Monroe; A President To Good To Be Great

History, it seems, loves a good drama more than a steady hand.

By any judgement President Monroe's incumbency was one of the most successful. Eight years of peace and prosperity with little to no political turmoil in fact "The Era of Good Feeling" His accomplishments included the Monroe Doctrine which kept the America's free from imperial turmoil and the humanitarian attempt to solve the slavery problem with the founding of Liberia whose capital is named after him. Yet Monroe, a revolutionary war hero, registers little in the American conscious, Monroe has appeared on only two US postage stamps whereas a relative non-entity like Marin Van Buren has appeared on three, nor are there any significant monuments etc. nor do historians judge him highly.

Why is that, is it only presidents who had serious wars or economic crises that history determines are significant?

James Monroe’s presidency (1817–1825) is often overshadowed in the American historical narrative, despite the notable achievements-peace, prosperity, the Monroe Doctrine, and the founding of Liberia. Several factors contribute to this relative obscurity, and they don’t solely boil down to the absence of wars or crises, though those certainly play a role in how presidents are remembered.

First, Monroe’s era, dubbed the "Era of Good Feelings," lacked the dramatic conflict that tends to cement a president’s legacy in public memory. Historians and the public alike are drawn to leaders who navigate high-stakes challenges—think Lincoln with the Civil War, FDR with the Great Depression and World War II, or even Washington with the founding of the nation. Monroe’s tenure, by contrast, was marked by a rare political harmony following the collapse of the Federalist Party, leaving fewer divisive or galvanizing moments to etch his name into the collective psyche. Peace and prosperity, while admirable, don’t generate the same visceral storytelling power as triumph over adversity.

The Monroe Doctrine, while a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy, was more a slow-burn achievement than an immediate, flashy victory. Articulated in 1823, it warned European powers against further colonization in the Americas, but its full impact unfolded over decades—most notably in the late 19th and 20th centuries, long after Monroe’s time. In his own era, it was a declaration without a dramatic enforcement event tied directly to him, unlike, say, Jefferson’s Louisiana Purchase or Truman’s Cold War containment. This delayed recognition dilutes its association with Monroe personally in the popular imagination.

Monroe’s personality and style also play a role. He was a steady, unflashy administrator—not a visionary orator like Jefferson, nor a larger-than-life character like Jackson. His competence didn’t translate into a mythic persona. Historians often rate him solidly (typically in the top half of presidents), but not spectacularly, because his achievements lack the emotional resonance or transformative upheaval that elevates others. For example, C-SPAN’s 2021 Presidential Historians Survey ranks him 14th—respectable, but not iconic.

Finally, monuments and cultural memory tend to favor either founding fathers (Washington, Jefferson) or those tied to defining national traumas (Lincoln, FDR). Monroe, despite his Revolutionary War service, (he caried a musket ball beneath his skin from that war the rest of his life) doesn’t fit neatly into either category. His Virginia roots also mean he’s overshadowed by the state’s bigger names—Washington, Jefferson, Madison—leaving little room for him in the monumental landscape.

So, it’s not just that wars or crises define significance; it’s that they create sharper narratives. Monroe’s success was real, but its quiet, incremental nature—coupled with a lack of personal charisma or a singular, electrifying moment—keeps him underappreciated. History, it seems, loves a good drama more than a steady hand.