Niagara 1814: America Invades Canada

Barbuto's main thesis seems to be that the American militia gave a better account of itself in the war than most historians give them credit for. Is this a valid point? He cites the battle of Chippewa as one example where Porter's militia roughly handled the British-lead Indians and Canadian Militia, but even still the US Militia broke when confronted by Pearson's Light companies. Scott had to use Jesup's 25th Infantry to cover his left flank during the battle after Porter's militia were streaming to the rear. Granted, the militia did better here, but they still could not stand up to regulars.

At Lundy's Lane Porter's 300 odd men from his brigade gave a pretty good account of themselves, but the were defending, always easier for militia to do, and in the end along with the rest of the US army they retired from the field giving Drummund's battered British regulars a hard fought victory.

Under Gaines at the sortie of Fort Erie the Militia did manage to overrun some British gun emplacements, but the battle becomes a confused affair in the rain, and the British reserves from the 6th & 82nd foot shatter the American militia with heavy vollies as they mill around in the captured British works. The fighting also took place in broken ground and was not a stand up fight, also more favorable circumstances for US militia. These facts are
not mentioned in Barbuto's work. The American militia can do adequately when properly lead, but even on these occasions they really can't stand up to British regulars, as much as Mr. Barbuto would like to make us think they could.

The book spends a lot of time going over the first two years of the war. I thought a bit too much time was used covering this background information which can be found in many of the other general histories on this conflict. Also, the author repeated information in this background study.

The main strength of this work is the operational perspective it provides on the Niagara campaign. Barbuto's work is basically a study of the campaign's background, preparation and exicution. As such it succeeds adequately. But those seeking a more detailed description on the major battles of Chippewa, Lundy's Lane and Fort Erie should read Donald Grave's work on these subjects. Where Mr. Barbuto excels is in his analysis of the battles and how they shaped the 1814 campaign. He provides cogent reasons for why certian decisions were made, and how they influenced events. This to me is the main strength of this book, which sets it apart from the geneal histories of the conflict.

Barbuto gives too much attention trying to prove that the American army was the equal to the British after Scott's intensive training. Again, the only clear-cut victory of the campaign in the open is at Chippewa, where Scott's spendid brigade bests the British in a fair firefight. At Fort Erie they do heavily repulse the British assult, but this is not a fair fight in the open. Fortunately Barbuto does not make the twin mistakes of claiming the British attacked in colume or that they
were routed at Chippewa. At Lundy's Lane the Americans fought hard, but in the end they retreated and give up the guns they captured from the British. Even at Fort Erie where Gaine's sortie makes initial progress, the attack bogs down and the British repulse the attack.

Given these circumstances it is difficult to support Mr. Barbuto's claim that after Chippewa American regulars and militia never gave ground again. In this regard the author allows his nationalism to unbalance his perspective somewhat.

Despite these drawbacks, this is still a worthwhile overview of the 1814 campaign. There is a lot of information about US regiments and leaders, while somewhat less on British units and their commanders. The perspective is mostly seen from the American side, with some attempts to describe what the British were doing. Probably for the most detailed and non-biased accounts of the battles of 1814 Donald Graves remains the best, but Barbuto has made a worthwhile effort. It would be nice if he or another author might do the same analysis on the 1812 or 1813 campagns, but few American historians want to study this embarrassing aspect of the war in any depth! Can we blame them!Deffinitely a good buy for War of 1812 fans if the slight pro-American bias is taken into account.


Great overall view of the Niagara 1814 Campaign   March 10, 2002
 3 out of 3 found this review helpful

I found Mr Barbuto's book well written and very easy reading.
He not only covers the personalities and strategies of the 1814 campaign but also reviews each engagement from both British and American points of very, opportunities lost, blunders as well as succesful strategies and places all in the context of the personalities involved.
The only shortfall may be alittle slowness to the beginning of the book as Mr Barbuto sets the stage and puts the action in context.


A native of the Niagara Frontier brings history to life.   August 2, 2001
I grew up in the Niagara Frontier but I only knew of these battles by the plaques on the side of the road or rare weekend visits to the old forts. This is a professional and thorough treatment of a history that was all around me, hidden no longer. Thanks for this book and the excellent work Dr. Barbuto.


A GREAT BOOK   July 24, 2001
 9 out of 10 found this review helpful

RICH BARBUTO IS MY DAD. HE GAVE ME A COPY OF HIS BOOK FOR ONE OF MY SCHOOL BOOK REPORTS. THE FIRST SEVEN CHAPTERS PUT ME TO SLEEP. BUT AFTER THAT I COOULDNT PUT IT DOWN. AS ONE OF THE PUBLISHER'S REVIEWERS SAID " ANY PERSON INTERESTED IN THE WAR OF 1812 OR ANY MILITARY HISTORY REALLY SHOULD READ IT. IT WAS RATHER LONG FOR AGE, BUT I REALLY LOVED IT.

A.F. BARBUTO


A correction in the introduction   January 19, 2001
 4 out of 15 found this review helpful

I can't rate this book because I haven't read it. However, in your introduction you state that Richard Barbuto is the first to write a comprehensive history of the War of 1812, which -- unless you really mean the first American writer to do so -- is not true. Pierre Berton, Canada's best-known writer of history, wrote a two-volume, comprehensive history of the war some 15-20 years ago. And he was resolutely neutral in his approach to the subject -- Mr. Barbuto would certainly have read that work in the course of his research and would probably agree with me.

I know that Pierre Berton approached a number of U.S. publishers after his work became a best seller in Canada. All turned him down because, they said, it did not take an American point of view; it was too neutral.

I'm not in any way trying to demean Mr. Barbuto or his work, just remind my American neighbors once again that we're part of this continent, too. We share with you both its history and the experience of living here. When we write about that experience, as we frequently do (and do so capably and conscienciously) we deserve to have our efforts recognized, even if your own book publishers don't think you'll appreciate our point of view.

Sincerely,

Jerry Lawton