Rating: 
Summary: The Difinitive volumn of the War of 1812
Review: As an author and film producer of a battle in the war of 1812, I must acknowledge that Dr. Don Hickey has produced the difinitive work on the war. If one could only read one book on this pivotal event in American history, Hickey's book is the one to choose.
Rating: 
Summary: America's First Defeat
Review: Donald Hickey provides a reasonably detailed study of the war of 1812, that is well written and concise. The books only real failing is a loss of objectivity in the closing chapters.The war of 1812 is interesting as an early example of American imperialism (It's greedy eyes cast on acquiring Canada) and of the fledgling nation's first defeat. And defeat it is: Despite the loss of the Battle of New Orleans for the British (Fought after the treaty of Ghent was signed, effectively nullifying its political value) the USA pretty much walked away with no concessions whatsoever; Its "Success" at the negotiating table was the same as that. Ie: It was lucky to walk away with the status quo re-established and nothing of value taken away from her. There are probably better single volumes treatments available, but if there are I have yet to read them. Recommended.
Rating:
Summary: America's First Defeat
Review: Donald Hickey provides a reasonably detailed study of the war of 1812, that is well written and concise. The books only real failing is a loss of objectivity in the closing chapters. The war of 1812 is interesting as an early example of American imperialism (It's greedy eyes cast on acquiring Canada) and of the fledgling nation's first defeat. And defeat it is: Despite the loss of the Battle of New Orleans for the British (Fought after the treaty of Ghent was signed, effectively nullifying its political value) the USA pretty much walked away with no concessions whatsoever; Its "Success" at the negotiating table was the same as that. Ie: It was lucky to walk away with the status quo re-established and nothing of value taken away from her. There are probably better single volumes treatments available, but if there are I have yet to read them. Recommended.
Rating: 
Summary: A political history, entirely from the U.S. point of view
Review: Hickey's history of the War of 1812 is easily readable - to the casual reader like myself. Likewise, the academic is likely to find the book extremely useful due to the index and footnotes - the author has done his homework! Remarkably, his discussion of bills/laws and the actions of Congress are not too boring to read - this feat in itself deserves a 4-star rating. However, I've only given it three stars because of three things that struck me as I got about 40 pages into the book: #1. It is told completely from the point of view of the U.S. - the lawmakers, the generals, the civil reactions, etc. Not once is there any mention of the very substantial "fifth column" in the Canadas that openly supported the annexation of the Canadas into the U.S. It was not until Brock's victories at Detroit and Queenston (and to a lesser extent, the seizure of Makinac Island) that the civil authorities in British North America felt they could rely on the civilian population at large to fight the invaders. Likewise, the unification of the native peoples under Tecumseh and the Prophet is given as a fait accompli, without any background into the years of treaties and effort put in by these two native leaders. #2. It is heavily political - there are 20 pictures of people in the book but only three maps - strategic ones, showing the location of cities and forts, without a single tactical map describing a campaign or battle. Likewise, the text heavily emphasises congressional debates and gives only a cursory description of battles. Even discussions of generals are given in terms of their personalities and links to politicians, rather then their tactics on the battlefield. #3. On the positive side, it is heavily referenced and indexed, and it is a very useful and readable account of the War of 1812, the previous two caveats notwithstanding. Interestingly, as the book progressed, I started seeing some parallels between this war and George W. Bush's war in Iraq - both deeply unpopular to a large constituency, both initially declared by the U.S. (although not without provocation), both started on dubious legal pretexts. Sailors' rights, the putative cause of the War of 1812, are not even mentioned in the eventual peace treaty, while Weapons of Mass Destruction have been all but forgotten in Dubya's Iraqi war. But back to the book. I don't want to sound negative - what the book sets out to do, it does very well. It presents the facts clearly and without bias. It rightfully debunks the notion that it was a Second War of Independence (ultimately it was a War of Independence of British North America from the U.S. that allowed the current nation of Canada to be formed). He also rightfully points out that the U.S. can be fairly said to have won the peace - Great Britain never again interfered in the U.S.'s wars (with Spain, in the Civil War, etc.). It ultimately defined the direction of U.S. expansion westward to the Rockies and southward into Mexico and Florida (and simultaneously doomed the Native peoples in those areas). It created everlasting peace on the U.S.'s northern border. And so, in the ultimate analysis, the War of 1812 is an important milestone in North American history, and this book helps fill in the very considerable knowledge gap about the war. It basically falls from 4-star status to 3-star status by representing itself as a comprehensive history of the entire war, not a specific civil examination of the U.S. government during the war.
Rating:
Summary: A political history, entirely from the U.S. point of view
Review: Hickey's history of the War of 1812 is easily readable - to the casual reader like myself. Likewise, the academic is likely to find the book extremely useful due to the index and footnotes - the author has done his homework! Remarkably, his discussion of bills/laws and the actions of Congress are not too boring to read - this feat in itself deserves a 4-star rating. However, I've only given it three stars because of three things that struck me as I got about 40 pages into the book: #1. It is told completely from the point of view of the U.S. - the lawmakers, the generals, the civil reactions, etc. Not once is there any mention of the very substantial "fifth column" in the Canadas that openly supported the annexation of the Canadas into the U.S. It was not until Brock's victories at Detroit and Queenston (and to a lesser extent, the seizure of Makinac Island) that the civil authorities in British North America felt they could rely on the civilian population at large to fight the invaders. Likewise, the unification of the native peoples under Tecumseh and the Prophet is given as a fait accompli, without any background into the years of treaties and effort put in by these two native leaders. #2. It is heavily political - there are 20 pictures of people in the book but only three maps - strategic ones, showing the location of cities and forts, without a single tactical map describing a campaign or battle. Likewise, the text heavily emphasises congressional debates and gives only a cursory description of battles. Even discussions of generals are given in terms of their personalities and links to politicians, rather then their tactics on the battlefield. #3. On the positive side, it is heavily referenced and indexed, and it is a very useful and readable account of the War of 1812, the previous two caveats notwithstanding. Interestingly, as the book progressed, I started seeing some parallels between this war and George W. Bush's war in Iraq - both deeply unpopular to a large constituency, both initially declared by the U.S. (although not without provocation), both started on dubious legal pretexts. Sailors' rights, the putative cause of the War of 1812, are not even mentioned in the eventual peace treaty, while Weapons of Mass Destruction have been all but forgotten in Dubya's Iraqi war. But back to the book. I don't want to sound negative - what the book sets out to do, it does very well. It presents the facts clearly and without bias. It rightfully debunks the notion that it was a Second War of Independence (ultimately it was a War of Independence of British North America from the U.S. that allowed the current nation of Canada to be formed). He also rightfully points out that the U.S. can be fairly said to have won the peace - Great Britain never again interfered in the U.S.'s wars (with Spain, in the Civil War, etc.). It ultimately defined the direction of U.S. expansion westward to the Rockies and southward into Mexico and Florida (and simultaneously doomed the Native peoples in those areas). It created everlasting peace on the U.S.'s northern border. And so, in the ultimate analysis, the War of 1812 is an important milestone in North American history, and this book helps fill in the very considerable knowledge gap about the war. It basically falls from 4-star status to 3-star status by representing itself as a comprehensive history of the entire war, not a specific civil examination of the U.S. government during the war.
Rating:
Summary: Great Single Volumne History
Review: Hickey's War of 1812: a forgotten conflict is an excellent single volume history of an early American conflict poorly understood by most people. Indeed, I suspect most people know little more than that the Star Spangled Banner was written during the war of 1812, and possibly that the British burned Washington.
Hickey does a good job of portraying the early U.S. as a small country whose common sense was overcome to some extent by its own nationalism. The early Americans saw themselves as world players, and they weren't. The war started for a variety of reasons, but the two main ones were trade restrictions by Britain imposed during the Napoleonic Wars, and Britain's policy of impressement, or boarding American ships looking for British nationals for the Navy. The joke is that the British conceded the offensive trade policies just prior to the war, but news reached the U.S. too late. As a result, the war proceeded with poorly defined objectives, a weak military and without firm economic support. The net results were military defeats and economic distress.
Hickey does a good job of mixing political and social history with military history. Indeed, the military aspects of the book get the least amount of coverage. There are no battle maps, or detailed maps to track the battles. Most of these would be mere skirmishes by today's standards, but I wish Hickey went into more depth in battle history. The political policies and differences are covered in great depth, and reading some of the quotes one can't help but get the impression that the more things change, the more they stay the same.
This book is a good single volume history of the war of 1812. This war has more of interest in it than the national anthem and the last attack (prior to 9-11) on the mainland U.S. by a foreign power. Hickey did an excellent job of giving a political/social history of the war with just enough coverage of military events to give the book a complete, balanced approach.
Rating:
Summary: Great Single Volumne History
Review: Hickey's War of 1812: a forgotten conflict is an excellent single volume history of an early American conflict poorly understood by most people. Indeed, I suspect most people know little more than that the Star Spangled Banner was written during the war of 1812, and possibly that the British burned Washington.
Hickey does a good job of portraying the early U.S. as a small country whose common sense was overcome to some extent by its own nationalism. The early Americans saw themselves as world players, and they weren't. The war started for a variety of reasons, but the two main ones were trade restrictions by Britain imposed during the Napoleonic Wars, and Britain's policy of impressement, or boarding American ships looking for British nationals for the Navy. The joke is that the British conceded the offensive trade policies just prior to the war, but news reached the U.S. too late. As a result, the war proceeded with poorly defined objectives, a weak military and without firm economic support. The net results were military defeats and economic distress.
Hickey does a good job of mixing political and social history with military history. Indeed, the military aspects of the book get the least amount of coverage. There are no battle maps, or detailed maps to track the battles. Most of these would be mere skirmishes by today's standards, but I wish Hickey went into more depth in battle history. The political policies and differences are covered in great depth, and reading some of the quotes one can't help but get the impression that the more things change, the more they stay the same.
This book is a good single volume history of the war of 1812. This war has more of interest in it than the national anthem and the last attack (prior to 9-11) on the mainland U.S. by a foreign power. Hickey did an excellent job of giving a political/social history of the war with just enough coverage of military events to give the book a complete, balanced approach.
Rating: 
Summary: A thorough discussion of the politics of the times.
Review: I didn't enjoy the endless discusions of the politics of the times. The book is really 300 pages long with 100 pages of sources. The passion of war was lost in the endless quotes and opinions of politicians and officers during each event. For example, I still don't know how the battle of New Orleans was faught. Who suffered? Who was outflanked? A few americans dead and a lot of british. The vote in congress was 13 to whatever and the bill didn't pass. The book is for serious scholars who can appreciate the hard work and detail the author has included and not for the casual history buff interested in the human condition.
Rating:
Summary: America's Most Unpopular War
Review: Like all nations we remember what we want to remember, what is pleasing and self-serving. Because there was very little to want to remember about the War of 1812, we chose to forget most of it. Mr. Hickey does a competent job of trying to correct that mistake - albeit in a small way. The Federalists were on the wane and the Republicans (lead by Jefferson and Madison) wanted desperately to make their lasting statement on the nation's future. Popular sentiment was very much against the Republican declaration of war - the reaction in New England was almost identical to the South's reaction to Lincoln's election in 1860, foreshadowing the terrible resolution of the state's rights issue. Mr. Hickey very clearly identifies the tenuous nature of the basis for the declaration of war, the horrific financial crisis created by mis-guided Republican financial and mercantile policies and the poorly developed military strategy. There was much more to the War of 1812 than "bombs bursting in air" over Fort McHenry, Andrew Jackson's victory at New Orleans (a battle fought after the peace agreement had already been signed) and the burning of Washington. Mr. Hickey does an admirable job of creating a one volume standard treatment with objectivity and insight. For those who would relegate this study to obscurity, consider a valuable lesson that the Republicans learned during this war (and that the Democrats are using to defeat the Republicans today). When public sentiment turns against you, adopt your opponents views, call those views your own (with an appropriate measure of pomp and rhetoric), and declare a great victory for the party. Bill Clinton would have made a fine Republican in 1815 - how the wheel turns.
Rating:
Summary: The War of 1812 the pride of patriots
Review: Not since 1776, has the United States and Britian fought. But in the year of 18 and 12 this on going battle was fought once again and once and for all. This books tracks America demanding it's rights to neutrality , to the bitter sweet cries of battle for a second independance. The Author of this book has pulled a forgetton lore from the bowels of history , and recreated it for todays age. So that we may never forget the War of 1812. I recommend this books for any student , any one with an inquiring mind , but most of all I recommend it for the American Patriot.
|
