After a presidential election year when the word “character was bandied all over the place—often by people possessing very little of the commodity themselves—history may have something to teach us. So readers interested in a clear definition of character, and its importance as an essential element of leadership, will find many valuable clues in Nathaniel Philbrick’s engrossing new study of the lives and tangled interaction of George Washington and Benedict Arnold. Both were dynamic men of action with unquestioned personal courage; both were driven by passionate ambition from an early age; both were capable of inspiring the men they commanded to acts of extraordinary sacrifice and endurance; both were hot-tempered by nature. Yet, despite all of these superficial similarities, one of them ended up a traitor, the other Father of His Country. It all boiled down to character, a case of honor versus glory. George Washington was guided by an indestructible sense of honor; Benedict Arnold was driven by a thirst for personal glory and the perquisites it could bring. Both men hungered for greatness, but to Washington, greatness meant subordination of self to cause, learning from mistakes and mastering personal weaknesses. To Arnold, greatness meant the triumph of self over others, victory on the battlefield as a key to wealth, privilege, and the indulgence of personal appetites. For him, causes were merely vehicles.

Source: Honor and Glory | The Weekly Standard