What do you think?
Rate this book
Liberty: 1784
A compelling alternate history novel by the breakout author of WW II era alternate history Himmler’s War and Rising Sun.The British win the American Revolutionary War, and a desperate Washington and the American founders must make a last stand in an enclave called Liberty.
In 1781, George Washington's attempt to trap the British under Cornwallis at Yorktown ends catastrophically when the French fleet is destroyed in the Battle of the Capes. The revolution collapses, and the British begin a bloody reign of terror. A group of rebels flees westward and sets up a colony near what is now Chicago. They call it Liberty. The British, looking to finish what they started, send a very large force under Burgoyne to destroy them. Burgoyne is desperate for redemption and the Americans are equally desperate to survive.
Had the Battle of the Capes gone differently, a changed, darker, New World would have been forced into existence. But even under those dire circumstances, Liberty may still find a way!
About Robert Conroy's Rising Sun:
“Conroy extrapolates a new and militarily plausible direction for WWII . . . A thrilling adventure.”—Booklist
About Robert Conroy’s Himmler’s War:
“[Conroy] adds a personal touch to alternate history by describing events through the eyes of fictional characters serving on the front lines. VERDICT: Historical accuracy in the midst of creative speculation makes this piece of alternate history believable.”–Library Journal
About Red Inferno: 1945
“An ensemble cast of fictional characters. . . and historical figures powers the meticulously researched story line with diverse accounts of the horrors of war, making this an appealing read for fans of history and alternate history alike.”—Publishers Weekly
“[E]ngrossing and grimly plausible. . .the suspense holds up literally to the last page.”—Booklist
About 1945:
“ moving and thought-provoking. . .”—Publishers Weekly
“Realistic. . .”—Booklist
About 1942:
". . .fans of Tom Clancy and Agent Jack Bauer should find a lot to like here.”—Publishers Weekly
“A significant writer of alternate history turns here to the popular topic of Pearl Harbor, producing. . . this rousing historical action tale.”—Booklist
“A high-explosive what-if, with full-blooded characters.”—John Birmingham, bestselling author of Without Warning
About 1901:
“. . .cleverly conceived. . .Conroy tells a solid what-if historical.”—Publishers Weekly
368 pages, Hardcover
First published March 4, 2014
21 people are currently reading
349 people want to read
About the author
Robert Conroy
26 books196 followersRobert Conroy was a best selling author of alternate history novels. His 1942, which is set within a Japanese conquest of Hawaii, won the prestigious Sidewise Award for alternate histories.
After taking early retirement from automotive management, Conroy decided to combine his loves of history and writing. After discovering that Kaiser Wilhelm had plans to invade the U.S., he wrote his first alternate history, 1901 in which the invasion took place. He found alternate history fascinating and the possibilities never-ending. He also wrote for Military History Magazine.
Conroy had a MBA, was a US Army Veteran and was a retired instructor at Macomb Community College. He had a married daughter and two grandsons. He lived in southeastern Michigan with his wife of forty-plus years. He passed away in December 2014 from Cancer.
After taking early retirement from automotive management, Conroy decided to combine his loves of history and writing. After discovering that Kaiser Wilhelm had plans to invade the U.S., he wrote his first alternate history, 1901 in which the invasion took place. He found alternate history fascinating and the possibilities never-ending. He also wrote for Military History Magazine.
Conroy had a MBA, was a US Army Veteran and was a retired instructor at Macomb Community College. He had a married daughter and two grandsons. He lived in southeastern Michigan with his wife of forty-plus years. He passed away in December 2014 from Cancer.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 47 reviews
March 13, 2014
Originally reviewed at Bookwraiths Reviews
After reading Mr. Conroy’s extremely entertaining alternative history book 1920: America’s Great War, I had high hopes for this novel. Not only did it seem to have an interesting premise regarding “what if” the British had won the American Revolution, but it also promised to delve into the idea of how would liberty survive in a conquered country that has lost its greatest leaders. This intriguing alternative world coupled with the author’s proven ability to write an easily digested, fast-paced, and exciting narrative seemed to make this book a can’t miss for me. However, for reasons I will outline later, Liberty: 1784 was a disappointment.
The whole concept of this book revolves around one simple change in history, specifically who won the Battle of the Capes in 1781. In real history, the French fleet won said naval battle, turning back the British relief ships sent to aid General Cornwallis. As Michael Lewis, the author of The History of the British Navy, puts it: "The Battle of Chesapeake Bay [alternately known as the Battle of the Capes] was one of the decisive battles of the world. Before it, the creation of the United States of America was possible; after it, it was certain." However, in Liberty: 1784, history has been turned upside down, and the victorious British navy brings relief to Cornwallis’ army, allowing him to win the Battle of Yorktown and thus the war.
From this starting point, Mr. Conroy crafts an eerily similar but far different America. One in which the colonies’ unconditionally surrender to Britain. The people are adrift, bereft of their leaders, as the Founding Fathers are either imprisoned or sent to London to be beheaded before a vengeful King George. From northern Massachusetts to Georgia, the land is an occupied territory, governed by General Cornwallis and the cities controlled by his victorious army. Freedom is something that is not openly spoken of, for fear of being further tormented by loyalist cronies of the Crown. In fact, things are so bleak that people begin to abandon their homes and farms to disappear into the west. Rumors say these travelers are heading to sanctuary. A place where the few remaining American leaders have fled into exile with a remnant of the Continental Army, there to create a new country in the continental interior. A land of freedom that is known only as Liberty!
At first, the British care little if American malcontents vanish into the endless forests of the interior. Good riddance! But then a European spark ignites the powder keg that the American peace rests upon: the French Revolution. This savage uprising against the French monarchy sends King Louis XVI and Queen Marie Antoinette fleeing to England, where King George grants them refuge and determines to put an end to the revolutionary spirit that is spreading across the world like a plague. Thus, the enraged monarch sends an army to France but also dispatches another to America; the western force tasked with finding and destroying the final bastion of liberty on the North American continent!
The story that follows is interesting enough, especially how Mr. Conroy gives a reader numerous viewpoint characters - both historically significant and totally fictional - to see all sides of the conflict. Everyday men and women play major roles in the action along side famous names such as Benjamin Franklin, Lord Cornwallis, Benedict Arnold, and the villainous Banastre Tarleton (most well known for his role as Mel Gibson’s adversary in the movie The Patriot.) Each character’s story blends with the others to form a top to bottom picture of this desperate battle for liberty. Yet, even with this said, there were major problems with Liberty:1784 that I will briefly touch upon.
1) Too much sex. I am not a prude. I’m fine with sex that moves the story along. I realize that hundred of years ago people had sex. However, in this book, it seemed like all the female characters were either being forced to perform sexual acts, getting raped or pulling up their skirts and mounting their men quite a lot. So much so that it detracted from the main story, which was a desperate struggle for survival and the future of the American colonies.
2) Too modern in tone. After reading 1920: America’s Great War, I knew that this novel would not accurately reflect the language, culture and social norms of eighteenth century America and Britain, so it did not surprise me when the characters spoke in a modern, twenty-first century voice. However, the language was so modern in this novel that it became totally unbelievable. We have women saying things like “Fairer and weaker sex my ass.” We have men and women talking about social issues like they are drinking coffee in a local Starbucks. Honestly, it was hard to maintain the belief that these people were living in the 1700s with the language being so modern and their outlook on life so present day in tone.
3) Farfetched history. Even though Mr. Conroy’s alternate world was somewhat plausible, it took too many leaps of faith to believe this type of story would have ever happened. I’ll try to point out a few without ruining the book for anyone.
A) Conroy has a trickle of American revolutionaries setting up a new country in the heart of Native American country without any alliance with or problems from the tribes. It would seem that the natives should play a huge role in the story, but they are only minimally involved.
B) The French Revolution erupts earlier than in our real history and occurs even though the democratic movement of the time has been dealt a huge defeat by the British winning the American Revolution.
C) When the revolution breaks out, Louis XVI takes refuge in England? It doesn’t make much sense, since in real world history the French royals attempted to escape to the Queen’s family in Austria.
D) After taking in the French monarchy, King George decides to join an alliance of the European aristocracy to retaking France, but he then immediately decides to split his forces, because he has to destroy a small frontier town in America that is hoping to “hide” from the British military? Just cannot see where Britain would be concerned enough to send an army.
All in all, Liberty: 1784 was an okay read; it was well-paced, fun in many parts and had enough twists and turns to keep a reader from focusing on the fact that you know the good guys (Americans) are going to win no matter what happens. Mr. Conroy also must be given credit for going out of his way to focus on several female characters and give women the page time that they deserve in this type of novel. However, this book just did not live up to my high expectations for it, so for that reason, it was a disappointment to me. Do not take this to mean I am abandoning any further reading of Mr. Conroy though, because nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, I look forward to enjoying more from him in the future and would encourage you to give him a try as well.
The publisher provided this book to me for free in return for an honest review. The review above was not paid for or influenced in any way by any person, entity or organization, but is my own personal opinions.
After reading Mr. Conroy’s extremely entertaining alternative history book 1920: America’s Great War, I had high hopes for this novel. Not only did it seem to have an interesting premise regarding “what if” the British had won the American Revolution, but it also promised to delve into the idea of how would liberty survive in a conquered country that has lost its greatest leaders. This intriguing alternative world coupled with the author’s proven ability to write an easily digested, fast-paced, and exciting narrative seemed to make this book a can’t miss for me. However, for reasons I will outline later, Liberty: 1784 was a disappointment.
The whole concept of this book revolves around one simple change in history, specifically who won the Battle of the Capes in 1781. In real history, the French fleet won said naval battle, turning back the British relief ships sent to aid General Cornwallis. As Michael Lewis, the author of The History of the British Navy, puts it: "The Battle of Chesapeake Bay [alternately known as the Battle of the Capes] was one of the decisive battles of the world. Before it, the creation of the United States of America was possible; after it, it was certain." However, in Liberty: 1784, history has been turned upside down, and the victorious British navy brings relief to Cornwallis’ army, allowing him to win the Battle of Yorktown and thus the war.
From this starting point, Mr. Conroy crafts an eerily similar but far different America. One in which the colonies’ unconditionally surrender to Britain. The people are adrift, bereft of their leaders, as the Founding Fathers are either imprisoned or sent to London to be beheaded before a vengeful King George. From northern Massachusetts to Georgia, the land is an occupied territory, governed by General Cornwallis and the cities controlled by his victorious army. Freedom is something that is not openly spoken of, for fear of being further tormented by loyalist cronies of the Crown. In fact, things are so bleak that people begin to abandon their homes and farms to disappear into the west. Rumors say these travelers are heading to sanctuary. A place where the few remaining American leaders have fled into exile with a remnant of the Continental Army, there to create a new country in the continental interior. A land of freedom that is known only as Liberty!
At first, the British care little if American malcontents vanish into the endless forests of the interior. Good riddance! But then a European spark ignites the powder keg that the American peace rests upon: the French Revolution. This savage uprising against the French monarchy sends King Louis XVI and Queen Marie Antoinette fleeing to England, where King George grants them refuge and determines to put an end to the revolutionary spirit that is spreading across the world like a plague. Thus, the enraged monarch sends an army to France but also dispatches another to America; the western force tasked with finding and destroying the final bastion of liberty on the North American continent!
The story that follows is interesting enough, especially how Mr. Conroy gives a reader numerous viewpoint characters - both historically significant and totally fictional - to see all sides of the conflict. Everyday men and women play major roles in the action along side famous names such as Benjamin Franklin, Lord Cornwallis, Benedict Arnold, and the villainous Banastre Tarleton (most well known for his role as Mel Gibson’s adversary in the movie The Patriot.) Each character’s story blends with the others to form a top to bottom picture of this desperate battle for liberty. Yet, even with this said, there were major problems with Liberty:1784 that I will briefly touch upon.
1) Too much sex. I am not a prude. I’m fine with sex that moves the story along. I realize that hundred of years ago people had sex. However, in this book, it seemed like all the female characters were either being forced to perform sexual acts, getting raped or pulling up their skirts and mounting their men quite a lot. So much so that it detracted from the main story, which was a desperate struggle for survival and the future of the American colonies.
2) Too modern in tone. After reading 1920: America’s Great War, I knew that this novel would not accurately reflect the language, culture and social norms of eighteenth century America and Britain, so it did not surprise me when the characters spoke in a modern, twenty-first century voice. However, the language was so modern in this novel that it became totally unbelievable. We have women saying things like “Fairer and weaker sex my ass.” We have men and women talking about social issues like they are drinking coffee in a local Starbucks. Honestly, it was hard to maintain the belief that these people were living in the 1700s with the language being so modern and their outlook on life so present day in tone.
3) Farfetched history. Even though Mr. Conroy’s alternate world was somewhat plausible, it took too many leaps of faith to believe this type of story would have ever happened. I’ll try to point out a few without ruining the book for anyone.
A) Conroy has a trickle of American revolutionaries setting up a new country in the heart of Native American country without any alliance with or problems from the tribes. It would seem that the natives should play a huge role in the story, but they are only minimally involved.
B) The French Revolution erupts earlier than in our real history and occurs even though the democratic movement of the time has been dealt a huge defeat by the British winning the American Revolution.
C) When the revolution breaks out, Louis XVI takes refuge in England? It doesn’t make much sense, since in real world history the French royals attempted to escape to the Queen’s family in Austria.
D) After taking in the French monarchy, King George decides to join an alliance of the European aristocracy to retaking France, but he then immediately decides to split his forces, because he has to destroy a small frontier town in America that is hoping to “hide” from the British military? Just cannot see where Britain would be concerned enough to send an army.
All in all, Liberty: 1784 was an okay read; it was well-paced, fun in many parts and had enough twists and turns to keep a reader from focusing on the fact that you know the good guys (Americans) are going to win no matter what happens. Mr. Conroy also must be given credit for going out of his way to focus on several female characters and give women the page time that they deserve in this type of novel. However, this book just did not live up to my high expectations for it, so for that reason, it was a disappointment to me. Do not take this to mean I am abandoning any further reading of Mr. Conroy though, because nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, I look forward to enjoying more from him in the future and would encourage you to give him a try as well.
The publisher provided this book to me for free in return for an honest review. The review above was not paid for or influenced in any way by any person, entity or organization, but is my own personal opinions.
June 11, 2022
Liked the idea. But it’s a bit on the surface in terms of character development and execution.
The intimate scenes were worth an eye roll or two as well. 2.5-3 stars
The intimate scenes were worth an eye roll or two as well. 2.5-3 stars
July 23, 2018
Oh, Perfidious Albion!
By Charles van Buren on July 5, 2018
Format: Kindle Edition|Verified Purchase
My earlier attempts to read a Robert Conroy novel all foundered on the rocks of improbability and impossibility. Things such as the Union which in real history could barely handle the Confederacy, managing to defeat the combined forces of the Confederacy and Great Britain. Right.
This one departs from history at Yorktown where, in this alternate universe, the Royal Navy manages to defeat the French fleet. Not that improbable as in reality the Royal Navy nearly always defeated the French. And the Spanish. And the Germans. And, well, really, everybody else. Though the Dutch gave them a really hard time in the seventeenth century.
However, a British victory at Yorktown would probably have not led to the complete destruction of Washington's army as it did in this novel. But it would not have been impossible. Cornwallis was not as bad a general as most Americans think. That is most of the relatively small percentage of Americans who even know who Cornwallis was. Thank goodness for Mel Gibson. Like Mr. Gibson, Conroy paints the British as really dastardly and arrogant villains. If you were not already predisposed to think poorly of King George and his government, you will very likely think them quite nasty before you finish this book. Oh, Perfidious Albion!
Conroy writes well but the book is a bit heavy on rape, torture and sex. All of which, in my opinion, weakens the book and makes it less enjoyable. Overall, pretty good alternate history but not up to the standards of Eric Fint's RIVERS OF WAR or his, and now others', 1632 series; the RANKS OF BRONZE sci-fi/alternate history series by David Drake, et al; the more recent 1066 TURNED UPSIDE DOWN compilation of short pieces by several authors; or the, not so well known, volumes by Marc Jones exploring what ifs from Rome to El Alamein to the Falkland War.
I am tempted to give three stars because of the aforementioned rape, torture and sex. However, I did enjoy the rest of the book so four stars.
By Charles van Buren on July 5, 2018
Format: Kindle Edition|Verified Purchase
My earlier attempts to read a Robert Conroy novel all foundered on the rocks of improbability and impossibility. Things such as the Union which in real history could barely handle the Confederacy, managing to defeat the combined forces of the Confederacy and Great Britain. Right.
This one departs from history at Yorktown where, in this alternate universe, the Royal Navy manages to defeat the French fleet. Not that improbable as in reality the Royal Navy nearly always defeated the French. And the Spanish. And the Germans. And, well, really, everybody else. Though the Dutch gave them a really hard time in the seventeenth century.
However, a British victory at Yorktown would probably have not led to the complete destruction of Washington's army as it did in this novel. But it would not have been impossible. Cornwallis was not as bad a general as most Americans think. That is most of the relatively small percentage of Americans who even know who Cornwallis was. Thank goodness for Mel Gibson. Like Mr. Gibson, Conroy paints the British as really dastardly and arrogant villains. If you were not already predisposed to think poorly of King George and his government, you will very likely think them quite nasty before you finish this book. Oh, Perfidious Albion!
Conroy writes well but the book is a bit heavy on rape, torture and sex. All of which, in my opinion, weakens the book and makes it less enjoyable. Overall, pretty good alternate history but not up to the standards of Eric Fint's RIVERS OF WAR or his, and now others', 1632 series; the RANKS OF BRONZE sci-fi/alternate history series by David Drake, et al; the more recent 1066 TURNED UPSIDE DOWN compilation of short pieces by several authors; or the, not so well known, volumes by Marc Jones exploring what ifs from Rome to El Alamein to the Falkland War.
I am tempted to give three stars because of the aforementioned rape, torture and sex. However, I did enjoy the rest of the book so four stars.
September 19, 2025
Conroy writes alternate history. This one is a little different, as most of his books have dealt with WWII. This one is an alternate history of the American Revolution ( not many of those have been done! ). Americans don't realize how close this country came to losing that war. For one thing, we prefer to forget that many Americans were Loyalists who sided with their King. There were black slaves who ran away to the British lines and fought for the Redcoats. And most of the Native Americans were for the Brits.
In this version of history, in 1781, as Washington's Franco-American army is besieging Gen. Cornwallis' army in Yorktown, Va., a British fleet breaks through the French fleet off the coast. In our history, the French fleet held off the British fleet and Cornwallis surrendered to Washington. In Conroy's story, Cornwallis manages to defeat the rebels and capture General Washington. The Revolution collapses swiftly after that.
Conroy's story focuses on James Fitzroy, veteran of the war, who escapes from a British prison ship in New York Harbor. He learns of an American force holding out to the west of the Appalachians, at a place called Fort Liberty. That fort will also become the target of the Governor General of America, Cornwallis, who organizes a strong army to crush the independence movement once and for all.
I agree with Conroy's idea here that if the Americans had lost their Revolution, a rebellion might have occurred later---unless the English had followed a very enlightened policy giving the Americans seats in Parliament and permitting them to industrialize ( and not just serve as a source of resources to be exploited by the Mother Country ). But victory over the colonials most likely would only have increased British arrogance and strengthened their resolve to keep the Americans subordinate.
Of course, looking around at the likes of Donald Trump today, I'm beginning to think we might be better off to have stayed in the British Empire and been part of a super-sized Canada.
In this version of history, in 1781, as Washington's Franco-American army is besieging Gen. Cornwallis' army in Yorktown, Va., a British fleet breaks through the French fleet off the coast. In our history, the French fleet held off the British fleet and Cornwallis surrendered to Washington. In Conroy's story, Cornwallis manages to defeat the rebels and capture General Washington. The Revolution collapses swiftly after that.
Conroy's story focuses on James Fitzroy, veteran of the war, who escapes from a British prison ship in New York Harbor. He learns of an American force holding out to the west of the Appalachians, at a place called Fort Liberty. That fort will also become the target of the Governor General of America, Cornwallis, who organizes a strong army to crush the independence movement once and for all.
I agree with Conroy's idea here that if the Americans had lost their Revolution, a rebellion might have occurred later---unless the English had followed a very enlightened policy giving the Americans seats in Parliament and permitting them to industrialize ( and not just serve as a source of resources to be exploited by the Mother Country ). But victory over the colonials most likely would only have increased British arrogance and strengthened their resolve to keep the Americans subordinate.
Of course, looking around at the likes of Donald Trump today, I'm beginning to think we might be better off to have stayed in the British Empire and been part of a super-sized Canada.
July 24, 2014
What a powerful story and the opening just grabs you by the throat
You can find summaries elsewhere - -
I cheered for the good guys (on both sides) and hissed at the bad guys (on both sides)
Again - very logical - wonderful development of characters
You can find summaries elsewhere - -
I cheered for the good guys (on both sides) and hissed at the bad guys (on both sides)
Again - very logical - wonderful development of characters
March 12, 2014
Reminded me of the For Want of a Nail book.
June 15, 2022
In 1781, George Washington’s attempt to trap the British under Cornwallis at Yorktown ends catastrophically when the French fleet is destroyed in the Battle of the Capes. The revolution collapses, and the British begin a bloody reign of terror. A group of rebels flees westward and sets up a colony near what is now Chicago. They call it Liberty. The British, looking to finish what they started, send a very large force under Burgoyne to destroy them. Burgoyne is desperate for redemption and the Americans are equally desperate to survive.
Things did not go well for the “Americans” once the French were defeated. The Colonies have surrendered unconditionally and the leaders of the rebellion were imprisoned and/or executed by the British, including a very graphic beheading of Thomas Jefferson to begin the novel. The occupying British Army now sees the citizens of the land as little more than rabble.
Contrary to popular belief, not everyone in the Colonies was on board with independence from the British. There were plenty of people who were loyal to the British. Emboldened by the defeat of the “Americans”, these loyalists ally themselves even more with the British, who turn a blind eye to their misdeeds, even if their targets are people who did not participate in the War for Independence.
To read my full review, please go to: https://thoughtsfromthemountaintop.co...
Things did not go well for the “Americans” once the French were defeated. The Colonies have surrendered unconditionally and the leaders of the rebellion were imprisoned and/or executed by the British, including a very graphic beheading of Thomas Jefferson to begin the novel. The occupying British Army now sees the citizens of the land as little more than rabble.
Contrary to popular belief, not everyone in the Colonies was on board with independence from the British. There were plenty of people who were loyal to the British. Emboldened by the defeat of the “Americans”, these loyalists ally themselves even more with the British, who turn a blind eye to their misdeeds, even if their targets are people who did not participate in the War for Independence.
To read my full review, please go to: https://thoughtsfromthemountaintop.co...
December 13, 2021
4.2/5
I enjoyed this book a lot. I loved the time period for the historical fiction. I liked the whole build up and back story and world building that was done. The Revolution failing and not ending when it did was described well and easy to understand. The building of the world with this change in history was a great too. Laying out territories and what’s going on in the world. The POV of both American and British sides was great too because you got a full understanding of what Is going on in this new world and how the story is going and building.
There wasn’t too much action, which is usually a turn off for me. But the world building and time period was great I was fully into it. Using names that are obviously famous and names that are less so but are still real and known was great too.
The ending was kind of abrupt and felt a little more could have been told tying everything together. But I did appreciate that the book wasn’t extended another hundred pages for filler.
I have to find more war and battle historical fiction type novels.
I enjoyed this book a lot. I loved the time period for the historical fiction. I liked the whole build up and back story and world building that was done. The Revolution failing and not ending when it did was described well and easy to understand. The building of the world with this change in history was a great too. Laying out territories and what’s going on in the world. The POV of both American and British sides was great too because you got a full understanding of what Is going on in this new world and how the story is going and building.
There wasn’t too much action, which is usually a turn off for me. But the world building and time period was great I was fully into it. Using names that are obviously famous and names that are less so but are still real and known was great too.
The ending was kind of abrupt and felt a little more could have been told tying everything together. But I did appreciate that the book wasn’t extended another hundred pages for filler.
I have to find more war and battle historical fiction type novels.
September 9, 2018
Exciting. Set up seems very plausible. Most of the events also seem plausible.
Sometimes seemed forced trying to fit as many revolutionary figures in as possible.
Think perhaps the "Burnt Man Angle" not needed. And some of the late Indian stuff too, unless he's trying to set up another book?
But overall, excellent. Good plan. Detailed characters on both sides. We know their motivations, wants, strengths, flaws. Shows the unpredictability of war, and the influence of politics.
Sometimes seemed forced trying to fit as many revolutionary figures in as possible.
Think perhaps the "Burnt Man Angle" not needed. And some of the late Indian stuff too, unless he's trying to set up another book?
But overall, excellent. Good plan. Detailed characters on both sides. We know their motivations, wants, strengths, flaws. Shows the unpredictability of war, and the influence of politics.
June 18, 2019
If you are into historical fiction that is accurate in every detail, this isn't your book.
This "what if?" book is a look at the American Revolution fought in 1784, years after it was initially lost. The language and sensibilities are of the modern era, but it's an interesting premise and I completely enjoyed this book.
I found this book because I love listening to Bronson Pinchot, and am so glad I did!
This "what if?" book is a look at the American Revolution fought in 1784, years after it was initially lost. The language and sensibilities are of the modern era, but it's an interesting premise and I completely enjoyed this book.
I found this book because I love listening to Bronson Pinchot, and am so glad I did!
August 3, 2019
This was astonishingly well written. The fictional characters had depth, and tied in very well with the men of true historical significance. The battle was described perfectly. I could feel the shots, and see the carnage unfold in my mind's eye. This was simply unbelievable and beyond entertaining. I look forward to reading more of Robert Conroy's works!
March 15, 2020
Possibly one of the worst alternate history books that I have ever read. I don't have a problem with how the British could have defeated the Americans in 1781, but they were exhausted by then and would have struggled to win back the colonies. Also, I can't see the Americans fleeing into the Midwest, as it was controlled by hostile Native Amerians, who called it "The Middle Ground".
October 15, 2020
Great alternative history of our Revolutionary War and aftermath. What would happen if the British were reinforced at Yorktown and Washington was captured. Actually, the story presents a very positive perspective for the outcome.
This book should be transformed into a mini series.
This book should be transformed into a mini series.
February 14, 2021
Picked it up and could not stop reading it. I really enjoyed the story and felt like this could have been true. Lots of death, but not a surprise in a war novel. Was a bit surprised at some of the historical people who were in the story. A great read and I recommend it!
September 9, 2022
An interesting plot and pretty good book (even if it does pull the predictable old trick of course correcting at the end). The major downside was the fact that there was far too much sex for an alt-history novel. 3.5/5
December 23, 2022
Good alternate history
Simon is a master of alternate history. I highly recommend his books about World War II and some of his other books this one was interesting but not up to par with the ones I just mentioned
Simon is a master of alternate history. I highly recommend his books about World War II and some of his other books this one was interesting but not up to par with the ones I just mentioned
didn-t-finish
January 27, 2023I dnf'ed this for now. I was listening to it at work and at some point, I just lost the plot and characters. I was just having such a hard time following the story. I'll probably give it another try with physically reading at a later date.
July 30, 2016
This was an "okay" book, overall. I did enjoy the overall story, but it was rather 'dark' in spots. It moved at a good clip, although I found myself wondering how a battle in the 'Wilderness' was going to cause the British to abandon the American colonies [there's more to it than just the 'climactic battle' at the end]. The character development was good.
I did find myself wondering how much the British would truly be going after a bunch of small enclaves in the wilderness when they had bigger fish to fry [as it were] brewing in Europe. That the British would be so obsessed with individuals who wish nothing more than to be 'left alone' far from 'civilization' seemed far-fetched, on the one hand. I mean, obviously, the Colonies [rebels] were going to win and defeat the British. [That was my expectation, anyway.] It was just a matter of getting from point A to point B so that the Americans would win.
The language seemed a lot more 'modern' than what ought to have been used during that time period. It was just a bit jarring to see modern curses, slang, and foul language in a story set in the late 1700s. Not only that, but 'modern issues' were also introduced into the story, mostly about a 'woman's place' in society [with disparaging remarks made about women serving in the military, women being lesser then men, etc.; perhaps these remarks were merely to contrast the actual conditions versus what might be considered 'ideal' today?]. The last novel of his that I read [1920] was similar in nature, in that it had 'more modern' language in it.
It has a lot of sex in it, which made me think of Turtledove while I read it. I realize people have sex, and people had sex before going into battle, but it just seemed 'excessive' in the book. That, and it seemed to focus on rapes, potential rapes, abusive situations, forced sexual situations, and sex. I don't know; it just seemed a bit much. I guess it is one thing if it is in the flow of the story and helps it move along; it's another thing if the story would actually have been better with less, and I felt this story would have been better with 'less' sex it in as the sex did not add to the story at all. Having said that, sex is one thing; rape is entirely different, and I felt this book could have done without the rapes [or, at the very least, without having to graphically describe women being violated].
I have mixed feelings about this book. On the one hand, I really enjoyed it, and I felt the author has been getting better in the telling of each story. On the other hand, I felt it was 'by the numbers' in the telling, especially at the end, and that there was no 'real surprise' at the end. At the same time, I did like Hannah's part to play . That was a bit of a surprise, and it was equally well done. I did not see that one coming.
The author does do a nice job of mixing historical characters with fictional characters in telling the story. There were scenes where I truly enjoyed the interaction between some of the characters [like Homer interacting with Will at the very beginning, or Will's interactions during parleys on the field of battle with Fitzroy]. I did find myself wishing that 'we' would have seen Daniel Boone and his men in action, as they were mentioned in the book at one point.
The author also does a nice job with 'other world events' influencing how the British handled the rebellious colonies. France still had its revolution, but it was bloodier and more far-reaching than the historical event. Civil unrest, rioting, and battles between rebels and Tories were also described in the Colonies . There were also 'regional' events that directly affected the Colonies that were mentioned in the book, so what happened in the Colonies was not entirely contingent upon this 'one big battle' in the Wilderness in the West.
It is kind of funny, but elements of the book [mostly the amount of sex in it] reminded me of Harry Turtledove's books [especially his Worldwar books and How Few Remain] while other parts of the book reminded me of Eric Flint's 1630 [mostly the women training to fight and their conversations during the training].
It was darker in tone and in the telling. There was a lot more graphic violence and/or acts committed, which did have an impact on the overall tone. At the same time, I never really got the impression that the 'main characters' were ever truly in any danger of being killed, or that the rebels would fail to succeed in winning their freedom [and the country's freedom] from the British. I am glad I read the book, but, had I not read it, I think I would have read something I would probably have enjoyed more.
I did find myself wondering how much the British would truly be going after a bunch of small enclaves in the wilderness when they had bigger fish to fry [as it were] brewing in Europe. That the British would be so obsessed with individuals who wish nothing more than to be 'left alone' far from 'civilization' seemed far-fetched, on the one hand. I mean, obviously, the Colonies [rebels] were going to win and defeat the British. [That was my expectation, anyway.] It was just a matter of getting from point A to point B so that the Americans would win.
The language seemed a lot more 'modern' than what ought to have been used during that time period. It was just a bit jarring to see modern curses, slang, and foul language in a story set in the late 1700s. Not only that, but 'modern issues' were also introduced into the story, mostly about a 'woman's place' in society [with disparaging remarks made about women serving in the military, women being lesser then men, etc.; perhaps these remarks were merely to contrast the actual conditions versus what might be considered 'ideal' today?]. The last novel of his that I read [1920] was similar in nature, in that it had 'more modern' language in it.
It has a lot of sex in it, which made me think of Turtledove while I read it. I realize people have sex, and people had sex before going into battle, but it just seemed 'excessive' in the book. That, and it seemed to focus on rapes, potential rapes, abusive situations, forced sexual situations, and sex. I don't know; it just seemed a bit much. I guess it is one thing if it is in the flow of the story and helps it move along; it's another thing if the story would actually have been better with less, and I felt this story would have been better with 'less' sex it in as the sex did not add to the story at all. Having said that, sex is one thing; rape is entirely different, and I felt this book could have done without the rapes [or, at the very least, without having to graphically describe women being violated].
I have mixed feelings about this book. On the one hand, I really enjoyed it, and I felt the author has been getting better in the telling of each story. On the other hand, I felt it was 'by the numbers' in the telling, especially at the end, and that there was no 'real surprise' at the end. At the same time, I did like Hannah's part to play . That was a bit of a surprise, and it was equally well done. I did not see that one coming.
The author does do a nice job of mixing historical characters with fictional characters in telling the story. There were scenes where I truly enjoyed the interaction between some of the characters [like Homer interacting with Will at the very beginning, or Will's interactions during parleys on the field of battle with Fitzroy]. I did find myself wishing that 'we' would have seen Daniel Boone and his men in action, as they were mentioned in the book at one point.
The author also does a nice job with 'other world events' influencing how the British handled the rebellious colonies. France still had its revolution, but it was bloodier and more far-reaching than the historical event. Civil unrest, rioting, and battles between rebels and Tories were also described in the Colonies . There were also 'regional' events that directly affected the Colonies that were mentioned in the book, so what happened in the Colonies was not entirely contingent upon this 'one big battle' in the Wilderness in the West.
It is kind of funny, but elements of the book [mostly the amount of sex in it] reminded me of Harry Turtledove's books [especially his Worldwar books and How Few Remain] while other parts of the book reminded me of Eric Flint's 1630 [mostly the women training to fight and their conversations during the training].
It was darker in tone and in the telling. There was a lot more graphic violence and/or acts committed, which did have an impact on the overall tone. At the same time, I never really got the impression that the 'main characters' were ever truly in any danger of being killed, or that the rebels would fail to succeed in winning their freedom [and the country's freedom] from the British. I am glad I read the book, but, had I not read it, I think I would have read something I would probably have enjoyed more.
March 3, 2020
Well done by a master of the art
Sadly we lost Robert Conroy, but when I find one of his novels I don't already own I always enjoy them and this is no exception.
Sadly we lost Robert Conroy, but when I find one of his novels I don't already own I always enjoy them and this is no exception.
July 22, 2020
Good historical fiction with a twist. What if we lost the American revolution? Use of British and American historical figures help enhance the plot.
April 22, 2021
I have nothing bad to say about this book. It was fine just fine. I'm not going to remember it in a couple weeks. There are worse ways to spend a few hours though.
July 12, 2021
Entertaining but it felt a bit too easy. No big surprises. No huge sense of danger. The villains were pretty standard.
December 15, 2022
Good read. I love the alt history genre. Especially when the author is good at re-creating the feel of the era.
May 3, 2024
Listened to on auible till they took it off from being free was good what I listened to, which wasn't much. Not worth buying or spending a credit on lol.
June 15, 2020
Enjoyable read!
July 29, 2016
Between the sympathetic cast of characters (in a genre typical mix of "little" people and big names like Cornwallis or Ben Franklin), the interesting point of divergence (Yorktown was lost by the colonials and the rebellion got beheaded, in Washington's case literally in many other cases by sequestering the convicted traitors away in a jail in the caribbean, in the case of our protagonist by enjailing lots of medium level officers in prison hulks in the New York Harbor where most of them die or waste away.) and a good pacing of the narration this book simply was a pageturner I could not lay away.
There seems to have been a certain amount of popular influence, for example the description of Banastre Tarleton is closer to the one in Mel Gibson's "Patriot" movie than what actual historians think about the man, making him a cruel butcher enjoying coldblooded murder, torture and mutiliation, where actually it has long since been known that most of this renomee came from rebel propaganda and he was far less bloodthirsty than this portrayal... but then a lot of other things just read like actual life in the 18th century, especially where warfare was touched upon.
The final outcome was a bit too predictable, the hints bordering on the obvious, but as this book was told to an satisfying end that does not spoil too much of the fun watching things happen that you already knew were coming...
Bonus points for the quirky idea of having Franklin rely on tested but outmoded ways of warfare for the rebels to use as secret weapons, the effect was a pleasant surprise and even the inclusion into the climactic battlescene worked well.
The only thing I've been missing after all was said and done was that this story with its elaborate set up and small but distinctive changes to the timeline begs for a sequel set 80 to 100 years after, somewhere between the mexican war and the civil war of our histories... It would be nice to watch some of these changes unfurl further the more waves these little stones can make.
There seems to have been a certain amount of popular influence, for example the description of Banastre Tarleton is closer to the one in Mel Gibson's "Patriot" movie than what actual historians think about the man, making him a cruel butcher enjoying coldblooded murder, torture and mutiliation, where actually it has long since been known that most of this renomee came from rebel propaganda and he was far less bloodthirsty than this portrayal... but then a lot of other things just read like actual life in the 18th century, especially where warfare was touched upon.
The final outcome was a bit too predictable, the hints bordering on the obvious, but as this book was told to an satisfying end that does not spoil too much of the fun watching things happen that you already knew were coming...
Bonus points for the quirky idea of having Franklin rely on tested but outmoded ways of warfare for the rebels to use as secret weapons, the effect was a pleasant surprise and even the inclusion into the climactic battlescene worked well.
The only thing I've been missing after all was said and done was that this story with its elaborate set up and small but distinctive changes to the timeline begs for a sequel set 80 to 100 years after, somewhere between the mexican war and the civil war of our histories... It would be nice to watch some of these changes unfurl further the more waves these little stones can make.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 17, 2014
Liberty 1784 starts off with a very plausible, very possible even, divergence from history. The French fleet in 1781, instead of winning the Battle of the Capes and sealing Cornwallis' doom at Yorktown, loses the battle. As such, the American colonies lose the Revolutionary War and the British institute an increasingly brutal occupation. The book starts with George Washington being beheaded at the Tower of London. Most of the other top leaders are in prison on Jamaica, while many military officers of junior rank are slowly wasting away on prison hulks, several of which are in New York harbor. One of these hulks fall apart and the prisoners escape and the story really gets going.
In this history the Kingdom of France has already fallen, worrying the British enough that they are keeping most of their troops in Europe. The remaining American rebels have set up a base called Fort Washington, near modern Chicago. The British devise a plan to destroy this place and the Revolution once and for all. So who prevails? Read the book, it is a very satisfactory and believable campaign, filled with well fleshed out characters.
Conroy's strengths are believable characters and sound alternate history. This story shows the issues both sides would have faced had 1781 turned out differently. The editing was sound, no major typos and nothing to interrupt the flow, which as a reader I appreciated.
Well written alternate history allows one to ponder the 'what if' factors. Liberty 1784 certainly meets this criterion.
In this history the Kingdom of France has already fallen, worrying the British enough that they are keeping most of their troops in Europe. The remaining American rebels have set up a base called Fort Washington, near modern Chicago. The British devise a plan to destroy this place and the Revolution once and for all. So who prevails? Read the book, it is a very satisfactory and believable campaign, filled with well fleshed out characters.
Conroy's strengths are believable characters and sound alternate history. This story shows the issues both sides would have faced had 1781 turned out differently. The editing was sound, no major typos and nothing to interrupt the flow, which as a reader I appreciated.
Well written alternate history allows one to ponder the 'what if' factors. Liberty 1784 certainly meets this criterion.
May 25, 2021
One of my favorite authors of alternative history, I was sorry to hear of his passing recently. Conroy found a set pattern of writing for his books, did lots of research, and the result works out the same. A very interesting view of what might have been with one change of the dice.
The British Fleet beats the French and save Cornwallis's butt, which, in turn, allows him to break out of Yorktown and smash the Colonial Armies and capture many of the important figures of the day if not outright kill them. The remainder flee west to 'Liberty' near present day Chicago. The British aren't willing to let it end there but they have problems enough of their own in Europe and at home.
Told from the point of view of 'assistants to the great' and the common man/woman, the views aren't directly from the commanders. Romance is thrown in, as always, to spice things up and to give dimensions to the characters, as well as a little conflict.
The conclusions that Conroy comes up with can be argued either way but you can't really argue that his ideas are out of the realm of possibility. Perhaps things would have gone differently. Feel free to do the research and write your own book to tell how it might have been different. Give me a copy and I'll even read/review it here!!
I look forward to reading the remaining books that Conroy wrote as I can find them. Hopefully, anyone caring enough to read this review will enjoy this book too.
The British Fleet beats the French and save Cornwallis's butt, which, in turn, allows him to break out of Yorktown and smash the Colonial Armies and capture many of the important figures of the day if not outright kill them. The remainder flee west to 'Liberty' near present day Chicago. The British aren't willing to let it end there but they have problems enough of their own in Europe and at home.
Told from the point of view of 'assistants to the great' and the common man/woman, the views aren't directly from the commanders. Romance is thrown in, as always, to spice things up and to give dimensions to the characters, as well as a little conflict.
The conclusions that Conroy comes up with can be argued either way but you can't really argue that his ideas are out of the realm of possibility. Perhaps things would have gone differently. Feel free to do the research and write your own book to tell how it might have been different. Give me a copy and I'll even read/review it here!!
I look forward to reading the remaining books that Conroy wrote as I can find them. Hopefully, anyone caring enough to read this review will enjoy this book too.
January 22, 2014
Robert Conroy has come a long way from his first novel 1901. He is still writing alternate history, but now the characters are much more than stand-up cardboard cut-outs, instead they have believable emotions, act rationally, and actually has the reader caring what happens too them.
Liberty 1784 postulates that the British fleet acted a bit more aggressively in regard to the French and actually resupplied Cornwallis at Yorktown. Cornwallis then managed to break out and destroy the combined Franco-American forces, capture Washington and win the war. Many of the rebels who could retreated to what is now the Chicago area. France has entered into a revolution that is making George III very nervous. So Burgoyne is leading an army into the American wilderness to put down the last of the rebellion. Of course, there are complications from spies, British incompetence, rogue Loyalists, etc., which leads to one supreme battle. Overall, this was a believable scenario that could have reshaped Europe and America. If you enjoy AH, and/or Robert Conroy, read on.
Liberty 1784 postulates that the British fleet acted a bit more aggressively in regard to the French and actually resupplied Cornwallis at Yorktown. Cornwallis then managed to break out and destroy the combined Franco-American forces, capture Washington and win the war. Many of the rebels who could retreated to what is now the Chicago area. France has entered into a revolution that is making George III very nervous. So Burgoyne is leading an army into the American wilderness to put down the last of the rebellion. Of course, there are complications from spies, British incompetence, rogue Loyalists, etc., which leads to one supreme battle. Overall, this was a believable scenario that could have reshaped Europe and America. If you enjoy AH, and/or Robert Conroy, read on.
Read
August 31, 2015 I really thoroughly enjoyed it and it has renewed my interest in "Alternate History", such as the genre is. I do not mean any insult whatsoever to Mr. Conroy's fine work, but it is yet another confirmative data point that the concept does not exist, for there is no allowance for an outcome that does not support the American ego. The Americans must always win in the end, however harder it may become, they will win in the end. Goddard will shoot down the Sanger, the Communists, or whomever, will be defeated in the end. I do wonder if "Alternate History" stories exist in other countries, and who wins in their tales? With his skills, perhaps Mr. Conroy can take on a follow up where the Indians establish their own Nation whose boundaries are respected by the Americans, maybe in Jackson's day?
Displaying 1 - 30 of 47 reviews