What do you think?
Rate this book
Sam Adams: Pioneer in Propaganda
In-depth portrait of the American revolutionary patriot and statesman, which focuses on his contribution to the propaganda machine, which led to the Declaration of Independence
448 pages, Paperback
First published December 12, 1936
54 people want to read
About the author
John Chester Miller
20 books5 followersA specialist in the early history of the United States, John Chester Miller taught at Bryn Mawr from 1940 until 1950, and at Stanford University from 1950 until 1973, where he was the inaugural holder of the Edgar E. Robinson Professorship in United States History.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
August 15, 2020
Sam Adams was THE premier propagandist of the Revolution. He spent his life fighting against what he perceived as the threat of the downfall of Puritan values in New England. He was well educated and used his education in spreading propaganda for the Revolution. In his written work as well as his speeches, he proved to be the indispensable propagandist, if a bit reckless at times. This book is very thorough and provides information on someone often overlooked in the Revolution.
January 28, 2020
No two cousins were more unalike than Sam and John Adams. John Adams revolutionary spirit that
he was thought seriously about what form an American government should take once Great Britain cut her colonial strings from the 13 colonies on the Atlantic shore. He was a lawyer by trade and
wanted a rule of law to prevail. It's why he defended those British soldiers after the Boston Massacre
in 1770.
Sam Adams was a tradesman and his trade was malling of good ale. No doubt he supplied the refreshment at those Sons of Liberty meetings that began with the agitation over the Stamp Act, the
beginning of the many taxes in 1765 that the British wanted the American colonists to cough up.
As per the title Adams was a master propagandist and used whatever weapon he could to keep the
rebellious fires stoked. In Puritan settled Massachusetts that included anti-Catholicism. He and
his fellow Sons of Liberty were so good at it that his handiwork went a long way with convincing
newly acquired Quebec with all those Catholic Frenchmen they were better off with the British.
His masterstroke was the Boston Tea Party. A really great media event for 1773. He was the organizer and to this day it is cited by many who want radical change in whatever cause they are
fighting for.
The American Revolution itself sort of puts Sam Adams in eclipse. A master propagandist he never
saw himself as a soldier in an army. After the war he looked for various causes, made and broke
various alliances to gain political power. He was Governor of Massachusetts from 1794 to 1797 and
thought the French Revolution was a great cause. He differed radically from cousin John and
actually opposed John's election as president in 1796.
Sam Adams died in 1803 a man who really had outlived his time. Author Miller who has a distinct
Federalist bias portrays him that way. Perhaps Sam Adams ought to be revisited, but I think
Miller has him down pretty good.
he was thought seriously about what form an American government should take once Great Britain cut her colonial strings from the 13 colonies on the Atlantic shore. He was a lawyer by trade and
wanted a rule of law to prevail. It's why he defended those British soldiers after the Boston Massacre
in 1770.
Sam Adams was a tradesman and his trade was malling of good ale. No doubt he supplied the refreshment at those Sons of Liberty meetings that began with the agitation over the Stamp Act, the
beginning of the many taxes in 1765 that the British wanted the American colonists to cough up.
As per the title Adams was a master propagandist and used whatever weapon he could to keep the
rebellious fires stoked. In Puritan settled Massachusetts that included anti-Catholicism. He and
his fellow Sons of Liberty were so good at it that his handiwork went a long way with convincing
newly acquired Quebec with all those Catholic Frenchmen they were better off with the British.
His masterstroke was the Boston Tea Party. A really great media event for 1773. He was the organizer and to this day it is cited by many who want radical change in whatever cause they are
fighting for.
The American Revolution itself sort of puts Sam Adams in eclipse. A master propagandist he never
saw himself as a soldier in an army. After the war he looked for various causes, made and broke
various alliances to gain political power. He was Governor of Massachusetts from 1794 to 1797 and
thought the French Revolution was a great cause. He differed radically from cousin John and
actually opposed John's election as president in 1796.
Sam Adams died in 1803 a man who really had outlived his time. Author Miller who has a distinct
Federalist bias portrays him that way. Perhaps Sam Adams ought to be revisited, but I think
Miller has him down pretty good.
November 1, 2019
Internet reviews and the book’s title may fool you into thinking this work is a cynical, anti-heroic evaluation of some figureheads machinations. It is quite the opposite. It shows the rarest heroism you seldom find among any, here squarely in the heart of Samuel Adams.
After reading this I tell my friends I came to the conclusion America is only whatever Samuel Adams is; and it ceased to exist when he was most likely robbed of even being governor by voter fraud in 1801 (which it covers a little of). The same old patterns have a momentum of their own and just reset themselves I suppose (see Ouspensky on that).
But it shows his life and struggles before then; from dealing in great humiliation and lamentation with calculating, lawful evil, pompous, upper class, wage enslavers to lascivious and indifferent rabble - and very few conscious, emotionally awake, middle class in between like he. This books sources for the real portrayal of that very upper class Thomas Hutchinson should be famous. Yet there were enough folk then in the in-between to wake up and change everything for a short while who felt him and did something. It really makes sense of Buddha’s saying though: avoid the upper and lower classes and stay hidden in plain daylight among the middle. There are no people like that today who will back rather than sneer at a hero one of my friends and I were realizing the other day.
Also it shows he was obsessed with reading all works on Roman History and loved - surprise, surprise - Kingship (just not the exchequers who used parliament parlor tricks to already, by then, carve out Kingship into a puppetry).
I love this book and would recommend it to anyone. Probably the best thing I learned from it is Samuel Adams word of advice to Revolutionaries: “don’t get too far out ahead of the crowd or they won’t follow you; just a little at a time.”
After reading this I tell my friends I came to the conclusion America is only whatever Samuel Adams is; and it ceased to exist when he was most likely robbed of even being governor by voter fraud in 1801 (which it covers a little of). The same old patterns have a momentum of their own and just reset themselves I suppose (see Ouspensky on that).
But it shows his life and struggles before then; from dealing in great humiliation and lamentation with calculating, lawful evil, pompous, upper class, wage enslavers to lascivious and indifferent rabble - and very few conscious, emotionally awake, middle class in between like he. This books sources for the real portrayal of that very upper class Thomas Hutchinson should be famous. Yet there were enough folk then in the in-between to wake up and change everything for a short while who felt him and did something. It really makes sense of Buddha’s saying though: avoid the upper and lower classes and stay hidden in plain daylight among the middle. There are no people like that today who will back rather than sneer at a hero one of my friends and I were realizing the other day.
Also it shows he was obsessed with reading all works on Roman History and loved - surprise, surprise - Kingship (just not the exchequers who used parliament parlor tricks to already, by then, carve out Kingship into a puppetry).
I love this book and would recommend it to anyone. Probably the best thing I learned from it is Samuel Adams word of advice to Revolutionaries: “don’t get too far out ahead of the crowd or they won’t follow you; just a little at a time.”
February 1, 2023
Massachusetts was founded on Puritanism, but a particular brand of it: separatist; local; and supreme above all other religions. This supremacy infected the Bay Colony, and led, through fits and starts and many years, to the riots, rebellion, and independence of the 1760s and 1770s in British North America. No founder embodies that Puritanical spirit than Samuel Adams, a man both spartan in his home life, fervent in his Congregationalism, and wedded to notions of liberty, freedom, and independence long before other colonists considered anything other than loyalty to Parliament and the Crown.
John Miller’s biography, though a few decades old, holds up quite well, breezing through the 18th Century history of Massachusetts and how the fight over the pro-yeomen Land Bank of the 1740s launched Adams, James Otis, and other Bostonians on the road to opposition and revolution. Throughout the riotous reactions to the Sugar Act, Stamp Act, Townsehend Duties, Boston Massacre, and East India Tea Act, Adams is lurking in the background, riling up the townsmen and creating a sharp division between the oligarchy, led by Thomas Hutchinson, and the noble citizens - mechanics, artisans, laborers, and rabble of the City of Boston.
Samuel Adams is that most modern of revolutionaries: able to take urban discontent, tether it to the usual inertia of countrymen, and conjure up a broad revolution based on mass participation, underhanded political tactics, and concerted propaganda. The revolutionary Samuel slinks once more into the background as the Revolution winds down in the 1780s, becoming more reactionary and wedded to his traditional Puritanical principles amidst the commercial Federalism in Massachusetts in the early Republic.
For fans of Stacy Schiff’s recent biography, John Miller’s is a worthy companion and adjunct.
John Miller’s biography, though a few decades old, holds up quite well, breezing through the 18th Century history of Massachusetts and how the fight over the pro-yeomen Land Bank of the 1740s launched Adams, James Otis, and other Bostonians on the road to opposition and revolution. Throughout the riotous reactions to the Sugar Act, Stamp Act, Townsehend Duties, Boston Massacre, and East India Tea Act, Adams is lurking in the background, riling up the townsmen and creating a sharp division between the oligarchy, led by Thomas Hutchinson, and the noble citizens - mechanics, artisans, laborers, and rabble of the City of Boston.
Samuel Adams is that most modern of revolutionaries: able to take urban discontent, tether it to the usual inertia of countrymen, and conjure up a broad revolution based on mass participation, underhanded political tactics, and concerted propaganda. The revolutionary Samuel slinks once more into the background as the Revolution winds down in the 1780s, becoming more reactionary and wedded to his traditional Puritanical principles amidst the commercial Federalism in Massachusetts in the early Republic.
For fans of Stacy Schiff’s recent biography, John Miller’s is a worthy companion and adjunct.
June 10, 2021
Wasn't familiar with Sam Adams before reading this book and wasn't sure what to expect. My copy is a reprint of the 1936 original. Miller's treatment of Adams seems sympathetic but critical. Virtues and successes are noted but so too are flaws and failures. In all, a good read.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews