What do you think?
Rate this book
American Tempest: How the Boston Tea Party Sparked a Revolution
On Thursday, December 16, 1773, an estimated seven dozen men, many dressed as Indians, dumped roughly £10,000 worth of tea in Boston Harbor. Whatever their motives at the time, they unleashed a social, political, and economic firestorm that would culminate in the Declaration of Independence two-and-a-half years later.The Boston Tea Party provoked a reign of terror in Boston and other American cities as tea parties erupted up and down the colonies. The turmoil stripped tens of thousands of their homes and property, and nearly 100,000 left forever in what was history's largest exodus of Americans from America. Nonetheless, John Adams called the Boston Tea Party nothing short of "magnificent," saying that "it must have important consequences."
Combining stellar scholarship with action-packed history, Harlow Giles Unger reveals the truth behind the legendary event and examines its lasting consequence--the spawning of a new, independent nation.
Combining stellar scholarship with action-packed history, Harlow Giles Unger reveals the truth behind the legendary event and examines its lasting consequence--the spawning of a new, independent nation.
306 pages, Kindle Edition
First published February 17, 2011
46 people are currently reading
745 people want to read
About the author
Harlow Giles Unger
37 books172 followersHarlow Giles Unger is an American author, historian, journalist, broadcaster, and educator known for his extensive work on American history and education. Educated at the Taft School, Yale College, and California State University, Unger began his career as a journalist for the New York Herald Tribune Overseas News Service in Paris. He later wrote for newspapers and magazines across Britain, Canada, and other countries, while also working in radio broadcasting and teaching English and journalism at New York-area colleges.
Unger has written over twenty-seven books, including ten biographies of America's Founding Fathers and a notable biography of Henry Clay. His historical works include Noah Webster: The Life and Times of an American Patriot, The Last Founding Father: James Monroe and a Nation’s Call to Greatness, and First Founding Father: Richard Henry Lee and the Call to Independence. He is also the author of the Encyclopedia of American Education, a three-volume reference work.
A former Distinguished Visiting Fellow in American History at Mount Vernon, Unger has lived in Paris and currently resides in New York City. An avid skier and horseman, he has spent time in Chamonix, France, and Jackson Hole, Wyoming. He has one son, Richard C. Unger.
Unger has written over twenty-seven books, including ten biographies of America's Founding Fathers and a notable biography of Henry Clay. His historical works include Noah Webster: The Life and Times of an American Patriot, The Last Founding Father: James Monroe and a Nation’s Call to Greatness, and First Founding Father: Richard Henry Lee and the Call to Independence. He is also the author of the Encyclopedia of American Education, a three-volume reference work.
A former Distinguished Visiting Fellow in American History at Mount Vernon, Unger has lived in Paris and currently resides in New York City. An avid skier and horseman, he has spent time in Chamonix, France, and Jackson Hole, Wyoming. He has one son, Richard C. Unger.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 63 reviews
April 9, 2011
I thought I had fallen through the rabbit hole. A Tory version of the events leading up to and following the Boston Tea Party? 18th-century Tory, that is. In Unger's version, Samuel Adams is "sinister" and "power hungry"; Hanock is a vain ("Hancock had become enamored of his gold-braided colonel’s uniform") and self serving if generous man; and the Revolution benefited only the rich. I'll leave it to you to decide. If biased, it is still well written and provides interesting details. Here are some telling quotes:
“The turmoil stripped tens of thousands of Americans of their dignity, homes, properties, and birthrights—all in the name of liberty and independence” 3
“Indeed, many [Boston merchants] were ready to sacrifice their honor as human beings—and the blood of innocents—by disguising their struggle for wealth as a quest for liberty for the common man.” 28
“As titular leaders of the radical majority, Otis and Adams used veiled threats of mob retaliation to gain control of every important committee in the House of Representatives.” 79
“Pope’s Day in 1765 marked a sharp turning point in John Hancock’s relationship with Boston radicals, and in the months that followed he drew ever closer to them—always motivated by self-preservation.” 88
“Unfortunately, Hancock’s fellow merchants had unleashed forces they could no longer control. Having called their workers and the rest of Boston’s/underclass to rebellion against British ‘taxes and tyranny,’ they aroused ambitions for liberties that most could not distinguish from license, and the result was madness.” 95-6
“The testimony at the soldiers’ trials had unmasked Sam Adams as a sinister, power-hungry plotter willing to sacrifice innocent lives and destroy the city, if necessary, to further his designs.” 149
“As Parliament debated appropriate punishment for Boston’s duplicity, even the staunchest colonist defenders spoke of Boston as a lawless city of ruffians and a hotbed of anarchy.” 151
“Hancock had little choice but to pen his legendary signature across each near-treasonous document or flee to London as quickly as possible with as many assets as he could salvage. So much of his wealth was real property, however, he knew he would not be able to leave with enough money to live in his accustomed style in London.” 157
“As merchants, landowners, and lawyers were posturing in Philadelphia, Boston was preparing for rebellion…” 193
“Warren had gone to Bunker’s Hill to warn the commander of ammunition shortages and then joined the troops at a makeshift fortification on Breed’s Hill. He thus became the only leader of the Tea Party Patriots to jump into the trenches and fire at the enemy alongside the men he had incited to go to war.” 222
“In effect, independence left those in power in each state free to exploit the land and the less fortunate without having to share their profits with the crown. Those who served the wealthy before the Revolution continued to serve them afterward, having gained no benefits.” 236
“Hancock had become enamored of his gold-braided colonel’s uniform…” 219
“The turmoil stripped tens of thousands of Americans of their dignity, homes, properties, and birthrights—all in the name of liberty and independence” 3
“Indeed, many [Boston merchants] were ready to sacrifice their honor as human beings—and the blood of innocents—by disguising their struggle for wealth as a quest for liberty for the common man.” 28
“As titular leaders of the radical majority, Otis and Adams used veiled threats of mob retaliation to gain control of every important committee in the House of Representatives.” 79
“Pope’s Day in 1765 marked a sharp turning point in John Hancock’s relationship with Boston radicals, and in the months that followed he drew ever closer to them—always motivated by self-preservation.” 88
“Unfortunately, Hancock’s fellow merchants had unleashed forces they could no longer control. Having called their workers and the rest of Boston’s/underclass to rebellion against British ‘taxes and tyranny,’ they aroused ambitions for liberties that most could not distinguish from license, and the result was madness.” 95-6
“The testimony at the soldiers’ trials had unmasked Sam Adams as a sinister, power-hungry plotter willing to sacrifice innocent lives and destroy the city, if necessary, to further his designs.” 149
“As Parliament debated appropriate punishment for Boston’s duplicity, even the staunchest colonist defenders spoke of Boston as a lawless city of ruffians and a hotbed of anarchy.” 151
“Hancock had little choice but to pen his legendary signature across each near-treasonous document or flee to London as quickly as possible with as many assets as he could salvage. So much of his wealth was real property, however, he knew he would not be able to leave with enough money to live in his accustomed style in London.” 157
“As merchants, landowners, and lawyers were posturing in Philadelphia, Boston was preparing for rebellion…” 193
“Warren had gone to Bunker’s Hill to warn the commander of ammunition shortages and then joined the troops at a makeshift fortification on Breed’s Hill. He thus became the only leader of the Tea Party Patriots to jump into the trenches and fire at the enemy alongside the men he had incited to go to war.” 222
“In effect, independence left those in power in each state free to exploit the land and the less fortunate without having to share their profits with the crown. Those who served the wealthy before the Revolution continued to serve them afterward, having gained no benefits.” 236
“Hancock had become enamored of his gold-braided colonel’s uniform…” 219
September 28, 2012
This is a clear, highly readable, and fascinating account of the Boston Tea Party, what led up to it, what followed, and how this became the spark that created the American Revolution.
Many things have been said and repeated about the Tea Party that simply aren't true. It wasn't about the tax on tea making tea unaffordable; the tea duty had been cut to the point it was undercutting the smugglers bringing in Dutch tea. It wasn't an act of vandalism by drunken thugs. the Tea Party crew were all responsible citizens, small merchants, professionals, farmers, and skilled craftsmen of Boston and the surrounding countryside. They were extremely careful to do no damage except to the tea, and to cause injury to no one.
The Tea Party was part of a rising tide of political discontent in the American colonies, arising out of conflicts between the interests of the colonies and Britain, and their lack of understanding of each other's positions. The British at home were heavily taxed to pay for the wars that had, among other things, protected the colonies. The colonists were paying almost nothing in taxes--and the colonies, beyond question, had the wealth to contribute to their own defense.
What they didn't have was either the understanding of what they were costing the mother country, or the hard currency with which taxes had to be paid.
Both sides in this conflict repeatedly tried to carry their point in ways that simply provoked and enraged the other side.
On the American side, the personalities involved are fascinating, complex, and only dimly familiar to us from grade school history class. Sam Adams is a far more interesting character than I had previously suspected, and his uneasy alliance with John Hancock, one of the few Boston plutocrats who came to side with the small merchants and the radicals in their opposition to British policy, is one of the most intriguing features of this account.
If you want to know more about the early history of the American Republic, this is a great place to begin.
Recommended.
I borrowed this book from the library.
Many things have been said and repeated about the Tea Party that simply aren't true. It wasn't about the tax on tea making tea unaffordable; the tea duty had been cut to the point it was undercutting the smugglers bringing in Dutch tea. It wasn't an act of vandalism by drunken thugs. the Tea Party crew were all responsible citizens, small merchants, professionals, farmers, and skilled craftsmen of Boston and the surrounding countryside. They were extremely careful to do no damage except to the tea, and to cause injury to no one.
The Tea Party was part of a rising tide of political discontent in the American colonies, arising out of conflicts between the interests of the colonies and Britain, and their lack of understanding of each other's positions. The British at home were heavily taxed to pay for the wars that had, among other things, protected the colonies. The colonists were paying almost nothing in taxes--and the colonies, beyond question, had the wealth to contribute to their own defense.
What they didn't have was either the understanding of what they were costing the mother country, or the hard currency with which taxes had to be paid.
Both sides in this conflict repeatedly tried to carry their point in ways that simply provoked and enraged the other side.
On the American side, the personalities involved are fascinating, complex, and only dimly familiar to us from grade school history class. Sam Adams is a far more interesting character than I had previously suspected, and his uneasy alliance with John Hancock, one of the few Boston plutocrats who came to side with the small merchants and the radicals in their opposition to British policy, is one of the most intriguing features of this account.
If you want to know more about the early history of the American Republic, this is a great place to begin.
Recommended.
I borrowed this book from the library.
April 16, 2017
I think the author wishes the American Revolution hadn't taken place.... he seemed so against it. I even looked him up to see if he was English or something. As a history major in college one of the classes I took was all about the concept of history and how there are facts and bias when those facts are examined and interpreted. This author had a definite bias and I think he may have had some points but he took it too far and only seemed to see the Revolution through his tainted lenses, leaving no room for the other side of the story. Although I guess that side is quite well represented by writers who thought the Revolution was a good thing.
This review: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show... has some good examples of the authors seemingly outright hatred of American patriots, the Sons of Liberty, John Hancock, and especially Sam Adams (whom he practically credits 100% for starting the Revolution).
I kept reading the book though because it was well written and contained some interesting information. I don't think I'd ever recommend it to others though.
This review: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show... has some good examples of the authors seemingly outright hatred of American patriots, the Sons of Liberty, John Hancock, and especially Sam Adams (whom he practically credits 100% for starting the Revolution).
I kept reading the book though because it was well written and contained some interesting information. I don't think I'd ever recommend it to others though.
February 19, 2013
Wow! They sure didn't teach us this in school. This is a very readable account of the events leading up to the Boston Tea Party and the subsequent effects, namely the Revolution. It really made me wonder what would have happened if... If King George had read and accepted the Olive Branch Petition, If there had be no Sam Adams stirring up dissent (would someone else have filled the gap?), If the British had handled things a little differently. I thought the account was fairly unbiased and explained why the British wanted to start taxing the colonists.
January 22, 2013
When I studied American History in school, I remember learning how the Americans were so upset with the British Government trying to make them pay a tax on the tea purchased from England that in December 1773 a group of them dressed like Indians boarded the ships and tossed the tea into the ocean. This action lead to the Revolutionary War, the British leaving, and the birth of the United States and its attendant rights. According to Harlow Giles Unger in AMERICAN TEMPEST, HOW THE BOSTON TEA PART SPARKED A REVOLUTION, that’s not quite what happened.
The tax on teas was the fourth tax levied on the Americans. Most of the earlier protests had been led by Sam Adams and James Otis. Their followers were dominated by ruffians and rabble rousers whose main interest was violent protests against individuals as well as the government.
The Stamp Act placed duties on five types of glass, red and white lead, paints, paper, and tea and was paid by all British subjects except the Americans. It cost less than a shilling a day per capita in US or less than 3 hours earnings a year for skilled artisans. However, merchants, publishers, and lawyers, the most influential groups, were the most heavily affected.. After protests from the Americans, all but the tax on tea were repealed. Tea, primarily drunk by wealthy women, was not a popular beverage. It was a symbol of the British and the wealthy. That was the first organized opposition to rule by the British monarchy. It united the Americans and taught them the power of organized united action against a government.
After the Bread Riots in England, the British reduced farm and property taxes 25%, cutting government revenues £500,000. It faced serious financial problems and were desperate for new sources of income. They could not reduce the cost of the miliary or the King’s £800,000 allowance and the Exchequer wanted the colonists to pay the full costs of the British military operations in North America. Except for tea, everything the colonists purchased was made in England so smuggling, which was somewhat common, was not an option for the Americans.
At that time, several states had paid or greatly reduced their war debts. Others could have done the same through land sales. The result was a call for the boycott of English goods Non-financial acts that the colonists protested included the courts trying smugglers and accomplices without juries and the direct payment of judges and governors by parliament rather than colonial legislatures. That would make the courts independent of colonial influence.
When British soldiers arrived, Adams’s backers retreated and most patriots became more moderate. However, the troops were a source of irritation to the Patriots. The British government was arrogant and they made a major miscalculation: they didn’t think any British subject would rebel.
At first, not all the colonies supported the anti-British actions. However, when town meetings without the governor’s consent became illegal, the others realized their states could also suffer. More tea parties occurred and England extended the Canadian boundaries to the Ohio River. That meant taking land owned by Virginia, George Washington, Patrick Henry, and the influential Lee family. The action united the wealthy and powerful against the British.
Committees of Correspondence spread the message of what was happening to all the colonies, in many cases inciting the Americans to take action. A Continental Association was formed which demanded a right to self-governance.
Lord Thomas Hutchinson sought reconciliation but the King demanded the rebellion be crushed. He barred New England fisherman from the North Atlantic fisheries and forbade New England colonists from trading with anyone except Britain and the British West Indies. Two week later the ban was extended to New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, and South Carolina.
Both sides began spreading propaganda and false reports of atrocities.
The immediate results of the Revolution were not what many of the people expected. The Tea Party leaders fought against taxation without representation. They not only failed to end taxation, the new independent state governments taxed more heavily than British had proposed or would propose. Americans had to support central national government and national military, both of which had been financed by the British. They had to buy arms and ammunition at a steep price. Only one member, John Hancock, rose to national prominence.
The first Virginian governor, Patrick Henry, taxed Virginians without their consent. Office holders had to be white, male property owners. Voters we same men of wealth and influence who had governed states under royal governors before revolution. South Carolina required voters and candidates for governor to have assets of at least £10,000. Pennsylvania levied a heavy poll tax. Virginia required voters to own at least 500 acres. These actions disenfranchised many who had fought in the revolution.
The wealthy continued to be able to exploit land and less fortunate. Now, they didn’t have to share their income with the crown. Only three states guaranteed the right of free speech; All states promised freedom of religion although five had state religions which everyone had to support financially. Eleven had freedom of the press. Eight offered the right of peaceful assembly. The Articles of Confederation did not guarantee individual freedoms or trial by jury of peers.
While many of these restrictions on individual freedom were removed by the Bill of Rights, others, such as voting restrictions, remained in place until the twentieth century.
AMERICAN TEMPEST is relatively easy reading and provides an interesting, alternative view of our country’s early history. It is repetitious and sometimes contradictory at times e.g., who drank tea.
The economic divide and the way the wealthy treated the rest of the colonists, the fight against paying taxes, and the effects of the split from England and our independence sounds a lot like the conflict in the US today between the classes and political parties.
The tax on teas was the fourth tax levied on the Americans. Most of the earlier protests had been led by Sam Adams and James Otis. Their followers were dominated by ruffians and rabble rousers whose main interest was violent protests against individuals as well as the government.
The Stamp Act placed duties on five types of glass, red and white lead, paints, paper, and tea and was paid by all British subjects except the Americans. It cost less than a shilling a day per capita in US or less than 3 hours earnings a year for skilled artisans. However, merchants, publishers, and lawyers, the most influential groups, were the most heavily affected.. After protests from the Americans, all but the tax on tea were repealed. Tea, primarily drunk by wealthy women, was not a popular beverage. It was a symbol of the British and the wealthy. That was the first organized opposition to rule by the British monarchy. It united the Americans and taught them the power of organized united action against a government.
After the Bread Riots in England, the British reduced farm and property taxes 25%, cutting government revenues £500,000. It faced serious financial problems and were desperate for new sources of income. They could not reduce the cost of the miliary or the King’s £800,000 allowance and the Exchequer wanted the colonists to pay the full costs of the British military operations in North America. Except for tea, everything the colonists purchased was made in England so smuggling, which was somewhat common, was not an option for the Americans.
At that time, several states had paid or greatly reduced their war debts. Others could have done the same through land sales. The result was a call for the boycott of English goods Non-financial acts that the colonists protested included the courts trying smugglers and accomplices without juries and the direct payment of judges and governors by parliament rather than colonial legislatures. That would make the courts independent of colonial influence.
When British soldiers arrived, Adams’s backers retreated and most patriots became more moderate. However, the troops were a source of irritation to the Patriots. The British government was arrogant and they made a major miscalculation: they didn’t think any British subject would rebel.
At first, not all the colonies supported the anti-British actions. However, when town meetings without the governor’s consent became illegal, the others realized their states could also suffer. More tea parties occurred and England extended the Canadian boundaries to the Ohio River. That meant taking land owned by Virginia, George Washington, Patrick Henry, and the influential Lee family. The action united the wealthy and powerful against the British.
Committees of Correspondence spread the message of what was happening to all the colonies, in many cases inciting the Americans to take action. A Continental Association was formed which demanded a right to self-governance.
Lord Thomas Hutchinson sought reconciliation but the King demanded the rebellion be crushed. He barred New England fisherman from the North Atlantic fisheries and forbade New England colonists from trading with anyone except Britain and the British West Indies. Two week later the ban was extended to New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, and South Carolina.
Both sides began spreading propaganda and false reports of atrocities.
The immediate results of the Revolution were not what many of the people expected. The Tea Party leaders fought against taxation without representation. They not only failed to end taxation, the new independent state governments taxed more heavily than British had proposed or would propose. Americans had to support central national government and national military, both of which had been financed by the British. They had to buy arms and ammunition at a steep price. Only one member, John Hancock, rose to national prominence.
The first Virginian governor, Patrick Henry, taxed Virginians without their consent. Office holders had to be white, male property owners. Voters we same men of wealth and influence who had governed states under royal governors before revolution. South Carolina required voters and candidates for governor to have assets of at least £10,000. Pennsylvania levied a heavy poll tax. Virginia required voters to own at least 500 acres. These actions disenfranchised many who had fought in the revolution.
The wealthy continued to be able to exploit land and less fortunate. Now, they didn’t have to share their income with the crown. Only three states guaranteed the right of free speech; All states promised freedom of religion although five had state religions which everyone had to support financially. Eleven had freedom of the press. Eight offered the right of peaceful assembly. The Articles of Confederation did not guarantee individual freedoms or trial by jury of peers.
While many of these restrictions on individual freedom were removed by the Bill of Rights, others, such as voting restrictions, remained in place until the twentieth century.
AMERICAN TEMPEST is relatively easy reading and provides an interesting, alternative view of our country’s early history. It is repetitious and sometimes contradictory at times e.g., who drank tea.
The economic divide and the way the wealthy treated the rest of the colonists, the fight against paying taxes, and the effects of the split from England and our independence sounds a lot like the conflict in the US today between the classes and political parties.
July 30, 2018
Definitely a different reading of the history of the beginning of the American Revolution than I grew up with.
January 11, 2015
What a really interesting book. I picked it up because I enjoyed Unger's biography of John Quincy Adams. The title here isn't necessarily misleading or inaccurate, but I must say it did not prepare me for the author's message. In a nutshell, Unger tells the story of the brewing tensions in Boston leading up to the American Revolution, from what comes across as nearly a Loyalist's point of view.
The author's opinions of the main cast of characters reads loud and clear. (Indeed, after reading reader reviews of some of his other books, it seems he is often chastised for taking a highly biased viewpoint--although in his biography of JQA I thought he struck an acceptable balance). In American Tempest, Sam Adams--hero and leader of the Sons of Liberty, as we were taught in school--is vilified as an uncouth, deceitful, rabble-rouser with a chip on his shoulder; As a young man, he saw his father disowned by the rest of the Boston elite after his land bank scheme pissed everyone off, and as an adult, Sam is hell bent on taking down the establishment at any cost. John Hancock is clearly Unger's favorite Founding Father--for most of the story, it seems he can do no wrong. A major theme of the book is the difference between Adams's and Hancock's approach to the impending American Revolution, and their battle over leadership of the evolving "Tea Party Patriot" movement. Astute businessman, wealthy socialite, and talented leader, a civilized and even-keeled Hancock becomes the hero of the story this time.
An interesting if unexpected third character arises in Unger's narrative--Massachusetts Chief Justice Peter Oliver. Unexpected because Oliver, with his unpopular Loyalist opinions, was quickly reduced to an all-but-helpless spectator in pre-Revolutionary Boston, eventually fleeing to exile in England. However, he left behind rich memoirs detailing the entire ordeal from his perspective. Unger relies heavily on Oliver's words to explain the Loyalist point of view which, as I mentioned earlier, underlies the entire book. Additional Loyalist voices would have enhanced the strength of this position, but it was nevertheless very interesting to hear from Oliver, whose thoughts I'm sure were ignored in our school textbooks.
Overall, a thought-provoking work that challenges the traditional tale of Boston's Sons of Liberty. Is it a balanced view? Not really, but then again, neither are the formative stories you were taught in school. Is it worth reading and thinking about? Absolutely yes.
The author's opinions of the main cast of characters reads loud and clear. (Indeed, after reading reader reviews of some of his other books, it seems he is often chastised for taking a highly biased viewpoint--although in his biography of JQA I thought he struck an acceptable balance). In American Tempest, Sam Adams--hero and leader of the Sons of Liberty, as we were taught in school--is vilified as an uncouth, deceitful, rabble-rouser with a chip on his shoulder; As a young man, he saw his father disowned by the rest of the Boston elite after his land bank scheme pissed everyone off, and as an adult, Sam is hell bent on taking down the establishment at any cost. John Hancock is clearly Unger's favorite Founding Father--for most of the story, it seems he can do no wrong. A major theme of the book is the difference between Adams's and Hancock's approach to the impending American Revolution, and their battle over leadership of the evolving "Tea Party Patriot" movement. Astute businessman, wealthy socialite, and talented leader, a civilized and even-keeled Hancock becomes the hero of the story this time.
An interesting if unexpected third character arises in Unger's narrative--Massachusetts Chief Justice Peter Oliver. Unexpected because Oliver, with his unpopular Loyalist opinions, was quickly reduced to an all-but-helpless spectator in pre-Revolutionary Boston, eventually fleeing to exile in England. However, he left behind rich memoirs detailing the entire ordeal from his perspective. Unger relies heavily on Oliver's words to explain the Loyalist point of view which, as I mentioned earlier, underlies the entire book. Additional Loyalist voices would have enhanced the strength of this position, but it was nevertheless very interesting to hear from Oliver, whose thoughts I'm sure were ignored in our school textbooks.
Overall, a thought-provoking work that challenges the traditional tale of Boston's Sons of Liberty. Is it a balanced view? Not really, but then again, neither are the formative stories you were taught in school. Is it worth reading and thinking about? Absolutely yes.
November 2, 2011
saw the disconcerting ant-authority bent of the early Revolution as well as British authorities who regarded themselves as Americans and traced roots as far back as anyone on the Patriot side. Still, author is honest about the Crown's myopia and mistakes at certain points. The interrelation of the Boston/Harvard elite before the fissure of Revolutionary events occurred is most interesting.
August 6, 2018
This covers the events leading up to the American revolution, and also the people instrumental in helping that happen.
A group of rabble rousing malcontents, merchants, shop keepers, yellow journalists, and the landed gentry, and common folk, led by Samuel Adams (cousin to John Adams, and son of the brewer Samuel Adams senior), the discontent of certain people, and a surprising number of false stories ‘fake news”, if you will, helped this country along to the glorious experiment that gave us our republic today.
I am glad to have read this. Those people did not have such noble feelings in the run up to our Declaration of Independence. They wanted lower taxes, basically, and the irony 20 years later when having to tax citizens of the fledgling USA at higher rates than the British kingdom had taxed them, was not lost on the leaders of that time. Most of the people groused about one thing or another, but they were basically 13 little countries who didn’t interact much until after the Boston Tea Party. Then some began to rally round the real instigators, The Sons of Liberty, led by an ill-mannered, embezzling, ne’er do well by the name of Samuel Adams .
His character was less than desirable, but he wrote great tracts and was able to whip others into a frenzy of discontent and righteous indignation. He found people to pay his way, bail him out of at least 3 charges of embezzlement, yet he was used by them as well, as his turn of phrase abetted others’ needs to get this news to the rank and file.
John Hancock was an influential person,who became wealthy by being adopted by his aunt and uncle, and wealthier still by his own sharp mind and business practices. He tried playing both sides for the 10 years prior to the war, and was on again off again with Samuel Adams for the rest of his life; a real love hate relationship.
Hancock mostly is shown as an heroic person, but he certainly was a dandy and didn’t mind playing the part. He was also a cooler head when others lost theirs.
I have gone on about these two major players because the two were poles apart in wealth, and temperament; yet, they both played important parts in the beginning, and some smaller parts later.
The thing I find most interesting is this: our country did not deal well with dissenters and the hypocrisy was as amazing then, as it is now. It seems no one felt it necessary to include the truths of our history in the classes we were taught growing up. This is most disturbing to me because if we do not learn from the mistakes of the past, we are doomed to repeat them.
Individuals with petty grievances and hidden agendas, unsavory rabble rousers, liars and cheats, abound in our history no matter how noble the outcome. And apparently. Independence was a side note..and yes it was noble and worth fighting for. But I wish we would teach the truth ... about this as about the emancipation proclamation..the civil war was not fought to free the slaves, that too was a noble side light, it was fought to keep the south from seceding. And the war of Independence was started to resist paying taxes...not necessarily to get rid of the crown.
I want to live in a country that confesses it’s sins, admits its mistakes, makes amends for the grievous errors made, and vows to do better. I want a government that lives up to that noble document The Declaration of Independence...”We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal...” and I want it to be true and lived truly.
Sadly, this book has shown me how far we still have to go.
A group of rabble rousing malcontents, merchants, shop keepers, yellow journalists, and the landed gentry, and common folk, led by Samuel Adams (cousin to John Adams, and son of the brewer Samuel Adams senior), the discontent of certain people, and a surprising number of false stories ‘fake news”, if you will, helped this country along to the glorious experiment that gave us our republic today.
I am glad to have read this. Those people did not have such noble feelings in the run up to our Declaration of Independence. They wanted lower taxes, basically, and the irony 20 years later when having to tax citizens of the fledgling USA at higher rates than the British kingdom had taxed them, was not lost on the leaders of that time. Most of the people groused about one thing or another, but they were basically 13 little countries who didn’t interact much until after the Boston Tea Party. Then some began to rally round the real instigators, The Sons of Liberty, led by an ill-mannered, embezzling, ne’er do well by the name of Samuel Adams .
His character was less than desirable, but he wrote great tracts and was able to whip others into a frenzy of discontent and righteous indignation. He found people to pay his way, bail him out of at least 3 charges of embezzlement, yet he was used by them as well, as his turn of phrase abetted others’ needs to get this news to the rank and file.
John Hancock was an influential person,who became wealthy by being adopted by his aunt and uncle, and wealthier still by his own sharp mind and business practices. He tried playing both sides for the 10 years prior to the war, and was on again off again with Samuel Adams for the rest of his life; a real love hate relationship.
Hancock mostly is shown as an heroic person, but he certainly was a dandy and didn’t mind playing the part. He was also a cooler head when others lost theirs.
I have gone on about these two major players because the two were poles apart in wealth, and temperament; yet, they both played important parts in the beginning, and some smaller parts later.
The thing I find most interesting is this: our country did not deal well with dissenters and the hypocrisy was as amazing then, as it is now. It seems no one felt it necessary to include the truths of our history in the classes we were taught growing up. This is most disturbing to me because if we do not learn from the mistakes of the past, we are doomed to repeat them.
Individuals with petty grievances and hidden agendas, unsavory rabble rousers, liars and cheats, abound in our history no matter how noble the outcome. And apparently. Independence was a side note..and yes it was noble and worth fighting for. But I wish we would teach the truth ... about this as about the emancipation proclamation..the civil war was not fought to free the slaves, that too was a noble side light, it was fought to keep the south from seceding. And the war of Independence was started to resist paying taxes...not necessarily to get rid of the crown.
I want to live in a country that confesses it’s sins, admits its mistakes, makes amends for the grievous errors made, and vows to do better. I want a government that lives up to that noble document The Declaration of Independence...”We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal...” and I want it to be true and lived truly.
Sadly, this book has shown me how far we still have to go.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
May 6, 2015
Another worthwhile read by H. G. Unger
The level of violence, guillibility, lack of foresight, and self-centeredness in individuals was surprising.
Some of the "patriot" thugs of Boston seemed to enjoy beating up people, burning houses and businesses, and violence in general. And some of the leaders played to that spirit.
The quantity of outright lies and distortions that were spread by individuals or publications was shocking; but the average colonial didn't seem to have any skepticism. They didn't "consider the source."
Until reading this work, in my ignorance, I thought of Sam Adams as a thoughtful idealist; yet the book shows him as a failed businessman, a poor manager of his own finances or those of his offices, and a rabble-rouser who's only thought was putting/keeping himself in power.
This book compares the pre revolution state of taxes, individual freedoms, and political governance to the post-war situation. Financially, people were taxed more after the revolution. Many people - slaves, the poor, those without sufficient landholdings, ... - did not have a voice in government, but were still being taxed.
This book forces me to compare then and now. How much have things changed? A lot, especially with respect to political representation, violence, and skepticism. But with respect to our dark side, maybe not so much.
Notes while reading:
Introduction
- Nov. 29, 1773, the Boston Tea Party begins.
- A tax of 3 cents per pound of tea.
- Larger wealthy merchants could afford it; others could not.
Chap. 1, "Rally, Mohawks!"
- Men made up as Mohawks
- Samuel Adams and other "tea party" supporters considered it a confiscation of their property.
- Previous taxes:
-- Molasses Act of 1733
-- Grenville acts of 1754
-- Stamp act of 1765
-- Townshends Acts of 1767, which included the Tea Tax.
Chap. 2, The Saints of Boston
- Military needs was a nearly constant source of revenue for merchants.
- Rum, the favorite drink at the time, was made from molasses, and had a profit margin of ~1200%
- The Molasses act would have cut that profit to only ~1161%; oh, sad lose.
- In short, a money-making ethic without bounds.
- The chapter title refers to merchants who returned some of their profits for community benefit.
Chap. 3, Mr. Cockle: The Governor's Creature
- George Washington gets his first taste of hit-and-run warfare; lucky to still be alive.
- Illicit trade continues; lengthens the British-French hostilities.
- Cockle relabels sugar cane from British West Indies to Anguilla, avoiding British duties.
- Caught, but establishes a new norm.
Chap. 4, The Miserable State of Tributary Slaves
- British continue to provide military for American security. Who pays?
- But maybe the military is simple to control the people.
- 1763 American Revenue Act
-- Tighten up collection
-- Stamp duties
-- Currency act
- Smugglers are US.
Chap. 5, Flockwork from England
- John Hancock times 3.
-- First arrived from England in 1634.
-- Second also became a minister.
-- Third, born 1737, adopted by uncle Thomas, learns merchant business.
- Assumes control in 1764 after death of Thomas.
Chap. 6, The Flame Is Spread
- French and Indian War (in US), 1754-1763, but mostly 1756-1763,
-- aka War of the Conquest,
-- aka Seven Years' War.
- Major participants: Great Britain and France.
- "For the better part of 2 centuries, New England's economy had been based on war or the threat of war."
- Now the military isn't buying, and the economy is hurting.
- The British government raises taxes.
- Merchant protests grew.
- John Adams and Patrick Henry advocate against the Stamp Act.
- Drunken mob causes damage.
- Stamp Act opponents rally in many cities to form the Sons of Liberty.
Chap. 7, A Diabolical Scene
- Mob violence spreads
- Boston merchants stop accepting goods from England; inventories swell.
- British merchants feel the pain.
Chap. 8, A Blackguard Town
- The Stamp Act is repealed.
- Sam Adams and Otis continue to press for more American autonomy.
- UK passes Townshend Acts, more taxes.
- Americans incensed.
- John Handcock continues to be the responsible humanitarian, seeking the middle ground.
Chap. 9, Farewell the Tea-board
- More mob violence.
- By 1770, the Townshend Acts were repealed, except for tea.
The last few chapters have shown Sam Adams, and Otis, and others repeatably lie and misrepresent.
Sam Adams is a master at inciting people to act on his lies.
Adams and his mobs destroy people's homes and businesses.
The mobs physically beat up others, to include tar and feathering.
They push for confrontations and provoke others to act unwisely.
Then Adams and crew highlight and expand on those unwise actions.
So, another round of lies continues.
Why are those followers so naive, so thoughtless?
Granted, communications then were slow and unreliable.
Granted newspapers of the time would sometimes post articles without any fact checking.
But, people should know to "consider the source".
Will there always be ruffians for liberty, football/soccer matches, pubs/bars, whatever?
I guess some of our darker side has not changed all that much.
Chap. 10, "Damn You! Fire!"
- Boston crowds make a habit of provoking and throwing things at the British troops.
- An incident at a sentry station becomes the "Boston Massacre".
- The author states: 2 dead and 6 wounded but recovered.
- Wikipedia states: 5 killed, 6 injured.
- By comparison, sounds like a normal day of traffic accidents in any good-sized city.
- Soldiers are tried; John Adams, future president, is defense counsel.
- Seeing the fairness of the trial, people settle down a little.
Chap. 11, "Let Every Man Do What Is Right!"
- Townshend Act repealed; renewed prosperity
- Court testimony shows "Sam Adams as a sinister, power-hungry plotter willing to sacrifice innocent lives and destroy the city, if necessary, to further his designs."
- Adams loses influence; his gangs fall apart.
- The Crown reaches out to John Hancock.
- Part of the Townshend Act is restored; judges are paid by the Crown rather than colonial legislatures.
- Adams reacts.
- More tea problems. Adams reacts. Towns ban tea drinking.
- Sons of Liberty dump tea into Boston Harbor, Dec. 16, 1773.
Chap. 12, "We Will Never Be Taxed!"
- Parliament decides to punish all of america, not just the offenders.
- Parliament passes Quebec Act, transferring territory north of the Ohio River to Canada
- Many wealthy americans stripped of holdings.
- Patrick Henry: "United we stand, divided we fall"
Chap. 13, "We Must Fight!"
- Towns form militias.
- Minutemen created.
- Another Coercive Act: quarter troops in private homes.
- Delegates to Continental Congress.
- MA provincial congress; rejects slave rights.
- More Parliament trade restrictions.
- Tensions escalate; people leave Boston.
Chap. 14, Savage Barbarites and Diabolical Cruelties
- Lexington, full battle, 1775.
- Second Continental Congress in Philadelphia. Hancock is moderator.
- Artillery forces Gen. Howe to leave Boston, taking some loyalists.
- Remaining loyalists were treated badly.
- July 4, 1776, Jefferson's Declaration of Independence is presented to Congress and approved without dissent.
- Copies were sent to the states for their approval.
Chap. 15, The Forgotten Patriots
Appendix A. The Declaration of Independence and Its Signatories
The level of violence, guillibility, lack of foresight, and self-centeredness in individuals was surprising.
Some of the "patriot" thugs of Boston seemed to enjoy beating up people, burning houses and businesses, and violence in general. And some of the leaders played to that spirit.
The quantity of outright lies and distortions that were spread by individuals or publications was shocking; but the average colonial didn't seem to have any skepticism. They didn't "consider the source."
Until reading this work, in my ignorance, I thought of Sam Adams as a thoughtful idealist; yet the book shows him as a failed businessman, a poor manager of his own finances or those of his offices, and a rabble-rouser who's only thought was putting/keeping himself in power.
This book compares the pre revolution state of taxes, individual freedoms, and political governance to the post-war situation. Financially, people were taxed more after the revolution. Many people - slaves, the poor, those without sufficient landholdings, ... - did not have a voice in government, but were still being taxed.
This book forces me to compare then and now. How much have things changed? A lot, especially with respect to political representation, violence, and skepticism. But with respect to our dark side, maybe not so much.
Notes while reading:
Introduction
- Nov. 29, 1773, the Boston Tea Party begins.
- A tax of 3 cents per pound of tea.
- Larger wealthy merchants could afford it; others could not.
Chap. 1, "Rally, Mohawks!"
- Men made up as Mohawks
- Samuel Adams and other "tea party" supporters considered it a confiscation of their property.
- Previous taxes:
-- Molasses Act of 1733
-- Grenville acts of 1754
-- Stamp act of 1765
-- Townshends Acts of 1767, which included the Tea Tax.
Chap. 2, The Saints of Boston
- Military needs was a nearly constant source of revenue for merchants.
- Rum, the favorite drink at the time, was made from molasses, and had a profit margin of ~1200%
- The Molasses act would have cut that profit to only ~1161%; oh, sad lose.
- In short, a money-making ethic without bounds.
- The chapter title refers to merchants who returned some of their profits for community benefit.
Chap. 3, Mr. Cockle: The Governor's Creature
- George Washington gets his first taste of hit-and-run warfare; lucky to still be alive.
- Illicit trade continues; lengthens the British-French hostilities.
- Cockle relabels sugar cane from British West Indies to Anguilla, avoiding British duties.
- Caught, but establishes a new norm.
Chap. 4, The Miserable State of Tributary Slaves
- British continue to provide military for American security. Who pays?
- But maybe the military is simple to control the people.
- 1763 American Revenue Act
-- Tighten up collection
-- Stamp duties
-- Currency act
- Smugglers are US.
Chap. 5, Flockwork from England
- John Hancock times 3.
-- First arrived from England in 1634.
-- Second also became a minister.
-- Third, born 1737, adopted by uncle Thomas, learns merchant business.
- Assumes control in 1764 after death of Thomas.
Chap. 6, The Flame Is Spread
- French and Indian War (in US), 1754-1763, but mostly 1756-1763,
-- aka War of the Conquest,
-- aka Seven Years' War.
- Major participants: Great Britain and France.
- "For the better part of 2 centuries, New England's economy had been based on war or the threat of war."
- Now the military isn't buying, and the economy is hurting.
- The British government raises taxes.
- Merchant protests grew.
- John Adams and Patrick Henry advocate against the Stamp Act.
- Drunken mob causes damage.
- Stamp Act opponents rally in many cities to form the Sons of Liberty.
Chap. 7, A Diabolical Scene
- Mob violence spreads
- Boston merchants stop accepting goods from England; inventories swell.
- British merchants feel the pain.
Chap. 8, A Blackguard Town
- The Stamp Act is repealed.
- Sam Adams and Otis continue to press for more American autonomy.
- UK passes Townshend Acts, more taxes.
- Americans incensed.
- John Handcock continues to be the responsible humanitarian, seeking the middle ground.
Chap. 9, Farewell the Tea-board
- More mob violence.
- By 1770, the Townshend Acts were repealed, except for tea.
The last few chapters have shown Sam Adams, and Otis, and others repeatably lie and misrepresent.
Sam Adams is a master at inciting people to act on his lies.
Adams and his mobs destroy people's homes and businesses.
The mobs physically beat up others, to include tar and feathering.
They push for confrontations and provoke others to act unwisely.
Then Adams and crew highlight and expand on those unwise actions.
So, another round of lies continues.
Why are those followers so naive, so thoughtless?
Granted, communications then were slow and unreliable.
Granted newspapers of the time would sometimes post articles without any fact checking.
But, people should know to "consider the source".
Will there always be ruffians for liberty, football/soccer matches, pubs/bars, whatever?
I guess some of our darker side has not changed all that much.
Chap. 10, "Damn You! Fire!"
- Boston crowds make a habit of provoking and throwing things at the British troops.
- An incident at a sentry station becomes the "Boston Massacre".
- The author states: 2 dead and 6 wounded but recovered.
- Wikipedia states: 5 killed, 6 injured.
- By comparison, sounds like a normal day of traffic accidents in any good-sized city.
- Soldiers are tried; John Adams, future president, is defense counsel.
- Seeing the fairness of the trial, people settle down a little.
Chap. 11, "Let Every Man Do What Is Right!"
- Townshend Act repealed; renewed prosperity
- Court testimony shows "Sam Adams as a sinister, power-hungry plotter willing to sacrifice innocent lives and destroy the city, if necessary, to further his designs."
- Adams loses influence; his gangs fall apart.
- The Crown reaches out to John Hancock.
- Part of the Townshend Act is restored; judges are paid by the Crown rather than colonial legislatures.
- Adams reacts.
- More tea problems. Adams reacts. Towns ban tea drinking.
- Sons of Liberty dump tea into Boston Harbor, Dec. 16, 1773.
Chap. 12, "We Will Never Be Taxed!"
- Parliament decides to punish all of america, not just the offenders.
- Parliament passes Quebec Act, transferring territory north of the Ohio River to Canada
- Many wealthy americans stripped of holdings.
- Patrick Henry: "United we stand, divided we fall"
Chap. 13, "We Must Fight!"
- Towns form militias.
- Minutemen created.
- Another Coercive Act: quarter troops in private homes.
- Delegates to Continental Congress.
- MA provincial congress; rejects slave rights.
- More Parliament trade restrictions.
- Tensions escalate; people leave Boston.
Chap. 14, Savage Barbarites and Diabolical Cruelties
- Lexington, full battle, 1775.
- Second Continental Congress in Philadelphia. Hancock is moderator.
- Artillery forces Gen. Howe to leave Boston, taking some loyalists.
- Remaining loyalists were treated badly.
- July 4, 1776, Jefferson's Declaration of Independence is presented to Congress and approved without dissent.
- Copies were sent to the states for their approval.
Chap. 15, The Forgotten Patriots
Appendix A. The Declaration of Independence and Its Signatories
July 5, 2020
Solid overview of how the Boston Tea Party came to be, and how the city became the ground zero of the American War of Independence.
Unger writes with an authoritative voice, even if a bit scatterbrained at times; the first half of the book especially gives this impression. But overall, he successfully conveys the gradual slide from peaceful colonial city to a hotbed of sedition and mob violence, focusing on figureheads such as Samuel Adams and John Hancock, who used their influence to aid the Patriots' stand against British injustice. It was especially interesting to note just how violent the Boston Patriots were, and Unger spared no detail in describing how they looted the homes of various Loyalists, and often tarred-and-feathered them, among other humiliations. The reader must work out whether the ends justified the means, and Unger leaves the question open. I for one feel as though the Patriot mobs committed gross injustices against their fellow Bostonians, but did the eventual formation of the American republic justify it? Who knows. These are questions we all must answer for ourselves, especially in the current sociopolitical climate, where there are many wanton acts of violence being committed and a crop of left-wing activists egging it on. The Tea Party Patriots will inevitably be cited as justification for violence by those who egregiously lack any nuance in their interpretation of history. It is best to equip ourselves with as much knowledge as possible.
Very solid book, and one that belongs on any American history bookshelf.
Unger writes with an authoritative voice, even if a bit scatterbrained at times; the first half of the book especially gives this impression. But overall, he successfully conveys the gradual slide from peaceful colonial city to a hotbed of sedition and mob violence, focusing on figureheads such as Samuel Adams and John Hancock, who used their influence to aid the Patriots' stand against British injustice. It was especially interesting to note just how violent the Boston Patriots were, and Unger spared no detail in describing how they looted the homes of various Loyalists, and often tarred-and-feathered them, among other humiliations. The reader must work out whether the ends justified the means, and Unger leaves the question open. I for one feel as though the Patriot mobs committed gross injustices against their fellow Bostonians, but did the eventual formation of the American republic justify it? Who knows. These are questions we all must answer for ourselves, especially in the current sociopolitical climate, where there are many wanton acts of violence being committed and a crop of left-wing activists egging it on. The Tea Party Patriots will inevitably be cited as justification for violence by those who egregiously lack any nuance in their interpretation of history. It is best to equip ourselves with as much knowledge as possible.
Very solid book, and one that belongs on any American history bookshelf.
December 17, 2019
A book that I did not intend to get so much information from, "American Tempest" makes no pretentions to overt blind patriotism. Just history. History that I thought I had a fair grasp of. What the American nation is today is the result of more moderate but firm founders such as John Hancock and George Washington. Hancock was quite the fence rider on matters pertaining to colonial relations with Great Britain right up till he had to make a decision one way or another and Washington like many of his southern compatriots was disgusted by the mob mentality that seemed to take over Boston and then other ports. Hancock's story was the most interesting in this book. The great bulk of this read takes place before the American Revolution proper when street toughs, dock workers, craftsmen, and even a few of the merchants were captivated and motivated by the vociferous haranguing of the ambitious Sam Adams in their nightly tavern visits. American independence had it's beginning in these rather scurrilous assumptions targeted at Britain's parliament but in the end it was high time in any case for Americans, that is what they were after three and four generations, to run their own affairs. This book is a must read that fleshes out many corners not usually explored so deeply in other books on Boston's role in the founding of the United States. A very good read.
June 12, 2017
I would like to give this book another 1/2 star but that can't be done so here it is in print: 3 1/2 stars.
I liked this book but it really is a strange read. In fact I would say this is one of the weirdest books of Colonial/Revolutionary history I've ever read. Its like a Tory wrote it but not really a Tory but a modern Tory. There is a very big bias that shines through. That being said I love reading different interpretations of events so it didn't bother me it was not all Gung-Ho America. I think anyone who reads enough history from this period realizes that violence was used against people unjustly just for holding the wrong political beliefs from time to time but not one hundred percent of the time and that mob violence did occur. But on the flip side I felt the authors picture of Sam Adams as a vicious bloodthirsty thug was over the line. While he was no saint he wasn't some Machiavellian warlord of the streets of Boston.
I like all of Unger's books and I've never noticed this much of a bias before. Maybe it was a one off. I still need to read his books on John Quincy Adams and Washington. If I had to pick this wasn't my favorite book of his but worth the read.
I liked this book but it really is a strange read. In fact I would say this is one of the weirdest books of Colonial/Revolutionary history I've ever read. Its like a Tory wrote it but not really a Tory but a modern Tory. There is a very big bias that shines through. That being said I love reading different interpretations of events so it didn't bother me it was not all Gung-Ho America. I think anyone who reads enough history from this period realizes that violence was used against people unjustly just for holding the wrong political beliefs from time to time but not one hundred percent of the time and that mob violence did occur. But on the flip side I felt the authors picture of Sam Adams as a vicious bloodthirsty thug was over the line. While he was no saint he wasn't some Machiavellian warlord of the streets of Boston.
I like all of Unger's books and I've never noticed this much of a bias before. Maybe it was a one off. I still need to read his books on John Quincy Adams and Washington. If I had to pick this wasn't my favorite book of his but worth the read.
December 24, 2023
Finished American Tempest: How the Boston Tea Party Sparked a Revolution by Harlow Giles Unger written in 2012. I really like this book. My college and high school US History courses covered the mid 18th century and the run up to the American Revolution in 5-10 pages in a most cursory way. This book fleshes out the people as well as the events in colonial America in the mid 1700’s and ends with the start of the American Revolution. There are lots of events and circumstances that don’t shine as well as many history books present like, New England smugglers sold supplies to the French in the Seven Years War while loudly arguing for British support against the Indians, that many of the Tea Party Patriots in pre Revolutionary Boston were little more than a mob, that British citizens paid more than 20 times the taxes that the colonists did and England paid an enormous sum to defend the colonists, and more. As is often said, not all history is black & white. For a self described history nerd this book was eye opening.
April 16, 2025
Overall, this was a good book but maybe not the best I have read. There was a lot of information regarding the causes and lead up to the Tea Party, which made the book feel top heavy. I wish the author had focused more on the aftermath of the Tea Party, as the title suggested. Even with the imbalance, this was a thorough history of Boston from 1770-1776. The book mentions other colonies and leaders briefly but the main focus of the book is in Boston. I also felt like the personal descriptions of some of the historical figures seemed slightly biased. For example, the author seemed to imply more than once that Sam Adams coerced or manipulated John Hancock (especially when he was young) into certain actions and beliefs - almost as if Hancock would not or could not have participated in the capacity that he did without the influence of Adams and that it was slightly against his will. I felt like the author had a deep dislike of Sam Adams in general. I don't know what his issue with Sam Adams but he really didn't paint Adams in a positive light at all.
May 22, 2019
Interesting history with lots of details, though somewhat of a biased Tory viewpoint. In Unger's view, the American Revolution was "for nought" soon after its completion. In concluding his book, Unger explains:
"One of the ironies of the American Revolution, of the Tea Party Tempest, is that it cost the new nation some of America's most brilliant people, men that Patrick Henry described as 'an enterprising, monied people,' who would have made enormous contributions to the new nation's political, economic, and social evolution. Even more ironic was that a decade after independence, the American government seemed to mirror the very British government that Tea Party Patriots had fought to shatter. Virginia's Patrick Henry railed that 'the American Constitution had created a great a mighty president with the powers of a king, and given Congress the powers of Parliament to impose unlimited direct taxation.' The revolution from Britain, it seemed, had been for nought."
"One of the ironies of the American Revolution, of the Tea Party Tempest, is that it cost the new nation some of America's most brilliant people, men that Patrick Henry described as 'an enterprising, monied people,' who would have made enormous contributions to the new nation's political, economic, and social evolution. Even more ironic was that a decade after independence, the American government seemed to mirror the very British government that Tea Party Patriots had fought to shatter. Virginia's Patrick Henry railed that 'the American Constitution had created a great a mighty president with the powers of a king, and given Congress the powers of Parliament to impose unlimited direct taxation.' The revolution from Britain, it seemed, had been for nought."
August 28, 2018
Readable and creates an interesting narrative that’s accessible and easy to follow. I appreciated learning more about Hancock’s contributions to the “Glorious Cause.”
That said, there are also a few factual errors here and there that threw me for a bit of a loop, and some sections I wished were more heavily cited so I could learn more about that particular discussion. I agree with other reviewers with regards to the seeming negative bias towards the event and particularly towards Samuel Adams. I will be using this to look more into the author’s sources to do my own research, but I can’t say I’d recommend it beyond the desire to get an alternative perspective on the lead up to the American Revolution.
That said, there are also a few factual errors here and there that threw me for a bit of a loop, and some sections I wished were more heavily cited so I could learn more about that particular discussion. I agree with other reviewers with regards to the seeming negative bias towards the event and particularly towards Samuel Adams. I will be using this to look more into the author’s sources to do my own research, but I can’t say I’d recommend it beyond the desire to get an alternative perspective on the lead up to the American Revolution.
April 24, 2021
This was a different way to approach the American Revolution. I have read hundreds of founding father books to include biographies of most of the Presidents. I understand the actual dates and characters in this American foundation story. Mr. Unger does not approach the story that way. I think he is trying to not be pro American or pro British. It seems he is wondering why it went sideways for both sides, with the new Americans winning. Since he is not taking the American side and has some extremely negative comments for many of our Founding Fathers, I am not sure if it is just a bash America book. Lots out there and since I'm an American, I don't want to believe I live in a hellhole. I think the book should be read to get a different outlook.
June 15, 2025
"American Tempest" offers a compelling look at the events surrounding Boston, from the years leading up to the Boston Tea Party to the formation of the Articles of Confederation. The book reveals that many of the underlying tensions stemmed from economic struggles among the wealthy rather than broader societal issues. I particularly enjoyed the insights into Samuel Adams and John Hancock, as well as the role of the press in shaping public sentiment and political movements. Arecommended read for history buffs seeking a deeper understanding of the Revolutionary era.
June 15, 2021
Unger makes an interesting argument for the Loyalists. I think that he goes a little overboard in his criticism of Sam Adams, using too strong adjectives to denigrate a man that Unger apparently thinks was th devil incarnate. Unger does give a fascinating, and seemingly fair, description of John Hancock. Like one of the other reviewers, I checked to see whether Unger is British. Also, like many reviewers, I feel that the book is an interesting and worthwhile read.
October 23, 2019
Another very interesting book by Mr. Unger. I believe I have now read five of his books. I find this book to be very to-the-point with in-depths descriptions of the subjects. In this case, the discussion regarding John Hancock's role bringing forth the early portions of the American Revolution which grants him the most famous signature on the Declaration of Independence.
May 22, 2022
Main takeaways:
- Hancock was much more important that I realized and had every expectation of becoming president.
- Americans rebelled against minor taxes and ended up paying larger ones when they became independent.
- Sam Adam’s was very different than the other founding fathers - bankrupt and coarser
-James Bowdoin was Hancock’s scapegoat.
- Hancock was much more important that I realized and had every expectation of becoming president.
- Americans rebelled against minor taxes and ended up paying larger ones when they became independent.
- Sam Adam’s was very different than the other founding fathers - bankrupt and coarser
-James Bowdoin was Hancock’s scapegoat.
November 12, 2022
I really enjoyed this book. I have never found a book about the American Revolution which focused so much on Sam Adams and John Hancock. I learned a lot about the politics behind the Revolution without feeling like I was reading one of my college textbooks. I would recommend this book to anyone who wanted to learn more about the build-up to the Revolution.
November 5, 2021
A clear and unreserved look at what was happening behind the myths of the American Revolution. Centered on Boston and the key legends of the age, this provides a good insight into motivations for people like Hutchinson, Hancock, S. Adams, and others.
June 13, 2017
Very detailed information about what led up to the Boston Tea Party and then the American Revolution. Very good!
August 25, 2019
The part on the tea party was kind of boring, but the part on the government afterward was really quite interesting. I learned that only one royal governor went over to the patriot sign.
March 12, 2020
It was a good review of all the difficulties that preceded and followed the Boston Tea Party. The best chapter was the final one where it detailed what happened to all the key players.
February 18, 2021
A very well written account of the early days of the American Revolution. The author offers great insight into the lives and opinions of the Tea Party Patriots.
December 24, 2023
Would love to learn more about the American Revolution. Great read overall
July 19, 2024
An exceptional perspective on this time.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 63 reviews