The history of the American rebellion against England, written by one of America's preeminent eighteenth-century historians, differs from many views of the Revolution. It is not colored by excessive worship of the Founding Fathers but, instead, permeated by sympathy for all those involved in the conflict. Alden has taken advantage of recent scholarship that has altered opinions about George III and Lord North. But most of all this is a balanced history—political, military, social, constitutional—of the thirteen colonies from the French and Indian War in 1763 to Washington's inauguration in 1789. Whether dealing with legendary figures like Adams and Jefferson or lesser-known aspects of a much picked-over subject, Alden writes with insights and broad eloquence.
John R. Alden was James B. Duke Professor Emeritus at Duke University and wrote a number of biographies of important figures in the American Revolution, including Thomas Gage, Charles Lee, and Stephen Sayre.
My opinion is so split on this book. On one hand, I love the heavy context that it brings in the pre-war years, and that it not biased against the British as so many American histories of the American Revolution traditionally are. On the other end, it definitely reads like it was first published 52 years ago and it's condensed one volume nature is a bit difficult to follow at some points.
Specifically, I loved the chapters that focus on the social context of the American Revolution, not only in the American colonies, but also in Great Britain. Alden succeeds in describing pre-war tension between American Patriots and Loyalists, and his chapter on Britain during the war was a highlight as well. However, the majority of the book is focused on the military history of the war, and this is where I feel that Alden kind of misses the mark. Most of the war chapters segue into walls of text with names, dates, and place names with very little insight on the context/purpose and tactics of the battles. This is where I feel the one volume nature of the text hurts it the most: I think it would be a better book were the military history and social history split into two dedicated volumes, but I know that was not Alden's purpose here and I cannot fault him for it.
I'll close with my final complaint on this otherwise solid history text: its minimalization of minority peoples when discussing the context and combat of the war. Alden only briefly discusses the impact of Native Americans on the fighting of the war, and even more briefly on that of both freed and enslaved African-Americans. Again, the text really shows its age here, but even for 1969 I would expect such a prolific revolutionary historian to be more inclusive on the very large impact these populations had on the process of the Revolution.
In conclusion, this is probably about as good as a single volume overall history of the very complicated timeframe it examines can get. Alden daftly discusses both social and military history with a splash of the civics of the time, albeit with not great attention toward organization or flow. Where it really shines is the unbiased and balanced weight toward both sides of the conflict and that it does not blindly over-glorify the Founding Fathers. I definitely can't recommend this tome to everyone, but those with a major interest in the American Revolution will get something here. I just know if they'll get everything they want.
For those of us ignorant of the American Revolution, this is the book to get caught up into it. I do not think of it as a revolution, but as a succession from Britain. George III was still king, and the British government was still in power. Not like the French Revolution where the king and his government were destroyed. Anyway, this book is a good read though a little difficult here and there due to some erudition and use of double negatives that are not always called for. So read carefully. It is very episodic in its presentation by covering the war mainly with a geographic perspective: Boston, Canada, the war in the south, the western war and so on. I think this is a good way to do it since events in the war are fairly spaced out time-wise so it is easy to match events from one theater to another as you read.
It covers social and governmental issues as well which makes it a pretty complete history. I think its coverage of the run-up to war is excellent and really sets the stage for the fighting to come. It could use a summary chapter at the end to tie it all together; it kind of ends with a thunk as it wraps up with the development of the Constitution. A very good introduction to why and how the Americans decided to leave Britain’s not-so-ideal governance. Britain’s leaders were much less than ideal to handle the hot potato of American recalcitrance.
Very good introduction to the subject. For me personally the chapters on military part of the revolution were too heavy and not too entertaining, but as regards the political history, to which most of the chapters are dedicated, it is a really interesting and insightful read.
This is a very good book for those wanting a general history of the American Revolution from the end of the French and Indian War until the ratification of the Constitution.
This is a very good and very readable one-volume history of the American Revolution from the years 1763 to 1789 (and a little beyond). Despite the fact that this book was first published nearly 40 years ago, Alden employs a great deal of scholarship and wit throughout. His witty line describing William Pitt (the Elder) is particularly good. One of the best features of this is that it is not a purely military history. It involves all the political revolutions and social reformations that changed the 13 colonies into one nation. The only problems with Alden's work are that, although he tries to remain balanced, he seems to quickly write-off a lot of British generals and politicians as incompetent or lacking necessary skills. Also, he doesn't always go into detail about things that may deserve a closer look. His chapter on the writing and ratification of the Constitution is a good example of this. All in all, though, a good introduction for the American Revolution.
This is a superb work of military history. It's a daunting book to be sure at near 600 pages, but well worth the read.
Alden is one of the only historians that I have come across who does not paint one side or the other in a glossy light. He goes out of his way to highlight the mistakes made by both sides during the revolution, as well as the character flaws and admirable qualities of the key people on both sides of the conflict.
Plenty of time is spent explaining the things that led up to the revolution, as well as exploring possible decisions that could have prevented it to begin with. This should be required reading in all US History classes. Whats the point in studying any other war if you don't understand this one?
Will be adding Alden's name to the list I have of writers to watch for and read more of.
Dismissive of Native Americans, African-Americans, and anyone the author doesn't like, much of the allure of the history of the fight for the early republic is lost in long descriptions of battle tactics peppered with insults to men on both the American and British sides, often without any justification. The author denies such events as the Conway Cabal and Charles Lee's insubordination and spends a great deal of time postulating on "what ifs" and assigning and reassigning blame for events. Its saving graces are the occasional inspirationally written phrase and, most importantly, the 22k gold lettering on the binding.