Product Description
This title is History Book Club bestseller. This is an unabridged edition. 'A penetrating analysis of prewar society...Highly recommended as an inclusive political, military, and social treatment of a customarily neglected war' - "ALA Booklist".Amazon.com Review
The War of 1812 gave the United States some of its finest military moments: AdmiralPerry's victory on Lake Erie, Andrew Jackson's lopsided triumph at the Battle of New Orleans,the immortal words "Don't give up the ship!," and Fort McHenry's defense of Baltimore (which inspired Francis Scott Key to write "The Star-Spangled Banner"). At the same time, the fighting didn'tgo especially well for the Americans. Their invasion of Canada failed and the British burnedthe White House to the ground. The conflict ended in a draw. With The War of 1812: A Forgotten Conflict Donald R. Hickey offers what maybe the most comprehensive treatment of the war, and includes many colorful anecdotes. For example, shortly after the mortally wounded James Lawrence uttered "Don't give up the ship!," his mendid just that. Their vessel was hauled off to England, broken up, and its timbers used in theconstruction of a flour mill. The subtitle calls the War of 1812 a "forgotten conflict"; Hickey'sexcellent book shows why it's worth remembering. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (15)

Complete book
I really enjoyed this book.I didn't know much about the War of 1812 or the period in general, but "The War of 1812" is extremely informative.The book covers every aspect of the war in great detail, especially when it comes to economics factors that lead Madison to push for a war declaration.The only thing a reader may not enjoy is that the book doesn't go chronologically.Some chapters go back and discuss aspects of the war that took place during or before events discussed in the last chapter.While this arrangement lets the author focus on a single topic at a time, it can be confusing.This is especially true in the closing chapters.All in all, this is a very informative book and a nice read.I would recommend it to the casual historian.

The standard
Even 20 years after its publication, this work remains one of the finest treatments of the War of 1812. It is especially strong on the diplomacy and domestic politics of the period. The writer's style, though a bit dry, is nevertheless thoroughly readable.

The War of 1812: A Forgotten Conflict. By Donald R. Hickey. (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1989. xvi + 457 pp.)
Donald R. Hickey departs from conventional approaches to studying what is "probably our most obscure war" (p.1).The War of 1812 is a scathing indictment of the Republicans who waged an unnecessary and costly war that simply concluded with a restoration of the antebellum order and, in the process, almost plunged the nascent country into civil war.Yet the Republicans, with their penchant for phantasmagoria, spun the war into a great victory, claiming that they had "defeated `the conquerors of Europe,'" and "'virtually dictate[d] the treaty of Ghent'" (p. 309). The Treaty of Ghent, did not touch on impressment, the main U.S. grievance against Great Britain, but was, nevertheless, the "most significant [American] victory" of the war, "not because of what the envoys won but because of what they avoided losing" (p. 281).
The War of 1812 is billed as America's "second war of independence," but Hickey contends that the "supposed threat to American independence in 1812...existed mainly in the minds of thin-skinned Republicans who were unable to shake the ideological legacy of the Revolution" (p.300).While ultimately the war was fought over maritime issues, chief among them impressment, it held many potential benefits for the Republicans, who, as heirs to the Revolution, were "steeped in Anglophobia" (p. 26). Republicans saw in the war opportunities to: reinforce republican institutions; further American diplomatic aims in the Northwest as well as on the high seas, and; gain significant political dividends vis-à-vis the Federalists.A new Indian war had also broken out on the western frontier in 1811 and most Americans blamed the uprisings on England. The mood in many parts of the country was thus sympathetic to war.
Hickey presents the war as an exercise in brinksmanship gone terribly awry.Madison declared war and dispatched peace feelers simultaneously.Britain, already embroiled in a European war, was not keen to commit troops to another conflict.In fact, even in the peace negotiations to end the war, "Great Britain had to rely on second-rate men because her top officials were busy with European affairs" (p. 285).
Hickey makes no attempt to conceal his deep antipathy for Republicans. He is critical of their policies and actions, and rightly so.But his defense of British policies in the lead-up to the war is often excessive, at times even bordering on ridiculous.On page 14, for instance, he observes that while the British refused to comply with the U.S. request to end their practice of impressment, "they did offer to observe `the greatest caution' in impressing British seamen [on American vessels]."He adds that "Britain showed such a conciliatory spirit on the other issues" that Monroe and Pinkney concluded that the Monroe-Pinnkey Treaty of 1806, which he faults Jefferson for failing to present to the Senate, "was in many ways more favorable to the United States than the Jay Treaty had been."The Jay Treaty, anathema to Republicans, is hardly a suitable standard by which to gauge the favorableness of treaties as the Republicans could hardly conceive of anything less favorable than it, save for outright colonization.For Hickey, the advantages of the Monroe-Pinkney Treaty are endless, but "Best of all, the treaty contained a kind of insurance clause that bound the British to indemnify any merchant whose vessel was detained in violation of the treaty" (p.14). Such unrestrained subjective enthusiasm belongs in an infomercial for car polish, not an academic book. All that generous Great Britain asked for in exchange for the "significant" concessions it offered was "little more than a promise of benevolent neutrality" (p. 14).But the intransigent Jefferson was unwilling to relinquish the weapon of commercial sanctions without a British promise to end impressment, in part because he was convinced that France and Russia would ultimately prevail in the European war and force the British to accept a much broader definition of natural rights.In rejecting the treaty, the United States declined to re-forge the Anglo-American accord of the 1790s and "to substitute peace and prosperity for commercial restrictions and war." Hickey's overzealous attempt to justify British behavior tarnishes an otherwise fine book; it is at once gratuitous and unconvincing.It does nothing to advance his thesis that the war was unnecessary or further his description of the Republicans as lacking in diplomatic finesse, strategic vision and military aptitude.There is no question that in 1812 the United States was ill-prepared for war. A country of seven-and-a-half million people that could not even muster a victory over Canada, population 500,000, stood virtually no chance against British hegemony.But that does not mitigate British excesses, particularly on impressment, a flagrant breach of U.S. sovereignty.
Far more interesting than the relationship between the United States and Great Britain was wartime interaction among Americans.Hickey's examination of domestic wartime dynamics is superb. His survey of the Baltimore Riots and their aftermath is the highlight of the book.One of the war's ostensible goals was to protect republican institutions, yet Madison refused to send troops to the Baltimore Post Office when it came under attack from Republican mobs seeking to prevent delivery of the Federal Republican. Madison "conceded that the post office was `under the sanction of the U.S.,' [but] he doubted that `any defensive measures, were within the Executive sphere'" (p. 67). Republicans did not welcome opposition to their war policy, but they did not invoke sedition laws as the Federalists had done.Madison, did, after all, draft the Bill of Rights. Absent an official ban on opposition, however, Republican mobs "had their own way of suppressing dissent, and the result was a chilling message for all who opposed the war" (p. 70).
The War of 1812 was a textbook example of poor leadership.Republicans were constitutionally opposed to a large defense establishment, arguing that "it fostered special interest groups that posed a danger to republican government" (8).In keeping with this antipathy toward defense establishment, they cut the peacetime army from 5,400 to 3,300 in 1802. In an 1808 war scare, they increased the army to almost 10,000 men and used the expanded officer corps to reward supporters. Nepotism was widespread and adversely affected wartime morale. Winfield Scott, "who served with these officers in the War of 1812, claimed that most `were imbeciles and ignoramuses" (p. 8). One reason the Republicans went to war "without adequate preparation was that they expected American troops to be welcomed in Canada" (p.73). That never happened, in part because militias repeatedly refused to cross the border, "standing on their supposed right to serve only in American territory" (p.88), which brought to the fore interpretive ambiguities of the fledgling Constitution.
In the interest of objectivity, Hickey defends the Republicans against claims that "agrarian cupidity" (p. 72) put them on the warpath. "Annexationist fever was particularly strong in the West" (p. 75), but Hickey is unconvinced that land acquisition was central to the Republican decision to wage war. He also concedes that although the War of 1812 was remarkably unremarkable, "Americans were never again subjected to those dubious maritime practices that had caused the war" (p.307).
Hickey intended for this book to appeal to both generalists and specialists.Invariably, such books frustrate both audiences. Detailed accounts of battles, commendable for their detail, will appeal to specialists, but are likely to overwhelm generalists. Translations of basic Latin phrases like status quo ante bellum, on the other hand, will annoy specialists.General readers will find many interesting factoids in this book. For instance, U.S. Certificates of Citizenship were introduced to protect Americans from impressment.This did little to assuage the British, however, because forged documents were readily available.
The War of 1812 was a compendium of ironies: it nearly destroyed the republican institutions it was intended to bolster. The only permanent land acquisition made during the war--part of Spanish West Florida--"came at the expense of a neutral power rather than the enemy" (p.303).Hickey attributes the war's obscurity to its lack of success. That is only half true. The war certainly would be much better remembered had it been highly successful, but the same would hold true had it been an abysmal failure. Great failures, after all, are often just as impressive as great successes.

A Good Detailed Summary
I boought this book to fill in my mental gap between the revolution and the civil war, and it filled the bill. The writing is clear and the subject covered very well. The research is deep and well documented. The writing style is dry and without any human interest, which is why I began life without an interest in history. Fortunately that changed, but this book won't turn around any students life in the way mine was by an excellent teacher. Regardless it is worth a buy.

A Concise Look at a Forgotten War
The War of 1812 is without a doubt one of the more forgotten episodes of American History.Most casual students of history can name only a couple of facts about a conflict that was the first American declared war after the Revolutionary War.Yet this important conflict deserves much more attention by historians than it is given justice, especially in light of current world events and contemporary politics, which in many ways the War of 1812 reflects.

This book would serve both the casual student of history as well as the serious academic researcher, for it's readability along with its comprehensiveness.There is a wealth of information, including all the major campaigns, as well as the politics and economics behind the conflict.

The only real criticism of this work comes in the form of its conciseness, that is, it occasionally glosses over some topics, which deserve more tribute.This oftentimes, however, is unavoidable when writing nonfiction due to the limited amount of source material.

It has been said that the book gives an uneven assessment of the conflict, because it doesn't give enough information from the British point of view.This may be true, however, this is a book about American History, and is intentionally written with an American audience in mind.Either way, it still gives an objective assessment of a great conflict in American History that is, sadly, too often overlooked. ... Read more

Product Description
The bloody war of 1812 saw British, American, and First Nations forces clash in a conflict that would forever alter North America. This book explains the background to the war and covers the three years of fighting on land and sea, including the battles of Lake Erie and Lake Champlain. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (5)

A Well Balanced Overview
This book provides a fairly comprehensive overview of the war.More importantly, the coverage is well balanced.The author, Carl Benn, did an excellent job of describing the conflict from both sides.

A common belief is that the War of 1812 was caused by the British practice of stopping U.S. ships and removing sailors they deemed to be deserters.The impressment of sailors into the British navy was a major point of contention.That said, the author also points out that the U.S. Government was looking for an excuse to conquer Canada.Interestingly, the British Government revoked the Orders in Council, which was one of the main reasons for going to war.News of the revocation did not reach the U.S. until after war had been declared.Even if it had, it still would not have been enough to cause President Madison to halt the fighting.

The book has some good geographic campaign maps.One map shows the timeline for the British blockade of the North American coast.Another map shows the extent of the conflict in the Atlantic Ocean.

The chapter on fighting is broken down by year.This is an easy way for the reader to follow the conflict.Unfortunately, the book does not contain any specific battle maps.Also, the battle narratives are short and hard to follow.The reader will know the basics of a specific battle, but not much more.

The ending chapters provide some interesting perspectives on the war.The "Portrait of a Soldier" chapter focuses on an Indian war chief named Black Hawk.It gives insight into the war from a Native American point of view.This is followed by a chapter on propaganda.Both sides accused the other of committing atrocities.The Americans were outraged by the scalping of civilians by Indians.Even so, the Americans and their Indian allies also engaged in this savage practice.

Although the book lacks meaningful detail on individual battles, it does provide a high level overview of the entire war and its causes.It is an enjoyable book, written in a clear chronological order.As with all Osprey books, this one contains a wide assortment of contemporary sketches in both black & white and color.Bottom line:the reader will walk away with a comprehensive, albeit high level, overview of the war.

Good introduction to the War of 1812
This book is a good, even-handed introduction to the War of 1812. The causes of the war, the major campaigns and battles, some of the major personalities, and the concluding Treaty of Ghent are all covered in varying levels of detail. American readers, who learned in school (as I did) that the War of 1812 was a "second war of independence", will find that not everyone shares this point of view.

In some sections it would have been nice to have a little more detail, but the author did a good job to cover so much within the limitations of the Essential History series. The book is a good overview and provides many references for further reading. I recommend it.

Typical Introductory-themed Volume
I agree with the other reviewer. Osprey books are designed for quick overviews of influential battles in world history.This is not meant as the 'be all end all of war of 1812' books. I suggest you read J. Mackay Hitman's 'The Great War of 1812' perhaps you will find that your liking.
Now for this book, its a great mini-intro to an often forgotten conflict that is-for the most part-overlooked. So take it from me, Ive built up my osprey collection and this one is one of the better volumes.

A Useful Overview
I have given this book four stars to try and even up the previous reviewer's harsh judgement. The book, like all Ospreys, is only designed to be a brief overview in which it is quite adequate; there are other publications for those who want more in-depth accounts.

As for the accusation by the previous reviewer that it makes the Americans look like 'aggressors', he appears unaware that the US started the war with the express aim of conquering Upper Canada (Ontario), something it repeatedly tried to do; or of Jefferson's claim that the capture of Quebec was 'a mere matter of marching'. If an account is 'unbiased' only when it is uncritical of US policy and actions, he is going to be doubly disappointed, and will find little solace in serious American accounts such as those by John K. Mahon or Donald R. Hickey - American's leading expert on the War. Instead, he will find Carl Benn's view, far from being 'disappointing for a historian', is the generally accepted outlook by serious students of the subject, both Canadian and American.

disapointing account
Unless you are looking for a very general study of the War of 1812, pass this book by. I was looking for an unbiased account to brush up on the facts of the conflict. However, the account is very biased towards the British and Canadians in particular. The US is made to look like aggressors and "imperialistic" in the eyes of this Canadian author. Very Disapointing for a historian.

Even the illustrations are sub-par. Maps are OK.

... Read more

Product Description
Thid unsurpassed work illuminates the unpopular, blunder-filled War of 1812. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (4)

Classic War of 1812
This volume consists of the chapters taken from Henry Adams lengthy History of the United States.Those chapters dealing with the War of 1812 have been excerpted from the multi-volume set and placed into single volume format here.This is a classic work of its kind, but it is not an easy read.Henry Adams goes into great deatail, and often engages in rhetorical discussions, a common trait of 19th century historians.His wide ranging views of the war brings to light many aspects often not covered in standard histories.This can be a plus as well as minus.Often Adams will go on and on about oragniaztionaland political aspects of the conflict which can seem dry to the modern reader.

Those looking for detailed descriptions of battles from the war will be somewhat disappointed. Adams does a lot to build up the background of each campaign or battle, but when it comes to the action itself he seems almost anti-climatic.Famous actions like Chippewa and Lundy's Lane are surprisingly short, even though the chapters are lengthy in discussing the admistrative and political aspects of the decision making and troop movements involved.

While Adams righly excoriates pitiful American leadership and imcompetence, he is always on the lookout for something positive to say as well.While Hull, Dearborn and Wilkinson are rightly seen as hopeless leaders, Adams also finds fault with Scott, Harrison and Jackson. The emphasis is naturally on the US perspective of the war, where insightful and often scathing observation is made on the inner workings of the Madison administration.British and Canadian strategy gets correspondingly less detail, although there is plenty of criticism of Proctor, Provost and Drummond among others.

There is a certain degree of national bias as most American historians have a hard time seeing how truly poor our performance was in this conflict.With Adams it comes down to Americans lacking discipline, but better at killing their enemies.The old American marksmenship fallacy.Adams believes that in most battles Americans inflicted greater losses. This is rather blatant bias here, because if we were to look at battles like Bladensburg we would find that British losses were greater because the Americans usually ran after firing a few good vollies! There were also many actions in which American losses were higher.In fact the overall body count was 8,000 US to 6,000 Anglo-Canadians in this war.Even with New Orleans thrown in US losses were greater overall!

This theory of better US markmanship has been put forward in regards to the American Revolutionary battles as well.Americans shot well until the British broke them and they ran.In breaking US troops the British usually had to assault and this is why they often took greater losses. For the British it was also hard to tell about the quality of the US troops opposed to them.In many actions US regulars and militia ran, and in others they fought well like Scott's Brigade.This spotty performance made it hard for the British to tell what kind of opposition they were up against.It resulted in their making some costly frontal attacks expecting that the Americans would break as usual.The US army can be best compared to the Spanish army of the Napoleonic period in this conflict. Overall poor, but with some good units, and largely indifferent leadership.

Some of the best chapters deal with the New Orleans 1814 Campaign in which Adams is highly critical of Jackson's actions, giving most credit to the US artillery for winning the action. Jackson's ruthless campaigns against the Creeks and Redsticks are described earlier in the book.Adams makes no appollogies for Jackson's cruelty toward the Indians, finding fault more with his organizational sloppiness than his genicidal tactics.PC readers today might certainly be upset with the Sang-Froid Adams uses to describe these events. Historians had a different emphasis in the past than they do today.

The final chapters describing the politics and personalities involved in the Peace of Ghent are also quite rewarding.It is fair to say that whatever American leadership lacked on the battlefield was more than made up for at the peace table. Readers will also find out a lot about the Federalists and their resistence toward the War in New England. The Hartford Convention is often mentioned only in passing with most works on this subject.

Adam's work is certainly worthwhile, and the style of writing combined with its analysis is not the kind of histography that we see much anymore.Readers will find some of the chatpters a difficult haul, but the rewards are many for those who persist. The War of 1812 came close to being a major US setback, it was certainly a debacle. That we managed to break even in the end was due more to luck than anything else.This work is a classic study which should be used in combination with more recent works.

Very Extensive
I just finished the book and as yet I have never read a book that paid such attention to detail as this one. The letters, the speeches the correspondence available in this book is second to none and were very interesting to say the least. The book does shoot off from time to time, it doesn't follow in line with events as it happened, but its all informative nonetheless.

My only issue with this book is that it omits the causes of the war of 1812, which was what I really wanted to know. The book starts with the first invasion as it may be said and goes on from there. Its really astounding at the amount of mistakes that were made in this war by the administration, especially on land, in the beginnings of the war and the unfortunate burning of Washington. And Adams is quick to add some humor in poking fun at the inconsistencies of the administration during this time.

I would recommend this to anyone who is interested in an extensive history of the war itself, most notably someone who is deeply interested in military history for it is very specific.

A close one for the U.S.
It is amazing that the US survived this conflict.The author's clear depiction of the politics and generalship (or lack thereof)leaves you wondering how the US ever made it out of this conflict relatively intact.This work is taken from Henry Adams great history that was originally published around 1890.The chapters relevant to the war of 1812 have been compiled to form a fine and detailed account of the war with Britain and Canada.

My only request for improvement would be the addition of an introduction that gives a clearer picture of the reasons for the conflict.

The Definitive History
In the introduction to this superb volume, Col John Elting, who has written his own version of the military history of this forgotten war, which is also a must have, states 'If you read only one history of thatwar, it still should be Adams!'

As a definite Elting fan, that is enoughfor me to buy, read, and use the book.It should also be enough for anyhistorian/reader to buy this volume.

An extract of the much larger AHistory of the United States during the Administrations of Jefferson andMadison published almost a century ago, this history of a war the UnitedStates almost lost was originally published by the Infantry Journal at FortBenning, GA.It was, and still is, the best one volume history of thatwar.

Adams had access to US Government papers and spent almost threeyears in European archives, many of those references now unfortunately lostbecause of two world wars.What he gives you is both the military anddiplomatic side, and also some interesting views of the events interactionwith the larger 'disagreement' going on at the time in Europe centeringaround Napoleon, Emperor of the French.

What you see is what you get.Itis a great story, boldly and accurately told that has stood the test oftime.It is highly recommended, and the introduction by Col Elting neatlysays it all.The best purely military history is Col Elting's Amateurs! ToArms.Taken together they are incredible-two books you will never forgetand will read and reread. ... Read more

Product Description

" Winner of the Army Historical Foundation Book Award During the War of 1812, state militias were intended to be the primary fighting force. Unfortunately, while militiamen showed willingness to fight, they were untrained, undisciplined, and ill-equipped. These raw volunteers had no muskets, and many did not know how to use the weapons once they had been issued. Though established by the Constitution, state militias found themselves wholly unprepared for war. The federal government was empowered to use these militias to ""execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions""; but in a system of divided responsibility, it was the states' job to appoint officers and to train the soldiers. Edward Skeen reveals states' responses to federal requests for troops and provides in-depth descriptions of the conditions, morale, and experiences of the militia in camp and in battle. Skeen documents the failures and successes of the militias, concluding that the key lay in strong leadership. He also explores public perception of the force, both before and after the war, and examines how the militias changed in response to their performance in the War of 1812. After that time, the federal government increasingly neglected the militias in favor of a regular professional army.

Customer Reviews (3)

Militia Bashing Overdone
The book does what is says, but beware!
At first I was very excited to see a book on the topic. It is generally interesting, but hard to read and unevenly researched. It is centered mostly on the southern states and nearly ignores actions along the coast north of Maryland. The book is a constant jab and bash at the militia system to the point of boredom. I don't believe anyone expected a militia system that trained 4 days a year to be anything but a speed bump to veteran British regiments. The system did what it was supposed to do and countered local raids and was the 'first' line of defense against invasion.
The book spends alot of time on the political troubles of the system and explains it well in a somewhat chaotic manner. Many first hand sources are used, but sometimes takes the author to the same incorrect conclusion as others before him. Modern studies that discount old myths seem to be ignored.
A couple of chapters that let me down were the 'Militia Organization' and 'The Atlantic Front..'. The first boils down to two paragraghs that give very general details of organization. I was shocked that artillery and cavalry were left out. No mention of the French military influence or the basics of 'standing militia', 'elite militia (lights, rifles, artillery and cavalry)' and 'volunteers'. The second chapters covers New England in two paragraphs that are poorly researched. Both are primary sources that are biased and inaccurate. Maine was actually invaded and occupied until well after the war with the intent to adding it to Canada. The New England states did not perform any better, however they were better organized and equipped than most.
The militia battle in Stonington/New London, CT mentioned on p. 130. barely gets a paragraph, but a positve chapter would counter the book's theme.
Sadly the author ignores the 'Laws of War' at that time which generally stated 'armed resistence of a city would forfeit it'. A key consideration for local militia and their homes and shops.
The fault was not with the militia, most countries had such systems, it is that the US depended too much on it.

Standing Army v. Militia: the reality.
When the Founding father's drafted the Constitution, the showed a fear of a standing military and a belief in local civilian soldiers called the "militia."The history of this debate have gotten lost in thesands of time so that now the relevant parts of the Constitution areignored or misquoted.The War of 1812 happened a mere 25 years after theConstitution was drafted and debated.The federal government had beencharged with "organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia"under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution had done what theAnti-federalists had feared (despite the Second Amendment guarantees) ofignoring the militia in favor of a standing federal military. The militiawas poorly armed and did not know how to use the weapons they wereprovided.The professional soldiers could not tolerate the lack ofdisciplne of the militia.The problem is that the language of theConstitutional debates no longer is understood; however, the United Stateshad to live with the institution of the militia as its first line ofdefence. The author more than suppportshis main argument: "[The Warof 1812 showed that] the militia was an unreliable main defense force"for the multitude of reasons.This book is less about militiary historyand very useful for Constitutional scholars.

Regular, Reservist and The War of 1812
The War of 1812 was a watershed for the United States; it was the first time we declared war on another nation. So, how did we do? For one, we gained recognition as a member of the world community. But moreimportantly, we relied on the militia to prosecute the war and learned somehard facts about their utility as a main defense force. This is the focusof Professor C. Edward Skeen. CITIZEN SOLDIERS seeks to describe thefederal use of the militia to augment the regular army; survey themilitia's performance in general; and review the operational aspects ofmilitia participation at the state level (p. 1).

The fifty-five delegatesof the Constitutional Convention believed state governments should providea counterbalance to the national government. State sovereignty andindividual liberty were paramount when the time came to provide for thecommon defense. This resulted in the militia system of national defense,which had its flaws. Although the federal government provided for"organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia" during wartime and couldmobilize state militias to "execute the laws of the Union, suppressinsurrections, and repel invasions," states reserved the right to regulatethe militia and appoint their own officers (p. 5). Thus, the federalgovernment wrote the regulations for the militia while state governmentsregulated the militia.

Six of the author's ten chapters are devoted tofederal-state relations and the organization and mobilization of themilitia. The other four chapters are the meat of the book; they evaluatethe combat performance of the militia and support Skeen's main treatise:Although the minutemen fought well under the right circumstances, the Warof 1812 proved that America could not rely on the militia to serve as itsfirst line of defense.

Commodore Oliver Hazard Perry bested the Britishon Lake Erie in 1813. This enabled General William Henry Harrison todestroy Tecumseh and break the back of the Indian confederacy. Skeenconcludes that the outcome of these campaigns "were attributable to themilitia" (p. 95), even if their record in combat was undistinguished.

Meanwhile along the Niagara, General Peter B. Porter of New York ralliedthe militia and routed the British at Battle of Black Rock. Skeen singlesout Porter as the quintessential militia leader of the war: "[Porter]demonstrated persuasively that militiamen, capably led, were effectivefighters" (p. 107).

Along the eastern seaboard, the Royal Navy sailedinto Chesapeake Bay, put troops ashore at Benedict on 18 August, andinvested Washington during the Battle of Bladensburg in 1814. According toSkeen, "The Battle of Bladensburg represented probably the worst example ofmilitia performance in the war. It illustrated in microcosm all of thethings wrong with the militia in the War of 1812" (p. 138). They werepoorly organized and equipped and they lacked unit cohesion andleadership.

The outnumbered British were opposed by 7,000 Americans ledby Brigadier General William Winder, whose "chief qualification [tocommand] was that he was a nephew of Levin Winder, governor of Maryland"(p. 130). Although Winder's force was predominantly militia, which Winderhimself blamed for the eventual outcome of the battle--it was theleadership, not the composition of the American force that led to theirdefeat. Simply put, Winder was incompetent.

The British withdrew fromBaltimore and the Chesapeake Bay area in September 1814 and shifted theirfocus to the southern theater along the Gulf of Mexico. Fortunately--forthe sake of the militia--the militiamen in the South performed better thantheir brothers did along the eastern seaboard. Andrew Jackson's dramaticvictory at New Orleans was the major battle in the Southern theater and thecapstone of the War of 1812. Skeen believes Jackson's leadership of themilitia "showed once again that, under the right circumstances, givenproper leadership, discipline, training, and arms and equipment, Americanmilitiamen were capable of fighting" (p. 174).

CITIZEN SOLDIERS is at itsbest refereeing the arguments over the militia between the states and thefederal government. For example, the New England states believed theirgovernors reserved the right to decide when the militia should bemobilized, not President James Madison. They questioned the federalgovernment's declaration of war and balked at mobilizing their militiabecause, they claimed, the war was unconstitutional (pp. 65-72). In fact,many of the militiamen that did fight still refused to cross the Canadianborder because they believed it "unconstitutional."

Unfortunately,CITIZEN SOLDIERS assumes a working knowledge of the War of 1812. AlthoughSkeen gives enough coverage of each theater of operations to support hisarguments, he does not offer enough depth for his book to stand alone as ahistory of the war.

In closing, I don't think CITIZEN SOLDIERS has brokenany new ground. Donald R. Hickey has already produced the definitivehistory of the war with his WAR OF 1812: A FORGOTTEN CONFLICT (Urbana,Ill.: University of Illinois Press, 1989). Likewise, John K. Mahon hasalready told us all there is to know about citizen soldiers and the militiawith his HISTORY OF THE MILITIA AND THE NATIONAL GUARD (New York:Macmillan, 1983) and THE AMERICAN MILITIA: DECADE OF DECISION, 1789-1800(Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 1960). Yet, thanks to aHerculean research effort, Citizen Soldiers is a winner. Skeen's endnotesand bibliographic essay evidence his extensive documentary research instate and federal archives. He has done well in marshalling evidence fromprimary and secondary sources and carries his main argument: "[The War of1812 showed that] the militia was an unreliable main defense force"(p. 3). ... Read more

Product Description

Customer Reviews (3)

Lots of Background, Lots of Detail
I enjoyed this book immensely.I would recommend this book to anyone interested in the War of 1812.It certainly added to my understanding. While it is not a stand alone history of the War of 1812, it is an excellent source book for the details of the war.The book begins with a good over view of the causes of the war and the vision that each side had of the other. The second chapter gives a rough chronology of the war from 1812 to 1814 with a discription of the campaigns.This is where the book gets really interesting.Dr. Hickey brings forth a host of details about the war in short sections about a page in length; where was the first land battle, who took the first prize, who killed Tecumseh, could the Americans have taken Quebec?Then we deal with the naval war in the same detail.Then the Soldiers, Sailors and Civilians where we learn about the citizens, militias, indians, negro's and women.Finally we deal with the mechanics of waging a war across the ocean for the British or at the edge of the frontier for the Americans and Canadians.Here we learn more about tactics, arms and deserters. Finally we deal with the end of the war with all the myths and details of the Battle of New Orleans after the war had ended.This victory allowed the American Public to convince themselves that they had won the war in popular myth.
Dr Hickey has done a masterful job of weaving together a many seperate facts into a coherent whole.

Myths and Facts
Excellent review of many aspects of the "forgotten war" in American history.Informative of past military misadventures.A good and fun read.

A Winner
This is the first book by Donald Hickey that I have bought and read and it is an outstanding, if somewhat unusual book, on the War of 1812.Because of this, I have just ordered two more books by the author.

One of the reasons that I bought and read this volume is that the forward is by Don Graves, who is the authority of the war on the Niagara frontier during the War of 1812, and in my opinion, the master of the small battle narrative.If he endorses a volume, that is good enough for me.

This book is easy to read, dispels many popular errors that have come down to us today in myth and legend, and is one of the best books in print on the War of 1812.It is organized well, is easy to find material and is an excellent reference work.I have placed it in my library next to Don Graves excellent volumes and alongside the work of John Elting and Henry Adams.

In short, this volume is crammed with exciting material that a reader may or may not have come across before, and should be on the table next to anyone who is studying this most forgotten of America's wars.It is not only highly recommended, but it is essential for any study of the war. ... Read more

Product Description
From War to Peace (Study Guide Included): Go back in time to the battles of Lexington and Concord, a winter at Valley Forge, and to witness the trials of a British family during the War of 1812. Read about the conflicts between Britain and the United States over the Great Lakes, Maine and Oregon. These stories tell how Great Britain and the United States went from war to peace.

The study guide that is included in this edition features activities that will help students understand and piece together the many topics covered in From War to Peace. There are quizzes, word searches, and essay questions to answer. There is even an essay contest that students can submit to. Details are in the study guide.

From War to Peace covers the time period of the American Revolution, the War of 1812 to the Oregon Treaty. It mixes historical fiction with non-fiction to make entertaining reading for anyone. In addition, it can serve as an excellent supplement for students studying history in school. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

Another Lambers Masterpiece!
Five stars plus for this young mans insight, interpretation, and brilliant display of history.I like many other readers were turned off by the boring history books we read in school.Lambers captures the true spirit of history! Because of the excitement this book ignites; this book has the potential to change the course of how history is viewed and studied.This book is a MUST READ for everyone.This book would make a great gift not only for teachers and history buffs, but also the person who hungers for knowledge.(The study guide is an added bonus to treasure) BRAVO!

Neat package of history
I read the book first, and it was interesting to realize that the peaceful relations with Britain that we now take for granted were nonexistent and took hard work to accomplish.And the Study Guide is very good, and issurprisingly loaded with historical facts and fun word searches.I wish Ihad studied with this kind of material instead of boring history books thatmade me "hate" history for many years.Now I love it!

Easy Reading
This book is early American history in a "capsule," full of important events describing the conflicts between America and Britain, yet imagines the ordinary citizen's feelings about the wars in an interestingblend of fiction and history. Young people especially should read it. ... Read more

Product Description

Customer Reviews (1)

An exciting, detailed account
This book does a good job of relating, in detail, all of the military movements and battles of the war.I would have liked more information about the political aspects of this war, but Mahon states at the beginningof this book that this is a purely military history and that is pretty muchwhat it is.There is a little information on the political and diplomaticaspects of the war, but not much.This is a frustrating war to read aboutif you are an American because we botched up just about everything relatingto this war, at least until 1814, when we had some success (the defense ofBaltimore and the battle of New Orleans).A bright spot for America duringthis war was the performance of our tiny navy.Our navy was too small tosignificantly damage the Royal Navy, but we won several dramatic ship vs.ship battles.The performance of our ground forces was mostly abysmal. America learned an important lesson during this war: we learned that weneeded a strong national army and that we could not rely on state militiasfor our defense.Anyway, the book is well-written, for the most part, andthe few good battles of this war are related in an exciting way.My onlyreal criticism of this book is that it jumps around too much from onetheater of the war to another.Some individuals are introduced briefly inone part of the book and then reappear much later in the book without areminder of who this person is.Overall, though, Mahon does a good job ofrelating the facts of this war, as well as make some good observationsabout some of the changes to our nation that were caused by the war. ... Read more

Product Description

With the Royal Navy's offensives in the Chesapeake Bay during the War of 1812 came devastating raids that wreaked havoc on the small villages along its shores and the very economy of the region. American naval forces were incapable of wresting control of the Tidewater from the superior enemy forces. Then in 1814 Captain Joshua Barney, a rare American hero during the struggle, intrepidly led his Chesapeake Flotilla against the invaders, determined to contest their advance on the nation's capital and drive them from the region.

Donald G. Shomette, director of the archaeological excavation of the flotilla's flagship, substantially revises the first edition of this captivating history with new information about Barney, his crew, and the mosquito fleet of gunboats and war barges that so valiantly fought the British. He sheds new light on the efforts of the U.S. Flotilla Service to build a viable coastal defense force. Shomette details the construction and manning of the famed Chesapeake Flotilla and recounts the terrifying details of British attacks on the towns, plantations, and farms throughout the bay region.

Doomed from its conception by sparse funds and the natural limitations of the bay's coastline, the flotilla ultimately suffered defeat. Yet its efforts were not completely in vain. Turning back wave after wave of British attacks, the fleet earned an improbable victory at St. Leonard's Creek and its men went on to make heroic stands at the battles of Bladensburg and Fort McHenry in 1814.

The thoroughly updated and enlarged edition of Flotilla is the result of impressive research on a forgotten chapter in the development of the young nation's naval and maritime tradition.

Product Description
This two-volume work by historian Robert Quimby presents a comprehensive and detailed analysis of military strategy, operations, and management during one of America s most neglected and least understood military campaigns, the War of 1812. With causes that can be traced to the epic contest against Napoleon in Europe beginning in 1803, the war itself was the first conducted by the young Constitutional government of the United States. Quimby demonstrates that failed American initiatives at the beginning of hostilities shattered the unrealistic optimism of the war s staunchest advocates; and while initial failures were followed by military success in 1813, whatever advantage might have been gained was soon lost to incompetent leadership. Major exceptions occurred in the Old Northwest, and in what was then the Southwest, where U.S. forces finally broke the strength of the long-successful Indian-British alliance.

In retrospect, what occurred during the War of 1812 demonstrated the necessity for gaining citizen support before committing the nation to armed conflict; it also provided a series of object lessons on how not to conduct a military campaign. Finally Quimby argues that, notwithstanding several victories at war s end, including the fabled Battle of New Orleans, American perceptions that the United States won the war are erroneous; at best the struggle ended in a draw. The United States Army in the War of 1812 is an up-to-date and long overdue reassessment of military actions conducted during a pivotal conflict in American history, one that shaped U.S. military doctrine for a half century.

Notes, maps, bibliography, index

2 volumes, issued without dustjackets ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

The best study of the US Army in the War of 1812
Quimby's study of the U.S. Army in the War of 1812 is a masterful anaylsis of the organization and campaigns of the Regular forces and militia between 1812 and 1815. He deals with the border conflicts in the north, thedefenses of the Chesapeake and New Orleans, and the Indian campaigns in thesouth. Much of the material has been gathered from original manuscripts andhis bibliography alone is quite valuable. He is less inclusive of Britishand Canadian sources, but he does offer much information about America'senemies. Quimby is not a Shelby Foote, so the text doesn't read like anovel, but he is more versed in the sources of the War of 1812 than Footeis versed in Civil War sources. Quimby died just as the book went to press,so he was not able to affect the look of the text. The most seriousshortcoming is the lack of suitable maps. This is a book that cries forgood maps and has very, very few. The price is steep, but the book is notdesigned for the casual reader, but rather for the military student. Quimbyseems most interested in the campaigns of Andrew Jackson, sometimes at theexpense of Brown's campaign along the Niagara in 1814 which was thebloodiest fighting of the war and should have received more attention. Inany case, Quimby's achievement was to produce a readable and useful studyof the Army in transition from a poorly-led body of amateurs to aprofessional force of educated officers and disciplined enlisted men. Theshortcomings of the Army in the War of 1812 led directly to the Army thatconquered Mexico thirty years later. Quimby's book is necessary for allstudents of the War of 1812. ... Read more

Product Description

Until now, the story of Iroquois participation in the War of 1812 has not received detailed examination, and there have consequently been major gaps in our understanding of the Iroquois, their relations with Euroamerican society, and the course of the war itself. The Iroquois in the War of 1812 proves that, in fact, the Six Nations' involvement was 'too significant to ignore.'

Benn explores this involvement by focusing on Iroquois diplomatic, military, and cultural history during the conflict. He looks at the Iroquois' attempts to stay out of the war, their entry into hostilities, their modes of warfare, the roles they played in different campaigns, their relationships with their allies, and the effects that the war had on their society. He also details the military and diplomatic strength of the Iroquois during the conflict, despite the serious tensions that plagued their communities.

This account reveals how the British benefited more than the Americans from the contributions of their Iroquois allies, and underscores how important the Six Nations were to the successful defence of Canada. It will appeal to general readers in both Canada and the United States and will have relevance for students and scholars of military, colonial, and Native history. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

An excellent look inside Iroquois society of 1812-14
After 186 years, it's about time for a comprehensive look at the Indians' participation in the War of 1812, on both sides of the conflict. While Carl Benn's focus is on the Iroquois of the Six Nations (or Grand River Tract)of Upper Canada, and the battles and skirmishes in the Niagara region, healso refers to their brethren of western New York, the Seven Nations of thelower St. Lawrence region, Tecumseh's western conflict, and other nationssuch as the Delaware, Ojibwa and Mississauga. His explanation of theIroquois way of war does much to dispel the myth of the "savage"and leads to a better understanding of their reasons for fighting,temporary desertion, looting and the now-repugnant practice of scalping. Heallows the reader a glimpse into Iroquois society and the divisions withinit, similar to those of Euroamericans, with pro-British, neutral, andpro-American factions. His account of the personal agendas and internalstrife among the Indian Department, the civil authorities and the militaryillustrates that, unfortunately, the status quo has changed little over thecenturies.

This book is a scholarly treatise, with 609 footnotes, andalthough there is a factual tone to it, it is certainly not dry. Benn hasmade the best use of an extensive bibliography to create a well- balancedexamination of the Iroquois alliances and conflicts, among themselves, andwith their allies and enemies. His description of the Battle of Chippawa isdownright exciting.

Benn tends to skim over actions that do not involvethe Iroquois. This is understandable, due to the subject matter, but quickreference can sometimes result in slightly distorted facts. As an example,Benn states that "Brock ordered the commandant at St. Joseph's Islandin Lake Huron to capture the American post of Fort Mackinac at the head ofLake Michigan." In fact, Brock was under direct orders from hiscommander-in-chief, Sir George Prevost, to restrain from aggression; hetherefore ordered the captain at St. Joseph Island to act according to hisbest judgement; by capturing Fort Michilimackinac, the captain acted on hisown initiative. However, this is a small point. For the most part, this isan excellent book about a part of history that deserves to be better knownand appreciated. ... Read more

Product Description
Sent to live with relatives in New Orleans during the War of 1812, eleven-year-old Elisabet determines to find a smuggler's treasure to ransom her imprisoned father. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (17)

Read This Book!
This was the third History Mystery I read out of about six (so far) and it is my favorite of all! My favorite type of book is a mystery so I was thrilled to hear about this one! I read it in one night!!! Definately a page turner! READ THIS BOOK!!!!

AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is one of the best mysteries I have ever read!! It never had a dull moment. And it's great because you learn about some of the history of our country while getting an entertaining read. I HIGHLY reccomend this book and other books in the American Girl series (especially the Addy books)!!

Highly recommended
This is another in the History Mystery series from American Girl, in which a young American girl is confronted by a mystery that will tax her resolve and her ability. This is the story of eleven-year-old Elisabet Holder, an eleven-year-old girl living in New Orleans in 1814. Her father had been impressed into the British Navy, stolen off his own ship, and when Elisabet learns that her uncle had died leaving behind a hidden treasure map, she begins looking for it, so that she can sell it and buy her father's freedom. But, there's someone else looking for the map, and Elisabet is walking into more trouble than she can imagine!

The final chapter is a bit of a bonus, a look at life in America in 1814. This is an exciting story with everything that you could want - pirates, mystery, ghosts, and friendship. My fourteen-year-old daughter has been a fan of the American Girls stories for years, and both she and I greatly enjoyed this story. If you are looking for a great story for your American girl (or for any reader!), then this is the book for you. My daughter and I both highly recommend this book to you.

The Smuggler's Treasure





The book, The Smuggler's Treasure is a very good book. I love the characters, Elisabet Holder and Marie. Marie and Elisabet meet each other in the story and become good friends. They both go to New Orleans together because Marie works at a bakery store and Elisabet's Aunt wanted Elisabet to help Marie. Elisabet has no family but her Aunt and Uncle. This book is a really good book. What I really liked about this book was that the character Elisabetwas very bright and intelligent. What I don't like about the story was when her uncle died.

Smuggler's Treasure
The Smuggler's Treasure, Sarah Masters Buckey

Elisabet Holder, is the main character in the novel, The Smuggler's Treasure. She is sent from Boston to New Orleans to live with Aunt, because her dad was captured by the British. This takes place in 1814, when America was fightening against the British. Elisabet forces herself to find the smuggled treasure to earn her dad's freedom. In my attention was grabbed right from the beginning. As the book progresses Elisabet realizes the treasure has been hidden in her own house. This book is a great book for people who like mysteries. I liked this book because every chapter has a mystery to it. I would recommend this book to girls. ... Read more

Product Description
According to Wikipedia: "Alfred Thayer Mahan (September 27, 1840 – December 1, 1914) was a United States Navy flag officer, geostrategist, and educator. His ideas on the importance of sea power influenced navies around the world, and helped prompt naval buildups before World War I. Several ships were named USS Mahan, including the lead vessel of a class of destroyers. His research into naval history led to his most important work, The Influence of Seapower Upon History, 1660-1783, published in 1890." ... Read more