Rating: 
Summary: Fine account of a forgotten battle and war
Review: "In 1814, we took a little trip, along with Colonel Jackson down the Mighty Mississipp"... whoops! I may have been channeling the spirit of Johnny Horton there, but remembering that song causes one to remember the battle it commemorates and the all-too-forgotten war in was a part of. All that most people know of the War of 1812 was that it was the second time we fought and defeated the British. Some may know that that was the war when our great national anthem "The Star Spangled Banner" was penned (though most think it was written during the Revolution or Civil War). Few realize or understand just how important the War of 1812 was to the future of the United States, or just how close this fledgling country came to having its livelihood destroyed. Even those who know a little more about the war may view the Battle of New Orleans as an unnecessary skirmish coming well after the signing of the peace treaty between Britain and America. Fortunately, Robert Remini's book, "The Battle of New Orleans", puts the war into its proper perspective and shows us how important military victory the Battle of New Orleans was.
For those not familiar, the War of 1812 began because the British would not recognize the sovereignty of the United States and kept conscripting its sailors to assist in Britain's war with France. In addition, Britain, along with all other European nations, did not respect the United States in general. The U.S. government believed it needed to take action to secure the safety of its own ships while also sending a loud statement to Europe that this was not a country to be trifled with. So, they declared war on Britain. Aside from a few skirmishes, though, the war was not much of note before the parties met to negotiate a peace treaty. The most notable happenings were the failed U.S. invasion of Canada (still a British colony), the British invasion and burning of Washington D.C., and the famed bombardment of Fort McHenry where the fort's resiliency caused Francis Scott Key to pen our anthem. While the terms of peace were be negotiated, though, the British forces sensed and opportunity to strike a crippling blow the United States by attempting to capture New Orleans, which would give them control of the Mississippi and essentially end all of the U.S. expansion hopes and keep this nation at only a third of its current size and likely would have slowly choked it to death. The U.S., recognizing this threat, sent a ragtag force commanded by General (not Colonel, as from the song) Andrew Jackson to fortify and defend the city against British aggression.
It is Remini's assertion that the ensuing conflict, which at one point included a skirmish where over 1000 British soldiers were killed to only 8 for the U.S., was the first true military victory for this young nation. He contends that the key battles of Saratoga and Yorktown during the Revolution were more surrenders than decisive military victories and, for that reason, Britain still did not respect the United States because they did feel that they had truly lost. Even most of the War 1812 was devoid of any decisive engagements. While Remini's opinion of those last battles of the Revolution are highly debatable, there is no doubting his claim that the resounding victory at the Battle of New Orleans was landmark achievement in the development of United States as a legitimate nation and a fledgling world power. Remini does a fine job setting up the battle and chronicling all the dramatic twists and turns that took place. Reading this book is essential to understanding the importance of the Battle of New Orleans and, on a greater scale, the War of 1812. At just 240 pages, it is a quick read. Yet, it gives the reader a wealth of detail regarding that battle. It's a definite must for any history buff.
Rating:
Summary: Fine account of a forgotten battle and war
Review: "In 1814, we took a little trip, along with Colonel Jackson down the Mighty Mississipp"... whoops! I may have been channeling the spirit of Johnny Horton there, but remembering that song causes one to remember the battle it commemorates and the all-too-forgotten war in was a part of. All that most people know of the War of 1812 was that it was the second time we fought and defeated the British. Some may know that that was the war when our great national anthem "The Star Spangled Banner" was penned (though most think it was written during the Revolution or Civil War). Few realize or understand just how important the War of 1812 was to the future of the United States, or just how close this fledgling country came to having its livelihood destroyed. Even those who know a little more about the war may view the Battle of New Orleans as an unnecessary skirmish coming well after the signing of the peace treaty between Britain and America. Fortunately, Robert Remini's book, "The Battle of New Orleans", puts the war into its proper perspective and shows us how important military victory the Battle of New Orleans was.
For those not familiar, the War of 1812 began because the British would not recognize the sovereignty of the United States and kept conscripting its sailors to assist in Britain's war with France. In addition, Britain, along with all other European nations, did not respect the United States in general. The U.S. government believed it needed to take action to secure the safety of its own ships while also sending a loud statement to Europe that this was not a country to be trifled with. So, they declared war on Britain. Aside from a few skirmishes, though, the war was not much of note before the parties met to negotiate a peace treaty. The most notable happenings were the failed U.S. invasion of Canada (still a British colony), the British invasion and burning of Washington D.C., and the famed bombardment of Fort McHenry where the fort's resiliency caused Francis Scott Key to pen our anthem. While the terms of peace were be negotiated, though, the British forces sensed and opportunity to strike a crippling blow the United States by attempting to capture New Orleans, which would give them control of the Mississippi and essentially end all of the U.S. expansion hopes and keep this nation at only a third of its current size and likely would have slowly choked it to death. The U.S., recognizing this threat, sent a ragtag force commanded by General (not Colonel, as from the song) Andrew Jackson to fortify and defend the city against British aggression.
It is Remini's assertion that the ensuing conflict, which at one point included a skirmish where over 1000 British soldiers were killed to only 8 for the U.S., was the first true military victory for this young nation. He contends that the key battles of Saratoga and Yorktown during the Revolution were more surrenders than decisive military victories and, for that reason, Britain still did not respect the United States because they did feel that they had truly lost. Even most of the War 1812 was devoid of any decisive engagements. While Remini's opinion of those last battles of the Revolution are highly debatable, there is no doubting his claim that the resounding victory at the Battle of New Orleans was landmark achievement in the development of United States as a legitimate nation and a fledgling world power. Remini does a fine job setting up the battle and chronicling all the dramatic twists and turns that took place. Reading this book is essential to understanding the importance of the Battle of New Orleans and, on a greater scale, the War of 1812. At just 240 pages, it is a quick read. Yet, it gives the reader a wealth of detail regarding that battle. It's a definite must for any history buff.
Rating: 
Summary: What Military History ought to be
Review: A fine account. Lucid, flowing prose and an interesting subject. The author is able to relate the details that make battles interesting from the point of view of the common soldier to the officers in charge, yet also connects the events of battle to the war itself and larger diplomatic and political issues thus highlighting their significance. This book also has what some good military histories foolishly lack -- good, detailed battlefield maps that make the action understandable. Take it from a former soldier (US Army 1966-69, Vietnam service 1968-69) you will enjoy this book.
Rating:
Summary: Good "popular history"
Review: After recent plagiarism scandals in the discipline (cf. Stephen Ambrose and Doris Kearns Goodwin), the future of "popular history" has been understandably called into question. So it's refreshing to read Remini's _Battle of New Orleans_.Well-conceived and thoroughly researched, this book focuses not only on the American troops, but also on British forces during their New Orleans campaign. The chapters on the battle itself are acceptable military history; they emphasize the new importance of artillery in the American campaign, even as they describe the demoralizing effects of American sniper fire on British troops. Although Remini's account of the battle is not sufficiently technical to satisfy military-history buffs and specialists, it's more than adequate for the general reader. Remini also creates a fascinating portrait of federal-period New Orleans -- a prosperous, multi-ethnic, multi-racial, polyglot society that seems not so far removed from our own. But he consistently glosses over the one major respect that this society differed: the presence of slavery. The prosperity of New Orleans depended in large part on the slave trade, which probably would have come to an end had the city been conquered by the British. Even more than patriotism, the economic threat might explain the passionate defense of the city -- a defense manned by persons spanning every social class. Still, Remini's book generally exhibits the best characteristics of "popular history." It's compulsively readable, patriotic but not facile, and responsive to historical and contemporary ideas. Highly recommended.
Rating:
Summary: Good "popular history"
Review: After recent plagiarism scandals in the discipline (cf. Stephen Ambrose and Doris Kearns Goodwin), the future of "popular history" has been understandably called into question. So it's refreshing to read Remini's _Battle of New Orleans_. Well-conceived and thoroughly researched, this book focuses not only on the American troops, but also on British forces during their New Orleans campaign. The chapters on the battle itself are acceptable military history; they emphasize the new importance of artillery in the American campaign, even as they describe the demoralizing effects of American sniper fire on British troops. Although Remini's account of the battle is not sufficiently technical to satisfy military-history buffs and specialists, it's more than adequate for the general reader. Remini also creates a fascinating portrait of federal-period New Orleans -- a prosperous, multi-ethnic, multi-racial, polyglot society that seems not so far removed from our own. But he consistently glosses over the one major respect that this society differed: the presence of slavery. The prosperity of New Orleans depended in large part on the slave trade, which probably would have come to an end had the city been conquered by the British. Even more than patriotism, the economic threat might explain the passionate defense of the city -- a defense manned by persons spanning every social class. Still, Remini's book generally exhibits the best characteristics of "popular history." It's compulsively readable, patriotic but not facile, and responsive to historical and contemporary ideas. Highly recommended.
Rating:
Summary: Andrew Jackson the hero
Review: Battle of New Orleans - Robert Remini
This book is about the Battle of New Orleans that took place as the last fight with Britain in the War of 1812. For me, I had to read it at one sitting. Great book.
The battle took place in January 1815, with 2 more attempts by the British, to defeat the Americans after their defeat on the fields of Chalmette.
The book includes 3 maps to support some of the writing as to where the battle was fought and who was where. However, the author goes into a lot of detail explaining which unit was where on the battlefield, and no maps are shown for the kind of detail written.
The book details events before and after the battle.
He notes that a group of states in the Northeast had met in Hartford Ct, and had drafted a proposal to secede from the U.S. The war was going badly, and we had been defeated everywhere, except at Baltimore.
The British had reason to believe they could just brush the Americans off the field of battle, as they had done this in several previous battles, including Washington, which they burned, and Hampton, Virginia, where they raped the women.
New Orleans was the key to the Mississippi, and the British were sending an army south from Canada, and this army was to go north. The armies would meet, and then they would march east to the Atlantic ocean, shredding the American military in its way.
They were the best of the British army, fresh from defeating Napoleon. 15,000 of them vs. 5,000 Americans.
New Orleans was bulging with goods, having been cut off from shipping due to the war. Only the Barataria pirates dared to venture into the Gulf. The British army knew that New Orleans had plenty of booty to share when they won the battle, and lots of women to rape, so they were very much in favor of the battle.
The British endured much to get to the battlefield, but the men thought it worth the prize.
The Brits though, had to deal with Andrew Jackson. He fought the Creeks, allies of the Brits and defeated them before the British army arrived. Had they not been defeated, it is likely that the combination of the Indians and the British army would have defeated Jackson.
Jackson attacked the Indians in Alabama and Spanish Florida, and defeated the Spanish and Indians at Pensacola. The Brits had a fort at Pensacola too, and blew it up when Jackson defeated the Spanish at the 2 Spanish forts defending Pensacola from a land attack. I have read accounts indicating that Jackson was insubordinate, disobeying orders from Washington not to attack the Spanish. Jackson did not get orders not to attack until after the battles were over.
Frustrating a British attack on New Orleans starting from Pensacola, the Brits attacked Mobile.
Jackson's men defeated them there too, successfully defending a fort defending Mobile bay.
This defeat meant that the British could not attack New Orleans over land, the easy way.
They had to attack from the east, in the swamps.
This they did, attacking from lake Borgne.
Having lived in New Orleans, and having seen several movies about the battle, this book corrects some myths.
Jackson had steel gray hair, not the white hair Charleston Heston wig of white hair. Jackson was 47 at the time of the battle. The people of New Orleans rallied around Jackson and his men, and fought bravely. Jackson's men did not defend a bunch of Cajun wimps. There were 3 Lafitte brothers. I did not know that Dominique You was one of them. He has always been portrayed as a former Napoleon artillery gunner.
The author makes no mention of any of the brothers fighting for Napoleon. It is true that the Lafitte pirates were pivotal in the battle, furnishing supplies, and artillery and knowledge of the land expertise. Jean Lafitte became one of Jackson aides.
In spite of this being the best of the British army, the officers made several blunders which cost them the battle, over and over.
1.When they initially got to the battlefield, on December 23, the Brits had enough troops to take New Orleans, and General Keane was urged by his officers to attack then and there with the men he had. Jackson was not aware that they were there. Keane waited for the rest of the army, so the opportunity was lost.
2. The plan on the day of the major battle , January 8, was to attack from both sides of the river. Unfortunately, a dumb Scot officer delayed the boats taking the troops across the river by several hours, thus the attack on the West bank was delayed several hours. The west bank attack was successful, but occurred after the major battle on the east bank, so thanks to the Americans spiking the artillery on the West bank, meant nothing when the Americans were defeated. General Packenham attacked even though he knew his troops were not placed correctly. He was impatient, and had no respect for the Americans.
3. Even after the battle on Jan 8, the Brits tried again to sail upriver and attack New Orleans from the river. Had they been able to get past Ft. St. Phillip, they could have still won. The Americans held Ft. St Phillip, and again New Orleans was saved. This battle is never shown in the movies.
4. The Brits then tried again at Mobile, to make an overland attack from there. This time they took the fort at Mobile. Unfortunately, the message that the Treaty of Ghent had been signed a month earlier arrived, so further attack was called off.
Rating: 
Summary: A Battle of No Importance
Review: During the closing months of the War of 1812, the British attempted an invasion of Louisiana, with the intent of capturing New Orleans. The citizens of the city, the British believed, would welcome them only. Instead, the British encountered dogged resistence orchastrated by one Andrew Jackson, who only had a motley assortment of military and militia units at his command. On December 28, 1814 and again on January 8, 1815, the two sides clashed, and eventually the British were repulsed, sustaining disproportionately high casualties. Tragically, however, the treaty ending the war had be signed on Christmas eve--thus the battle was little more than a useless waste of life. All and all, this was an entertaining read, but I was somewhat bemused by the fact that the author found it necessary to emphasize the fact that such a rag-tag assortment of men had defeated the "best trained army" in the world. Considering the repeated defeats that the Americans had experienced prior to this, and the fact that the British were much more preoccupied with Napoleon, etc., the victory at New Orleans really seems to be a hollow victory at best.
Rating:
Summary: A Battle of No Importance
Review: During the closing months of the War of 1812, the British attempted an invasion of Louisiana, with the intent of capturing New Orleans. The citizens of the city, the British believed, would welcome them only. Instead, the British encountered dogged resistence orchastrated by one Andrew Jackson, who only had a motley assortment of military and militia units at his command. On December 28, 1814 and again on January 8, 1815, the two sides clashed, and eventually the British were repulsed, sustaining disproportionately high casualties. Tragically, however, the treaty ending the war had be signed on Christmas eve--thus the battle was little more than a useless waste of life. All and all, this was an entertaining read, but I was somewhat bemused by the fact that the author found it necessary to emphasize the fact that such a rag-tag assortment of men had defeated the "best trained army" in the world. Considering the repeated defeats that the Americans had experienced prior to this, and the fact that the British were much more preoccupied with Napoleon, etc., the victory at New Orleans really seems to be a hollow victory at best.
Rating:
Summary: Remeni is the "Shelby Foote" of the war of 1812
Review: For me, a Civil War reader, this book was a smidgen out of my target time zone. But it looked interesting, I took a chance with it, and wasn't disappointed! The War of 1812 falls in a personal historical void between the Revolutionary War and the Civil War. I had little idea of the political context for the battle. As it turns out, it is a very fascinating step in the process of America becoming...well, America. That America as a concept is a process, and one that is very much ongoing even today, is something that needs to understood. And this war of 1812 was a very interesting step in that process. For Civil War readers, this book reads like the Shelby Foote Civil War narratives...which is a compliment of the highest order.
Rating:
Summary: Remeni is the "Shelby Foote" of the war of 1812
Review: For me, a Civil War reader, this book was a smidgen out of my target time zone. But it looked interesting, I took a chance with it, and wasn't disappointed! The War of 1812 falls in a personal historical void between the Revolutionary War and the Civil War. I had little idea of the political context for the battle. As it turns out, it is a very fascinating step in the process of America becoming...well, America. That America as a concept is a process, and one that is very much ongoing even today, is something that needs to understood. And this war of 1812 was a very interesting step in that process. For Civil War readers, this book reads like the Shelby Foote Civil War narratives...which is a compliment of the highest order.
|
