4 of 4 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A Proper Sense of Honor: Service and Sacrifice in George Washington's Army, December 30, 2008
A Proper Sense of Honor: Service and Sacrifice in George Washington's Army by Caroline Cox. 2007. 368 pages.
Everyone now and then you read a book which perfectly dovetails with other things you are thinking about, a book which takes you by surprise and wallops you. This book did that for me.
The book is much more then a study in colonial class relations. This book is a study in organizational formation and structure. The author has chosen as the core of the book the human body. All of the chapters generally revolve around how the human body is viewed and treated. The chapters look at the human body in terms of existing societal norms, evolving societal norms and the formation, promulgation and memory of service in the Continental Army.
The author takes us through the formation of the army in 1775 with its necessary hierarchy and how it was imposed using existing models both Colonial and European. It also discusses how the notions of rank, prerogatives, and duty and obligation were viewed, imposed and evolved.
The third chapter was a very informative if uncomfortable chapter as it covered the issues of law and order, punishment and reform. It provides a very quickly understandable view of the concepts of honor and deferment in 18th century society. It also provides a greater understanding of the society from which the Continental Army was formed from and formed to protect. Though the methodologies of the time, this is before the notion of penitentiary and reform had influenced practices, were brutal it did show the degree of leniency that the Continental Army practiced when compared to other armies of the time. Three interesting observations though can be made. The first observation is that Colonial society outside of the military had very few punishment options between whipping and capital punishment. Executions for even repeat petty criminals were quite common. This lack of degrees was a constant complaint of George Washington and yet he was as tied to traditions of the times as most.
The issue of whippings or floggings presents an interesting notion of societal structure. Officers were not whipped and NCO's rarely so. Officers were generally saved the hangman's noose and could expect, if they transgressed to be either reprimanded or cashiered. To 21st century norms and values this seems grossly unfair in terms of the weight of punishment for similar transgressions being ameliorated by social standing. This is where the whole notion of honor enters into the picture. At the bottom rungs of society a person had no reputation and no property to loose or risk, essentially all they had was their own flesh and so in order to impact them you had to impact their flesh. Moving up to middle class you had a degree of reputation and a greater degree of real property or wealth which could be leveraged by fines or confiscation or through public reprimand the reputation could be sullied to the point where the person would be unable to conduct business. In the upper reaches honor and reputation had a huge degree of face to it. The anguish caused by the loss of face or honor was societaly equivalent to a whipping for some one who had nothing else. It is a tale of hitting a transgressor where it hurts the most. A very illuminating study in relations and values.
The third issue is how Washington most often dealt with his men. Reading his letters and edicts you quickly get the sense of 18th century notions of humility and honor when dealing with subordinates. Washington repeatedly admonished his men to their better natures. He attempted to impart honor and value by the way he formed his displeasure. Rather relying totally on fear and negation i.e. don't do this, this is forbidden, do this and you will pay etc... .Washington most often tried to tell his men not what he did not want but rather what he wanted. Instead of saying don't do this he would implore them to be good soldiers, remember their honor and do this. He did not spend his time telling them what he did not want but rather what he wanted. This methodology is also the methodology behind the androgogy practiced by von Steuben.
The book also covers the issues of medical treatment, funerals, and prisoners of war. These issues cover the thoughts and reasons behind the structures and methods as well as how they were carried out and the impact that they had on the participants. This book is a well written, well researched, and well thought out text. The book provides valuable context into understanding societal and military structures and, operations, and aspirations. To the even the casual reader it will provide valuable insight into our structures and operations at work, church, civil society and even or families. It is a very thought provoking and deep, but easily digestible tome.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Excellent discussion of the double standard of the day, January 14, 2007
This review is from: A Proper Sense of Honor: Service and Sacrifice in George Washington's Army (Hardcover)
Dr. Cox has written a very well-researched account of the differing lifestyles, and attitudes towards, officers and enlisted person during the American War of Independence. Without the historical background, it is nearly impossible for people with today's sensibilities to understand the dichotomy. We have long left behind the life when a "commoner" was expected to doff a cap in the presence of a gentleman, or the fact that such individuals were really not held to be as "equal" as some of our documents from the periods would seem to indicate. "All men are created equal" clearly did not apply to everyone. In fact, the breaking down of the the distinction between the gentry and "the common herd" was something that many revolutionary leaders neither anticipated nor advocated (see S. Gordon Wood's The Radicalism of the American Revolution or Revolutionary Characters, for example). Washington himself, as Cox notes, was a huge proponent of the distinction and believed that the accepted superiority of the character and intelligence of "gentlemen" was necessary for military order. Cox makes this accepted distinction crystal clear and shows the implications for how the troops were treated and were considered by the population at large. To our eyes, the distinctions between how officers and enlisted persons were treated seems arbitrary and most unfair. Cox's careful historical analysis allows us to understand this better by understanding the thinking of the day regarding the make-up of the people involed. I would recommend Freeman's Affairs of Honor as excellent supplemental reading.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
