Scan barcode
vanilla22's review against another edition
5.0
The details are horrifying and will change the way you view the Revolution. An easy to read book with an abundance of gory illustrations that pair disturbingly well with the descriptions.
katevaliant's review
5.0
This book focuses on the violence of the Revolution and how it shaped the war, a side of the war we aren't generally taught in school. My favorite parts were the inclusion of Patriots versus Loyalists and how the civil fighting between Americans affected the war. This a good book for anyone interested in the violence of the Revolution without it being watered down.
bahareads's review
adventurous
emotional
funny
informative
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
4.0
Holger Hoock makes it clear that he does not have a stake in American history (as he is a german man). He has a fresh outlook on American history because he did not grow up with nationalistic American myths. Hoock wants to shed light on the shared anglo-history and myths on both the US and British sides. He wants to write violence back into the story of the American revolution so that readers can really understand it. Violence is his central analytical and narrative focus. Experiences of violence came in many forms - physical, emotional, and intellectual. For political and military violence he only focuses on key dynamic points in history. Hoock's narrative is looking at all sides of the war - Colonists, Loyalists, Indigenous, and Black.
Death rate statistics are shocking (if I remember correctly is one of THE most violent wars that the USA participated in.) By understanding how violence relates to nation-building is critical to understanding the creation of America. Children were picking up skeletal parts up until the 1840s in certain areas in the US. After the war, vets were used to showing the cruelty of the British - helping perpetuate the narrative that the British were solely evil. War showed that propaganda worked well. Facing the truth that both sides were equally evil and violent to each other will allow for frank reflection on America's birth. Hoock also says racial injustice is set in the founding of America, as does Robert G. Parkinson. The American Revolution gave the US a blueprint on how to suppress violence in America and how to treat Indigenous people and their land.
Death rate statistics are shocking (if I remember correctly is one of THE most violent wars that the USA participated in.) By understanding how violence relates to nation-building is critical to understanding the creation of America. Children were picking up skeletal parts up until the 1840s in certain areas in the US. After the war, vets were used to showing the cruelty of the British - helping perpetuate the narrative that the British were solely evil. War showed that propaganda worked well. Facing the truth that both sides were equally evil and violent to each other will allow for frank reflection on America's birth. Hoock also says racial injustice is set in the founding of America, as does Robert G. Parkinson. The American Revolution gave the US a blueprint on how to suppress violence in America and how to treat Indigenous people and their land.
mightync's review against another edition
3.0
I've read a lot of American Revolution literature, so I'm keenly aware of the violence, massacres, and atrocities committed by both sides before, during, and after the conflict. I knew about most of the examples cited in this book, so not much of this was new to me. The underground dungeons, however, never made their way into any books I've read before, so at least I learned something. And yes, the author set out to write about the violence that led to our American Independence, and he succeeded in his task. It just wasn't told in a very interesting manner, nor do I think it revealed any profound insights that would make me feel any differently about the way the war was fought and won. True, someone just starting their foray into the Revolution might come away shocked and appalled at the barbarity of the struggle. But for a seasoned veteran as myself, the theme of this story was already well known.
beereads618's review against another edition
5.0
The details are horrifying and will change the way you view the Revolution. An easy to read book with an abundance of gory illustrations that pair disturbingly well with the descriptions.
classysmarta's review against another edition
4.0
A brutal look at the American Revolution or as the author terms it, the first American civil war. I appreciated the extensive research this historian put into giving a broad look at violence during this war but also how he brought in personal stories and anecdotes to really drive points home. Some of the stories are very disturbing but he does give a disclosure at the beginning warning you to that. This is a unique look at the war removing some of the layers of idealism that often accompanies how Americans typically look at the war: bloodless and whitewashed. He discusses the circumstances beyond the battles which I greatly appreciated. We know war is violent but the violence that happened to prisoners of war, women, slaves, and loyalists are never things I had considered and need to be observed.
socraticgadfly's review against another edition
5.0
This is not a totally chronological history, though it follows that general order. It is in no way a military history.
Rather, it's about violence leading up to, and during, the American Revolution. Hoock, being a native of the Netherlands, is positioned for some type of "neutrality." (Several years ago, I read one British book of the period; from the British POV, it could be called the British Civil War.)
People who know this period are familiar with things like tarring and feathering of Stamp Act agents, etc., by Patriots. That's Hoock's starting point.
He deals with violence against other civilians by both Patriots and Tories, and by Continentals/militias and Redcoats/Hessians alike.
The civilians were about equally bad. Washington's troops weren't as bad as the British, but weren't perfect, and, of course, many Revolutionary theaters of action had troops not under his command. This includes American atrocities against Indians in New York.
I don't know if the number of relatively low ratings is in part due to some people not liking to hear all this message, or what.
Rather, it's about violence leading up to, and during, the American Revolution. Hoock, being a native of the Netherlands, is positioned for some type of "neutrality." (Several years ago, I read one British book of the period; from the British POV, it could be called the British Civil War.)
People who know this period are familiar with things like tarring and feathering of Stamp Act agents, etc., by Patriots. That's Hoock's starting point.
He deals with violence against other civilians by both Patriots and Tories, and by Continentals/militias and Redcoats/Hessians alike.
The civilians were about equally bad. Washington's troops weren't as bad as the British, but weren't perfect, and, of course, many Revolutionary theaters of action had troops not under his command. This includes American atrocities against Indians in New York.
I don't know if the number of relatively low ratings is in part due to some people not liking to hear all this message, or what.
njmatt04's review against another edition
3.0
Probably more like 3.5 stars. It was a bit niche for my taste, but I found it discussed a few events I was unaware or only vaguely aware of. The general view of the Revolution has been whitewashed and romanticized over years, but books like this serve to remind you that it was a lot messier and cruel at times than we’d often like to believe.