In another great book, McCullough addresses a foundational event in American history, full of insight and teachable moments to appease interested readers. He seeks to focus on a key part of the Revolutionary War, twelve months that not only shaped the event in a way that tipped the scales in favour of the colonies, but also encapsulated the most intriguing battles and manoeuvring on both sides. Illustrating both sides of the story, McCullough offers less of a 'hoorah America' and more a chess match approach to the overall history that saw the birth of America and the Declaration of Independence devised by the Continental Congress. Highlighting the roles of the two Georges (Washington and King George III) and General Howe, along with a handful of essential actors, McCullough fleshes out some of the story behind the tension and shows how both sides were not prepared for anything save a full-on victory. McCullough argues that Washington wore two distinctive hats: the quasi first King of America and military leader whose passion for independence fuelled his personal fire. While by no means a politically-minded individual or one with military savvy, Washington did all he could to guide colonial troops against their British oppressors, seeking freedom. Told in such a way that a layperson could easily see the historical progression of 1776, McCullough brings the story to life and helps any curious reader (Americans especially) understand why that year is so important in America's history, besides the obvious. A must-read addition to the historical Crown Jewels on offer by one of America's premier historians.

Having navigated through two previous McCullough tomes (Truman and John Adams biographies) I am well-versed with the style and format on offer. It was not long ago that I tackled the Adams biography, where I think some of the germinating ideas for this book might have come. I was thoroughly interesting in learning more about this year after it received a cursory discussion in the Adams biography. While I had hoped for more political analysis, the book focusses primarily on the military campaign and Washington's tactics to outsmart and out manoeuvre the British troops. That said, it offers wonderful insight into the military campaigns that brought about independence for the thirteen colonies. McCullough masterfully weaves the story from George III's parliamentary proclamation through to the twelve months of monumental fighting that brought independence from an idea to reality. With a cast of characters that help fill out the story left untold in many history books, McCullough pulls on the heartstrings of many Americans and surely instils some pride in the annual July 4th celebrations.

Kudos, Dr. McCullough for such a powerful piece of work, told so succinctly and yet thoroughly. I see you have a bunch more to entertain and educate me as time goes on.

This review could just be the reader, not the content. The audiobook was very boring and I felt myself getting easily distracted and stop paying attention. The book version may work better, if you're thinking of giving this one a try.

Intended as a companion book to the John Adams biography, and also complements Ron Chernow's Washington. It was a quick read (only 300 pages), and I enjoyed it. I wanted some additional military history to read that wasn't dry, and 1776 was entertaining. Can't really go wrong with this book. I think I might have my fill of the year 1776 for now, and can move on.

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

I thought I respected George Washington before reading this book but I now venerate the man! An absolutely fantastic history. McCullough does not just list the events of the American Revolution, he brings the time to life. I highly recommend this history!

Perseverance and spirit have done wonders in all ages.
-tGeneral George Washington

I’m ashamed to say that, despite even the meager teaching I received in grade and high school, my knowledge of the Revolutionary War period is still rather slim. I know the notable names, the dates, and general locations certain battles were fought, but know nothing of the details, the inspirations, or the specifics regarding motivating factors. The true political landscape of the time completely escapes me, much to my detriment. It’s something I’ve made a goal to remedy, believing that understanding and acknowledging the generation of the founding fathers and their undertaking in forging this nation, to be both honoring of them and their efforts, and necessary to create within me a new appreciation and gratitude for the freedoms I currently practice with relative autonomy.

As has been said many times on news networks, radio, various websites, and in many forms of print, America seems to be more divided than ever; that we are now on the edge of losing our great nation to division, dissension, partisan politics, and general unrest. With the rise of social media platforms, our new, almost ubiquitous connectedness, and constant 24-hour news cycle, the doom and gloom pessimism that some find it a joy to spread is now allowed to permeate society in entirely new ways, taking its toll on morale, uniting naysayers alike, and forging bastions of negativity when, in all truthfulness, it’s the last thing we need in the face of such separation.

Within this strife there is a tendency to want to return to a simpler time, a utopian time; a time when all Americans were united in cause and vision, when the nation stood together for the greater hope of all who shared the same ideals. The stories of the revolutionary period always seem to be dredged up when political pundits of various parties wish to restore something that was ‘lost’, or when a jingoistic interpretation of history will serve as the perfect springboard to justify whatever action needs approved at the time. Unfortunately, despite the great desire for this magical point in history in which this perfect peace existed, it did not, and has never actually been a reality.

It really bothers me when I hear people dismiss the past as a 'simpler time', usually when referring to how 'terrible' things are currently. The real nails-on-the-chalkboard lines for me are “It’s the worst it’s ever been,” and “It’s never been this bad,” and “[insert virtue here] is such a rare quality these days.” It’s always punctuated with the words these days, as if virtue was prevalent in days past. As if the preceding periods of human history have been filled with simple conflicts, virtuous leaders and selfless lay-people, and the liar, the thief, the murderer, and the despot were all inventions of this generation.

It's important to note that only a third of the population of the colonies had any interest in independence. The majority was either loyal to King George or waiting to see who won before deciding allegiance. When Britain was forced to retreat during the Siege of Boston they took over 1,000 loyalists with them to England. Regular people, simply seeking to live their lives fled their homes and everything they knew, looking to escape the effects and outcomes of 'the glorious cause'. What some now look at as a simple mission for liberty and freedom was much more complicated in nature, with views and opinions all over the spectrum. While the ideals of the revolutionary period may, in fact, be rooted in the idea of equality and liberty for all people, the specifics are far more varied and prone to the ugliness of human frailty.

As I mention in my n  Mayflowern review, despite the rose-colored glasses that many Americans attempt to view history with, or through which politicians attempt to focus our gaze, there was no utopian period in which freedoms were exercised in a perfect vacuum of personal liberty. The very colonization of Plymouth, along with the subsequent century leading to the Revolutionary War, was filled with war, religious dispute, and political turmoil, just as the century which followed it would produce the trappings which led to the Civil War.

Regardless of the rhetorical efforts to the contrary, history reveals that the America we know today was, in fact, born of, and has continued to press onward despite, hardship, not its absence.

It is constant trial that forces us, as individuals, and as a nation, to always reexamine our path, and challenge ourselves to redirect accordingly in order to maintain our moral compass, and to attain higher achievement. Not merely achievement in the economic sense, but in the moral, in the legal, in the scientific, in education, and in provision. Without hardship we have only comfort, and the only traits born of comfort are indifference, distance, and apathy. Struggle provides discomfort, discomfort forces evaluation, evaluation, hopefully, leads to action and self-improvement rather than sloth.

If anything can truly be called American, and stand as a pillar upon which the nation itself sets its ideals, is that idea of a resilient spirit in the midst of challenge; to be accepting of challenge, and to embrace dissension and difficulties as growing pains incurred while working toward a higher aim. Holding one's self to a greater standard is essential in a democratic system, particularly when working to ensure that ideal is provided to all people, even our enemies. That conviction and perseverance has been required of Americans many times before, and nowhere was it more important than when we weren't yet what we are now.

1776, by David McCullough, is the encapsulated biography of the most dangerous and most pivotal year of the revolution that resulted in the creation of our country. Written as a companion piece to his book, John Adams, it traces the steps of George Washington and the Continental Army from the Siege of Boston, in January, to the crossing of the Delaware River and ensuing attack at Trenton, the day after Christmas. While the Continental Congress argued as to how to respond to the growing political crisis, Washington, and several thousand volunteer troops, were all that stood between the colonies and the might of the 18th century's strongest empire.

The reflection upon my situation and that of this army produces an uneasy hour when all around me are wrapped in sleep. Few people know the predicament we are in.

-tGeneral George Washington, January 14th, 1776

In reading 1776, I was hoping for a detailed introduction to the events surrounding the historical moment when the thirteen colonies became a unified presence. What I received instead was much less detailed, though far more inspiring. As a whole, the book doesn't present any of the specifics regarding the catalysts that resulted in revolution, but is more of a character study of those involved in the key battles involving what constituted the continental army at the time. It serves as a 'ground-level' portrayal of events, with McCullough utilizing excerpts from letters and missives to breathe life into the names and situations. It's impressive just how many he's able to pull from, and not just the names we know, but also those of the common soldier (on both sides of the conflict), and the distant citizen.

George Washington is the book's central figure, with the narrative resulting from actions he would take, or would indirectly feel the effects from. There is so much mythology surrounding the founding fathers and their contributions to American freedom that the history is practically legend; the specifics lost in the popular acceptance of misty caricature and vague principal. Washington has become a mythic figure, his human traits lost amidst his accomplishment. McCullough does not allow his weaknesses and mistakes to go unnoticed, and goes so far as to highlight them.

Writing to Lund Washington on September 30, Washington was even more candid about his miseries. “Such is my situation that if I were to wish the bitterest curse to an enemy on this side of the grave, I should put him in my stead with my feelings.” […] “In confidence I tell you that I never was in such an unhappy, divided state since I was born.”

In doing so, McCullough decries the deity-like stature the man has obtained, reducing him to the human being that he truly was, and in the process, making the achievement of his enduring leadership the true testament of greatness it really was. He was no military genius, no brilliant tactician. Washington was at least partly responsible for a string of failures that devastated his soldiers during the middle of the year. Having succeeded in driving the British out during the Siege of Boston in January, he and his army were promptly trounced in every successive major engagement, until December, when his army was at its lowest point, both in morale and in number, when desperation forced his hand and he decided to attack.

The problem was not that there were too few American soldiers in the thirteen states. There were plenty, but the states were reluctant to send the troops they had to help fight the war, preferring to keep them close to home, and especially as the war was not going well. In August, Washington had an army of 20,000. In the three months since, he had lost four battles – at Brooklyn, Kips Bay, White Plains, and Fort Washington – then gave up Fort Lee without a fight. His army now was divided as it had not been in August and, just as young Lieutenant Monroe had speculated, he had only about 3,500 troops under his personal command – that was all.

Washington's plan to march to and cross the Delaware, on Christmas night, in a blizzard, to attack a force of superior numbers with superior training, in a last-ditch attempt to seize a much-needed victory, was arguably the turning point of the entire war.

The question, that begs to be asked, is why, after all those defeats, after a year of constant retreat, after consistently disease-ridden conditions, in the middle of the worst weather possible, did those 3,000 men follow him into what very well could have amounted to a suicide mission? Why did men follow him for nine miles after the crossing, without shoes, without proper clothing, or equipment? Why did men continue to march to Trenton even though two of them froze to death in the process?

It was because of Washington's ability as a leader. He utterly convinced them of the possibility of victory through the sheer portrayal of his convictions.

The sight of Washington set an example of courage such as he had never seen, wrote one young officer afterward. “I shall never forget what I felt…when I saw him brave all the dangers of the field and his important life hanging as it were by a single hair with a thousand deaths flying around him. Believe me, I thought not of myself”.

It's these personal narratives and character traits upon which McCullough spends his time developing for the reader, rather than the simple outlining of dates and locations. He gives voice to the individuals who participated, who lived through the experience, allowing us too see through their eyes and connect with them on a very human level. Individuals like Henry Knox, a 25-year old bookseller with no military training, who was instrumental in winning the Siege of Boston when he suggested, and was subsequently placed in charge of, a daring trip to fetch cannon from a distant fort; and "Molly" Corbin, who fought alongside her husband in the defense of Fort Washington. When her husband was killed in battle, she took his place, loading and firing artillery.

One of those I found the most interesting was Nathaniel Green, 33, and the Continental Army's most capable tactician, who dedicated himself to personal improvement through rigorous study, and of which McCullough writes: "Having ample means to buy whatever books he needed, he acquired a number of costly military treatises few could afford. It was a day and age that saw no reason why one could not learn whatever was required - learn virtually anything - by the close study of books, and he was a prime example of such faith." I found that to be tremendously inspiring, believing even more so that people are capable of such in the digital age.

Having spent so much time with primary documents, collating their descriptions of people, places, the mood, and even weather, he keeps 1776 from feeling like a long-forgotten year populated by mythic stereotypes. Some may not like McCullough's approach on this, preferring the objective or distant view of academic history. I do admit that I like historic details, as well as organic specifics, and 1776 falls closer to the latter, though doesn't exclude anything of relevance. The scenario is painted for the reader from life; the emotion of the people is the canvas on which this great drama is hung.

It's the frailty of these people, the frailty of Washington that makes their courage all the more notable.

Lest you think 1776 is a book devoted to hero-worship of the American cause, McCullough does includes a portrait of the dissenting British viewpoint, not just from their military, but also the opinions of loyalists in the colonies. This provides a necessary counter to all the American flag-waving and provides a sharp dose of reality. The multi-faceted aspects of the war took their toll on more than just the soldiers.

“I found I could not stay in Boston and trust my person with a set of lawless rebels whose actions have disgraced human nature and who have treated all the King’s loyal subjects that have fallen in their hands with great cruelty and for no other crime than for their loyalty to the best of Kings and a peaceable submission to the best constituted government on earth.

They are certainly damning in their description of the situation.

I don’t believe there ever was a people in any age or part of the world that enjoyed so much liberty as the people of America did under the mild indulgent government (God bless it) of England and never was a people under a worser state of tyranny than we are at present.”

McCullough writes regarding the American standard of living in 1776:

In fact, the Americans of 1776 enjoyed a higher standard of living than any people in the world. Their material wealth was considerably less than it would become in time, still it was a great deal more than others had elsewhere. How people with so much, living on their own land, would ever choose to rebel against the ruler God has put over them and thereby bring down such devastation upon themselves was for the invaders incomprehensible.

Perhaps we can add the insatiable desire for more to the list of American qualities.

There is a fine and terrible balance to be obtained in maintaining freedom on a principle of equality by taking away that same freedom from others. As Joseph Reed, a delegate to the Continental Congress, wrote to his wife: ”To attempt to introduce discipline and subordination into a new army must always be a work of much difficulty,” [...] “but where the principles of democracy so universally prevail, where so great an equality and so thorough a leveling spirit predominates, either no discipline can be established, or he who attempts it must become odious and detestable, a position which no one will choose.”

”…we must bear up against them, and make the best of mankind as they are, since we cannot have them as we wish.”

1776 is a good book, and serves its purpose well. I can see why some would refer to it as ‘pop history’ since its focus is on the drama, the emotion, and the energy of the period, rather than just maps, charts, dates, and movement of armies. In regards to his approach to understanding history, McCullough says, “History is not about dates and quotes and obscure provisos. History is about life, about change, about consequences, cause and effect. It’s about the mystery of human nature, the mystery of time. […]and it isn’t just about politics and the military and social issues, which is almost always the way it’s taught. It’s about music, and poetry, and drama, and science, and medicine, and money, and love.”

While some may frown on his approach, preferring a more objective and distant approach, I find myself appreciating his style. McCullough brings the history to life in an approachable way. I would certainly recommend the book though would do so with the caveat that this isn't going to give you any great insight into the period as a whole, but rather the events of 1776, and the people involved.

What's missing is how these events affect the grand scheme; how did Trenton play a role in the next year? How did Britain respond to the success of the rebel attacks? Why did the conflict carry on for another seven years? There is nothing of that in this book, which isn't entirely terrible since inquiring minds will seek out additional materials on the period, though it left me with the overall impression of experiencing a great part of a whole without knowing any of the lasting effects. It would be akin to reading the The Iliad, but only the parts in which Hector bravely leads the Trojans to push the invading Greeks back to the sea only to watch them counter-attack successfully, but then ignoring the rest of the story.

I would call the end of the book a bit frustrating, since it's so abrupt. It's as if McCullough's editor told him he needed to finish the book on a specific page, reducing the rest of the war to a few paragraphs. I understand his intent was not to write a broad history of the war, though an extended epilogue to see the ultimate outcome of some of the major names would have been a fine addition. It's a small nitpick to an overall very satisfying and engaging work.

With all that said, I would certainly recommend it. As a companion piece to John Adams, it's a wonderful augmentation to the political history. It's a human look at what was a very complicated and frightening period of our nation's history. To look on it now, two-hundred years later, with all its drama, tragedy, loss, and triumph, it truly is history as theater. It is an epic told on the stage of days, etched into time by the work-ethic of our ancestors. Against incredible odds, against the greatest military force in the world, a committed group of remarkable individuals was able to achieve something truly remarkable, greater than any one of them, that was equal only, perhaps, to the lot of them.

It really is a wonder they succeeded.

Thankfully, they did.

“The year 1776, celebrated as the birth year of the nation and for the signing of the Declaration of Independence, was for those who carried the fight for independence forward a year of all-too-few victories, of sustained suffering, disease, hunger, desertion, cowardice, disillusionment, defeat, terrible discouragement, and fear, as they would never forget, but also of phenomenal courage and bedrock devotion to country, and that, too they would never forget.”

I enjoyed this book and learned so much. I knew very little about this time period, I had learned a lot in the book John Adams, another must read. This covers the soldiers, the fighting, the blood and muck, starvation, bravery. Learning more about George Washington was a plus also. I have the hard copy which I plan to read. Kudos to David McCullough for the excellent narration of his Pulitzer Prize winning novel 1776. Highly recommend!

For star book for history buffs. Not a narrative, not an exciting dramatic take on the history, but the FACTS! A little dry for me, but because it is such high quality facts and so well researched I can't help but give it 4 stars.

While this history of that integral year in American history was interesting, I have to be honest: if I had been actually reading this book, I never would have made it through; there was way too much military maneuvering for me to be enthralled, although I had the distinct impression (not for the first time) that the end result of the American Revolution was a miracle. But with David McCullough reading his book, I was able to stay with it and finish with a happy sigh.

Of course, I have to say that the moment that has stayed with me was the description of a retreat (I no longer remember which one) that occurred because a fortuitous fog that settled over the patriots and allowed them to escape the notice of the British. This made me smile because it reminded me of The Iliad, and I imagined the "grey-eyed goddess" having a word with Zeus, asking him to cut the Americans a break. All in all, though, a fine book for morning commute listening.

This book is not as interesting as people led me to believe. It's basically a book about War....well duh, I hear you say, that's what the War of Independence was all about. However I thought it would be more analytical, why the war started, who the players were, give you the real story of political intrigue and all that jazz. Because war is never really about truth, justice and the American way. It's ALWAYS about a group of people that want the wealth and power of the current people who are in power, they just don't tell the people they lead to the slaughter that's what it's about.

The book starts smack bang into the war.....no lead in, no tension building just BOOM, the Americans are pissed and decide to start a fight and the British are indignant about the whole affair.....but who's going to say no to a bit of a war, we all know how much the British and Americans like a good scuffle.

I tried to get through the book but when the penny finally dropped that it would just be about war, I just had to call it quits.....I guess I wouldn't cut it as an American because real Americans DON'T QUIT! But I have to admire how they shook off the British.....200 years later and Australia still has Britain on it's back and their 'un-desirables' still flock down under to the 'colonies' and obviously complain about it all.

Non-fiction history of the year 1776, a pivotal year in the American Revolution. McCullough focuses on the prominent leaders, both British and American, and we get a good idea of their strengths and weaknesses. It contains descriptions of each military target, the strategic objectives, how the engagement ensued, and its outcome. After reading this book, I am astounded that the Americans won, as they severely lacked weapons, powder, money, troops, experience, discipline, and leadership. One of the strengths of the book is showing how the leaders of the Continental Army, particularly George Washington and his top staff, learned hard lessons early, and applied them in later battles. The author provides balance by going into depth on the personal traits of the British leaders and why they made certain decisions. He also shows how the actions of the many loyalists assisted them. The main detractor, for me, was the abrupt ending. I realize he was focusing on just one year, but the ending summarizes seven years into a few paragraphs. The author has done an incredible amount of research, as documented in the footnotes, bibliography, and acknowledgements. The images at the end were helpful. Recommended to readers of history-related non-fiction or anyone that wants to learn more about the American Revolution.

I have read several of David McCullough's books including John Adams and it is easy to see why he is called "America's storyteller". As the title suggests this novel focuses on the pivotal year of 1776. It is the story of both the British and the Americans, the events that took place and the major players in these events.

On the British side there is King George III, General William Howe, General Henry Clinton, General Charles Cornwallis, and others. At the time Britain was probably the mightiest nation. They had one of the greatest armies and navies. In America there were many who were loyal to the King. As if this was not enough Britain employed Hessian mercenaries. An overwhelming and mighty force.

On the American side there was George Washington and the militia of New England. There was a struggle to get other states to send troops. America had no army. The men Washington was to lead were boys, farmers, school teachers, shop keepers. Two of the men who Washington came to depend on the most, Nathaniel Greene and Henry Knox, only military knowledge came from what they read in books. The author puts a human face to the names from history. I sometimes had to pause in amazement that War of Independence survived the year of 1776. The militia only signed on for short enlistments and when these were up they would return to their farms and their families. They had no uniforms, often not even shoes, suffered from lack of food and shelter, and were poorly armed. There were desertions. In the latter half of the year they lost four consecutive major battles and gave up a fort without a fight. Yet Washington, who had never led an army in battle, persevered.

I live close to where Washington crossed the Delaware. Every year they hold a reenactment. There are plenty of signs around indicating points of interest from the Revolutionary War. One of these is a place Nathaniel Greene headquartered in Buckingham, PA. I actually lived in Buckingham at one time and remember this historical site. I may even have heard that it was here that plans were laid out for the attack on Trenton. It triggered a memory. But I didn't recall all who took part in these planning meetings. Washington, Greene, Knox, Sullivan, Benjamin Rush. Having finished reading this book it will be a little harder to not stop and pause for a moment the next time I see one of these historical site signs.