I listened to this on audio-book, although I do have a hard back copy in my library. David McCollough's distinct voice, which makes his speeches so enjoyable, also makes him the perfect candidate to read his own books. His is the recognizable voice from the 90's as the narrator of Ken Burns PBS classic "The Civil War". The only McCullough book I've read is his Pulitzer Prize winning biography, John Adams.

1776 is not quite on the level with John Adams, but it's very good, very enlightening, about a part of history that most of us just received the highlights of during high school history class. Of course the main highlight of the year was the signing of the Declaration of Independence on July 4th. But this book focuses on the military campaign of George Washington and the Continental Army. For the most part 1776 wasn't a very good year for either. It did see the British Army and it's naval fleet evacuate Boston after Washington, in a brilliant one night manoeuvre, move his army and artillery onto Dorchester Heights, making the British retreat necessary. Washington then moved the army to New York to defend there, but the British Fleet returned, and with superior forces, total naval domination of the harbor and rivers, they routed the Continental's in a series of battles, finally capturing Ft. Washington. What was significant though about this episode was the fact that the British could have ended the war right then if they had pushed their advantage. But in another brilliant night manoeuvre, Washington stole quietly across the river with his army and escaped.

Washington moved his army to New Jersey to be in a position to defend the Capitol, Philadelphia. They camped on the west side of the Delaware River while the British occupied the east side which included Trenton and Princeton. This set the stage for the famous night crossing of the Delaware by boat, and the successful attack and taking of Trenton the next morning. They followed up the next day by taking Princeton, probably saving the army and the country from defeat.

The war would last another five years before Cornwallis surrendered at Yorktown in 1881. The treaty of Paris was signed in 1883 officially bringing peace. A lot happened in those years, but this book focused on 1776 and the events I've mentioned here. Again I'll say that I think my appreciation of the book was enhanced by listening instead of reading.

I get it with the author was trying to do here, highlight the first year of the American Revolution. And I get that. But it felt unfinished, mainly because I felt like there was so much more to the story. My fault, but still three stars

“If you only read one book on the American Revolution, read 1776 by David McCullough.”

I’m sure that someone, somewhere has made this declaration. I’m not sure if this has any validity because this is, in fact, the only book I’ve read on the subject. I can now say that is it the best book I’ve read on the war, and I had a lot of fun reading it. It’s a thrilling story from start to finish, especially told by such a masterful writer and historian.

It’s a perfect book for folks like me who know little about the conflict. My previous knowledge was like a very rough sketch. This book help shade in a few of the major events and bring it all into a coherent and superbly entertaining narrative.

The result of the Battle of Trenton when Washington crossed the Delaware River is catalogued here in words that would seem jinjoistic and bragging if they weren’t what we know to be the truth (more lies have been written about battles than any other human endeavor, even sex). A proud moment in American history and one of the building blocks in the American myth:

It had all happened in forty-five minutes or less. Twenty-one Hessians had been killed, 90 wounded. The prisoners taken numbered approximately 900. Another 500 had managed to escape, most of them by the bridge over Assunpink Creek.

Incredibly, in a battle of such extreme savagery, only four Americans had been wounded, including Captain Washington and Lieutenant Monroe, and not one American had been killed.

It sucked.

This book didn’t have any overarching themes. It just talked about what happened in 1776. When I started reading it felt like I had jumped into the middle of a book. But David McCullough is a good enough writer that he can make this approach work.

I didn’t realize this book was going to focus almost entirely on military battles. It didn’t get into politics, for instance any of the details around the Declaration of Independence except noting how this was communicated to the troops.

More specifically, it focused on the battles George Washington presided over, and George Washington himself. But I didn’t learn anything surprising about Washington I didn’t already know from Ron Chernow’s biography, which I recently read.

In summary, Washington is depicted as a mediocre strategist, but a great leader. As a strategist, he has a history of some poor decisions and indecisiveness. Thankfully, he was at times talked out of his opinions, such as his desire to make a full attack on Boston. Where he excelled was in his leadership skills: ability to motivate, to listen with an open mind, to stay calm, and to put his ego in check.

I really enjoyed the story of Henry Knox sneaking munitions up to Dorchester Heights without the British knowing. What an amazing story. It seemed like a scene in a movie.

McCullough captures how bleak things looked in late 1776, after losing several battles in New York, and being low on supplies. Morale was low and troops were deserting. Washington’s leadership was key to keeping things together.

One last random note is about General Charles Lee. He was portrayed as being rather clownish in Hamilton the Musical (I don’t remember if this was also how he was portrayed in the Chernow book) but I came away with a different view of him from this book. He seemed to have some ability as a strategist, and George Washington trusted his judgment.

I didn’t love this book as much some of my favorite GR reviewers did, but it might just be a matter of style preference. I didn’t enjoy the meandering feel, but the writing was just as elegant as you would expect from McCullough.

Man oh man why, did I wait all these years to enjoy this great book?
Now, per the title, it only covers 1776, so battles and events are mentioned that occurred earlier so If you want to know what happened at say, Lexington or Concord you’ll have to read another book.
History really jumps out of the page, it humanizes larger than life figures such as George Washington who could be indecisive and indeed lost 4 battles in a row that year!!
The British point of view is also written in great detail, no doubt due to McCulloughs exhaustive research in England, and of his large research team.
No dry or dull text anywhere in the book.
Since I’ve completed it, it’s spurred a great interest in the American war of independence. I’ve got three checkouts from the library on events covering 1765 to 1789. Stay tuned!

Have a great reading week, many blessing from Texas.

David McCullough passed away earlier this year. According to many he was one of the best working historians in the states. Those claims could be backed up with multiple Pulitzer Prizes under his belt. I had yet to read any of his books even though History is my preferred genre, so I thought I’d correct that by starting with 1776. 

This reads like you're being narrated a story by a much wiser elder…a great story-teller, filled with many small side-stories and interesting facts. One example I remember is the story of how the young American army regulars were almost constantly drunk, with a British surgeon observing “inordinate amounts of rum” surrounding rebel camps. McCullough digs into primary sources and estimates that the colonial soldiers were drinking a bottle of rum per day, per man. 

I was awed when trying to visualize the story of the complete British armada arriving off Staten Island…a force of nearly 400 ships large and small as well as 73 warships. McCullough makes the lofty claim that it was the largest most powerful force ever sent from any one nation in history! All told, 32,000 well armed, well equipped and well trained soldiers landed on Staten Island, more than the total population of the largest colonial city in America (Philly) at the time. And all that to quell a rebellion fought by farmers, fishers, sailors and skilled artisans…most with no prior combat experience! 

The book mostly focuses on Washington and a few of his close generals, and their counterparts in the British army. My interest is with the first nations of this land, but there wasn’t much mention of that particular aspect of the war. Nor is it required, of course, since that isn’t the focus of this book. Calloway’s 'The Indian World of George Washington' covers that base. But I was struck with a few related thoughts from two passages:

On page 99, McCullough notes that on March 9 1776, a new type of warfare was brought to New England such as was never before seen in those lands, with a thunderous all-night bombardment of Dorchester. By 1776, ‘New England’ was already fully conquered by the English. McCullough writes that Joseph Reed, a Philadelphia attorney would himself write of the British the following passage in a letter:


“I cannot help being astonished that a people should come 3,000 miles at such risk, trouble and expense to rob, plunder and destroy another people”. 


The cognitive dissonance is striking. He literally wrote that about the British empire destroying the “American” people…when just 100 years prior those “American”…(really British people), did the very same thing to the Narrangansetts, Pokanokets, Pequots, Nausets, Massachusetts, Nipmucks, Sakonnets, and many more (as I learned thanks to Philbrick’s magnificent book 'Mayflower'). 

The other passage, really a one-off sentence, that stayed with me, was on page 47, during the “character background” section of the book for Washington. McCullough mentions that Washington, from Virginia, was very wealthy at a young age, owning 54,000 thousand acres of land and 100 slaves. McCullough moves on after that, and doesn’t come back to the topic. But it's an amazing fact to me. For one man to own 54,000 acres, land that was so violently stolen not long prior (Powhatan land in Virginia), seems absurd. And to have 100 slaves, working for you every day all day. A large enterprise of free labor. Take away all the inhumanity for a moment. Just imagine if it was labor alone… that’s a 100 employee enterprise, a solid mid-size company, and not one penny of labor has to be recompensed. All profit. It was just amazing for me to think that most of the “founding fathers”, the heroes of the American republic, and especially George Washington, their whole way of lives was supported and made possible by the use of the first nation’s traditional lands and slave labor. Yes… I suppose I kinda knew this before, but I feel that knowing the facts (as much as possible) does matter. 54,000 acres and 100 slaves!

Anyways, I digress. Overall, I enjoyed this book. I really like David McCullough’s prose. His style of writing history is engaging. Indeed the literary world lost a great wordsmith. I look forward to checking out his other books, especially the one on the Wright Brothers and his book on the creation of the Panama Canal. 3.5 to 4 Stars.

If you want something so dense, so boring, and so un-enlightening, then THIS is your book. Does McCullough write specifically for people that have insomnia? The dictionary was more enthralling than this tome.

I would Wikipedia the Revolutionary War if that is your thing. You can get the highlights without loosing consciousness 9 times.

This isn't the book I wanted to read, or was expecting to read, but it was good nonetheless.

What I was expecting:

1. A book about the first full year of the American Revolution (this part was accurate).
2. Insight into the causes of the Revolution (absent almost completely).
3. Portrayals of the way the two sides saw each other, and why (somewhat present).
4. Stuff about George Washington and the other founding fathers (there was some stuff on George Washington, mostly in his role as commander in chief of the first continental army, but there was almost nothing on his personal life or anything outside his new role).
5. Explanations of battles (this is basically all the book consisted of).
6. Lots about the writing of the Declaration of Independence (there was NONE OF THIS).

So you can see I was probably setting myself up for failure, but luckily halfway through I forced myself to adjust my expectations and get over it. I ended up enjoying the book for what it was, and not what I wanted it to be.

What this book actually was:

1. A book about the full first year of the Revolution, during which time the US army almost lost the war, but managed through perseverance and some luck to turn things around.
2. Insight into each individual battle of the war during the period of January 1776-January 1777 and how each one set the tone for the war to come.
3. Portrayals of the strategies employed by both sides, and reasonably conclusions for why the did so.
4. A focus on George Washington and his main generals in the war, including Nathanael Greene and Henry Knox, as well as soldiers int he war and other people who McCullough was able to track down primary sources for. The book is told almost exclusively through finding and piecing together different primary sources from the day (letters, journals, proclamations, articles, essays, etc.) It is very much in their own words and there is very little outside analysis on McCullough's part, aside from the decisions he made in putting the whole thing together.
5. Lots and lots of battles, including detailed descriptions of the living conditions of both sides of soldiers, including the pros and cons of the British being so regulated and traditional, and the Americans being so disorganized, inexperienced, but enthusiastic.
6. In large part, this book actually works to de-mythologize and unromanticize everything you learned in elementary school about the Revolution, and focuses on how the first year of the war influenced the rest of it.

I would definitely be interested in reading more books by this author, especially his one on John Adams, which I have a feeling is the one I should have been reading in the first place, given what I wanted from this one. Mostly, though, it just made me want to read more books about this time in history, because it made me realize that aside from those common romanticizations most Americans hold about the Revolutionary war, I know almost nothing concrete about it, a situation I really need to rectify as soon as possible.

Having read Truman and John Adams, as well as one more recent book, The Pioneers I am a huge fan of David McCullough’s work. I have three others on the shelf (actually in a cupboard - they aren’t allowed on the shelf until they are read!) to be read over the next few months.

1776 is another wonderful book about one year in the eight-year Revolutionary War. A year that was mostly disastrous and ended with a couple of consequential wins that are nothing short of miracles.

That Washington was far from a great general is not glossed over and I come away amazed at how this rebellion was anywhere near successful. History obviously proves it was and this book describes this slice of the war brilliantly.

Oh, why did I put this book down for so long? I forgot what a wonderful writer David McCullough is. Especially in these last few pages he was making the revolution come alive to me.

Of course, it did help that it had gotten to where Washington crosses the Delaware and routs the drunken Hessians by Trenton. (Per McCullough, the Hessians weren't really drunk. Just another urban legend, I guess.) I had friends who lived in Yardley, PA, right by Washington's Crossing, which, I presume, is the then McKonkey's Ferry. They do a reenactment there. We didn't go out in the middle of the night to see them cross, but in the morning (I think it was Christmas morning) we went over there and we didn't see a lot of ice, but it was a warm winter that year, and a wonderful display by a piper band coming out of the fog. I almost swooned - it was really enough to almost take your breath away.

In college, there was a professor who said that any general but Howe could have beat Washington and any general but Washington could have beat Howe. I don't know. Washington had an awful lot go wrong for him in the year 1776, especially from August to December. On November 30, I think it was Howe (might have been Cornwallis) made an offer for people to quit the Americans. And the people in New Jersey were coming in by droves. It is end of December and another enlistment period is almost up and Washington is fearful that he is not going to have an army come the new year. They must do something daring! They do.

Washington preaches perseverance. He was one who learned from experience and probably rarely made the same mistake twice. Thank goodness or who knows what would have happened to us. Franklin once famously said that we must all hang together or else we will hang separately. So I, for one, am grateful for Washington's perseverance.

George Washington was a terrible general: indecisive, dilatory, proud, inwardly contemptuous of his troops (though his troops, in fact, WERE contemptible). He hated New Englanders, thought they were smelly, avaricious & lacking in Southern elegance. He had a “chief slave” who hung around with him always; they were like the Lone Ranger and Tonto. His big mistake was trying to hold New York City – but he was a politician WHILE being general; he couldn’t abandon Manhattan after fighting nobly for Boston, without looking prejudiced.

New Yorkers were the same then as they are now: two-faced, ambitious, decadent, culturally advanced. Soldiers, British & American, loved hanging out there. (But there were lots of prostitutes in “Puritan” Boston, too!) 20,000 people lived in one square mile.

Eventually, in the course of one year, Washington mastered the Taoist Art of Retreat – the length of New Jersey! As for the fabled victory at Trenton (the one for which Washington crossed the Delaware), those were Hessians, not British soldiers, and they were not drunk on Christmas Day – just taken by surprise. And mowed down by Patriot cannon in the streets.

The Continental Army would march uncomplaining through a blizzard – many of them barefoot! Back then Americans were tough as pruning shears.

David McCullough may be the greatest prose writer in our nation.