The War of 1812 [Paperback]

Henry Adams (Author), John R. Elting (Introduction)

Book Description

Publication Date: September 28, 1999

Thid unsurpassed work illuminates the unpopular, blunder-filled War of 1812.

Editorial Reviews

Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.

For civil affairs Americans were more or less trained; but they had ignored war, and had shown no capacity in their treatment of military matters. Their little army was not well organized or equipped; its civil administration was more imperfect than its military, and its military condition could hardly have been worse.

Product Details

• Paperback: 392 pages
• Publisher: Cooper Square Press; 1 edition (September 28, 1999)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0815410131
• ISBN-13: 978-0815410133
• Product Dimensions: 9 x 5.9 x 0.9 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.1 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.5 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (4 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #411,737 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
  • #26 in Books > History > Military > War of 1812

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

46 of 52 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars The Definitive History, July 2, 2000

By 

Kevin F. Kiley - See all my reviews

This review is from: The War of 1812 (Paperback)

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 that war, it still should be Adams!'

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

An extract of the much larger A History of the United States during the Administrations of Jefferson and Madison published almost a century ago, this history of a war the United States almost lost was originally published by the Infantry Journal at Fort Benning, GA. It was, and still is, the best one volume history of that war.

Adams had access to US Government papers and spent almost three years in European archives, many of those references now unfortunately lost because of two world wars. What he gives you is both the military and diplomatic side, and also some interesting views of the events interaction with the larger 'disagreement' going on at the time in Europe centering around Napoleon, Emperor of the French.

What you see is what you get. It is a great story, boldly and accurately told that has stood the test of time. It is highly recommended, and the introduction by Col Elting neatly says it all. The best purely military history is Col Elting's Amateurs! To Arms. Taken together they are incredible-two books you will never forget and will read and reread.

12 of 12 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A close one for the U.S., April 28, 2002

By 

T. Seagraves "jendomaniac" (Texas) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: The War of 1812 (Paperback)

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.

5 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Classic War of 1812, April 8, 2008

By 

Roger Kennedy (USA) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (REAL NAME)   

This review is from: The War of 1812 (Paperback)

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 oragniaztional and 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.