John Hancock : Merchant King and American Patriot

Rating:
Summary: An incredibly BIASED account of Hancock and his role in the
Review: events leading to independence. After reading Unger's work, you would think that John Hancock single handedly brought this country to freedom. The author's extreme adulation for his subject constantly paints Hancock in positive light and ALWAYS as the victim of others, never at fault. Lame excuses are given for why Hancock did not receive this office or that praise. One of the most disturbing elements is the vindictive condemnation of Samuel Adams (probably the man most singularly responsible for influencing the Declaration of Independence) is incredibly overdone and grossly inaccurate. Speeches which were written by Adams (and some given by Adams) are credited to Hancock, a man who is overwhelmingly acknowledged as lacking the writing ability for such speeches. Hancock is instrumental in bringing about revolution but unfortunately, not in the way suggested by this author.

Rating:
Summary: New England Giant
Review: I thoroughly enjoyed this book. My own ancestor Major Reuben Colburn, a patriot from Pittston, Maine was a close friend and business associate of Hancock. While his Maine dealings are only mentioned in passing by Mr. Unger, his research is impeccable and after all the story is, and has to be, told from Hancock's point of view. This is what he was doing during the formulation of our country in legal form. It was surprisingly anti-Adams but I believe this is normal in competition for fame, ideas and recognition both then and now.

General Washington and Benedict Arnold employed Colburn to supply and lead a 1100-man army to capture Quebec City in 1775. The mission failed and Colburn was stuck with the bill. He died broke as did Hancock. John Hancock was beloved in New England and Unger portays this with great accuracy and flair. He was big in our family, staying at Colburn House when in Maine seeing to his landholdings. One of Colburn's few surviving letters is addressed to Hancock from Pittston in 1786.

Hopefully my new book "Patriot On The Kennebec: Major Reuben Colburn and the March To Quebec 1775: His Life and Times," will join this one on a new mission to educate the public about our collective roots as Americans. Both men risked everything to start America, and to them we owe everything.

Rating:
Summary: An incredibly BIASED account of Hancock and his role in the
Review: My cousin wrote this book, so my review will be somewhat biased. However, as I try to be an impartial observer I must say that Harlow has really done a fantastic job with this book! While John Hancock certainly was an integral part in an amazing and interesting period in USA's history, his life really came alive in this book. And while the story of a Revolution is very interesting in itself, the historical reseach Harlow presents is very relevant and made me understand the history in greater detail. Even the part of history that used to bore me the most (reports from the first Continental Congress in Philadelphia) were fascinating from John Hancock's perspective as Harlow presented them.

Rating:
Summary: Leaving me wanting...
Review: Perhaps my expectations were set too high by the biography I read on Benjamin Franklin by Walter Isaacson. I found Unger's book on John Hancock easy to read, interesting, but lacking of facts and objectivity. I got the impression that the author did not like any of the people involved in the American Revolution. Is this author a Tory? His descriptions of people and things were often shallow and repetitive. For example...Unger used the description of a livered carriage with four horses for Hancock throughout the book many, many times, but does not describe once what this really means. How many servants were working the carriage? Were they slaves? Were they in uniform? If so, what colors? How fancy? The book does not describe in much detail the relationships Hancock has with other founders other than Sam Adams whom he paints extremely negatively.

Plus, Unger gets at least one important historical fact wrong. Here's what I got from Isaacson's book: John Hancock, declared at the signing of the Declaration of Independence, "There must be no pulling different ways. We must all hang together." To which, Ben Franklin replied, "Yes, we must, indeed, all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately." In Unger's book, he attributes the first quote to Franklin not Hancock and omits the second quote all together - which is the famous line!

It just seems to me the author was sloppy in research and lazy in writing this book. If you can't find anything else about Hancock, then the information is interesting - I did find out that the Declaration was signed by one person - Hancock for the first month of its existence and that they created 13 originals - one for each state. It's a very quick read, but don't rely on this book as the final answer on what went on during the Revolution.

Rating:
Summary: Readable, Interesting, a Little Vicious
Review: So John Hancock turns out to be a pretty interesting fellow, the millionaire head of a mercantile empire who initially gets dragged into revolutionary politics to prevent the revolutionaries from vandalizing his property, but converts and becomes a leading, if moderate, revolutionary voice. A vain man and one accustomed to luxury, he nevertheless gives very generously of both his money and his time to the revolutionary cause and to the governing of Massachusetts.

His career includes stints as the president of the continental congress, member of the Massachusetts legislature and governor of the newly independent state of MA. His roles in the revolution and the adoption of the constitution are central: as president of congress, his is initially the only signature on the Declaration of Independence; he coordinates and equips the continental army, including large expenditures out of his own pocket; he turns the tide in Massachusetts in favor of ratification.

So the biography is interesting because the man is interesting, even pivotal. It's also well-written, in the sense of being easy to read.

But the book's also a little spiteful. Anyone who clashes with Hancock, ever, comes in for a little sting from the biographer's pen. Sam Adams, in particular, is described as a bloodthirsty, erratic and backstabbing radical, who undercuts and betrays Hancock at every turn. Even George Washington is painted as behaving irrationally, in contrast with Hancock's genteel polish, in respect of some offers of hospitality that Hancock extends to the general, and Unger seems incapable of mentioning John Adams without calling him "fat little John Adams".