In the 1760s, the British government of North Carolina was so corrupt that many of the residents took up arms against it. Governor William Tryon led an army against these "Regulators," and defeated them.

The Regulator Rebellion was not related to the American Revolution -- most Regulators, in fact, would be Loyalists when the Revolutionary War came to North Carolina. The rebellion arose simply because the British officials in that state misused their power so badly. But, because the Revolution followed soon afterward, the Regulators are often seen in a sort of Revolutionary light. As a result, British scholars never study them and American scholars tend to idolize them.

This book was described in a recent history as a useful balance -- the first book to give Governor Tryon his due. I looked it up on that basis.

There is no question but that author Haywood tries to tilt the balance. But I think he tilted it too far. He says openly (p. 189) that he was "not a great admirer of the Regulators" -- which is an understatement. He pretty clearly despised the Regulators -- and so exalts Tryon. While I agree that the Regulators were probably too ready to take up arms, there is no question but that their complaints were just -- and that Governor Tryon made no serious attempts to right the situation. Instead of a balanced portrait of Tryon, Haywood eventually indulges in what-about-ism so severe that he actually rings in the account (from the Book of Judges in the Bible) of Samson using foxes with their tails on fire as a weapon of war. Which is absurd even if you assume that (A) the tale is true and (B) that Samson was a good guy rather than a stupid street brawler. In any case, the fact that war is ugly does not justify Tryon's refusal to address the valid complains of the Regulators.

Also, it should be noted that this isn't a biography of Tryon, even though it tends to be presented as one. It's almost entirely about his few years in North Carolina. Before he went there, he had been a solder; after 1771, when he won his victory, he was sent to be governor of New York. He fought (on the British side, of course) in the Revolutionary War, then retired to England. But that is barely sketched in this book; the part about his early life is particularly weak. For all of his life before the mid-1760s or after 1771, you'll simply have to look elsewhere.

The scholarship also perhaps leaves something to be desired. Almost the only sources cited are the "Colonial Records of North Carolina." Which are doubtless the most reliable sources -- but some eyewitness accounts would be nice. If Haywood cites another source, it is almost always a secondary history that he cites in order to sneer at it -- which, since those other books are mostly even more obscure than this one, is uninformative and unpleasant. And the book is filled with long, undigested quotes from those old records that would make a lot more sense if we were given some background.

Finally, the style is extremely stiff. The book was written in the early twentieth century, but it sounds a century older. I don't mean that the language is not modern; there are no problems with archaic forms or such. But the writing is plodding, pedestrian, frankly dull, in a way that sounds more eighteenth century than twentieth. If you've read other works about the Regulators, this book is still important. But don't take it as entirely reliable, and certainly don't expect to enjoy it. ( )