What do You think about The Glorious Cause (2003)?
This epic sequel to "Rise to Rebellion" continues the story of the American Revolution, with this novel covering the years following the signing of the Declaration of Independence through the war's conclusion. Shaara does an admirable job of covering so much action and history through the eyes of several characters. My only complaint is that, while "Rise to Rebellion" included the battles as well as the pursuit of the congress and some of the home lives, this book is almost exclusively about the battles. The only exception is account of Franklin's negotiations with the French. While it's hard to fault, this book would get really long if added to the detail of the action that Shaara provided, it does make this a book with smaller dimensions than its prequel. Nevertheless, a fine novel on this period of history.
—David
The Glorious Cause is a very well written and often times epic in scope novel about the Revolutionary War. It mostly uses the point of view of the major people involved in the war, primarily through the eyes of George Washington, who is more or less the central character of the novel. Shaara really goes through great pains to show the struggles that the Colonialists had to go through before things finally turned around. They had to show amazing resiliency overcoming horrible situations. It’s one thing to know the history of what happened from a class or a textbook, but this novel makes it come alive. Of all the characters in the novel, George Washington is the one that really stands out with his inner strength and refusal to fail. The prose is strong and the voice that the author uses fits the narrative and the times. Although a bit long-winded this is a strong novel that I would recommend.Carl Alves – author of Blood Street
—Carl Alves
Another book that I should've reviewed days ago. Too much work .... too much going on ....The Glorious Cause continues the story of Franklin, Adams, Washington, Cornwallis, and more through the climax of the American Revolution. This is Shara's Schtick. He picks a few key players in great historical events and follows them through those events. As a reader you gain insight into the thinking, the strategy, the plots of these great people. The insight is fantastic.The approach is also a great weakness of the book. It does follow those great men, but it does leave untouched what I find more intriguing about historical fiction. What about the individual farmer - the small landholder or craftsman? History is not necessarily about the great and powerful. In many ways I like to read about the small person who is caught up in great events and somehow manages to shape those events through their pluck and luck. Wouldn't it have been cool to place a man or woman at the heart of the Revolution? Stealing British secrets on the sly to influence the course of the conflict? Or what about a Hessian mercenary who decides to desert over a shot at his own land? Or an English soldier who is conflicted about what his comrades are doing to drive the colonies away? I'm not saying abandon covering Franklin or Cornwallis, but just add more. (On the note of the great men, I did appreciate the focus on Cornwallis. He comes across very sympathetically.)Besides enjoying the stories, I also enjoy historical fiction because I learn about new periods and events that I was more or less ignorant of. In the case of The Glorious Cause, I had a first hand seat following the British army's Southern Strategy. Basically, with the war in New York, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts at a stand still, the British sought to end the Revolution in the Southern Colonies and then work their way North. I had the chance to be at the Battle of Cowpens (yes, a real battle) and at the final surrender of Cornwallis at Yorktown. Pretty cool stuff.Three and a half stars out of five. Rounding it down to three based on the fact that I wanted more average Joe, less great man.
—Mr. Matt
