We are coming up on the 250th Anniversary of the Battle of Lexington & Concord.
When Paul Revere was released by Major Andre (after Revere’s skillful use of psyops), he made his way back to the parsonage where Hancock and Sam Adams were staying. There Revere found John Hancock furiously trying to sharpen his ceremonial sword to fight the British. Revere and Adams had to convince Hancock that they were management, and their capture would be a very big deal.
Hancock and Adams fled and ended up at the homestead of Amos Wyman and his wife. There they fed the patriots a simple meal as the salmon Hancock had brought to the parsonage was left behind (along with their women). When Hancock later became the Governor of Massachusetts, he gave a cow to Mrs. Wyman, which was a very big deal back in the day.
Most of the biographies of Hancock that I have read were not very complementary of that Founding Father. I look forward to reading / hearing this one.
John Adams admired John Hancock very much.
Today is the birthday of my Revolutionary War ancestor (born in 1744, served in the Virginia militia, was present at Yorktown).
In addition to the post above describing his key role in preserving the French-American alliance, there were three other things I learned, two of them interesting and good, and one that was negative.
First, I did not realize how wildly popular John Hancock was. He was adored and appreciated at all levels by the citizenry, and whenever someone was needed for "something", to hold an office, chair a meeting of some kind, or work on a committee to construct a document, Hancock was the man of the hour.
I had read a book (also on Librivox) called "The Life and Times of Joseph Warren", and up until his death at the Battle of Bunker Hill, I very much got the impression Warren was also "The Man of The Hour", but Hancock sounds like he took on that role after Warren's death. He was a hardworking man and not afraid to assume responsibility.
Second, I knew he was philanthropic, but did not realize how generous he was, and his unfailing generosity to his fellow man was both noted and appreciated by his contemporaries which made him all the more popular. He was rich, and one would think the lower classes would resent him, but...they didn't.
Third, he had plenty of enemies, and they were the ones who got to stick the knife in Hancock. While it seemed to me that many people of all classes admired and liked him, I definitely got the impression that his worst enemies were his political and economic rivals, who from what I read, appeared to resent his success and popularity.
That said, he did a great disservice to himself as the Treasurer of Harvard College, which he strung out for years in the face of repeated entreaties by Harvard to give them what they needed to run the college.
Apparently, he was so overloaded with work that his duties as Treasurer of Harvard College were constantly put on the back-burner, but he also resented the efforts of Harvard College to find a Treasurer who would devote time and effort to the task. I think they kept after him constantly for ten years, asking him for information, for statements, etc. and he simply refused to comply. I don't believe for a second that he was dishonest, but his enemies, in the way one foe pilloried him in a public way for cowardice (untrue) the others latched on to his performance as Harvard's treasurer as a way to smear him.
In the end, of all things, Hancock was indeed human. He had problems with his vanity, and was sensitive to criticism.
In that light...who doesn't battle those things? His foes took advantage of them, and they wrote the history. This author was not one who bought into it.