|
The War That Made America: A Short History of the French and Indian War | 
 enlarge | Creator: Simon Vance
Publisher: Tantor Media
Category: Book
List Price: $34.99
Buy New: $22.95
You Save: $12.04 (34%)
New (13) Used (5) from $22.95
Avg. Customer Rating:  22 reviews
Sales Rank: 471053
Format: Audiobook, Cd
Media: Audio CD
Edition: Unabridged
Number Of Items: 7
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.5
Dimensions (in): 6.5 x 5.4 x 1.1
ISBN: 1400101964
Dewey Decimal Number: 973.26
EAN: 9781400101962
ASIN: 1400101964
Publication Date: January 1, 2006
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Shipping: International shipping available
Condition: Brand new item. Over 3.5 million customers served. Order now. Selling online since 1995. Few left in stock - order soon. Code: I20080807022211S
|
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
Apart from The Last of the Mohicans, most Americans know little of the French and Indian Wara "also known as the Seven Yearsa (TM) Wara "and yet it remains one of the most fascinating periods in our history. In January 2006, PBS will air The War That Made America, a four-part documentary about this epic conflict. Fred Anderson, the award-winning and critically acclaimed historian, has written the official tie-in to this exciting television event.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 17 more reviews...
 The wrong book, but worthwhile none-the-less January 31, 2008
Normally I shy away from abbreviated versions of much larger "comprehensive" works. But for some reason I choose "The War that Made America" over "Crucible of War" and I now regret it. As smoothly written as is the former, on almost every page I was eager for more detail, which simply couldn't be included in a 250-page volume. I am now confronted with the likely possibility of either purchasing Mr. Anderson's earlier work to satisfy my hunger (to which I am sure the author would have no objections), or alternatively, just going straight to the touchstone: Parkman. Whatever. Despite my mistake this is a great overview. I especially liked the summary chapter(s) covering 1763 to the outbreak of the Revolution. Recommended.
 Good Overview December 15, 2007
5 out of 17 found this review helpful
In recent years, both Fred Anderson and Colin Calloway have joined the league of Francis Parkman as the foremost authorities on the French and Indian War. In 2000, Anderson established himself with the publication of "Crucible of War", of which, Publisher's Weekly calls THE WAR THAT MADE AMERICA a `companion' book. I would say it is more accurate to call this an abridged version rather than a companion.
If you've read Crucible of War, you may be disappointed here, but if you wanted to read Crucible but considered its 900 pages too daunting, then you will absolutely love this book. Anderson is able to condense the contents of Crucible in a tome roughly one-third the size of the original. Although the minute details are gone, the overall scope of the war is covered quite succinctly.
I would consider Calloway's 2006 book, The Scratch of a Pen, a more enjoyable read as Calloway writes with a flowing narrative that will captivate readers from beginning to end. Anderson's writing has more of a text book feel to it. Extremely educational, but dry at times.
If your desire is just a basic introduction to the French and Indian War, I would recommend reading Parkman. If you're looking for a more modern rendition, Calloway. If you're ready to expand your search and get into the tiny details of the war, read Crucible. If you don't want to invest the time to read such a voluminous volume, read this one.
This book contains a number of wonderful plates and maps. There are even sixteen pages of color plates. One thing the book does not contain, that always disappoints me, is a bibliography. There are, however, eight pages of bibliographic notes that will lead to some great resources for those readers seeking further study.
If you're looking for an easily digestible, general overview of the war, this is an exceptional read.
Solid History devoid of Dogma September 25, 2007
Anderson has put together a real gem here that many people -- many besides Americans -- should get a lot of meaning out of. The themes he develops are very germane but overlooked in the standard New World View of history. Although most Americans see it as self-evident that America should have revolted from Britain, twenty years prior to the beginning of the revolution America was solidly British. The mere thought of revolt would have provoked a laugh.
Indeed why should America revolt at all prior to the revolution: it enjoyed the lowest taxes and was heavily subsidsed by Britain; it was more properpous and the standard of living much higher than Britain. The reason was simply that since the British triumph in what the Americans came to call the "The French-Indian Wars" the security threat to America had been removed. With differing security interests the Americans chaffed as defence taxes (against no real enemies), and treaties with natives designed to protect the tribal rights confined the growing westward drive of the American spirit. This uncontained spirit would later ravish the west and deprive and despoil the Indian nations.
Anderson traces the early threads of these interests. The Canadians had the finest frontier light infantry in the pre-revolutionary era. They regularly took on and beat the British and Americans. But with only 1/10 of the population, whatever early advantages they gained -- and there were many -- only put off the inevitable reckoning. Finally the British gathered strength and defeated the French in classic field maneuvres of pitched battles and sieges. For all the romance the myth of harrassing infantry and slow death in the winderness woods, the ranger fronteirsman played no strategic role in the engagements to conquer North America. The deciding battles were more classic set-pieces, akin to what to was happening in Europe, than many would like to realise.
The Americans and British also unleashed a paranoid warlike anger on the Natives of North America. As Anderson states, prior to this war the Iroquois nation was a true nation and regarded so by the British and the French. It was the third party to be negotiated, placated and coopted in any measurement of power. Natives were no peaceful savages, but nation- state actors cognizant of their rights and ability to win of loose through hitching their cart to the right or wrong alliance. In 1750 they could stand their own against both the British and the French. By 1760 Native tribes would never again be considered state actors in American history. Although Britian tried to hold the line on white encroachment, Americans thought otherwise and the war at last gave full vent to those who looked upon it as a time long in coming to expand and slaughter natives to make way for white settlements.
Once the French were defeated Britain and America no longer enjoyed a common enemy. Hence cooperation and community of interests diverged. Paying taxes (and none really existed except a nominal one for tea) was seen -- some my argue irrationally -- as reason to part ways. But why should American's pay tax for protection against a enemy that no longer existed by 1760.
British agreements with North American Natives protecting them from White encroachment, were also seen as denying the American manifest destiny. It is how this war at first fused and then disolved interests that Anderson tells in an amazing narrative.
I also was profoundly impacted by Anderson's treatment of the Iroquois nation. The traditional notion of Native Americans (both within and outside of Native history) has seen their actions as being ones of enlightened savants at best and unnoble savages at worst -- in tune with nature, but not able to think about their own self-interests. Anderson dispels such foolery and supplants it solid academic research that very much butresses the rational nature of the North American Indian -- oh but if traditional White and native "culturist" historians could do the same. Anderson restores the Native North American to his rightful place -- as a rational nation state actor in international relations. A nation state that was also destroyed by the American nation and ironically more or less protected in Canada (which saw no Indian wars).
A fine book and a wonderful read. Good details in this slim volume.
Fantastic March 11, 2007
5 out of 5 found this review helpful
I've read many books about the American Revolution, and they generally concentrate on events after about 1770. This book gives you a good history of what America and Canada were like between 1720 and 1770. I've picked up more history about the role of the American Indian tribes with respect to interaction with the French, British and colonies than any other book I've ever read. The book is very well written, and moves right along. The author takes you through the alliances with various Indian tribes and the French, British and Colonists. Who knew that Pennsylvania basically hired the Iroquois to act as enforcer and protector against other tribes. The author also takes you through the massacre at Fort William Henry, which was the backdrop to Last of the Mohicans. Reading this book makes me want to see the movie again. Lots more to like in this book including the rise and influence of William Pitt and the impact of events in Europe on the conflicts in North America. Enjoy.
Superb balance of narrative, scholarship and originality February 3, 2007
9 out of 9 found this review helpful
The French and Indian Wars are generally treated as a subtheme in the wider context of the war between Britain and France that in a single year -- 1759 -- gave Britain its Empre -- Wolfe's capture of Quebec, Clive's victories in India which provided the treasures that funded the Industrial Revolution, the capture of the sugar islands that createdSilicon Valley wealth for the new political class, and Hawke's and Boscawen's naval victories that began the ownership of the oceans that soon was extended by Cochrane and Nelson as the consequent protagonists of an entirely new style of sea battle.
The American colonial part of this triumph is generally seen as at most a sideshow, although one of the well-known and great ironies of history is that the entire war was launched -- after a long build up -- by the blunder of a young British officer, George Washington that gave the French the excuse they needed to start what was indeed the first global war.
This excellent, well-written book with, from my own knowledge, its impeccably researched and balanced scholarship, shifts the focus from Europe to the complex four-sided relationships and intense politics of the Iroquois Six Nations, very sophisticated and key to the British success, the British administrators/military commanders, the Colonial players and their French equivalents. It helps explain better than any other book I have read how it was this period and this war that is at the roots of the American Revolution and perhaps made it inevitable.
It is strong in bringing to life key personalities -- not Washington, who is a constant background presence -- but Amherst, Johnson, Montcalm and Vaudreil and their competition and conflicts, and also the extent to which alliances with the Indians who controlled the territories of the Ohio "West" and the betrayals on both sides were fundamental to the war. It also and undramatically shows how the anti-Indian racism emerged and how the Indians were hardly the "Noble Savages" of romantic myth.
It's a great story if you are not familiar with the era and the War. If you are, I think it offers a thought-provoking new slant on an old subject. It is compact and subtle. It does not push any pet topic or thesis.
I recommend this unreservedly.
|
|
|
Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| |
