What do you think?
Rate this book
Vicious and Immoral: Homosexuality, the American Revolution, and the Trials of Robert Newburgh
The fascinating story of a British army chaplain's buggery trial in 1774 reveals surprising truths about early America.
On the eve of the American Revolution, the British army considered the case of a chaplain, Robert Newburgh, who had been accused of having sex with a man. Newburgh's enemies cited his flamboyant appearance, defiance of military authority, and seduction of soldiers as proof of his low character. Consumed by fears that the British Empire would soon be torn asunder, his opponents claimed that these supposed crimes against nature translated to crimes against the king.
In Vicious and Immoral, historian John McCurdy tells this compelling story of male intimacy and provides an unparalleled glimpse inside eighteenth-century perceptions of queerness. By demanding to have his case heard, Newburgh invoked Enlightenment ideals of equality, arguing passionately that his style of dress and manner should not affect his place in the army or society. His accusers equated queer behavior with rebellion, and his defenders would go on to join the American cause. Newburgh's trial offers some clues to understanding a peculiarity of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth while gay acts were prohibited by law in much of the British empire, the newly formed United States was comparatively uninterested in legislating against same-sex intimacy.
McCurdy imagines what life was like for a gay man in early America and captures the voices of those who loved and hated Newburgh, revealing how sexuality and revolution informed one another. Vicious and Immoral is the first book to place homosexuality in conversation with the American Revolution, and it dares us to rethink the place of LGBTQ people in the founding of the nation.
On the eve of the American Revolution, the British army considered the case of a chaplain, Robert Newburgh, who had been accused of having sex with a man. Newburgh's enemies cited his flamboyant appearance, defiance of military authority, and seduction of soldiers as proof of his low character. Consumed by fears that the British Empire would soon be torn asunder, his opponents claimed that these supposed crimes against nature translated to crimes against the king.
In Vicious and Immoral, historian John McCurdy tells this compelling story of male intimacy and provides an unparalleled glimpse inside eighteenth-century perceptions of queerness. By demanding to have his case heard, Newburgh invoked Enlightenment ideals of equality, arguing passionately that his style of dress and manner should not affect his place in the army or society. His accusers equated queer behavior with rebellion, and his defenders would go on to join the American cause. Newburgh's trial offers some clues to understanding a peculiarity of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth while gay acts were prohibited by law in much of the British empire, the newly formed United States was comparatively uninterested in legislating against same-sex intimacy.
McCurdy imagines what life was like for a gay man in early America and captures the voices of those who loved and hated Newburgh, revealing how sexuality and revolution informed one another. Vicious and Immoral is the first book to place homosexuality in conversation with the American Revolution, and it dares us to rethink the place of LGBTQ people in the founding of the nation.
1 pages, Audio CD
Published June 18, 2024
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
December 14, 2024
Before the Reverend Mr. Robert Newburgh even joined the army, an officer in his future unit spread a rumour, started by servants, that Robert Newburgh had shared a bed with his foster brother and servant and that he was a buggerer. This rumour followed Robert Newburgh into the 18th Regiment of the Royal Irish Regiment of Foot. A frequently-violent fellow officer called him a buggerer, and Robert Newburgh was repeatedly court-martialed for minor offences because his colourful dress and reputation as a buggerer made other officers see him as rebellious against authority and against the king. Robert Newburgh and other members of the 18th Regiment also charged other officers with various offences and they were court-martialed. I think it was a very troubled and toxic workplace, and Robert Newburgh was being bullied at work by most of his fellow officer because of his clothing and a rumour about him. His few supporters left the service.
Such minor offences as having a green jacket made for him by an army tailor and wearing light-coloured lambskin breeches while riding instead of black (seen as more appropriate for a parson) were used against him in his court-martials, as evidence that he was a buggerer and unfit for service. Robert Newburgh always maintained that he had not had sex with men and his clothing said nothing about his character, but his fellow officers in the 18th Regiment saw him as being unfit for service because of what his reputation said about his character. There is no evidence that Robert Newburgh was a homosexual or that he had sex with men, but he was treated as though he did.
I think the author's final sentence that "at it's creation, the United States inherently included a place for LGBTQ+ people" is stretching it a bit too far because I don't agree that that's what the founding fathers or most Americans wanted at the time, but I agree that Americans were less concerned with prosecuting men for homosexual acts than the British were. However, sex between men was still a capital crime in most American states and was still prosecuted. I think there's a parallel between the 18th century attitudes towards men seen as homosexual described in this book and the 20th century view of homosexuals as traitors to the state. It's the same attitude and the same military, just with different details. This book describes an interesting time in American history, and I enjoyed it.
Such minor offences as having a green jacket made for him by an army tailor and wearing light-coloured lambskin breeches while riding instead of black (seen as more appropriate for a parson) were used against him in his court-martials, as evidence that he was a buggerer and unfit for service. Robert Newburgh always maintained that he had not had sex with men and his clothing said nothing about his character, but his fellow officers in the 18th Regiment saw him as being unfit for service because of what his reputation said about his character. There is no evidence that Robert Newburgh was a homosexual or that he had sex with men, but he was treated as though he did.
I think the author's final sentence that "at it's creation, the United States inherently included a place for LGBTQ+ people" is stretching it a bit too far because I don't agree that that's what the founding fathers or most Americans wanted at the time, but I agree that Americans were less concerned with prosecuting men for homosexual acts than the British were. However, sex between men was still a capital crime in most American states and was still prosecuted. I think there's a parallel between the 18th century attitudes towards men seen as homosexual described in this book and the 20th century view of homosexuals as traitors to the state. It's the same attitude and the same military, just with different details. This book describes an interesting time in American history, and I enjoyed it.
May 19, 2025
Moderately interesting topic of a accused homosexual in the British army at the time of the American revolution. However, it was too detailed to be interesting, and felt like it was based off of a limited set of primary data given the lack of historical record, then repeated continuously throughout the book. I think I would've been more interested in a magazine article about this topic rather than 300 pages.
March 26, 2026
This is obviously a painfully well researched book about the "I swear I'm not buggerer" Robert Newburgh in a time when being homosexual was considered "vicious and immoral". I get that all that research could motivate the author to go ahead and pile every bit of fact into the book, and include every court case and court marshall that Newburgh could contrive to prove that no, he was not a sexual deviant. His flamboyant clothes and mannerisms did not help his cases, nor did his intimate associations with men in his bedrooms and bathhouses, nor the fact that he never married in an 18th century world.
I'm not sure what the author was trying to tell us, but he sure let us know all about every detailed thing he could, regardless. Actually, that's not true, the epilogue does a very good job of telling us what the author wanted to convey. It's just that his book doesn't do this. He made several references to other high profile cases, including Oscar Wilde's libel case about homosexuality, which sounds like that may have a been more interesting book. According to the author, though, Robert Newburgh's litigiousness greatly influenced subsequent trials regarding accusations of sodomy and sexual perversion until it finally was no longer illegal. I get that being labeled is never fun, regardless as to whether the label should apply, but especially when it affects your well being, happiness, and livelihood.
The fact that these events happened months, weeks, and even days before the American Revolutionary War was also a claim of importance by the author that seemed to be anything but important. There's the passing statement that, no, Washington, Jefferson, and other auspicious men didn't seem to care one way or the other about homosexuality, but only attributed to lack of documented facts and statements.
There was also the idea, which was purported by the author, that sodomy was conflated as being associated with pedophilia. So that if you accept one, the other is just as acceptable. But this again was only specific anecdotes, not a widespread social concept.
The one interesting idea, however, was while the pent up British were keen to litigate sodomites, the American revolutionaries were more accepting. But this seems to be more of an opinion than a fact or historically agreed upon concept.
The overall theme, in the end, is that the author had something to say, and lots of facts, but the facts did not really support his ideas and the structure did not uphold his thesis. I do give the author an A+ for interesting stories and for reading the audiobook himself, but maybe go with something more documented and ideas that can be better supported in future endeavors?
I'm not sure what the author was trying to tell us, but he sure let us know all about every detailed thing he could, regardless. Actually, that's not true, the epilogue does a very good job of telling us what the author wanted to convey. It's just that his book doesn't do this. He made several references to other high profile cases, including Oscar Wilde's libel case about homosexuality, which sounds like that may have a been more interesting book. According to the author, though, Robert Newburgh's litigiousness greatly influenced subsequent trials regarding accusations of sodomy and sexual perversion until it finally was no longer illegal. I get that being labeled is never fun, regardless as to whether the label should apply, but especially when it affects your well being, happiness, and livelihood.
The fact that these events happened months, weeks, and even days before the American Revolutionary War was also a claim of importance by the author that seemed to be anything but important. There's the passing statement that, no, Washington, Jefferson, and other auspicious men didn't seem to care one way or the other about homosexuality, but only attributed to lack of documented facts and statements.
There was also the idea, which was purported by the author, that sodomy was conflated as being associated with pedophilia. So that if you accept one, the other is just as acceptable. But this again was only specific anecdotes, not a widespread social concept.
The one interesting idea, however, was while the pent up British were keen to litigate sodomites, the American revolutionaries were more accepting. But this seems to be more of an opinion than a fact or historically agreed upon concept.
The overall theme, in the end, is that the author had something to say, and lots of facts, but the facts did not really support his ideas and the structure did not uphold his thesis. I do give the author an A+ for interesting stories and for reading the audiobook himself, but maybe go with something more documented and ideas that can be better supported in future endeavors?
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
April 24, 2025
In 1773, Robert Newburgh landed in America, ready to be the new chaplain for the Eighteenth Regiment, the "Royal Irish". However, his reputation preceded him -- there was a rumor going around that the new chaplain was a "buggerer" who had slept with his manservant. The Eighteenth was already divided and toxic; their commander had recently fled after accusations of using his office for personal gain, leaving behind divisions between his attackers and supporters, and the rebellion brewing in the Colonies threatened to infect the Army as well. The situation was a powder keg already, and when Newburgh arrived - a man with a reputation, who dressed more colorfully & fashionably than most religious men - the stage was set.
This is a really interesting book. 1774 in the Colonies was an intense time, and the various investigations, lawsuits, and court-martials that spiralled out of Newburgh's arrival are all set against this backdrop. I hadn’t read about this case before but McCurdy did an excellent job of both telling the story and setting it in its broader historical context.
This is a really interesting book. 1774 in the Colonies was an intense time, and the various investigations, lawsuits, and court-martials that spiralled out of Newburgh's arrival are all set against this backdrop. I hadn’t read about this case before but McCurdy did an excellent job of both telling the story and setting it in its broader historical context.
October 6, 2024
Very interesting and well-researched, but the focuses more on military court proceedings than attitudes towards homosexuality. DNF at 40%. For someone more interested in colonial judicial history than me.
June 24, 2024
McCurdy provides a well sourced review of the trial of a British chaplain accused of immoral conduct in 1774.
July 26, 2025
This past summer I had the pleasure of hearing Dr. McCurdy discuss his book at an event in Philadelphia blocks from where the book takes place. I finally read the copy I obtained that evening and wasn't disappointed. Very detailed and well researched. May appeal more to those interested in history of the revolutionary period. Beautifully footnoted. Look forward to reading Dr. McCurdy's other works.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews