Our First Civil War: Patriots and Loyalists in the American Revolution
- Downloads：1332
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2021-11-21 17:21:23
- Update Date：2025-09-07
- Status：finish
- Author：H.W. Brands
- ISBN：B08WCRHXJR
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
New York Times bestselling historian H。 W。 Brands offers a fresh and dramatic narrative of the American Revolution that shows it to be more than a fight against the British， but also a violent battle among neighbors forced to choose sides， Loyalist and Patriot。
What causes a man to forsake his country and take arms against it？ What prompts others， hardly distinguishable in station or success， to defend that country against the rebels？ That is the question H。 W。 Brands answers in his original new narrative history of the American Revolution。
George Washington and Benjamin Franklin were the unlikeliest of rebels。 Washington in the 1770s stood at the apex of Virginia society。 Franklin was more successful still， having risen from humble origins to world fame。 John Adams might have seemed a more obvious candidate for rebellion， being of cantankerous temperament。 Even so， he revered the law。 Yet all three men became rebels against the British Empire that fostered their success。
William Franklin might have been expected to join his father， Benjamin， in rebellion but remained loyal to the British。 So did Thomas Hutchinson， a royal governor and friend of the Franklins， and Joseph Galloway， an early challenger to the Crown。 They soon heard themselves denounced as traitors--for not having betrayed the country where they grew up。 Native Americans and the enslaved were also forced to choose sides as civil war broke out around them。
After the Revolution， the Patriots were cast as heroes and founding fathers while the Loyalists were relegated to bit parts best forgotten。 Our First Civil War reminds us that before America could win its revolution against Britain， the Patriots had to win a bitter civil war against their sons and neighbors。
What causes a man to forsake his country and take arms against it？ What prompts others， hardly distinguishable in station or success， to defend that country against the rebels？ That is the question H。 W。 Brands answers in his original new narrative history of the American Revolution。
George Washington and Benjamin Franklin were the unlikeliest of rebels。 Washington in the 1770s stood at the apex of Virginia society。 Franklin was more successful still， having risen from humble origins to world fame。 John Adams might have seemed a more obvious candidate for rebellion， being of cantankerous temperament。 Even so， he revered the law。 Yet all three men became rebels against the British Empire that fostered their success。
William Franklin might have been expected to join his father， Benjamin， in rebellion but remained loyal to the British。 So did Thomas Hutchinson， a royal governor and friend of the Franklins， and Joseph Galloway， an early challenger to the Crown。 They soon heard themselves denounced as traitors--for not having betrayed the country where they grew up。 Native Americans and the enslaved were also forced to choose sides as civil war broke out around them。
After the Revolution， the Patriots were cast as heroes and founding fathers while the Loyalists were relegated to bit parts best forgotten。 Our First Civil War reminds us that before America could win its revolution against Britain， the Patriots had to win a bitter civil war against their sons and neighbors。
Reviews
Socraticgadfly
，
Brands has been hit-or-miss for several years now， and while this book isn't as bad as his one a few years ago about Dugout Doug MacArthur in Korea， it's not that good。 （Change that; as I finish writing the review， I think it's as bad， and maybe worse in some ways。 "Goes to character， your honor。" See below。）Having recently read Stanley Weintraub's "Iron Tears，" I already knew a fair amount about Loyalist-Patriot divisions， and MUCH more about divisions within British leadership and thought lead Brands has been hit-or-miss for several years now， and while this book isn't as bad as his one a few years ago about Dugout Doug MacArthur in Korea， it's not that good。 （Change that; as I finish writing the review， I think it's as bad， and maybe worse in some ways。 "Goes to character， your honor。" See below。）Having recently read Stanley Weintraub's "Iron Tears，" I already knew a fair amount about Loyalist-Patriot divisions， and MUCH more about divisions within British leadership and thought leaders。I picked up two new things of note from this book， one questionable。The first， and unquestionable， was the information about Joseph Galloway eventually going Loyalist。 I knew he had， but hadn't before read the details。The second， is of two parts。First， on the good side， is to have Brands showing Franklin originally asking for reparations， as well as for Canada， at the start of peace negotiations。But， later in the peace talks narrative， Brands appears to be dipping into revisionist history。 Revisionism isn't necessarily bad， but it is when it doesn't appear to be based on anything。Brands claims that Vergennes gave Franklin his blessing to pursue independent peace talks， shortly before Adams and Jay arrived in Paris。 He claims Vergennes said this would help France as well as the US。 He goes on to portray Vergennes as having total equinamity when the results came in。NEVER heard that before。 The story I've always heard is that Jay as well as Adams thought Franklin was too wedded to Vergennes and persuaded him that they needed to strike out on their own。 The American team then presented the British offer as a fait accompli to France。And， I'm three-quarters right and one-quarter wrong， but right on the bigger part。 It is true that after the Battle of the Straits， Vergennes said France had grown tired but couldn't get Spain to back off yet。 BUT 。。。 Brands omits that Vergennes said his plan was for a USofA to be east of Appalachia with the Ohio Country an Indian-held neutral ground。 He also omits that Jay approached Shelburne right after this and started the process of what were not just independent but SEPARATE negotiations。 And， Jay and Adams had a significant part in them， unlike in Brands' telling， which makes negotiations into almost entirely a work by Franklin。It's all at Wiki: https://en。wikipedia。org/wiki/Treaty_。。。Or more details， and a bit more nuance， at a site specifically devoted to the Treaty of Paris: https://www。treatyofparis。org/With that， I can note that this is when I moved my review from three stars to two。 I'll add， per the "goes to character，" that the Treaty of Paris section comes off as mendacious。 Brands has lost some serious credibility。 。。。more
Anne Morgan
，
This was an interesting book on the American Revolution， although not as good as previous Brands books that I've read。 It went on longer than I thought it needed to go， included a lot more than I thought it needed （including a lot about the French and Indian War that， while interesting， was far more than I really needed for setting the stage for a book on the American Revolution）， and while I liked how lots of primary sources were used， I thought there were times， especially towards the end， whe This was an interesting book on the American Revolution， although not as good as previous Brands books that I've read。 It went on longer than I thought it needed to go， included a lot more than I thought it needed （including a lot about the French and Indian War that， while interesting， was far more than I really needed for setting the stage for a book on the American Revolution）， and while I liked how lots of primary sources were used， I thought there were times， especially towards the end， where there was far too much unneeded direct quoting from diaries。 A strange thing to say， but there it is。 While there was a lot of interesting information here， especially regarding the relationship between Benjamin Franklin and his Loyalist son， I was expecting a lot more detailed information about the daily experience of Americans who remained loyal to Britain in the lead up and throughout the war。 I never really felt like I got that。 There was a lot about Washington， his troubles with Congress， military maneuvers that I never quite understood how they fit into the book， but not as much of the experience of the Loyalist in America overall。 I did appreciate how Brands charted Ben Franklin's changing views on American and British relationships， but overall I found myself a bit disappointed with the book overall。 Perhaps more based on what I expected than the book itself。I received an ARC of this book from NetGalley in exchange for an honest review 。。。more
Blaine DeSantis
，
One of our leading historians tackles the Revolutionary War in his newest book， and while it is not quite up to the level of his prior works it is a solid work on that period in US history that we all know about （We Won！） but of which little is really known of all the behind the scenes work that went on in the US， with the military， in London and Paris。 One of the main issues I had with this book is the title。 I had expected a much more detailed look at those people living in America at the time One of our leading historians tackles the Revolutionary War in his newest book， and while it is not quite up to the level of his prior works it is a solid work on that period in US history that we all know about （We Won！） but of which little is really known of all the behind the scenes work that went on in the US， with the military， in London and Paris。 One of the main issues I had with this book is the title。 I had expected a much more detailed look at those people living in America at the time and the contrast between the Revolutionaries and the Loyalists。 It never really meets the standard laid out in the title。 We do have lots of information on Washington， Franklin， John Adams， as well as the politicians in London and Paris， but as to the average loyalist in America there are very few glimpses of their lives。 Yes one or two do shine through but this book is basically about the elites and how things maneuvered during this period。 Fascinating book in that regard， with a heavy emphasis on personal correspondence and diaries of these individuals （sometime a tad bit too much verbatim quotations）。 And we see the highs and lows among the rulers in England， the Congress in Philly， our military leaders and the difficulties that all parties had during his momentous period of World History。 Very good book， not his best， but it does shine a light on a topic that Brands has not really delved into in his previous works。 。。。more
Jan
，
And it was every bit as wrenching as the War Between The States。 Politics is always a losing proposition for some， and this was toxic to the max。 Remember， not all Loyalists trekked to Canada， and a lot of businessmen had their own agenda。 Individually and in groups， the author disentangles all of the divided loyalties and grudges prevalent in that particular time， place， and war。 Well done！ And this from a Rev War re-enactor on Washington's side。I requested and received a free ebook copy from D And it was every bit as wrenching as the War Between The States。 Politics is always a losing proposition for some， and this was toxic to the max。 Remember， not all Loyalists trekked to Canada， and a lot of businessmen had their own agenda。 Individually and in groups， the author disentangles all of the divided loyalties and grudges prevalent in that particular time， place， and war。 Well done！ And this from a Rev War re-enactor on Washington's side。I requested and received a free ebook copy from Doubleday Books/Doubleday via NetGalley。 Thank you！ 。。。more
David
，
I’ve always been a fan of Brands， so I was excited to receive this NetGalley ARC， and this is a solid overview of the American Revolution。 It does tend to stray from its stated “First Civil War”/Patriots vs。 Loyalists theme fairly often， and when it hits it， it tends to involve the Franklins。
Brandon Westlake
，