What do you think?
Rate this book
The True History of the American Revolution
"The purpose of this history of the Revolution is to use the original authorities rather more frankly than has been the practice with our historians. They appear to have thought it advisable to omit from their narratives a great deal which, to me, seems essential to a true picture. I cannot feel satisfied with any description of the Revolution which treats the desire for independence as a sudden thought, and not a long growth and development, or which assumes that every detail of the conduct of the British government was absurdly stupid, even from its own point of view, and that the loyalists were few in numbers and their arguments not worth considering. I cannot see any advantage in not describing in their full meaning and force the smuggling, the buying of laws from the governors, and other irregular conduct in the colonies which led England to try to remodel them as soon as the fear of the French in Canada was removed..." - S.G. Early Conditions And Causes. Smuggling, Rioting, and Revolt against Control. Parliament Passes a Stamp Tax and Repeals It. Parliament Taxes Paint, Paper, and Glass and then Abandons Taxation. The Tea Episode. The Final Argument. The Rights of Man. A Reign of Terror for the Loyalists. The Real Intention as to Independence. The Continental Congress. The Situation in England. Triumphant Toryism. Lexington and the Number of the Loyalists. The Second Continental Congress and the Protests of the Loyalists. Bunker Hill. The Character and Condition of the Patriot Army. The Attack upon Canada. The Evacuation of Boston and the Declaration of Independence. The Battle of Long Island. The Battles of Trenton and Princeton. The Battle of Brandywine. The Battle of Saratoga and Its Results. Clinton Begins the Wearing-out Process. Arnold, the Loyalist, Tries to Save the British Empire. Cornwallis Brings the War to an End at Yorktown.
194 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1902
148 people are currently reading
741 people want to read
About the author
Sydney George Fisher
92 books11 followersSydney George Fisher was a United States lawyer and historian.
He was the son of Sidney George Fisher.
He was the son of Sidney George Fisher.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
August 25, 2020
This was easily the best book I've ever read on the American Revolution. Written in 1902, this book is a very easy read, and is safe from modern influences. The main take aways for me were:
-England's General Howe was an American hero, and it's stunning that as a nation we don't sing his praises for how he let us win the American Revolution. Howe was an anti-war, pro-American, member of Parliament who was put in charge of suppressing our rebellion, and did everything in his power to let us win.
-Americans cared less about nerdy concept like "natural law" and "freedom", our main contention with England came down to money.
-The Whigs vs. Tories is essential to understanding the American Revolution.
-England could have easily beaten us, our history could have been like that of the Irish or of the Boer.
Many myths were busted in my mind. Excellent use of primary materials. I recommend this to all American Revolution fans. Two flaws are the lacks of foot notes and page numbers, but even then I liked it so much it still gets 5 stars from me.
-England's General Howe was an American hero, and it's stunning that as a nation we don't sing his praises for how he let us win the American Revolution. Howe was an anti-war, pro-American, member of Parliament who was put in charge of suppressing our rebellion, and did everything in his power to let us win.
-Americans cared less about nerdy concept like "natural law" and "freedom", our main contention with England came down to money.
-The Whigs vs. Tories is essential to understanding the American Revolution.
-England could have easily beaten us, our history could have been like that of the Irish or of the Boer.
Many myths were busted in my mind. Excellent use of primary materials. I recommend this to all American Revolution fans. Two flaws are the lacks of foot notes and page numbers, but even then I liked it so much it still gets 5 stars from me.
October 21, 2018
Great read!
I highly recommend to anyone who doesn’t know or understand the circumstances under which the American Revolution was fought. Here we have the why and the wherefore, and many myths are exploded and secrets revealed.
I highly recommend to anyone who doesn’t know or understand the circumstances under which the American Revolution was fought. Here we have the why and the wherefore, and many myths are exploded and secrets revealed.
May 31, 2020
A view of the American War Of Independence that is not the commonly accepted one. The received wisdom of British tyranny getting its comeuppance at the hands of rightful & justified American rights is shaken violently. British conciliatory efforts are very heavily concentrated on & the apparent absurdities & inconsistencies of the patriots’ highlighted. The author almost seems sorry that Britain didn’t pursue a policy of total war to the knife to preserve the status quo. Whether you agree or not, I suspect sheer practicality would have dictated a relinquishment of the colonies once Britain was confronted with mass European opposition due to her maritime policy which effectively declared neutral nations’ trade with her enemies as illegal. This is all explained clearly if the conservative bias is allowed for. The comparison with other colonies independence aspirations is also interesting, given the volume was published in 1902. Not a military history in the accepted definition but a good overview.
February 7, 2022
Absolutely excellent and balanced. Fisher takes all the fake glamorized details out and presents a much more complicated view of history than we're sold in education. The central thrust of this work is to show the reasoning behind both the patriots and the British loyalists. The former was essentially a mob that needed to be controlled and steered by Washington. The latter was internally divided in parliament with the whigs and the torries. The whig view of the war took complete precedence in the minds of the British generals who tried to stop the Revolution.
March 31, 2024
Even though it was written in 1904, it still feels fresh and up to date more than a hundred years later. This account of the American revolution is unlike the reflection of the American revolution that became a part of national myth. Not exactly the story of yearning for freedom and self-government that was wholly felt by the entire nation, a story that got ingrained in the American psyche over the years of existence of American state, not a golden path that was supposed to always end in the victory and independence of the American colonies, but more of a story of popular movement that was supported by a significant part of the population that was not really a majority at the beginning, a story that might end with the British victory and utmost oppression of the likes of Ireland, a story of the nation that got lucky quite a few times in order to gain its freedom and was at the peril of defeat even right before it prevailed.
Some might say that this account taints the noble character of the patriots and the ideals the United States were founded upon as it shows them more human, more egotistical and self-centered than the contoured and well rounded depiction you'd normally find in the history books, makes the revolution itself more of a not at all predefined event in history that might go the British way dozens of times rather than the manifest providence that brought the colonies what was theirs by right, but for me it makes the Revolution even more interesting as it makes it a human affair of the flawed but generally good men and women that came together to try and go their own way and manage their own land as they grew apart from the country they came from and succeeded at that not just due to their own competence but also because the circumstances helped them do so, which means that other peoples and other places also have a chance to get on to the pursuit of happiness if they try.
Some might say that this account taints the noble character of the patriots and the ideals the United States were founded upon as it shows them more human, more egotistical and self-centered than the contoured and well rounded depiction you'd normally find in the history books, makes the revolution itself more of a not at all predefined event in history that might go the British way dozens of times rather than the manifest providence that brought the colonies what was theirs by right, but for me it makes the Revolution even more interesting as it makes it a human affair of the flawed but generally good men and women that came together to try and go their own way and manage their own land as they grew apart from the country they came from and succeeded at that not just due to their own competence but also because the circumstances helped them do so, which means that other peoples and other places also have a chance to get on to the pursuit of happiness if they try.
May 23, 2021
Fascinating summary of the British perspective of the American Revolution that is very much outside of the standard history book account.
December 15, 2022
The best way of truly understanding the American character, as it exists today, is in reading a sober history of its revolutionary war. There is perhaps no more of a defining event the country has ever known. So much of what people in America see as their identity is wrapped up in their idea of what happened in this war.
Written in 1902, Fisher’s book does a great job of removing the miasma of myth from it all to show us what it really was, using sources which have always been widely available and simply presenting them with some obvious interpretations. What he found when he did this is that it was all so much more complicated than Americans like to think.
It started with the French. The English were fighting for control of the continent but first they had to dispel the French. Because they were worried that the colonists might align themselves with the French if they treated them better than the English they let the Americans have a freedom to govern themselves they gave no other colony. The result was that the country became a kind of wild child: rough, selfish, self-reliant, self-serving, and resistant to authority. By the time the English had dispelled the French and tried to get the colonies back into line it was too late.
A major point Fisher is eager to make, which comes up repeatedly in his descriptions, of the way the war went was that the English were conflicted about it from the beginning. In some ways, according to Fisher’s understanding it was, for the English, more of a struggle between the Whigs and the Tories than it was between England and its colony.
The trouble began when the English chose General Howe to be commander in chief. The way Americans like to tell it, Howe was utterly incompetent which is one reason the Americans won. But Fisher does not see it that way. Howe was a Whig and therefore liberal and inclined to let the Americans be. He believed reconciliation was the best path toward bringing the colonies into line whereas the Tories (the conservatives) preferred a slash and burn approach.
Because of Howe’s political leanings he never prosecuted the war in a way that was winnable for the English. Fisher brings up many instances when Howe could have destroyed the Continental Army and ended the revolt but chose not to do so, in an effort, according to Fisher, to make the Tories (who were in power) look bad and thus tilt the politics of England in the Whigs’ favor. This point of view demolishes the idea of courage and resilience being the key to American victory.
In fact, America itself was deeply conflicted about the war. There were far more loyalists than we are generally led to believe. Fisher calculated about a third of the country were patriots who desperately wanted independence, a third were sympathetic to the patriots but were ready to let things play out either way, and a third were staunch supporters of the Crown. What this meant is that there were a lot more Americans fighting Americans during this war than we are usually led to believe. So the war was a radical act perpetrated by a determined minority, people who showed great fortitude and blind belief in an idea that had a little or no chance of succeeding on the face of it.
At one point, Fisher speculates on what would have happened if there hadn’t been a war. The character of the country would have been, in his estimation, less violent and the Civil War would probably never would have happened since the English in 1833 would have insisted the country liberate its slaves.
Another major factor In the way the war played out was European politics. If the Dutch, French, and Spanish hadn’t gotten involved we probably would have lost. They only did so (with some reluctance) because they were fighting over trade and other colonies around the globe and wanted to weaken England.This view punctures the entrenched American belief in the virtue of isolationism, the idea that we did this essentially by ourselves and have never needed anybody. Fisher thinks that without the help of these countries the patriots probably would have been driven westward and the war, from that point on, would have been nothing but a series of pesky guerrilla-type raids that would have been more of a bother to the English than anything.
Nothing Fisher writes diminishes what the patriots did. It was remarkable but it was also lucky. It’s amazing that people like George Washington would have even gotten involved in it considering everything they had to lose. It makes you respect the Founding Fathers all the more.
Still, the myths prevail and are as destructive in their way as they are binding.
Written in 1902, Fisher’s book does a great job of removing the miasma of myth from it all to show us what it really was, using sources which have always been widely available and simply presenting them with some obvious interpretations. What he found when he did this is that it was all so much more complicated than Americans like to think.
It started with the French. The English were fighting for control of the continent but first they had to dispel the French. Because they were worried that the colonists might align themselves with the French if they treated them better than the English they let the Americans have a freedom to govern themselves they gave no other colony. The result was that the country became a kind of wild child: rough, selfish, self-reliant, self-serving, and resistant to authority. By the time the English had dispelled the French and tried to get the colonies back into line it was too late.
A major point Fisher is eager to make, which comes up repeatedly in his descriptions, of the way the war went was that the English were conflicted about it from the beginning. In some ways, according to Fisher’s understanding it was, for the English, more of a struggle between the Whigs and the Tories than it was between England and its colony.
The trouble began when the English chose General Howe to be commander in chief. The way Americans like to tell it, Howe was utterly incompetent which is one reason the Americans won. But Fisher does not see it that way. Howe was a Whig and therefore liberal and inclined to let the Americans be. He believed reconciliation was the best path toward bringing the colonies into line whereas the Tories (the conservatives) preferred a slash and burn approach.
Because of Howe’s political leanings he never prosecuted the war in a way that was winnable for the English. Fisher brings up many instances when Howe could have destroyed the Continental Army and ended the revolt but chose not to do so, in an effort, according to Fisher, to make the Tories (who were in power) look bad and thus tilt the politics of England in the Whigs’ favor. This point of view demolishes the idea of courage and resilience being the key to American victory.
In fact, America itself was deeply conflicted about the war. There were far more loyalists than we are generally led to believe. Fisher calculated about a third of the country were patriots who desperately wanted independence, a third were sympathetic to the patriots but were ready to let things play out either way, and a third were staunch supporters of the Crown. What this meant is that there were a lot more Americans fighting Americans during this war than we are usually led to believe. So the war was a radical act perpetrated by a determined minority, people who showed great fortitude and blind belief in an idea that had a little or no chance of succeeding on the face of it.
At one point, Fisher speculates on what would have happened if there hadn’t been a war. The character of the country would have been, in his estimation, less violent and the Civil War would probably never would have happened since the English in 1833 would have insisted the country liberate its slaves.
Another major factor In the way the war played out was European politics. If the Dutch, French, and Spanish hadn’t gotten involved we probably would have lost. They only did so (with some reluctance) because they were fighting over trade and other colonies around the globe and wanted to weaken England.This view punctures the entrenched American belief in the virtue of isolationism, the idea that we did this essentially by ourselves and have never needed anybody. Fisher thinks that without the help of these countries the patriots probably would have been driven westward and the war, from that point on, would have been nothing but a series of pesky guerrilla-type raids that would have been more of a bother to the English than anything.
Nothing Fisher writes diminishes what the patriots did. It was remarkable but it was also lucky. It’s amazing that people like George Washington would have even gotten involved in it considering everything they had to lose. It makes you respect the Founding Fathers all the more.
Still, the myths prevail and are as destructive in their way as they are binding.
September 20, 2023
So much of my knowledge of the revolutionary war is from grade school therefore unrealistic in it’s susceptibility to myth, legend, and propaganda. I’d heard a political thinker mention this book as a good summary of the war from a more neutral position. A lot of interesting takeaways that make more sense thinking about the beginning of this country:
1. England’s demands were not unjust or crazy at the time. We were a colony that had been given almost full reign for 100 years simply because we produced so much money for the empire. When England finally tried to exert its power on us, the merchants and elites who had made their fortunes from the lack of government freaked out.
2. General Howe, the main British general during the majority of the war, was ideologically opposed to the war (yet forced to fight it anyways) and made some interesting strategic decisions that basically allowed Washington and the patriots to “survive to fight another day” multiple times.
3. There were more loyalists in the colonies than I thought previously. And there were many migrations of loyalists during the war, most notably a migration from NE to the area of Canada which is now New Brunswick.
4. When the Declaration of Independence says “all men are created equal”, it is of a political equality.
5. Alot of the funding of the war came from foreign powers (France, Spain, Holland, etc.) not because they were sympathetic to our cause (Spain definitely did not want to give its colonies any ideas about self determination), but because they wanted to screw with Brittain - the hegemon of the time.
Definitely a good read if you’re interested in a more detailed look at the influences and causes of the Revolutionary War from a more balanced perspective.
1. England’s demands were not unjust or crazy at the time. We were a colony that had been given almost full reign for 100 years simply because we produced so much money for the empire. When England finally tried to exert its power on us, the merchants and elites who had made their fortunes from the lack of government freaked out.
2. General Howe, the main British general during the majority of the war, was ideologically opposed to the war (yet forced to fight it anyways) and made some interesting strategic decisions that basically allowed Washington and the patriots to “survive to fight another day” multiple times.
3. There were more loyalists in the colonies than I thought previously. And there were many migrations of loyalists during the war, most notably a migration from NE to the area of Canada which is now New Brunswick.
4. When the Declaration of Independence says “all men are created equal”, it is of a political equality.
5. Alot of the funding of the war came from foreign powers (France, Spain, Holland, etc.) not because they were sympathetic to our cause (Spain definitely did not want to give its colonies any ideas about self determination), but because they wanted to screw with Brittain - the hegemon of the time.
Definitely a good read if you’re interested in a more detailed look at the influences and causes of the Revolutionary War from a more balanced perspective.
July 13, 2023
This book recounts the revolutionary war and the events leading up to it very differently than what I have learned in history class or popular culture. Fisher paints a picture of an already functionally-independent nation being governed very gently by England with a small and unpopular group of loudmouths who wanted independence. The story is told of the poorly planned an executed war from the patriot side which was decided entirely by British commanders. As the story goes, the first commander (Howe) was put in charge after specifically saying that he would refuse such a position and he proceeded to sandbag as hard as he could until he was sent back home and replaced with a new commander who was doing a good job of winning the war until yet another dude was either team-swapping or just a terrible strategist and lost all the British troops in traps.
Overall very interesting book but not really a page turner. I started in Nov and had a goal to read 12 books this year which no longer seems realistic.
Overall very interesting book but not really a page turner. I started in Nov and had a goal to read 12 books this year which no longer seems realistic.
February 2, 2023
~3 Stars~
November 18, 2023
Amazing
So many facts have been ignored and covered up. The American Revolution did not occur in a vacuum, so much European and world wide context has been left out.
So many facts have been ignored and covered up. The American Revolution did not occur in a vacuum, so much European and world wide context has been left out.
September 28, 2016
This book really went into the depth of the American Revolution. For those history fanatics I highly recommend you read this book. On the cover of the book is a picture of George Washington on a boat crossing the Delaware river. It explained why George Washington was forced to launch a surprise attack on the British and how long it took to get to the other side. George Washington believed that his troops would follow him anywhere because the people left were the people who really trusted George Washington or else they would left sooner. Therefore, after George Washington found out about British plans he concluded that the day after Christmas would be the best time to attack before the river froze over. The Hessian shelter offered everything that George Washington's troops needed to survive the war or keep them in the revolutionary war. It had guns, ammunition, water, shelter, food, cannons, and horses. George Washington knew that if he could take over Trenton the war would be turned around. Even though the odds were stacked against Washington and all his companions disagreed with him and claimed that " he was leading them into hell" George Washington strong willed mind led him to attacking Trenton. To get the men across the river took to long therefore colonists had to march fast on the way to Trenton. Since George Washington and his army started marching at about midnight they attacked at exactly 8 o clock. When George Washington and his troops took over Trenton that marked a new beginning in the Revolutionary war. Not only that, this book also went into the specific economic condition that the British were in that prevented them from fighting. Even though King George III wanted to keep fighting parliament rejected because England was in such an enormous debt. Soon after the Revolutionary war was over America took a couple years to sign peace treaties with England and settle down. Not only does this book explain the fine details in about the American Revolution it also goes over many misconceptions about the revolutionary war, therefore you should read this book.
August 20, 2016
If you want to believe comfortable lies, read anything else about the American Revolution. If you want to learn the truth, read this amazing book, and prepare to have your mind blown.
Fisher shows that the so-called "Patriots" and "Founding Fathers" were some of the most disgusting, evil, amoral cretins ever. The Revolution was not some noble crusade for freedom and liberty, but a treasonous morass of bloodshed over nothing.
Although published in 1902, it reads very easily. The author has a deft and dry sense of humor. Within, you will learn, among so many other things, that:
- the taxes Americans paid were considerably less than those paid by those living in England!
- the British parliament repeatedly repealed and cut taxes whenever the Americans whined about it (so much for "Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury")
- the Boston Tea Party was deliberately staged in order to provoke the parliament into passing the so-called "Intolerable Acts"
- that tea dumped into the harbor was dirt cheap - cheaper than the illegal tea smugglers like John Hancock were peddling
- suspected 'loyalists' were subjected to a reign of terror different only in degree, rather than in kind, from the French one. Homes were burned, libraries destroyed, families harassed. Those who refused to commit treason were maimed, paraded around, and psychologically tortured until they cracked
- in the name of "liberty," freedom of speech, freedom of press, and property rights were rather shamelessly destroyed by the rebels
Prepare to have your eyes opened.
Fisher shows that the so-called "Patriots" and "Founding Fathers" were some of the most disgusting, evil, amoral cretins ever. The Revolution was not some noble crusade for freedom and liberty, but a treasonous morass of bloodshed over nothing.
Although published in 1902, it reads very easily. The author has a deft and dry sense of humor. Within, you will learn, among so many other things, that:
- the taxes Americans paid were considerably less than those paid by those living in England!
- the British parliament repeatedly repealed and cut taxes whenever the Americans whined about it (so much for "Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury")
- the Boston Tea Party was deliberately staged in order to provoke the parliament into passing the so-called "Intolerable Acts"
- that tea dumped into the harbor was dirt cheap - cheaper than the illegal tea smugglers like John Hancock were peddling
- suspected 'loyalists' were subjected to a reign of terror different only in degree, rather than in kind, from the French one. Homes were burned, libraries destroyed, families harassed. Those who refused to commit treason were maimed, paraded around, and psychologically tortured until they cracked
- in the name of "liberty," freedom of speech, freedom of press, and property rights were rather shamelessly destroyed by the rebels
Prepare to have your eyes opened.
August 29, 2016
Dated but interesting.
At times it reads as if written by an Englishman because of the viewpoint put forth by the author. After awhile it becomes clear that Fisher's understanding on the British Parliament and political situation makes this a very well written political history from a viewpoint not often seen by modern Americans
At times it reads as if written by an Englishman because of the viewpoint put forth by the author. After awhile it becomes clear that Fisher's understanding on the British Parliament and political situation makes this a very well written political history from a viewpoint not often seen by modern Americans
May 3, 2017
Loved it, and I know I can trust the information. There are good examples of why the American people were bamboozled by the so called "patriots".
Loved it. There are good examples of why the American people were bamboozled by the so called "patriots". I know I can trust the information how the continental congress suppressed an independence Bill that would have gotten results without needless casualties.
Loved it. There are good examples of why the American people were bamboozled by the so called "patriots". I know I can trust the information how the continental congress suppressed an independence Bill that would have gotten results without needless casualties.
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews