student or anyone interested in the relationship between these two monumental early Americans. Also, for anyone who, like me, is a state's rights advocate, this book gives tremendous insight into how the judiciary became the monarchial behemoth we are saddled with today.

Whether you are a Jeffersonian style state's rights advocate, or a Marshall style Federalist, you will finish this book with a greater understanding of things became the way they are.

a riveting, but slanted account
Mr. Simon has nicely outlined the titantic struggle between two cousins and their different views on the proper government and role of that government in America. This account is fairly readable, but dips into legalistic prose at times. The most remarkable aspect of the book is how little these two relatives shared in common. A point of detraction is that Mr. Simon fails to point out the many basic things the two cousins must have shared - like patriotism, belief in popular sovereignty, etc. Also, Mr. Simon seems to take a rather negative view of Jefferson. This is rather voguish these days, but I am not entirely convinced by the evidence Mr. Simon suggested. Suffice it to say that this is the best comparison account available that chronicles these two men and their opposing views.

How We Got Here
If you have read the Founding Fathers and the Constitution, and wonder how we got from there to here, this is an excellent book. It traces the evolution of the Supreme Court during the early years of our republic.

It frames this evolution in the thoughts of Thomas Jefferson and John Marshall. We see Jefferson's thinking that the Supreme Court would be some sort of advisory board, and that federal law should not reign supreme over state law. On the other side, we see John Marshall's strongly held beliefs that the Supreme Court should have equal power with Congress and the President, and that federal law should be considered superior to state law.

We see the various court battles that brought about judicial review and that cemented John Marshall's views as American policy.

A very interesting and thoughtful book. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Marshall the Judge as Witness for Washington
This is the only Washington biography written by a contemporary who knew him and served with him in the Army. Certainly the longest Presidential biography I know of written by a U.S. Supreme Court Justice. According to Senator Beveridge's later biography of John Marshall, Marshall wrote it in installments, and sold it through the U.S. Post Offic distribution network, to make enough money to pay off his massive Virginia land purchsse which in turn enabled Marshall's children to live out their lives free of the need to write books or make land deals. And it worked that way. But that's not all this is.

The first entire volume says little about Washington, because Marshall felt he needed to set the stage with a condensed history of the colonies prior to Washington. Few of Washington's later biographers went to such subsequent introductory lengths, but then Marshall's law practice ended up acquainting him with the early pre-history of the deeds and conveyances of Virginia, the further elaboration of which can be interpreted as enveloping the rest of the colonies.

This is also a history of the U.S. Army, and how it fought and starved in successive cycles which are described in minute detail exceeding most other accounts. Some of this covers organized military campaigns preceding the declaration of independence, the scope of which I had not heretofore realized by undergoing annual waves of pilgrim-study in "My Early Education."

Leading and embodying this story of land and armies, and ideas, Marshall gives us Washington, illuminated most clearly by excerpts from Washington's own letters. Marshall also gives us Marshall, distilling out of military examples and instances of weak government preceding 1789, potent arguments for increased federal power to do the things our federal government has since done quite well: raise armies, raise taxes, subdue the Indians, kick out the European powers, build a strong navy, and take no back talk from smallish tyrants resentful of centralized governmental power directly and simultaneously exercised on each citizen, and on each state.

When Hamilton wrote that we need "energy in the Executive" he had to have been thinking of Washington, and Marshall catalogs this energy with meticulous documentation of each British officer leading campaigns against us, each subordinate officer on our side under Washinton's command, and how the constant maneuver of armies up and down the length of our seaboard was accomplished--usually without many shoes and without much dry powder.

So Marshall knowing Washington probably insulated him from too much disconnected iconography, and his writing is free of modern fixations on negative or unseemly personal or pychographic tidbits of trivia. Modern readers are left to cling to factual reporting of how Washington handled this British Lord or that recalcitrant congress.

There's a lot here in all five volumes, and the flow of the over-written parts isn't that bad once you get used to it. When one man had such a central role in all of the key events of our country's founding, and rode out the formation into its institutional phase, thereafter to die in bed at home, Marshall may not have been able to write it any other way than to go over all of the events, to catch the essence of the man.

Neat discovery: LaFayette was only 24 years old while commanding the French at the battle of Yorktown. Marshall quotes from the letters of Cornwallis (or maybe it was Sir Henry Clinton) who refers to LaFayette as "the boy." This is the same boy who later presented Washington with the key to the Bastille, which today hangs on the wall of the stairway of Mount Vernon going up to the second floor. ... Read more

Book Description

Reviews (17)

This book is a must read for anyone US legal history!
John Marshall defined American law, politics and power. This book paints a vivid picture of who Marshall was, and why he is still important today. The author does an excellent job stating the facts and letting the reader decide for her/himself whether or not Marshall did the right or wrong in the very important decisions he made. This book is enlightening and well written. Marshall's life is wonderfully told through the authors use of clear and concise writing. This book is excellent. It clarifies many misconceptions of this great man who came out of a generation that claims many great men. Marshall may be the least understood of them all, but he certainly is no less important than any of his contemporaries in forming and defining the United States of America.

Mike
This is a good read about a fascinating individual. John Marshall is clearly one of the most underrated shapers of our country and this book goes a long way in providing the texture and context of his life. The author does a good job of balancing history with legal scholarship and I believe that this is worthwhile for both the "lay-man" and the "law-man". I did believe that the author abridged the content a bit too much at times(for example, he did not cover Marshall's point of view on the Declaration of Independence or Articles of Confederation, and he covered the last 12 years of Marshall's life as Chief Justice in less than 50 pages), but overall, it was a solid investment of my time.

Complete picture of Marshall the man, not just the jurist
This is one of the best biographies I have read in recent years. While Marshall is best remembered today as the great Chief Justice and the originator of the notion of judicial review, Smith very much shows that there was more to the man, both public & private, than the few nuggets we all got in our Intro to American History classes.

In fact, the bulk of the book deals not with Marshall's 35 years on the bench, but with his other activities as a soldier, politician, diplomat and Secretary of State. One is left with profound admiration for Marshall's political skills while in Congress and in the Cabinet. As a moderate Federalist from Virginia, Marshall was in a tight spot, to say the least. His state was increasingly dominated with Jeffersonian Republicans who had little trust for the man, but on the other hand, the High Federalists from New England were more than a little suspicious of any Virginian, even one of their own party. Smith portrays a skillful politician & deal-maker who is able to walk deftly between the two camps and actually managed to get a few things done. One cannot help but wonder if the Federalist Party might have survived if Marshall had been at its helm or had been a Federalist candidate for president.

Marshall's time as a diplomat, spent in France during the years of the Directorate, also reveal him to be a canny negotiator who was more than equal to the task of dealing Talleyrand, the ultimate conniver of his time. Despite his somewhat rustic origins, Marshall was quite capable of adapting to the surroundings of the most cosmopolitan city in Europe, but without yielding to the corruption expected by the French bureaucracy.

All of this work by Smith shows that Marshall did not enter the Chief Justice's chair as a blank slate --- in fact, he already had a lifetime's experience in a myriad of different professions, and this no doubt contributed in large part to his great influence on the Court's development. I would suspect that his background is more impressive and varied than any of the Chief Justices that have succeeded him.

Unlike a lot of judicial histories, Smith does not get bogged down in the minutiae of the court decisions. In fact, relatively little time is spent discussing the decisions themselves, except for those that truly could be considered definitive. 35 years of court decisions could easily have made this an unworkable biography for Smith, who spends more time examining how Marshall, using his experience as a diplomat & legislator, was able to lead the court effectively and get it to render, for the most part, unanimous decisions.

Although Marshall & Thomas Jefferson were well-known as cousins who had a very strong mutual dislike of each other, Smith does not beat the reader over the head with this fact. Nor does Smith, despite his obvious partiality for Marshall, engage in excessive Jefferson-bashing. If anything, he gives Jefferson the benefit of the doubt, particularly in regards to the 1805 impeachment of Justice Chase. Smith regards the affair as being largely the making of rogue Congressional Republicans such as John Randolph of Roanoke (another cousin), although many historians believe that Jefferson had a much greater hand in instigating the affair.

The most Smith will criticize Jefferson on is his capacity for self-delusion, particularly where it concerned the Supreme Court. Jefferson came to regard the Marshall Court as an instrument of the Federalists, despite the fact that 5 of the 7 justices were Republican appointees. I find this to be an amusing parallel to modern-day criticism of the Court by some pundits, who view it as dominated by liberals --- despite the fact that 7 of the 9 justices have been appointed by Republican presidents. Evidently, some things never change.

This would also be a useful book for those critics of the court who feel that justices are too politically involved these days. A study of Court's history shows that rarely have the justices been political eunuchs, and certainly Marshall was no exception. Many of his decisions on the court, although he was careful not to run amok with judicial authority, were calculated as parries to the thrusts to various political extremists such as Spencer Roane (who, like most of the states'-rights crowd, comes off quite badly in this book, as Smith portrays him as being hopelessly out of step with the nations' evolution). Marshall as much as anyone was responsible for defining the notion that the federal government ultimately has authority over the respective states in national matters, a notion that would be put to the test a quarter century after Marshall's death.

Not only is this an informative book, but it is also very well-written and engaging. Do not let the 700+ pages daunt you, as the narrative flows quite briskly and will not bog the reader down. For most of us who know only know Marshall in connection with Marbury vs Madison, there is a lot more to the man than that --- this book will more than fill in the blank spaces.

History at its best
I have read a critique of this book that stated the author was obviously biased towards the person of John Marshall. In a day when few politicians stand for what they believe in, it is easy for one to be cynical. Maybe, just maybe, John Marshall was a man who lived his life in a consistent manner. Jean Edward Smith has written one of the best biographies of this period of US history. It is amazing what impact John Marshall has had on our lives even today.

Where is his bill?
'Definer of a Nation" is by far the most accurate and succinct description of John Marshall. He is best known for creating the idea of judicial review which finished the circle of checks and balances in American government. He is also, without a doubt, one of the most capable and visionary legal and political thinkers to walk the earth.

This much is established without the assistance of Smith's book. What is done is a flushing of the character of Marshall. It is carried out brilliantly throughout, melding commentary with firsthand sources seamlessly. You get an idea of the person Marshall was from his hand, with Smith filling in what would be understood by the audience of intended by the Justice.

Not only is this a supurb documentary of the life of one of the most important figures in American history, but is also extremely entertaining. If you read it, you will never again have to think about how to answer the question 'if you could have a conversation with anyone, living or dead, who would it be?" ... Read more

Book Description

John Marshall (1755-1835) was arguably the most important judicial figure in American history. As the fourth chief justice of the United States Supreme Court, serving from 1801 to 1835, he helped move the court from the fringes of power to the epicenter of constitutional government. His great opinions in cases like Marbury v. Madison and McCulloch v. Maryland are still part of the working discourse of constitutional law in America. Drawing on a new and definitive edition of Marshall's papers, R. Kent Newmyer combines engaging narrative with new historiographical insights in a fresh interpretation of John Marshall's life in the law.

Newmyer vividly unfolds Marshall's early Virginia years- his Americanization in Fauquier County before the Revolution, his decision to fight for independence as "a principled soldier," and his emergence as a constitutional nationalist in the 1780s. Marshall's experience as a Federalist politician and a leading Virginia lawyer during the 1790s, Newmyer argues, defined his ideas about judicial review and the role of the Supreme Court as a curb on party-based, states'-rights radicalism.

Perhaps best known for consolidating the authority of the Supreme Court, Marshall is revealed here to have been equally skilled at crafting law that supported the emerging American market economy. He waged a lifelong struggle against champions of states'-rights constitutional theory, a struggle embodied in his personal and ideological rivalry with Thomas Jefferson.

More than the summation of Marshall's legal and institutional accomplishments, Newmyer's impressive study captures the nuanced texture of the justice's reasoning, the complexity of his mature jurisprudence, and the affinities and tensions between his system of law and the transformative age in which he lived. It substantiates Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.'s view of Marshall as the most representative figure in American law. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

John Marshall and the Heroic Age of the Supreme Court
John Marshall and the Heroic Age of the Supreme Court written by R. Kent Newmyer is a biography about the fourth Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, John Marshall. This is not just an ordinary biography, but a biography with feeling, deep understanding andcomprehensive knowledge of Marshall.

This book is, by far, the most extraordinary biography, and paints a portrait of Chief Justice Marshall, the man, with perception and details , at the same time the author does an exhaustive biography of the jurisprudence of the Marshall Court.

John Marshall, (1801-1835) was appointed to the Supreme Court by John Adams as he was leaving office. A last minute appointment and second cousin to Thomas Jefferson, Marshall served in some of the most formative years that the has ever seen. Marshall wanted to bring the court into the central picture of the government and reigned in the court from the fringes of government, Consolidating the authority of the court making the Supreme Court the final arbitor when it came to constitutional.

John Marshall was a man equal to Jefferson when it came to the challenges of office and was equally skilled at the crafting law that supported the emerging American market economy. It was Jefferson and Marshall, however who symbolized and personalized the competing constitutional persuasions of the age and brought them into explosive focus. Each had taken a stand on the great foreign and domestic issues of the 1790's; each had conflated those issues into a dispute over the meaning of the Constitution. When fate and ambition made Jefferson president and Marshall chief justice, the institutional stage was set for what is one of the most creative confrontations in American constitutional history. At stake was not just the position of the Supreme Court in American government but the place of law in republican culture.

Can you imagine being there when Marshall was giving the oath of office to Jefferson... when the new chief justice administered the oath of office to the new president on March 4, 1801. With his hand on the Bible held by Marshall, Jefferson swore to uphold the Constitution, Marshall was sure sure he was about to destroy.

This book has an engaging narrative and you seem to read the information quickly and with ease, the author's prose is extremely well-written. As for the historical information it is spot-on even the court cases are found on a listing in the back of the book. Marshall was more than a chief justice, he was priciple in the forming a United States. Marshall's institutional accomplishments are found in this impressive study. For a one volume book... this is the most comprehensive... Marshall was the most representative figure in American law. This book is well worth the money ans should be in the library of all who study American History.

Chief Justice Marshall's Conservative Nationalism
John Marshall, our nation's fourth Chief Justice, served from 1801 until 1835. He was appointed by President John Adams in one of the last and most significant acts of his administration.

Professor Kent Newmyer has written a comprehensive account of the great Chief Justice's career. The account is admirably researched and documented, drawing extensively on a new edition of Marshall's papers. It includes careful analyses of Marshall's leading opinions. Most importantly, Professor Newmyer gives a thoughtful discussion of Justice Marshall's place on the Court and on the importance of his vision of the United States for our history.

The book includes a good discussion of Marshall's role in the Revolutionary War, as a successful lawyer in Virginia, and as a landowner and extensive land speculator. But most of the book consists of a discussion of Marshall's career on the Court, his opinions, and the manner in which he shaped the Court as an institution.

While Newmyer admires his subject greatly, I found this a very balanced account. He allows that Justice Marshall did not always meet his own stated goals of separating law from politics and notes how Marshall's activities as a land speculator seemed to play a critical role in several of his leading opinions.

The discussion begins with Marbury v Madison and its role in the doctrine of judicial review. It continues with a thorough discussion of Marshall's role in the treason trial of Aaron Burr, through a discussion of the great opinions construing the Commerce Clause and Contracts Clause of the Constitution, through the Cherokee Nation opinions that Marshall wrote near the end of his tenure which established the foundation of American Indian Law. (Professor Newmyer considers these decisions Justice Marshall's proudest moment.)

The book considers Marshall's attitudes towards and opinions dealing with slavery. There is also a discussion of a series of polemical articles Justice Marshall exchanged with critics following the decision in McCollough v Maryland. Marshall's critics feared that he was giving too expansive a power to the National Government as opposed to the States. In fact, at the end of his career, Justice Marshall feared his life work had been overtaken by events with the rise of the democracy, a strong state rights movement, and the Presidency of Andrew Jackson.

Professor Newmyer sees Justice Marshall as a Burkean conservative in a new world. Marshall interpreted the Constitution broadly, yet flexibility to allow the development of individual, and national commerce and enterprise. Yet he was devoted to institutions and strongly inclined to accept the world as he found it rather than make it over in accordance with abstract principles (as he accused the supporters of the French Revolution of doing.) Newmyer writes:

Marshall spoke as a Burkean conservative, or as much of one as American circumstances allowed. He was repelled by reductionist abstractions as well as abstract idealims, even when it was couched, as was much of southern constitutionalism in terms of a mythical past. He worked from the 'given', accepted the world as it was, relished 'the disorder of experience" to borrow a phrase from Charles Rosen." (p.351)

Justice Marshall was not an original thinker, but he took the text of the Constitution, together with the Federalist, and molded it and the Court's interpretive role in a way that is with us today. He remains America's great Chief Justice. There is much for the interested reader to learn and to think through in Professor Newmyer's fine study of Justice Marshall. ... Read more

Book Description

The Cinema of John Marshall explores the life and art of the pioneering ethnographic filmmaker. Its centerpiece is an autobiographical essay in which Marshall assesses his forty-year involvement with the San peoples (Bushmen) of South Africa and his films, from the 1957 award winning ''The Hunters'' to his current work in progress, ''Death by Myth.'' The book weaves together the political economy of San dispossession, history and ethnography, personal narratives of historical importance, and expositions of film techniques and film language. The first English language study of the man and his work, The Cinema of John Marshall conveys the complex unity of Marshall's life: the filmic, the intellectual, the political, and the human. ... Read more

Amazon.com

In Brand New, Harvard Business School professor Nancy Koehn looks at six entrepreneurs and the extraordinary brands they built. The entrepreneurs include Josiah Wedgwood, Henry Heinz, Marshall Field, Estee Lauder, and Michael Dell. What interests Koehn is not so much the success that these brands enjoyed as much as the trust these household names were able to inspire in consumers. Koehn makes her study especially relevant to today's marketers in that each of the entrepreneurs she looks at developed their brand during a period of tumultuous change. For example, Wedgewood's tableware became popular during the Industrial Revolution and the emergence of the middle class; Schultz's coffee empire blossomed in the 1990s and the present-day information revolution. Part business history, part marketing manual, Brand New is a valuable study of brand development that belongs on every thoughtful marketer's bookshelf. --Harry C. Edwards ... Read more

Reviews (18)

"Brand New"-- A fresh look at branding and entrepreneurship!
Brand New is a brilliantly written book about entrepreneurs, brands, consumers, business history, and socioeconomic change. The book explores these subjects through the examples of six entrepreneurs-Josiah Wedgwood, H. J. Heinz, Marshall Field, Estée Lauder, Howard Schultz of Starbucks, and Michael Dell-and the brands and companies they created during times of economic and social change: Wedgwood during the Industrial Revolution, Heinz and Field during the Transportation and Communication Revolution of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and Lauder, Schultz, and Dell in our time.

Koehn is a perceptive historian and biographer as well as an astute analyst of brand creation, entrepreneurship, and organization-building. She explains how the entrepreneurs in her book were able to understand the economic and social change of their times and anticipate and respond to demand-side shifts. This understanding, she argues convincingly, enabled these entrepreneurs to bring to market products that consumers needed and wanted and to create meaningful, lasting connections with consumers through their brands. Koehn also focuses on the importance of these entrepreneurs as organization builders who understood that their success depended on developing organizational capabilities that supported their products and brands. Her book is very well-researched throughout, and uses primary archival documents extensively in the historical chapters on Josiah Wedgwood, H. J. Heinz, and Marshall Field. Koehn also brings her entrepreneurs and the stories of how each built his or her company and brand to life with her talent as a biographer and historian.

The book's emphasis on drawing lessons from both past and present offers many valuable insights for those interested in coming to a better understanding of brand creation, entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial management, and organization-building. Koehn's emphasis on the demand side of the economy and on entrepreneurs and companies making connections with consumers through the brand distinguishes her book as an important work of business scholarship on brands and entrepreneurship. A lively, interesting, and engaging read, Brand New is also valuable reading for anyone interested in business, economic, or social history or biography of business leaders. I highly recommend it!

Building Trust by Being Dependable When Others Aren't
Stories are the way that we all learn best. Professor Koehn has provided six meticulously detailed ones about brand development by 18th and 19th century entrepreneurs (Josiah Wedgwood, H.J. Heinz, Marshall Field) as well as 20th century ones (Estee Lauder, Howard Schultz, and Michael Dell). Almost any reader will learn details new to her or him from these cases. Each example focuses on how important brands got started on a shoestring. The book has a major weakness in that the financial details of the six businesses are too sketchy to really help understand the economics of what the entrepreneurs did.

Wedgwood improved the quality of earthenware, and changed the way that the products were used by the wealthy and the aspiring. He courted the visible elites and royalty to inspire emulation by those who could afford the products.

H.J. Heinz offered quality and convenience at a time when most preserved food products were shoddy and women did most of their own preserving.

Marshall Field courted the carriage trade who could afford to pay top dollar for top quality goods and service.

Estee Lauder provided high quality cosmetics at more affordable prices.

Howard Schultz introduced most Americans to the latte, taking coffee from being a source of caffeine to a tasteful experience.

Michael Dell changed the business model for how corporations got their computing equipment, customizing for each one just-in-time.

Having been educated in both history and in business, it is clear that Professor Koehn comes at the problem more from the historical discipline than from the business one. As a result, the book will be most appealing to those who are interested in the origins of one or more of these brands, companies, or entrepreneurs. At this level, the book is five-star entertainment.

Business readers will find that relevant details are often missing. For example, Wedgwood staged very expensive exhibitions of his wares. You wonder how he could afford to do this, and finally learn near the end of the study that the company had enormous profit margins. H.J. Heinz is described as being very successful in a predecessor company, yet he goes bankrupt. Some information about his margins would probably have revealed that he had low margins. The information is not included. There are bits and pieces of ratios and annual revenue numbers, but the financial side of these examples is clearly underdeveloped. That's a shame, since they all built up important enterprises on a shoestring.

The choice of cases seems flawed from a business perspective. Five of the six are consumer products and services. Of the five, all appealed initially to high income people when good products and services were largely unavailable. Forming brands in such an environment is no great trick. Readers would have learned more about brand building from cases where the competition was fierce from people who were providing exactly the same choices.

As a result, from a business perspective, this is a three star book. I averaged the five and the three star ratings out to reach my four star conclusion.

After you read this book, you should think about how you decide which brands to trust, and how you go about establishing the trustworthiness of brands that you represent. What else is important before trust can be earned? In particular, pay attention to the significance of establishing improved business models (something that all six entrepreneurs had in common).

Make your brand stand alone in its desirability in the eyes of all who see it!

a very useful and interesting business history book
Did you know that in 1859 Americans consumed about eight pounds of coffee per year, per capita? Or that by 1939 it was fourteen pounds? If this is your cup of tea, then I think you will like this book. This is not a criticism, I liked the book because it looks at the growth in demand which was supplied by the entrepreneurs who formed the brands described in the book. Indeed this demand-side view is part of the book that made the biggest impact on me.
Some of this is obvious, but somewhat in the backround of our knowledge - "between 1860 and 1920 the population of the US grew from 31.5 to 107 million" - and some of this is well extracted in this book - e.g. "in 1844 (when Henry J. Heinz was born)less than 10% of American's lived in towns of greater than 2,500 population, 75 years later (when he died) 50% were urban dwellers and 20% lived in cities of greater than 250,000 people". Koehn builds up this demand side very well in each of the six cases she uses to illustrate who entrepreneurs build up branded business - Wedgwood , Heinz, Marshall-Fields, Estee Lauder, Starbucks and Dell.
Koehn, a Harvard business historian, is also quite good at showing how developing technology is put to use to serve this demand (or does it create it?) - "In 1830 it took three weeks to get calico from New York to Chicago, in 1860 it took three days, by 1880 ... less than 24 hours"
Again we all knew the importance of the railroad, but here its phrased in a way that makes sense of the dynamic growth and gentrification of the Mid West. She illustrates well the need that urbanisation created for prepared food that could be trusted and describes very well the increasing sophistication of industrial level food preparation - " by the 1860;s the introduction of calcium chloride to boiling water cut sterilization times from five hours to 25 minutes". She can even make innovations in canning technology sound exciting.

So much for the good stuff, I did find the tone of the descriptions of each entrepreneurs a bit fawning. Each had the feel of a business case, with the usual tone of awe and deference to the wit and wisdom of the main characters. With the exception of the Starbucks case - where Howard Shultz openly tells of his mistakes and wrong turnings - each case seems to highlight the wisdom of the main character, whereas it seems to me its their determination that marks them out, more than anything else. Henry Heinz went bankrupt three times in food products, before he became successful, Michael Dell was still seen as a cloner into the late 1980's.
Koehn makes no judgements about the more unpleasant side of this determination - Estee Lauder staged a meeting with the Duke of Windsor, which she had photographed and publicised, in order to make it appear she had high-society connections, Josiah Wedgwood supplied free gifts to royalty in the certain knowledge that the aspirations of the middle classes to emulate royalty would drive demand for this his products.
There are good insights into how these individuals drove modern marketing techniques - Wedgwood emphasized showrooms, Estee Lauder the free gift. And all had tremendous energy for customer service and production detail. However in each of the early cases we are told that 20th Century techniques were unknown to the industry " Brand marketing was virtually unheard of in the 18th Century" [ Wedgwood]; " Between 1869 and 1899, real per capita income increased at an annual compound rate of 2.1%. Henry Heinz had no access to these statistics. These numbers are based on economic concepts developed in the 20th Century". This kind of clumsiness crops up in each case, ok we get the point that these pioneers instinctively did something which is now solidified into great theory, but surely this point could be illustrated with more deftness.

This apart, a very useful and interesting book, a book for anyone interested in the general history of business. Some excellent details, too much fawning and praise too little criticism of the central characters who built the brands. A fascinating story.
If you liked this book, check out books by Arthur Chandler and John Drewer.

One final fact, Charles Darwin had the time and money to devote to his famous voyage on the Beagle - which laid the basis for the theory of Evolution - because his wife's grandfather was Joshua Wedgwood. Was this financial evolution at work?

Overview of successful entrepreneurial approaches to brands
Koehn has produced a weighty and informative look at the way successful entrepreneurs have used brands to achieve a number of goals. These goals include long-term differentiation from competitors, internal quality control, profit margin protection, and facilitation of additional product introduciton.

To make her case, she chose three cases from the past (Wedgwood, Heinz, and Marshall Field) and three cases from the present (Estee Lauder, Starbucks, and Dell Computers). Finally, she concludes the book with a chapter which addresses the issue of historical forces and entrepreneurial agency.

I particularly found the cases from the past persuasive in their argumentation for a long-term differentiating factor in brand. The newer cases are obviously harder to make in that (particularly with Starbucks and Dell) how long-term the success will be remains to be seen. One of the best features of the book is the depth with which she treats each case-- she provides enough information to build her thesis (and often entertain with the anecdotes) but not so much that the book becomes bogged down. The excellent footnotes provide whatever's necessary to someone looking for further information.

One minor quarrel is that I would have liked to see the further reading pulled out into a better organized bibliography. There were obviously quite a few good sources scattered amongst the footnotes and if you were interested in a particular subject matter it required some patience to pull all of the citations out.

Brands Old: Inspiration for Brands Yet to Be
As she completed her research and then began to write this book, Nancy Koehn made several important decisions. First, she placed her primary objective in clear focus: to explain "how entrepreneurs earned customers' trust." Next, she limited her attention to only six. Finally, she then examined them within an historical context from the late-18th century until the present time. As Koehn observes, "Before 1750,...most Britons ate off wood or pewter plates. Then came Josiah Wedgwood. In antebellum America, the majority of women made their own pickles. Then came Henry Heinz. Until the Civil War, urban retailing was a specialized activity with a wide variety of small shops offering particular kinds of goods. Then came department store entrepreneurs such as Marshall Field." It is important to stress that Koehn is a biographer and cultural historian only to the extent that the material she provides helps to advance the narrative of her core themes: how six individual entrepreneurs dealt with the "imperatives" to quality goods at reasonable prices, communicate the virtues of her or his products to potential buyers in effective ways and thereby maintain and grow a viable customer base, and, how to develop organizational capabilities to learn about their respective customers and then earn their trust.

Before 1945, Koehn observes, "few American women wore premium lipstick or facial creams, and those who did [when they could] bought them in beauty shops along with elaborate treatments administered by trained cosmeticians. Then came Estee Lauder. Prior to the late 1970s, Americans bought ground coffee mostly in one-pound cans sold in supermarkets and supplied by large food processors. Then came [Howard Schultz and] Starbucks. Before 1980, most businesses used only typewriters and copy machines for paperwork. Large companies relied on mainframe and midsize computers to handle extensive calculations and data processing. Only a small number of households owned a personal computer or printer. Few if any of these users expected to be able to specify a particular computer's configuration. Then came Apple, IBM, Compaq, and Michael Dell." It is also important to stress that each of the six entrepreneurs whom Koehn discusses fully understood what rapid social and economic change in their respective era meant for consumers' needs and desires. Moreover, as she carefully explains, all six used their knowledge of both the supply and demand sides of the prevailing economy to create high-quality goods,, meaningful brands, and other connections with customers..." and they built elite organizations that worked to [in italics] satisfy and then [in italics] anticipate buyers' changing preferences."

In Chapter 1, Koehn provides a brilliant overview on "Entrepreneurs and Consumers," then devotes an entire chapter to each of the six entrepreneurs. In her final chapter, she shifts her attention to "Historical Forces and Entrepreneurial Agency," followed by 104 pages of notes. In that final chapter, Koehn points out that the six entrepreneurs "lived and worked in different contexts. Yet they all shared a powerful gift: the ability to discern how economic and social change affected consumer needs and wants. They also understood that these demand-side shifts presented critical business opportunities -- opportunities that each exploited by creating new, best-of-class goods and strong brands." She goes on to suggest that they were "institution builders who were not interested in riding the wave of a short-lived trend or forcing their young brands on buyers. They wanted to [in italics] earn consumers' trust and keep it."

It remains to seen which entrepreneurs emerge during the next few years but it seems certain that they will also encounter "economic and social change affected consumer needs and wants" and in a global marketplace yet to be developed. There is much that they -- and we -- can learn from Josiah Wedgwood, H.J. Heinz, Marshall Field, Estee Lauder, Howard Schultz, and Michael Dell. Thanks to Nancy Koehn, those "lessons" are provided in a single volume, one which will continue to be of interest and value for decades to come.

Those who share my high regard for this book are urged to read Wolf's The Entertainment Economy, Schmitt's Experiential Marketing, Gobe's Emotional Branding, Gilmore and Pine's The Experience Economy, and Brands: The New Wealth Creators co-edited by Hart and Murphy. ... Read more

Book Description

Book Description

This study draws on critical historical analysis and contemporary language theory to illuminate John Marshall's jurisprudence and political philosophy in new ways. It challenges both liberal and conservative views and it defines Marshall's constitutional interpretations, political ideology, and pragmatic interests anew. It shows how his pragmatism and "republican revisionism" impacted decisions about matters of property, contract, and debt. Legal scholars, political scientists, and historians interested in law and language, 19th-century history, and republicanism will find this study especially interesting. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Excellent chronology of topics
Let me first confess that I am the named research aide who assisted Professor Johnson on this book. But what I didn't have anything to do with was his useful organization of the caselaw into topical segments. Not only is this book a useful work for the reasons stated by the other reviewer(s), but if someone wants to know the Court's holdings over time in a number of areas, such as the law of nations or separation of powers, this is a useful book. Professor Johnson organizes the book so that a researcher may use it to glean trends on a particular topic rather than presenting a jumble of topics and leaving it up to the reader to discern the development of the law on a given issue.

I might also note that Professor Johnson's conducted meticulous research over many years organizing Supreme Court decisions by topic in a fashion only rivaled by West Publishing.

Excellent legal analysis
For those who wish to read a biography of our greatest chief justice, this is not the book to read. For those who are interested in the jurisprudence of C.J. Marshall, this book provides an outstanding introduction. The book provides compelling, and accurate, evidence that in addition to John Marshall being a great jurist, he was also, and foremost, a founding father -- one of the few who realized the potential for our great nation. While it can be successfully argued that at times Marshall expanded the powers of the Supreme Court beyond those intended by the authors of the Constitution, the book also provides a compelling argument for the necessity of expanding those powers. Johnson successfully reasons that, where it not for Marshall's ability to occasionaly read "beyond" the strict guidelines of the Constitution, the role of judicial review (and hence our constitutional guarantees) would not exist today. Overall, an excellent study into a chief justice whose concerns where not those of partisanship -- but rather those of aiding a fledgling country through its formative years. ... Read more

Book Description

John Marshall remains one of the towering figures in the landscape of American law. From the Revolution to the age of Jackson, he played a critical role in defining the "province of the judiciary" and the constitutional limits of legislative action. In this masterly study, Charles Hobson clarifies the coherence and thrust of Marshall's jurisprudence while keeping in sight the man as well as the jurist.

Hobson argues that contrary to his critics, Marshall was no ideologue intent upon appropriating the lawmaking powers of Congress. Rather, he was deeply committed to a principled jurisprudence that was based on a steadfast devotion to a "science of law" richly steeped in the common law tradition. As Hobson shows, such jurisprudence governed every aspect of Marshall's legal philosophy and court opinions, including his understanding of judicial review.

The chief justice, Hobson contends, did not invent judicial review (as many have claimed) but consolidated its practice by adapting common law methods to the needs of a new nation. In practice, his use of judicial review was restrained, employed almost exclusively against acts of the state legislatures. Ultimately, he wielded judicial review to prevent the states from undermining the power of a national government still struggling to establish sovereignty at home and respect abroad.

No chief justice and only one associate justice (William Douglas) served longer on the Supreme Court. But, as Hobson clearly shows, Marshall's deserved place in the pantheon of great American jurists rests far more upon principles than longevity. This book better than any other tells us why that's true and worthy of our attention. ... Read more

Book Description

This three-volume work constitutes a comprehensive scholarly edition of the correspondence of the English economist, Alfred Marshall (1842-1924), one of the leading figures in the development of economics and the founder of the Cambridge School of Economics.The edition fills a long- standing gap in the history of economic thought and contains hitherto unpublished material.Notable for their frankness and spontaneity, Marshall's letters provide much new information about his views on economic, social and political issues, his struggles to promote the teaching of economics at the University of Cambridge, and his relations with colleagues there and elsewhere. ... Read more

Book Description

Like Abigail Adams, Malvina Shanklin Harlan witnessed—and gently influenced—national history from the unique perspective of a political leader’s wife. Her husband, Supreme Court Justice John Marshall Harlan (1833–1911), played a central role in some of the most significant civil rights decisions of his era, including his lone dissenting opinion in Plessy v. Ferguson, the infamous case that endorsed separate but equal segregation. And for fifty-seven years he was married to a woman who was busy making a mental record oftheir eventful lives.

After Justice Harlan’s death in 1911, Malvina wrote Some Memories of a Long Life, 1854–1911, as a testament to her husband’s accomplishments and to her own. The memoir begins with Malvina, the daughter of passionate abolitionists, becoming the teenage bride of John Marshall Harlan, whose family owned more than a dozen slaves. Malvina depicts her life in antebellum Kentucky, and her courageous defense of the Harlan homestead during the Civil War. She writes of her husband’s ascent in legal circles and his eventual appointment to the Supreme Court in 1877, where he was the author of opinions that continued to influence American race relations deep into the twentieth century. Yet Some Memories is more than a wife’s account of a famous and powerful man. It chronicles the remarkable evolution of a young woman from Indiana who became a keen observer of both her family’s life and that of her nation.

When Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg began researching the history of the women associated with the Supreme Court, the Library of Congress sent her Malvina Harlan’s unpublished manuscript. Recalling Abigail Adams’s order to “remember the ladies,” Justice Ginsburg has guided its long journey from forgotten document to published book. Some Memories of a Long Life includes a Foreword by Justice Ginsburg, as well as an Afterword by historian Linda Przybyszewski and an Epilogue of the Harlan legacy by Amelia Newcomb. According to Library Journal, “This is the sort of book you call a publishing event.” ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Not very interesting
There are only a few pages worth reading in this volume, and the editor who passed it up the first time ( around 1914) knew his business. She is at her most interesting when describing some of the minutae and customs of 19th century life. When she starts descibing people, places and events, she falls flat. Very superficial, very stereotyped. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Reconciling the emotional wounds of the Vietnam War
This is a book written by the grandson of the famous military historian, General S.L.A. "SLAM" Marshall.It conerns allegations made about his grandfather, that appear to be true.Allegations that make his grandfather out to be a person who does NOT lie about catching the fish,but each time the story is told, the fish gets bigger and bigger.Atleast, that was my impression.But, it's also about how John DouglasMarshall, the grandson and First Lietenant in the US Army, disappoints andhurts his grandfather by filing for and receiving a Concientious Objectorstatus in 1969, instead of being sent to the Vietnam War. Initially, I wasslightly irked, because I was drafted in 1969, and have psychiatricproblems from my two tours in Vietnam.It often seems that people withconnections, or better education, often get the best of what America has tooffer.Yet on another level, I was very pleased with Mr. Marshall'shonesty, and the book shows how, no matter what family you came from, theVietnam War affected everyone in this country, one way or another.One ofthe remarks Mr. Marshall made, which I will always remember, is a feelinghe shared, many years later, with a fellow concientious objector.It wasthat their decision to seek C.O. status was the most important decision oftheir lives.And in this sense, I must agree with him and his friend. Because I think my decision to go to Vietnam for two tours, at the end ofthe war, was the most important decision or event to occur in my life, andI think that must be true of almost any male of our generation.No matterwhat course of action you took in regards to the war, it was a definingmoment in your life.At this point, I look for forgiveness and healing,and I would suggest that this book is truly about some kind ofReconciliation Road for all of us.

Reconciling the emotional wounds of the Vietnam War
This is a book written by the grandson of the famous military historian, General S.L.A. "SLAM" Marshall.It conerns allegations made about his grandfather, that appear to be true.Allegations that make his grandfather out to be a person who does NOT lie about catching the fish,but each time the story is told, the fish gets bigger and bigger.Atleast, that was my impression.But, it's also about how John DouglasMarshall, the grandson and First Lietenant in the US Army, disappoints andhurts his grandfather by filing for and receiving a Concientious Objectorstatus in 1969, instead of being sent to the Vietnam War. Initially, I wasslightly irked, because I was drafted in 1969, and have psychiatricproblems from my two tours in Vietnam.It often seems that people withconnections, or better education, often get the best of what America has tooffer.Yet on another level, I was very pleased with Mr. Marshall'shonesty, and the book shows how, no matter what family you came from, theVietnam War affected everyone in this country, one way or another.One ofthe remarks Mr. Marshall made, which I will always remember, is a feelinghe shared, many years later, with a fellow concientious objector.It wasthat their decision to seek C.O. status was the most important decision oftheir lives.And in this sense, I must agree with him and his friend. Because I think my decision to go to Vietnam for two tours, at the end ofthe war, was the most important decision or event to occur in my life, andI think that must be true of almost any male of our generation.No matterwhat course of action you took in regards to the war, it was a definingmoment in your life.At this point, I look for forgiveness and healing,and I would suggest that this book is truly about some kind ofReconciliation Road for all of us. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

It's good it's short

John Marshall was born to a lower class of aristocracy on 24th of September 1755.His parents, Thomas Marshall and Mary Randolph Keith were uncommon people.Mary Keith Randolph connected her family to other upper echelon families of Virginia, families like the Jeffersons, the Lees and, of course, the Randolphs.Thomas Marshall however, did not come from the best families, or even one of them.He did however manage to work his way through the layers of society by being appointed to government positions.Stites unfortunately does not show the reader why his Thomas Marshall was appointed or thought qualified.The important fact however, is that the Marshalls became an important family in an important colony.
John Marshall followed in his father's footsteps, climbing even higher in Virginia society.After fighting in the American Revolution, becoming a local war-hero he was elected to the House of Delegates, representing his native Fauquier County.Establishing himself as an up and coming young gentleman he married, and married well.Polly Ambler was one of Jaquelin Ambler and Rebecca Burwell's daughters.The Amblers were of the most prominent families in Virginia.
Now with his new bride and plans coming together, Marshall moved to Richmond to practice law.He had not been an outstanding law student, however, he had shown general aptitude in understanding government and law.He was young and had very little, but with hard work and calculation he excelled.
Within three years Marshall became "a leading member of the Richmond bar".This was no mean task as there were many well established and men already practicing at Richmond.His law career took off, leading to judicial appointments and even cabinet positions.He eventually became the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, where he stabilized the unpredictable court.
The private life of John Marshall, as Stites portrays it, impresses on the reader that Marshall had black piercing eyes and had a wonderful, passionate marriage.At the end of the book Stites apologizes for the several passages on Marshall's gaze by admitting, "John Marshall was a careless record keeper who simply did not believe the records of his life worth preserving."His record of Marshall's public life is different.
This difference is because "Without the public records of his career as a lawyer, legislator, and chief justice, we would have only fragments, many gleaned from the more carefully preserved records of his correspondents".Stites admits that most information about Marshall comes from Public records.
Marshall was a Federalist.He became established in politics through his ties with Federalists.The party enjoyed his support, especially because of his sway in Jefferson's home territory of Virginia.He became involved in the Adams's administration as a delegate to France during the difficult times with that country.Also while serving in the Adams administration he was appointed to the chief justice seat on the
Supreme Court.Once in office he revolutionized the judicial branch of the United States government.He fought for judicial review, providing the Supreme Court to the interpreters of the Constitution.He also worked to bring the National government into a place of authority over states.Marshall's influence also brought unanimous decisions to the court, making it an impartial branch of government.
Among his lasting impressions of the court itself was that before Marshall was appointed to the court, it was very difficult to keep judges on the bench.They would constantly resign after a short period.Marshall attributed this hardship to the difficult routine of judges under the system of courts that were in place then.Instead of resigning, Marshall retired the system, putting a more efficient one in its place.After Marshall was appointed no one found higher callings, except when their Maker called them.
The significance of Marshall's relationship with Jefferson was not very well explored by Stites.Stites being the sole source of information on this relationship, the reader is left not knowing.
I did not like Stites.Marshall, I felt was able to come through a little, in spite of Stites and his apologies.Coming to know a smidgen of Marshall, I also have a better appreciation for Federalists and what they were about as a whole.
... Read more

Book Description

This is the second of a three-volume work constituting a comprehensive scholarly edition of the correspondence of the English economist, Alfred Marshall (1842-1924), one of the leading figures in the development of economics and the founder of the Cambridge School of Economics. The edition fills a long-standing gap in the history of economic thought with hitherto unpublished material. Students will find it a basic resource for understanding the development of economics and other social sciences in the period since 1870. In particular, it provides much new information about Marshall's views on economic, social and political issues, his struggles to promote the teaching of economics at the University of Cambridge, and his relations with colleagues in Cambridge and elsewhere. Marshall's letters are notable for their frankness and spontaneity. ... Read more