What do you think?
Rate this book
Oliver Wiswell
In this novel, Kenneth Roberts portrays a very different side to the story of the American Revolution, that of the loyalists (those colonists who supported the British monarchy). Spanning the years from 1775 to 1783, “Oliver Wiswell” traces the adventures of a Yale student who is deeply loyal to the established government of the colonies. This wonderfully far-ranging novel is packed with battles, sudden flights, escapes, intrigue, massacres, romance, and exile as it follows Wiswell, a spy for Sir William Howell (Commander in Chief of the British Armies) on Long Island, as well as in Paris and London. He captures a sloop single-handedly and joins Benedict Arnold against the American revolutionaries of the southern colonies. “Oliver Wiswell” did no less than challenge the accepted perceptions of the loyalists. Though branded by history as cowardly traitors, many of them were men of strong convictions and fierce courage, sometimes defeating triple their number of Continental troops and militiamen in battle. With strong historical detail and vivid depictions, Roberts explores the hearts and minds of those men and women who opposed the Revolution.
836 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1940
16 people are currently reading
841 people want to read
About the author
Kenneth Roberts
95 books98 followersKenneth Lewis Roberts, a noted American, wrote his historical novels, including
Northwest Passage
(1937), about the colonial period.
Roberts worked first as a then popular nationally known journalist with the Saturday Evening Post from 1919 to 1928. Roberts specialized in regionalist historical fiction. He often wrote about terrain of his native state and also depicted other upper states and scenes of New England. He for example depicts, the main characters in Arundel and Rabble in Arms from Kennebunk, then called Arundel; the main character of Northwest Passage from Kittery, Maine, with friends in Portsmouth, New Hampshire; the main character in Oliver Wiswell from Milton, Massachusetts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth...
Roberts worked first as a then popular nationally known journalist with the Saturday Evening Post from 1919 to 1928. Roberts specialized in regionalist historical fiction. He often wrote about terrain of his native state and also depicted other upper states and scenes of New England. He for example depicts, the main characters in Arundel and Rabble in Arms from Kennebunk, then called Arundel; the main character of Northwest Passage from Kittery, Maine, with friends in Portsmouth, New Hampshire; the main character in Oliver Wiswell from Milton, Massachusetts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 72 reviews
January 22, 2012
"Oliver Wiswell" by Kenneth Roberts is an excellent book. It is a unique Revolutionary War novel in that it presents very convincingly the injustices endured by Americans broadly described as loyalists. These people were both educated, successful professional people and simple country people content to continue to live their lives without being interfered with by others.
Two of the book's themes particularly impressed me. I was astounded at how savagely rebel Americans treated the loyalist population. No family holding beliefs that differed from their rebel neighbors was exempt from punishment. Houses and barns were burned, livestock klled, property seized, and individuals physically harmed or killed. Hatred was pervasive. At the war's end, no loyalist could remain in America. Loyalists emigrated to Kentucky, Nova Scotia, Bermunda and the Bahamas, and Gibraltar.
Equally impressive was the author's portrayal of British arrogance. Virtually every British officer from general to lieutenant and every British governmental official considered every American to be an inferior. Valuable advice given to them by knowledgeable loyalists was always rejected. Opportunities to vanquish the rebel army and end the war early were thrown away by British generals who would not heed such advice and act promptly and decisively. British protection of the loyalist population ranged from indifference to criminal negligence. Loyalists came to understand that the British were not their allies and that they had to fend for themselves.
I enjoyed the author's accounting of the major events of the war from the loyalist perspective. I was reminded of how incompetent Generals Howe and Clinton were and how obstinate the king and his ministers behaved in their waging of the war. The novel's main character and his faithful companion, Tom Buell, were witnesses or participants in just about every event. My interest in the author's accounting of each event allowed me to excuse this departure from reality. Helping also was the author's excellent characterization of all who appeared and his knowledgeable detail of how people at that period of time lived.
Two of the book's themes particularly impressed me. I was astounded at how savagely rebel Americans treated the loyalist population. No family holding beliefs that differed from their rebel neighbors was exempt from punishment. Houses and barns were burned, livestock klled, property seized, and individuals physically harmed or killed. Hatred was pervasive. At the war's end, no loyalist could remain in America. Loyalists emigrated to Kentucky, Nova Scotia, Bermunda and the Bahamas, and Gibraltar.
Equally impressive was the author's portrayal of British arrogance. Virtually every British officer from general to lieutenant and every British governmental official considered every American to be an inferior. Valuable advice given to them by knowledgeable loyalists was always rejected. Opportunities to vanquish the rebel army and end the war early were thrown away by British generals who would not heed such advice and act promptly and decisively. British protection of the loyalist population ranged from indifference to criminal negligence. Loyalists came to understand that the British were not their allies and that they had to fend for themselves.
I enjoyed the author's accounting of the major events of the war from the loyalist perspective. I was reminded of how incompetent Generals Howe and Clinton were and how obstinate the king and his ministers behaved in their waging of the war. The novel's main character and his faithful companion, Tom Buell, were witnesses or participants in just about every event. My interest in the author's accounting of each event allowed me to excuse this departure from reality. Helping also was the author's excellent characterization of all who appeared and his knowledgeable detail of how people at that period of time lived.
July 28, 2008
Probably my favorite novel of the American Revolution. As a stickler for historical detail this novel appealed to me for it's reliance on historical fact.
Told from the point of view of a Loyalist, this work represents a departure from the "hero literature" of the American Revolution that still dominates the genre. This work looks at the reason people may have been opposed to open rebellion and considers their struggles to survive what became in the South a civil war.
Roberts also includes the Siege of Ninety Six. Located in South Carolina this small outpost was actually the longest siege of the Revolution. Fought in the stifling heat of a South Carolina summer it culminated in American forces attempting to blow up the fort with a tunnel and gunpowder. Roberts includes all these details in his work.
Certainly worth a read to get a different perspective on the war and it's many political and military variables.
Told from the point of view of a Loyalist, this work represents a departure from the "hero literature" of the American Revolution that still dominates the genre. This work looks at the reason people may have been opposed to open rebellion and considers their struggles to survive what became in the South a civil war.
Roberts also includes the Siege of Ninety Six. Located in South Carolina this small outpost was actually the longest siege of the Revolution. Fought in the stifling heat of a South Carolina summer it culminated in American forces attempting to blow up the fort with a tunnel and gunpowder. Roberts includes all these details in his work.
Certainly worth a read to get a different perspective on the war and it's many political and military variables.
June 6, 2008
Kenneth Roberts, while a storied curmudgeon and believer in water divining, is an excellent author of historical fiction, covering the Revolutionary War, War of 1812, French and Indian War in his various books, taking the reader from Maine to New York to Wisconsin with great historical accuracy. This particular book tells the story of a Tory family living in Massachusetts and their struggle against the revolutionaries. It is a classic.
April 2, 2013
The hardbound edition that I read 40 years ago was 700 pages or so. Do not let that fact deter you from reading it. After all this time, this novel still resonates with me with the richness of its characters and the excitement of its events. Roberts eloquently portrays the Loyalists of the American Revolution as men of principle, who, generally agreed with many of the complaints and issues that their fellow Americans, the patriots, also had. The difference between the two sides only being in the resolution. This book moves until its bitter-sweet ending while never forgetting that two groups of Americans loved their native land. I have always been surprised that Hollywood or British film makers have never attempted to transfer the book to film, at best, a mini-series. With recent historical productions, many of which are from the American Revolutionary period being developed, there is always hope.
October 22, 2025
I read this book many years ago but think it’s still worth reading! Very interesting - the American Revolution as seen through the eyes of a loyalist.
April 26, 2009
Kenneth Roberts was great at doing extensive research and writing authentically. But I find his novels difficult to get through. I read them because I'm interested in revolutionary America. But I have to work to get to the end of each book. The last third of this book was the best. It moved quickly. I had to work at the first two-thirds.
January 25, 2008
The American Revolutionary War from the Loyalist perspective. A history in novel form that makes you feel you are living it.
December 3, 2025
Roberts was a best selling author in the 1930s and 1940s. He wrote historical fiction but with a twist - he wrote to rehabilitate American villains. In Northwest Passage he wrote about Robert Rogers, the man who created the Rangers, but who also fought against his countrymen during the American Revolution. In his Arundel stories he attempted to rehabilitate Benedict Arnold, who was one of the best American military leaders until he turned traitor. In Oliver Wiswell he writes about the Loyalists in the Revolution, a perspective rarely written about. The book offers a very different view of that war, although in it the British leaders are portrayed as the incompetents who lost the war.
December 21, 2023
Gets rounded up to the next complete star for aspiration rather than execution.
A unique depiction of the American Revolutionary War, in that it takes the part of the hundreds of thousands of Americans who opposed the idea of taking up arms against the Crown. As such it abandons the usual portrayal of the war as a conflict between Britain and America and instead gives the reader a civil war that divides every American province right down the middle--and sides quite firmly with the Loyalists over the Patriots. Roberts is unapologetic about his depiction of the persecutions visited by the Patriots not just on those who disagreed with them, but on those who simply wished to remain neutral in the dispute: torture, maiming, destruction of property, murder, mob rule, summary suppression of free speech, brutal expulsion and exile. Every American schoolchild learns about tarring and feathering as an abstraction, but here the narrative opens with a vivid depiction of what a disgusting, painful, harmful and humiliating experience it was. Nor is there ever a hint that all these things are unfortunate but at least done in a worthy cause; the characters of Oliver Wiswell are deeply grieved at the destruction of the colonial Anglo-American experiment thanks to the combination of Patriot violence and British highhandedness. Indeed, when Patriots appear onstage in the chapters after the Treaty of Paris ends the war, they're explicit that the new society they've created is an awful one and that going to war for it was a mistake.
In this regard I'm impressed by Oliver Wiswell, though the book isn't without its problems. For a work of eight hundred pages, it draws its subjects in disappointingly broad strokes: every American Patriot is an intemperate, dishonest, greedy scoundrel, jealous of anyone else's good fortune; every Briton is condescending, arrogant, contemptuous of Americans from either side, and deliberately incompetent (excepting three--John Graves Simcoe, Lord Rawdon and Sir Guy Carleton--who each appear only for about five pages in the latter half of the book, and who are drawn as wise and admirable purely because they defer to Loyalists in all decisions); every American Loyalist is perceptive, level-headed and the only reasonable voice in the room. Of no character is this truer than Oliver Wiswell himself, who can be gratingly sanctimonious and is so astounded anytime he meets someone less sanctimonious than himself that there are far too many times when he finds he cannot quite believe the other person isn’t joking.
Oliver Wiswell's central thesis regarding the Revolutionary War is that the war was never won by the Patriots, but rather was lost by the British high command, and that the British high command's mistake was to alienate the Loyalist plurality who existed everywhere outside New England by not entrusting the war effort to the Loyalists themselves. It's unfair to compare a novel written in 1940 to modern scholarship, but it's worth noting that this contention is exactly the opposite of true: scholars like Andrew Jackson O'Shaughnessy have argued convincingly that the strategy pursued by British leaders such as Howe, Clinton, Germain and Lord North was exactly that which their Loyalist advisors urged upon them. Repeatedly they seized those parts of the thirteen colonies where, they were told, silent majorities of Loyalists but awaited the arrival of the British Army so that they could rise up in support of the Crown: New York in 1776, Philadelphia and Albany in 1777, Georgia and the Carolinas in 1779. And every time, the promised Loyalist support failed to materialise, and the British Army found itself isolated, surrounded by enemies and far from home. The Loyalists were certainly there, as the exodus of tens of thousands of them to Canada after the war demonstrates, and there should be more books like this one to remind modern Americans of that fact, but it's not that the British Army refused to hand the war over to them; it's that every time the British attempted to hand it over, they refused to accept it.
A unique depiction of the American Revolutionary War, in that it takes the part of the hundreds of thousands of Americans who opposed the idea of taking up arms against the Crown. As such it abandons the usual portrayal of the war as a conflict between Britain and America and instead gives the reader a civil war that divides every American province right down the middle--and sides quite firmly with the Loyalists over the Patriots. Roberts is unapologetic about his depiction of the persecutions visited by the Patriots not just on those who disagreed with them, but on those who simply wished to remain neutral in the dispute: torture, maiming, destruction of property, murder, mob rule, summary suppression of free speech, brutal expulsion and exile. Every American schoolchild learns about tarring and feathering as an abstraction, but here the narrative opens with a vivid depiction of what a disgusting, painful, harmful and humiliating experience it was. Nor is there ever a hint that all these things are unfortunate but at least done in a worthy cause; the characters of Oliver Wiswell are deeply grieved at the destruction of the colonial Anglo-American experiment thanks to the combination of Patriot violence and British highhandedness. Indeed, when Patriots appear onstage in the chapters after the Treaty of Paris ends the war, they're explicit that the new society they've created is an awful one and that going to war for it was a mistake.
In this regard I'm impressed by Oliver Wiswell, though the book isn't without its problems. For a work of eight hundred pages, it draws its subjects in disappointingly broad strokes: every American Patriot is an intemperate, dishonest, greedy scoundrel, jealous of anyone else's good fortune; every Briton is condescending, arrogant, contemptuous of Americans from either side, and deliberately incompetent (excepting three--John Graves Simcoe, Lord Rawdon and Sir Guy Carleton--who each appear only for about five pages in the latter half of the book, and who are drawn as wise and admirable purely because they defer to Loyalists in all decisions); every American Loyalist is perceptive, level-headed and the only reasonable voice in the room. Of no character is this truer than Oliver Wiswell himself, who can be gratingly sanctimonious and is so astounded anytime he meets someone less sanctimonious than himself that there are far too many times when he finds he cannot quite believe the other person isn’t joking.
Oliver Wiswell's central thesis regarding the Revolutionary War is that the war was never won by the Patriots, but rather was lost by the British high command, and that the British high command's mistake was to alienate the Loyalist plurality who existed everywhere outside New England by not entrusting the war effort to the Loyalists themselves. It's unfair to compare a novel written in 1940 to modern scholarship, but it's worth noting that this contention is exactly the opposite of true: scholars like Andrew Jackson O'Shaughnessy have argued convincingly that the strategy pursued by British leaders such as Howe, Clinton, Germain and Lord North was exactly that which their Loyalist advisors urged upon them. Repeatedly they seized those parts of the thirteen colonies where, they were told, silent majorities of Loyalists but awaited the arrival of the British Army so that they could rise up in support of the Crown: New York in 1776, Philadelphia and Albany in 1777, Georgia and the Carolinas in 1779. And every time, the promised Loyalist support failed to materialise, and the British Army found itself isolated, surrounded by enemies and far from home. The Loyalists were certainly there, as the exodus of tens of thousands of them to Canada after the war demonstrates, and there should be more books like this one to remind modern Americans of that fact, but it's not that the British Army refused to hand the war over to them; it's that every time the British attempted to hand it over, they refused to accept it.
August 8, 2015
Hadn't read any historical fiction in a while, and when I realized that one of Roberts's books was the story of the Revolution from the loyalist side I decided I had to read it. I kind of regretted that, round about page 600 or 700. I mean, I remember liking "Arundel," but that's only barely 600 pages. This is well over 800.
And the pages aren't USED all that well. Roberts spends no time at all setting the scene, he just picks up two days before the start of the war at Lexington and Concord. But the main character is from just outside of Boston, and here it is two days before the war and he's all "Loyalists? Rebels? Tarring and feathering? What's going on?" It's like he was in a coma until the day before the book started. How can he need catching up two days before the war?? I liked the siege of Boston and battle of Long Island stuff from the British side, that was interesting, but then Roberts blows over a hundred pages on this boring interlude in London and Paris and I can't even remember what the point of it was. They were trying to steal letters or something? Eventually he gets back to the actual war, which was nice. Then there's this other whole interlude where the main character almost moves to Kentucky. That takes an inordinate number of pages too.
Also, the book is kinda racist. I think I remember that Roberts was kind of racist in general, but his treatment of black characters is basically Gone With the Wind but with no character development or differentiation at all. Enslaved people are basically good for labor in the book, and being silly and/or scared. He seems to like Indians all right. Not that they get to do much.
And the central love story is boring. He tries to throw in a little love triangle to spice things up, only to abandon it abruptly 70 or 80 pages later. Boring.
Maybe I should read "Arundel" again and see if I was right that it was good.
And the pages aren't USED all that well. Roberts spends no time at all setting the scene, he just picks up two days before the start of the war at Lexington and Concord. But the main character is from just outside of Boston, and here it is two days before the war and he's all "Loyalists? Rebels? Tarring and feathering? What's going on?" It's like he was in a coma until the day before the book started. How can he need catching up two days before the war?? I liked the siege of Boston and battle of Long Island stuff from the British side, that was interesting, but then Roberts blows over a hundred pages on this boring interlude in London and Paris and I can't even remember what the point of it was. They were trying to steal letters or something? Eventually he gets back to the actual war, which was nice. Then there's this other whole interlude where the main character almost moves to Kentucky. That takes an inordinate number of pages too.
Also, the book is kinda racist. I think I remember that Roberts was kind of racist in general, but his treatment of black characters is basically Gone With the Wind but with no character development or differentiation at all. Enslaved people are basically good for labor in the book, and being silly and/or scared. He seems to like Indians all right. Not that they get to do much.
And the central love story is boring. He tries to throw in a little love triangle to spice things up, only to abandon it abruptly 70 or 80 pages later. Boring.
Maybe I should read "Arundel" again and see if I was right that it was good.
December 21, 2023
“Oliver Wiswell” raised questions for me. First, what would my part of America be like if there had never been a War of Independence? Second, what would it be like if the revolution had failed? Third, what would it be like if there had been post-victory reconciliation with Britain and America’s loyalists? Though Mr. Robert’s has strong points of view on who are the good guys and the bad guys, it is interesting to view the War of Independence as a civil war in which the two sides live next door to each other rather than in different geographies as in the Civil War of the 1860s.
OW is a road novel. It follows the many travels, adventures and battles of a stolid young loyalist hero of great energy and courage. We meet his somewhat roguish sidekick, Thomas Buell, who prints his own money and is otherwise inventive. The loyalist characters are all intelligent and have great integrity. The rebels are all uneducated, manipulated by people like Samuel Adams and John Hancock, violent, and somewhat stupid and poorly informed.
I rather liked how OW moved along at a good walking pace. I loved the hero’s excellent asides on the stupidity of war and how politics scatters evil everywhere. “When two parties in a country resort to arms to settle political differences, every man is a potential enemy to every other man, and the distinction between legalized killing and murder is not clearly drawn in the minds of average men, who are incapable of sustained thought.” (at page 551)
OW is a road novel. It follows the many travels, adventures and battles of a stolid young loyalist hero of great energy and courage. We meet his somewhat roguish sidekick, Thomas Buell, who prints his own money and is otherwise inventive. The loyalist characters are all intelligent and have great integrity. The rebels are all uneducated, manipulated by people like Samuel Adams and John Hancock, violent, and somewhat stupid and poorly informed.
I rather liked how OW moved along at a good walking pace. I loved the hero’s excellent asides on the stupidity of war and how politics scatters evil everywhere. “When two parties in a country resort to arms to settle political differences, every man is a potential enemy to every other man, and the distinction between legalized killing and murder is not clearly drawn in the minds of average men, who are incapable of sustained thought.” (at page 551)
January 12, 2013
Another excellent book"Oliver Wiswell" by Kenneth Roberts. It is a unique Revolutionary War novel in that it presents very convincingly the injustices endured by Americans broadly described as loyalists or Tories. These people were both educated, successful professional people and simple country people. The characters are extremely well developed, and the story is highly enjoyable as well as factual. A great read.
June 13, 2016
Gosh, I remember reading this in high school. :-)
December 3, 2016
Perhaps the best novel of the American Revolution I have read.
December 9, 2021
This is one of the best books I've ever read. I very rarely rate a book 5-stars, and if I could, I would give this one six! For me to rate a book 5 stars, it has to be the kind of book that is not only well written, but one that will stay with me for a very long time. This one definitely will as I will never again be able to think of the American Revolution in quite the same way.
The story is about the American Revolution from the Tory point of view. The amazing thing is that while it was written in 1940 and describes events that occurred in the late 1700s, it could easily be describing today. The Patriots tended to be the populists (the "rabble" as they were frequently described at the time), while the Tories or Loyalists tended to be the wealthier, more educated class (e.g., the elites). It really explains a lot about why we Americans are the way we are today.
I grew up thinking of the American Revolution as a war between the Americans and the British, but in actuality, it was a Civil War, with Americans fighting other Americans, and about a third of the country terrorizing everybody else. They say that those who forget history are condemned to repeat it--something to keep in mind as our country is becoming increasingly more polarized.
The book gives you a feel of what it was really like to be a Loyalist and to have to watch your country being torn apart and ultimately have to flee. Many Tories were reasonable and rational people who had moderate views. Like the Patriots, many Loyalists disagreed with British policies such as the Stamp Act. They just didn't think it was worth fighting a war over and hoped to persuade the British to compromise with non-violent means. They wanted to negotiate with the British, not become an independent country. However, anybody who wasn't willing to support the Patriots had their life and property threatened.
This was an extremely moving book--as well as an educational one. Highly recommended.
The story is about the American Revolution from the Tory point of view. The amazing thing is that while it was written in 1940 and describes events that occurred in the late 1700s, it could easily be describing today. The Patriots tended to be the populists (the "rabble" as they were frequently described at the time), while the Tories or Loyalists tended to be the wealthier, more educated class (e.g., the elites). It really explains a lot about why we Americans are the way we are today.
I grew up thinking of the American Revolution as a war between the Americans and the British, but in actuality, it was a Civil War, with Americans fighting other Americans, and about a third of the country terrorizing everybody else. They say that those who forget history are condemned to repeat it--something to keep in mind as our country is becoming increasingly more polarized.
The book gives you a feel of what it was really like to be a Loyalist and to have to watch your country being torn apart and ultimately have to flee. Many Tories were reasonable and rational people who had moderate views. Like the Patriots, many Loyalists disagreed with British policies such as the Stamp Act. They just didn't think it was worth fighting a war over and hoped to persuade the British to compromise with non-violent means. They wanted to negotiate with the British, not become an independent country. However, anybody who wasn't willing to support the Patriots had their life and property threatened.
This was an extremely moving book--as well as an educational one. Highly recommended.
December 23, 2018
This book is fascinating. Published in 1940, it must have been out of step with its time. Having enjoyed Northwest Passage, I originally read OW some twenty years ago and it was a revelation to me. My knowledge of history was developed in the 50/60s so heavily influenced by Disney view, Catholic education, John Wayne style Hollywood movies.
That Loyalists could have had a legit gripe and point of view must have been a sacrilege in 1940.
Then about 10 years ago JDG and I went to Nova Scotia for vacation. In Halifax we found a lot of info about Loyalist refugees that captivated me.
Add to that reading “Someone Knows My Name”, and the Book of Negroes......there is no truth in History. There are historical point of view and experiences.
In order to re-read this, I purchased a used hardback edition on line. It was a first edition. Very cool....there was a gift note inside: “ Herbert Rich from Doris, Nov. 27, 1940”. Inexpensive and priceless.
There were “anti war” passages, certainly anti-British officer, anti-rebel. Waste everywhere, people’s lives ruined stupidly.
And I’ve always been haunted by the scene of Loyalists refugees flooding from Winchester to the Cumberland Gap. What did they leave, where did they go? Were their lives better then?
The South was fighting an intense civil war, also not in am
Ny of my Swamp Fox Disney education or Mel Gibson Patriot.
Our history was all Valley Forge and GW
This was a book that should be famous
That Loyalists could have had a legit gripe and point of view must have been a sacrilege in 1940.
Then about 10 years ago JDG and I went to Nova Scotia for vacation. In Halifax we found a lot of info about Loyalist refugees that captivated me.
Add to that reading “Someone Knows My Name”, and the Book of Negroes......there is no truth in History. There are historical point of view and experiences.
In order to re-read this, I purchased a used hardback edition on line. It was a first edition. Very cool....there was a gift note inside: “ Herbert Rich from Doris, Nov. 27, 1940”. Inexpensive and priceless.
There were “anti war” passages, certainly anti-British officer, anti-rebel. Waste everywhere, people’s lives ruined stupidly.
And I’ve always been haunted by the scene of Loyalists refugees flooding from Winchester to the Cumberland Gap. What did they leave, where did they go? Were their lives better then?
The South was fighting an intense civil war, also not in am
Ny of my Swamp Fox Disney education or Mel Gibson Patriot.
Our history was all Valley Forge and GW
This was a book that should be famous
May 12, 2019
Kenneth Roberts enthralls me once again with Oliver Wiswell. Much I didn't know (or learned once, as a footnote in history manuals) about the men who fought to win independence for young America from England...some fictional but entwined with historical figures in such a way that they shine throughout the novel. I found it very interesting that the book presents a favorable view of the loyalists, explaining the many reasons for their reticence in joining the violent, boisterous nature and intolerance of the rebels and bringing to the forefront the many failures (laziness? hidden motives) of the British commanders whose tactics did not seem to match the end supposed goal of winning the war. I suppose I like it because everything should be questioned today, as it should have then, and mostly because despite the fact that cooler minds did not prevail (at first), out of this messy, unholy war, emerged a great nation.
I should say, i'm only 3/4 through and I only know of the main character's (and author's, implicitly) disdain for the original "rabble rousers" Sam Adams, John Hancock, Patrick Henry, etc. Those to come, Hamilton, John Jay, John Adams, George Washington, have but brief references for now, but I can already tell he is much more sympathetic to them.
I will probably not review Northwest Passage yet, but that book is the reason why Kenneth Roberts became one of my all-time favorite historical fiction authors.
I should say, i'm only 3/4 through and I only know of the main character's (and author's, implicitly) disdain for the original "rabble rousers" Sam Adams, John Hancock, Patrick Henry, etc. Those to come, Hamilton, John Jay, John Adams, George Washington, have but brief references for now, but I can already tell he is much more sympathetic to them.
I will probably not review Northwest Passage yet, but that book is the reason why Kenneth Roberts became one of my all-time favorite historical fiction authors.
May 14, 2022
I read this years ago. It was a refreshingly new read about the Revolutionary War. I had never seen it from the side of the Loyalists. Those who were loyal to the government of their time. Their allegiance was to the crown, the legal government of the realm. Seen from their point of view the entire happening was perplexing. They suffered for their allegiance through personal attacks and in the end loss of everything.
A long and agonizing read. Agonizing only when one feels for the protagonist, Oliver Wiswell, historian. This loyalist was determined to write the history of the conflict as one who stood by the King.
I enjoyed reading this book. To try to understand what was happening during those years one needs to see both sides. The one story I have found that does just that.
Definitely a necessary read for those who want to understand the years in which the United States was born. A good book that should not be forgotten.
A long and agonizing read. Agonizing only when one feels for the protagonist, Oliver Wiswell, historian. This loyalist was determined to write the history of the conflict as one who stood by the King.
I enjoyed reading this book. To try to understand what was happening during those years one needs to see both sides. The one story I have found that does just that.
Definitely a necessary read for those who want to understand the years in which the United States was born. A good book that should not be forgotten.
September 28, 2017
What an eye opener this novel is! Foremost, it is a fun read in the style of a classic historical novel. But it is also a reliable history lesson, and quite a myth-bluster at that! From the dozens of cited sources, including first hand accounts, we can see that there is much truth here from which we can see the firm founding for Loyalist views of the First American Civil War.
I am fortunate to have read it this year. I could see so many parallels between the intolerant, inflamed rebels inspired to inhuman crimes by lies of their manipulating leaders and those of today's revolutionaries who scream and anyone who doesn't agree with them of being a racist, white supremacist, anything-phobic bigot and won't have a civil and logical discussion. How history repeats itself when the evil and idiotic ignore it.
I am fortunate to have read it this year. I could see so many parallels between the intolerant, inflamed rebels inspired to inhuman crimes by lies of their manipulating leaders and those of today's revolutionaries who scream and anyone who doesn't agree with them of being a racist, white supremacist, anything-phobic bigot and won't have a civil and logical discussion. How history repeats itself when the evil and idiotic ignore it.
October 31, 2016
One of the best of Roberts' historical novels tells the story of the American Revolution from the point of view of a Massachusetts loyalist and his friends. The story shines with all the powerfully descriptive writing, orneriness and extensive research that Roberts habitually brought to his work. This one apparently took some gumption to produce because of its contrarian view of the quasi-sacrosanct story of the Revolution. What makes it forceful as historical fiction is the finely grained detail. The characters are mostly as colourful as the ones Roberts always drew, but some are painted with fairly broad strokes and the narrator is a touch bland, as the first-person narrators of Roberts' novels tended to be.
February 6, 2018
At age 11 I came across this book in my mother's shelves. From the beginning, I knew I was reading way above my grade level, and yet I felt drawn by this counter-narrative of the war between the Patriots and the British Crown, told from the perspective of those who found themselves caught between loyalty to the Crown and defending themselves from the Patriot threats to their livelihoods, homes and lives. At times the Patriots come across as low-lives who take pleasure in harassing and despoiling the persons and properties of their fellow countrymen who aren't devoted to the Patriot cause. Clearly the book underscores that the American Revolution was not simply a struggle for independence from Britain -- that it was also a civil war between those loyal to and those opposed to the Crown.
April 24, 2021
This book gave me the most comprehensive overview of the American Revolution in a historical novel format. The author contrives a story line that threads Oliver Wiswell (main character) and his slightly goofy faithful friend Tom Buell through all the major locations and actions of the Revolution. An usual aspect is that Oliver and Tom are Loyalists — those who supported the King, not the revolution. Typically in US history we believe the Patriots (e.g., Samuel Adams, Paul Revere, etc) were the “good guys”. I was embarrassed to learn how little I actually knew about the revolution. I also see parallels between what the cultural divisions then, subsequently into the Civil War, and still apparent in American politics today.
April 15, 2018
I am a huge Kenneth Roberts fan, but just read this particular book from him. The ONLY reason this doesn't get 5 stars is simply because I compare it to Arundel, and Northwest Passage which I think are just beautiful, historical, "coming of age books"- by far my favorite subject matter. As always, I find the Loyalist perspective of the Revolution to be fascinating, and he follows this point of view through his main character Oliver. I can't help but think that writers for the series "Turn" borrowed much from this book, although making a mess of it. I recommend reading this with Ellis's non-fiction book, "Revolutionary Summer", which is a perfect companion to the Robert's book.
June 30, 2021
This historical novel by Kenneth Roberts was the origin of my interest in history. It chronicles the experiences of a Tory during the American Revolution, shedding a dark light on events that people in the United States typically glorify. It depicts brutal mobs attacking loyalists, the seizure of loyalists' property, and other atrocities committed by American rebels during the Revolution. Aside from its alternate perspective on the Revolutionary War, the book also features memorable characters and an engaging plot.
June 26, 2019
I enjoyed this book for the history in it. It was published in 1940. The story is about the revolutionary war from the Tori’s side of the conflict. If you are interested in American History I recommend it.
The four star rating is only because of the length, 800+ pages in small print. Still a good read.
The four star rating is only because of the length, 800+ pages in small print. Still a good read.
January 1, 2021
Such a fantastic book. Written about a loyalist during the American Revolution, the author tells the story of how neighbors can become adversaries simply because of politics. This story is as relevant today as when it was published in 1940.
July 10, 2019
1775-1781 American Revolution from a Tory point of view
August 29, 2019
really just informational reading .. history buffs would love it
December 14, 2022
I love anything by Kenneth Roberts, but especially this book dealing with the treatment of the Loyalists during the Revolutionary War.
January 9, 2023
A bit laborious but yet so engaging. Loved it. A different perspective on our country's birth pangs.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 72 reviews