Customer Reviews

The Glorious Cause: The American Revolution, 1763-1789 (Oxford History of the United States)

5 star:		(26)
4 star:		(23)
3 star:		(17)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

The inaugural volume of the highly honored but still unfinished "Oxford History Of The United States" series is "The Glorious Cause: The American Revolution, 1763-1789," a superbly written, scholarly, and highly literate account of the America's War for Independence. Written by Robert L. Middlekauff, Professor of History... this is the finest account of the Revolutionary War I've found to date... even better than Benson Bobrick's "Angel in the Whirlwind," which I've already reviewed.

"The Glorious Cause" is a comprehensive account of the American Revolution designed to give readers a well rounded overview of not only the causes of the war, but also of how the war was fought. The book succeeds admirably at its task. After finishing "The Glorious Cause," I felt a much greater appreciation for the men and women whose struggle for freedom brought forth on the North American continent a new and independent nation - the United States of America.

"The Glorious Cause" begins by examining the causes of the American Revolution. In one of the book's earliest chapters, entitled "The Children of the Twice Born," Middlekauff carefully lays out his closely reasoned and well argued thesis: that the seeds of revolution were planted long before the war was actually fought. Those seeds, embodied in the economic, social, political, and religious fabric of American society, made the evolution to democracy on the North American continent almost inevitable.

The earliest settlers came to the New World because of their disenchantment with authoritarian English laws and what they viewed as centralized, overly ritualistic, dogmatic Anglican religion. When the settlers arrived with their ideals of political and congregationalist religious democracy, they found land cheap and plentiful. Whereas only about 20 percent of all Englishmen were landowners, and hence were eligible to participate in England's parliamentary democracy, over 50 percent of American colonists owned land and therefore could take part in colonial parliamentary government. The result: provincial representative assemblies tended to do the bidding of their constituents rather than the royal governors. After the Seven Years' War, tension between American political and economic interests and the interests of the British government was exacerbated by Parliament's intent to restore Britsh prerogatives in America.

Tension was bound to lead to conflict, and that conflict wasn't long in coming. The American colonies were left pretty much to their own economic and political devices during the Seven Years' War, so long as they provided support for Britain's war against the French. The colonists bore the brunt of the fighting during the war against the French in North America; at war's end, they expected to be permitted to return to some semblance of self-government. It was not to be, however. Under Britain's new King and a Parliament with a new-found awareness of the American colonies' potential to enrich their colonial masters, Parliament began enacting a series of laws (Stamp Act, Townshend Acts, Sugar Act, etc.) designed to bring the colonies to heel. The colonists, thoroughly imbued with the ideals of democracy and liberty, rebelled, first through political means, and finally, inevitably, through violence.

Once "The Glorious Cause" completes its assessment of the causes of the war, it takes the reader on a fascinating journey through the war itself. The way the American Revolution was fought is frequently shrouded in the mists of legend, with great American heroes standing tall against the overwhelming might of the British and Hessian armies. There are strong elements of historical truth to that legend, but Middlekauff does an excellent job of portraying the war exactly as it was: a very closely contested fight between colonial masters and those who wished to throw off the yoke of colonialism.

There's really almost nothing to criticize in "The Glorious Cause." It is, in nearly every respect, an outstanding work of history. It's comprehensive in its scope; thorough in its approach; obviously very well researched; and imbued with careful, thoughtful, and incisive historical analysis. Middlekauff's descriptions of Revolutionary War battles are first-rate. The author completely captures the flavor of eighteenth century warfare in general, and of the battles of the American Revolution in particular. When I finished reading "The Glorious Cause," I felt as if I had actually been there at some of the great battles of the war.

One very minor caveat: because "The Glorious Cause" takes a fairly academic approach to studying the American Revolution, the book's somewhat lofty and scholarly sounding language may not appeal to readers with only a passing interest in history in general, and the American Revolution in particular. That's not to say the book has only a narrow appeal to academics and history scholars, however; it is definitely written for the general reader with a love of American history. It will, in my view, prove a most satisfying experience for the vast majority of history lovers who decide to read it.

"The Glorious Cause" is a winner of a book in every respect. With a dearth of excellent books about the American Revolution currently in print, this volume fills a crucial need for those who wish to learn about America's struggle for independence. As the inaugural volume of the "Oxford History Of The United States," "The Glorious Cause" also sets the tone for the whole series... highly readable, thoroughly imbued with first-rate scholarship and a polished, eloquent writing style; and simply a pleasure to read.

Middlekauff has read deeply in the history of the American revolution and the early republic. Moreover, he is interested in more than just a simple narrative; he is interested in causes and motives, as he shows in chaps. 20 and 21 of this book, which discusses why soldiers fought instead of ran.

Unfortunately, the narrative in this book has holes, and Middlekauff often fails to put people and personalities into context, making the reading less interesting than it should be. He also makes high demands on readers' attention; this, plus the holes, made the book heavy going at times.

Here are some examples of holes: 1) In his discussion of the Intolerable Acts, Middlekauff fails to say what the Quebec Act was, yet on pp. 239 and 280 he assumes you know. 2) 471: "They all knew what happened to Buford's men at Waxhaws when they tried to run away." This is the only time "Buford" and "Waxhaws" are mentioned in the book. 3) 340: "June also brought William Howe back to New York." I can't find where it says Howe had been in New York before. 4) 462: "Some hint of what was coming was given ...when the victors, shouting 'Tarleton's Quarter,' shot and stabbed the wounded..." There is no explanation of this anywhere in the book. 478: "... Lee's Legion rode in. Greene once more had his army in one piece." This is the first time that "Lee's Legion" is mentioned. I had to look in the index to find out that "Lee" was Henry Lee. It never explains how he got a legion. The last time we saw him, on 417, he was foraging in Delaware.

No context for people and personalities: Isaac Barre gives a speech supporting the colonies in parliament (74-75), but Middlekauf never tells us who he is or why he speaks so strongly.
Directly below, the American who thinks Barre's speech is "noble" is never identified. Apparently it was Jared Ingersoll, who appears in a very different light in other parts of the book.

Demands on reader's attention: 406-7 "Amherst told the king..." This is Jeffrey Amherst. The last time we met him, also identified only as "Amherst", was page 276, where he was fighting Montcalm in Quebec for all of one sentence. Look up Amherst in the index, see where he appears, and see how easy it is to connect these references. This is very tough, demanding writing.

Middlekauff knows the period, is a very intelligent writer, has interesting views and judgments which he backs up effectively. However, if you want to understand what is going on, you will have to go to other books in addition to this one, and you will have to pay very close attention to Middlekauff, with pencil in hand and constant reference to the index.

As an example of a book which brings people and personalities strongly into context, I recommend Barbara Tuchman's "March of Folly" which has an outstanding chapter on "The British Lose America." This will tell you who Barre was, why they were drinking toasts to John Wilkes in South Carolina in 1768, and what the Quebec Act was. It's only a tiny fragment of the history Middlekauff tries to cover, and occasionally falls down as well (Tuchman mangles the text of Barre's speech), but is a great example of fascinating historical writing which historians would do well to study.

The Glorious Cause is comprehensive and complete, extremely ambitious in its scope. It is painstakingly footnoted, documenting a wealth of sources of both primary and secondary research. It is a military history as well as a political history, and wanders into social commentary as well. Middlekauff does a masterful job of explaining how pivotal the French and Indian War was in American History as it forced England to re-examine her relationship to her American colonies. Prior to that war the colonies had not provided England with the wealth that imperial nations desire from their colonies, but they had not really cost her anything either. But that war caused England to realize that money would have to be spent to defend her stronghold in the New World if she intended to keep it. That looked to be an expensive proposition, making it necessary to find a way to make the colonies produce revenue to offset the expense. Attempts at taxation without representation, a fundamental right of Englishmen, caused colonists to examine their status as citizens of their mother country, leading them to decide that they were not Englishmen at all. Middlekauff also gives us a glimpse of heroes of the pre-revolutionary period and shows our "patriots" as radicals and "revolutionaries," a far more accurate depiction of the men who were able to bring about so monumental a change in the course of history. It also shows the human side of the American army, and how Washington wrestled with the fact that many were unwilling to fight. Due to the length of the book and the abundance of detail, it can be tedious. Middlekauff does his readers no favor in trying to impress them with his personal observations such as: "Soldiers of all nationalities usually have a special fondness for profanity, and many have a special proficiency in its use" (p. 419). In a less lengthy book, such intimacy with the reader might be appreciated, but in a book of 665 pages, it is simply wasted words. Yet, upon reading the book with an eye toward shortening it, one realizes that not much could, or should, be left out. Just be prepared for the most thorough, complete, and detailed account of this period of American history that you will ever find in one book.

I was candidly overwhelmed by the military nature of this historical work. I was hoping for a great deal more in the political, social and economic areas than Profesor Middlekauff was able to deliver. If this well researched historical text were to be part of the Oxford MILITARY History of the United States one would be less surprised at the laborious details the author gets into on the various battlefields. I have previously read two voumes of the Oxford History of the United States: James McPhearson's "Battle Cry of Freedom" and David Kennedy's "Freedom from Fear" dealing with the Civil War and World War II, respectively. Both of these authors deliverd strongly where Middlekauff fell far short, namely away from strictly military matters. I would strongly urge those interested in military history to read this book. Those less interested should search out some other work with a broader analytical framework such as The Radicalism of the American Revolution where its author, Gordon Wood, addresses the political theory and thought that went into the Revolution.

Oxford History of the United States - Update (March 2007)

After a long silence there has been some news this terrific series, as reported in the Boston Globe (December 24, 2006).

It appears as if readers are in for a treat over the next 12- 24 months with the "missing" volumes at least having manuscripts into David Kennedy (Freedom from Fear) and the series' new editor with the passing of C. Vann Woodward.

Volumes 1 and 2, covering the Colonial Period (1672-1763) have been assigned, in some order, yet to be made public (that I am aware of) to Fred Anderson (University of Colorado) and Andrew Cayton (Miami University of Ohio).

Volume 3 - The Glorious Cause 1763-89, Robert Middlekauf PUBLISHED
Volume 4 - The U.S. from 1789-1815, Gordon Wood (Brown University)
Volume 5- What Hath God Wrought 1815-48, Daniel Walker Howe (UCLA)
Volume 6- Battle Cry of Freedom, 1848-65, James McPherson PUBLISHED
Volume 7- Leviathan: America Comes of Age, 1865-1900, H.W. Brands (Texas)
Volume 8- Reawakened Nation, 1896-1929, Bruce Schulman (Boston University)
Volume 9- Freedom from Fear, 1929-1945, David M. Kennedy PUBLISHED
Volume 10- Grand Expectations, 1945-74, James T. Patterson PUBLISHED
Volume 11- Restless Giant, 1974-2000, James T. Patterson PUBLISHED

Volume 12- a complete history of American foreign policy, George Herring (Kentucky)

It appears that the Brands addition has been pulled and will not be part of the series. What will take its place is not yet known. I would speculate that Brands will be writing on this same period, just not for this series as the work was largely done. A similar event happened some time ago with Stanley Elkins and Eric McKitrick writing "The Age of Federalism, 1788-1800". This was originally to be part of the series but the two apparently did not go far enough chromatically for the publishers. Also John Gaddis Lewis has written extensively and was also, somehow, dropped by Oxford. All of this makes for great reading one way or another.

After hearing the Schoolhouse Rock favorite, "The Shot Heard Round the World" about 500 times on a trip recently (I have young kids), I just had to get a good book on the American Revolution. I chose this book, the first in the Oxford History of America Series, "The Glorious Cause" by Robert Middlekauff from several at my local bookstore (don't worry Amazon, I buy a lot of books from you, too). I chose it in large part because the publisher was Oxford, who generally puts out great books and series. Overall, the book did not disappoint, but it was not quite as good as the dust jacket led me to believe.

First, the good: the language and flow is excellent. In the sense of just sitting back and reading - it's a good one. The vocabulary level is pretty high, but you won't need to reach for the dictionary often. The book seems incredibly-well researched. It was clear that Middlekauff is VERY well read on this subject and period, and the footnoting is well-done. I really like being able to follow up on the sources he used and he is generous and thorough in sharing them. Also, he spends a lot of time on the events leading up to the war. Although one reviewer feels that four chapters on the Stamp Act is too much, it actually almost wasn't enough for me! I say that because if you believe what Middlekauf first states (and seems to be true from other readings), that the American people had NO desire to secede from Britain early on, then you must wonder how they got so quickly (relatively speaking) to a course of action as radical as a fight for independence! So I believe the time spent on that period is critical and interesting. The details of the battles are excellent, and generally, any material he provides is thoughtful and interesting. Basically everything he chooses to write about is done well.

One of the negatives, though, is that the book feels like so much is missing. I can appreciate the desire to keep the book from becoming 3,000 pages; however, there is something about its structure or style that makes it feel like he tried to cram 3 volumes into one - and didn't succeed very well. One chapter, for example, near the end of the book covers such diverse topics as the Tories, the Indians, Slaves and Slavery, American social classes, the Navy, etc., etc. The section on Indians is only two or three pages. I understand that you can only cover so much, but I think Middlekauf would have been better served by either narrowing his focus and writing a coherent narrative, or expanding the book.

I admit to much ignorance of the subject, which has been somewhat repaired by reading this book, but there seemed to be some important items left out: there was nothing about Benedict Arnold's betrayal, virtually nothing about British popular reaction to the war, very little to explain French movements and personalities, and in general, the coverage of the last few years is scantier than the first. Upon reflection, I think the criticism here is related to the first - it simply reads as if the book is a collection of really great bits and pieces of the history of the revolution without a clear plan as to what was going to be covered in detail and what was going to be left out. One of the things that contributes to this is covered by another review in detail: Middlekauf's tendency to mention key figures without any introduction or even hint that they have never been mentioned before (you find yourself thinking, "oh, I must have forgotten that paragraph that explained who this person is...", but then you go back and realize - there is no such paragraph!).

My single biggest complaint, though, is reserved for the editor - the typos!!! There were misspelled words, bad grammar, and other obvious typographical errors every three or four pages. It was really, really annoying and there is really no excuse for a publisher like Oxford to let something out in this state.

If I appear to be more negative than positive, then the negative came off too strong (I wish I could give it 3.5 stars). It IS a good book. I enjoyed reading it and actually found it quite hard to put down. I just wanted it to be better. I think it fell short of its potential and didn't do justice to the writer's obvious command of the subject. Maybe I'll feel differently after reading other histories of the same period - this was my first. I still recommend it, though, despite the flaws, and would read other works by Middlekauf.

This second volume of "The Oxford History of the United States" provides an objective, sober look at the American Revolution without denying its role in world history as a truly "glorious cause". In demythologizing the war as we saw it through grade-school eyes, author Robert Middlekauff profiles our Revolutionary forebears as they really were: men of courage and vision who were not without their flaws. Likewise, the British redcoats we loved to hate may not have been entirely hostile or unsympathetic to the legitimate grievances of the Americans, yet their often condescending view of the colonists and an incompetent colonial policy gave America no option but to rebel in the end. The book's well-written accounts of the Revolution's major battles will increase the reader's understanding of political, logistical, and strategic problems on both sides which contributed to the conflict's drawn-out, six-year duration. Unlike other histories of the war which end with the Treaty of Paris in 1783, Mr. Middlekauff offers an absorbing narrative of the drafting of the Constitution in 1787 and its subsequent ratification by the states. After reading "The Glorious Cause", I can better appreciate the sacrifices made over 200 years ago by a determined people who, in defending divinely-established rights and liberties for themselves and their posterity, defended virtue and morality as well.

This is a very good book on the Revolution, or The Glorious Cause. Right from the beginning you get a sense of what Middlekauff is attempting to portray as he describes in detail the major factors that led to the Declaration: debt from the Seven Years War and the taxes that were meant to help recoup that debt. His recursive style - of starting a new chapter by backtracking in order to fill the gaps that are needed in order get back to the timeframe of the previous chapter - is an amazing way to write. I haven't seen much of this style of writing in nonfiction, only in fiction by authors such as Faulkner and Morrison, and it does well in furthering the story along. The additional chapters scattered throughout that explain some of the non war aspects are very helpful and interesting to read.

This is a long read, though, so prepare yourself. It doesn't help that the last 80 or so pages is about the debates at the Constitutional Convention, which is an extremely dry read that should not have been included in the first place. Additionally, there is a focus on the battles fought, so if you prefer not to read about battles than this book would not be for you. All in all, Middlekauff did exactly as he set out to do - even with the Constitutional Convention chapters, since this does fall into the premise of his book - and I would recommend this book to anyone interested in the time period. For those who are also interested in the French and Indian War read Anderson's Crucible of War, which is a perfect lead in to the The Glorious Cause.

Middlekauf's book starts off with a far more detailed account of the roots of the American Revolution than are offered by most books; I especially enjoyed the explanation of the Townsend Acts and Pitt's strange withdrawal from running the government. The middle part of the book was a bit unsatisfying and disjointed; he never, for example discusses Benedict Arnold's treason, and the surrender at Yorktown seemed almost anticlimatic. And those looking for a revisionist or even slightly ironic description of the main characters of the tale are going to be disappointed. Middlekauf gets back on form with the tale of how the Constitution came into being; he seems most comfortable dealing with drawing-room politics. All in all, not bad, but not the classic that others of the series have become.

"The Glorious Cause" is an excellent secondary source on the Revolutionary Era. However, in this review I will focus on the presentation of the Kindle edition rather than the book's contents. The Kindle edition has some problems.

The biggest issue is that in two places, large chunks of text appear out of order (e.g., toward the end of Chapter 21 there's a sudden break mid-sentence, followed by several pages of text that belongs at the start of Chapter 22).

The other issues are ones that seem to be shared by many non-fiction Kindle books. The maps and the index are illegible. Also, while the notes are linked (a good thing), you can't page through the notes themselves. Thus, if you click on a particular note and find that it reads "ibid.," there's no easy way to access the preceding notes and find out what source "ibid." is referring to.

Notwithstanding these problems, I'm delighted that Oxford has made "The Glorious Cause" available as a Kindle book. Oxford has been one of the most active Kindle publishers and should be praised for jumping in.

Middlekauf writes a very thorough book on the causes, fighting and management of our Revolutionary War. The exhaustive account of British debate about and guidance of the colonial issue in North America gives background not always found in other treatments of this subject. Although at times it tended toward an academic tone, "The Glorious Cause" is well researched, presented and argued. For the serious student of the War of Independence.