So imagine you open up a book from the 1700s written by a guy who was basically kicked out of his hometown for rooting for the wrong team in a revolution. That’s exactly what happens with Samuel Peters’ General History of Connecticut. It reads like an explosive exposé written in a slightly stuffy, old-fashioned voice. Peters, who served as an Anglican minister before the Revolution, had his property seized and fled to England after being accused of being a Loyalist spy. He was never able to return to his beloved Connecticut. Instead of moping, though, he decided to write a ‘history’ that roasted the Puritans like a Thanksgiving turkey on a spit.

The Story

Peters covers New England from the early 1600s up to his own time, but he isn’t your average academic doctor. He claims that Connecticut’s famous “Blue Laws” were not just ridiculous (like banning kissing, having children, or staying indoors on Sundays) but deliberately oppressive. He paints the Puritan leaders as dictators who happily crushed free speech—and free thought—with wooden rules. Mixed in are unbelievable stories: he reportedly documents the sightings of a 70-foot “winged serpent” near a Delaware river, mentions giant Lake Champlain snakes (before Champ!), and notes colonial meetings full of backroom deals. The deep suspicious thing is that historians cannot agree if the blue laws Peters lists were actually real, exaggerated from other texts, or entirely made up. He also includes lots of quoted legal documents from the time, which gives his book an official air—even if he purposely mistranslated a few rulings to confirm his pessimistic view. Essentially, his story says: The Puritans worked okay, good setting but poor law governance.

Why You Should Read It

Because it’s a master class in riding a hobby horse. There is no attempt at fair or balanced anything: every chapter wipes colonial rule down while trying to protect his own far from innocent record as a Loyalist. You don’t just get New England history—you get to watch a white-hot grudge smolder into post Revolutionary propaganda. This dramatically intense storytelling unrolls like a detective mystery: any actual 1770s notebook feel suddenly skipping again through space and story you must constantly ask what makes it necessary truth wise, then you see clearly around each loophole of official record. It’s gossip, rumor-mongering, legal footsie—sometimes bright fun; other times slimy maddening propaganda that keeps us guessing writing perfection from his partisan library. That personal anger is actually what makes the book brilliant because you live inside that passion.

Final Verdict

You would love this if you are into unsound yet motivated writing. It tests your BS meter famously if colonial New England is your pastime lore. Think favorite podcast detective's break, only transcribed three entirely complicated court records from royal’st side narrative. Revere his wit? laugh thru on tone, your analytic side get smart whiplash. Great beginning. Much strange embellishment—wrap you like surprise clue almost gone wild goose. Perfect both for historical arguing and history connoisseur lovers wanting another side door to famous myths—not a simple dry reading page to shelf—great alive bitter book.