Customer Reviews

The Day the American Revolution Began : 19 April 1775

5 star:		(14)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

This book was written to be easily read. Almost entertaining to the point it read like a story.

Not your typical history book but more of a history novel.

If you're looking for good stories on all the key player of the American Revolution about their where abouts, thoughts, and action during the start of the revolution then this book is for you.

It tracks the sequence of communication from the first days of the Revolution to the time it became official in England.

Also it has an excellent outline of all the historical events that lead up to the start of the revolution listed in the back of the book.

I highly recoment this book to all History buffs and non-history buffs looking for a good factual historical information.

I could not put this book down once I started to read it - it reads more like a story rather than hard-core non-fiction. I think it is one of the best books I have read in a long time.

The day that the american revolution began was literally a different day in each colony, because each colony heard about the events in Massachussetts as the post road riders arrived with the information. The book starts with the battles of Concord, and then follows the post road riders down the coast of the colonies. The author then takes us to London where we find out the British reaction to the revolution.

What sets this book apart from all the others on this time period that I've read is that the author focuses not only on the battles and key events of the time but also on individuals. For example, in Boston we learn of a man who has just learned that his children have a fatal pox and who must choose between standing with his fellow countrymen on Lexington Green or staying with his family. And after the battle in Concord, two ships leave the Boston harbor bound for London, one carrying the British version of the battle and one carrying the patriots' version. The ship that gets to London first will have its version taken to King George, and the patriots' ship leaves last. I couldn't wait to get to the final chapters to find out which ship got there first.

I thought that this book more than any other I have read really brought the times of the revolution and the people participating in to life: the personal fears and hopes and dreams of both the British and the patriots. This book was exhaustively researched, and in reviewing his extensive bibliography, I see that the author draws from many primary sources such as diaries and journals to document his work.

Truly an exceptional book.

Using the events of April 19, 1775 to illuminate the issues and personalities of the American Revolution,Hallahan delves into the philosophical, political and personal ambitions of the rather small cadre of men who spearheaded the drive for independence.

"The day the American Revolution began was not the same day for everyone," begins Hallahan in his prologue. The news rippled through the country day by day and did not reach London until the colonial version arrived on May 28, beating General Gage's account by two weeks.

Hallahan opens with the events in Massachusetts as British troops gather to march on Lexington to confiscate illicit arms and quiet rebellion with a show of strength - playing right into the grasping hands of Sam Adams who had been fomenting rebellion for more than a decade. As the day proceeds, the author introduces us to the post riders, militia leaders and strategists, the brave, the lucky and the hapless.

He sketches personalities, histories and circumstances, revealing the rebels as a mixed lot of thinkers, smugglers, dandies, farmers and shopkeepers. Culling his information from diaries, letters, documents and memoirs, Hallahan clearly and vividly recreates a tumultuous time when, but for a vocal, ambitious minority, and a recalcitrant, shortsighted Royal policy, America might have remained British.

Had the compromisers prevailed, suggests Hallahan, "There might have been no American Revolution and no French Revolution, the United States might still be part of the British Commonwealth, and consequently both World War I and World War II might have been averted because Germany would not have so brazenly gone on the offensive."

A breathtaking statement, to be sure. But, while the book illuminates many thwarted opportunities for peace, it also lays bare the total corruption of British government at the time - the rule of the many by the aristocratic few, the buying and selling of important offices and its selfish and ruinous economic policies toward the colonies. Reading Hallahan's account, few will conclude that compromise with Britain was ever sustainable or desirable in the long run.

Lively, fascinating, informative and opinionated, Hallahan's well-organized, readable narrative should spur new interest in Revolutionary history among a general readership.

I found this book to be riddled with errors about Boston in the Revolution. The author mixes up several figures with similar names, such as James Warren and Dr. Joseph Warren. He accuses Samuel Adams of breaking into a governor's house to steal letters; those letters were actually obtained in London. Statements on two pages about John Adams's 1770 political career contradict each other, and neither is correct. And those are only some of the errors I saw in a one-day skim. As a result, I distrust the book's sections on other American towns. What could have been a fine opportunity to trace the start of the Revolution is squandered by poor research.

I'm a fan of much of Hallahan's earlier fiction (Search for Joseph Tully, The Trade, Tripletrap, etc,)but found this non-fiction effort to be even more enjoyable. The author paints a vivid portrait of the most pivotal time in our nation's history,and does so in a non-text book, entertaining fashion.

Good book, entertaining and educational, and I enjoyed reading it straight through. Accomplishes its purpose of making the events accessible and interesting to a wide audience. But as a real history, the book falls short. Hallahan relies too much on conjecture and doesn't document his quotes. It seems like he's tried to give the players personalities to make them more interesting characters in the story. In several places I would have liked to look at the original references, to see how much he is "filling in" and how much is actually documented, but Hallahan doesn't specifically cite his sources, so the reader is forced to wonder about accuracy.

Just how important were Samuel Adams, John Hancock, Paul Revere, etc. etc. etc. in winning and even instigating the American Revolution? Also what was really happening in England at the time? Who was influencing King George IV? If you think you know it all-- you're in for a surprise. Read this book. It offers detailed unique, clear-cut, startling at times shocking little known facts about that turbulent era. It is a most enlightening view of the times and temperament of the men of the "pre-Lexington/Concord shots that were "heard around the world" . Highly recommended.

As others have noted, this book can be a quick read, since it races from place to place and from person to person as it depicts the days and circumstances of pre-revolution America. It is indeed hard to put down.

This book surprised me, in that it showed me how much grass-roots rebel-rousing actually went on in the Colonies leading up to the revolution, much of which was instigated and lead by that hoodlum Sam Adams. The background information regarding the whys, wherefores, and thinking that led some of the lesser-known of our forefathers to take the actions they did made the book for me. Also most enlightening was how the loyalists were treated during all of this. Interesting too was how it seems that London just "didn't get it" and made every mistake (willful or otherwise) imaginable to force the war into being.

If you thought that at any time the American Revolution was some sort of paper affair, think again, read this book, and learn some of the story as it happened away from hallowed halls and the larger war scene, at the common man's level.

This is a well-written, easy to read book. But, while the book starts out exciting, it bogs down a bit in the middle with all those short biographies of the many various people involved and how they were affected. These are interesting, but some of them are just really minor characters, and it almost seems as if the author used them just to "fill-out" the book a bit more. But, overall, the book is very enjoyable to read, leads the reader along to the finish; and I would recommend it.
However, and this is a BIG one: the author is just plain misleading on some of his "facts." For example, in speaking of General Gage's war record, the author points out that Gage was with Braddock at Braddock's defeat during the French and Indian War. This is true, but the author states Gage was "On July 9, 1755, with Braddock during the French ambush near Fort Pitt." Well, kinda, but not really. It was actually Fort Duquesne. Fort Pitt was an English fort built near the same site after Fort Duquesne was destroyed. Fort Pitt didn't exist in 1755. And it wasn't an ambush. Anyway, the author goes on to state that Gage conducted a rear guard action that enabled the few survivors to escape. Nowhere in any historical writings is Gage given credit for any rear guard action, and Gage wasn't a hero here. He was the one that marched right past the "high ground," and when the French and Indians attacked, this is the ground that was used by the enemy to destroy Braddock's troops. If Gage had done his job and secured the high ground as would have been mililtarily prudent, Braddock might not have been defeated. Many placed much blame on Gage for this military blunder. And Gage really wasn't any hero in the retreat. In fact, had he held his ground at the beginning, as ordered, things may probably not have gone so bad for the English. The author implies that Gage saved George Washington's life by his actions in the retreat, but George Washington had as more to do with the successful retreat than Gage. In fact, Gage had retreated so far back already, that he was lated accused of cowardice. So while the author doesn't really write anything actually wrong, he is misleading in trying to make his point of Gage's "bright resume" (as the author calls it). The problem with this is now I am wondering what else he wrote in the book that is maybe not quite historically accurate. It is disturbing when an historian distorts the facts for the benefit of his own narrative.
For example, one of the main points the author tries to make in this book is that Sam Adams may have been the one who either shot or "hired" someone to make the first shot at the battle of Lexington. This is the shot "that was heard around the world." Now, considering that the author twists facts a bit to make his point in other areas, I wonder how much he twists things in this case also. The author spends much time in the book trying to lead the reader to believe that Sam Adams was a self-serving, villianous rogue. While this may be true to a degree, it really doesn't offer any evidence that Adams had anything to do with the mysterious shot. In fact, when it comes right down to it, the author offers absolutely zero evidence to back up this claim, other than that Adams might have had motive to do it. Again, this might be true, but so did many others. Therein lies my problem with this author--he tries to prove a point with no evidence to back it up.
Also, the author seems to leave out evidence that doesn't back the points he is making at the time. For instance, in speaking of the British General Braddock, the author states the General "in 1754 had condemned the colonials as cowards." That is true, but after Braddock's Defeat, he had changed his mind completely, and so stated. So the author is misleading here in stating Braddock's view of the "colonials."
Also, sometimes the author contradicts himself. Again in Gage's case, he states that Gage "was known to plan meticulously to avoid making mistakes." But on the next page, the author states "...Gage had begun making mistakes," "..he made the poor choice...," "To compound that mistake, and against the advice of other generals...." And earlier the author states, that after the Battle of Concord "...Gage needed a plan--and he didn't have one. Now this doesn't really sound like a man that plans well to avoid mistakes. Oh well.
In any case, this is really a reasonably decent book otherwise. I would have rated it higher were I not in doubt about his historical accuracy.

By sheer coincidence, I began reading this book on April 19, 2001, exactly 226 years after the events recorded in the first chapter. Reading this work reveals a fascinating, and little-known, tale of the beginnings of the Revolution. It reminds me of the scene in "The Wizard of OZ" where Dorothy and her friends are ushered into the presence of the Great and Powerful OZ. Smoke pours out, lights flash, loud voices are heard, but everything is manufactured by "the man behind the curtain". This appears to be the theme of this book, that Samuel Adams and a few others, by deft maneuvering, and some incredibly stupid moves by the British authorities, created the Revolution out of whole cloth. The facts are presented quite plainly, and while all readers may not accept the premise of the author, I must admit that he has made a very good case. The book is well-written, and worth reading, if only to learn a lot about how the Revolution began, facts that aren't the common inserts in school history textbooks.