Rating: 
Summary: Informative and a surprisingly quick read
Review: Don't let the size of this book daunt you -- it is well written and chapters are in easily digestible chunks. Anderson has put together a great overview without sacrificing a necessary level of detail. It is much deeper than just the battles, but delves into the politics and diplomacy of the players involved as well as giving a look at many of the important personalities. Perhaps most interestingly, he talks about Native American policy vis-à-vis the two colonial powers. Recommended for anyone interested in their period of North American history and a good backgrounder for those interested in the American Revolution.
Rating: 
Summary: Best History I've Ever Read
Review: I received this book as a gift for my 18th birthday. I was not looking forward to read this massive volume, but very quickly, I couldnt put it down, and finished this book in a week and a half. I avoided TV, the internet and even sleep to read more.Anderson, like William Manchest, author of "A World Lit Only By Fire", are great story tellers, and informative. Anderson shows the enormity of this war, the great span of the first world war, which was fought on the fields of Prussia, mountains of Appalachia, trade routes of South East Asia and over the sugar of the Carribean. My words do not give this book justice, to put it simply, it is a great read and I recommend it to anyone. -student in Scotland
Rating:
Summary: Very Good
Review: In Crucible of War Anderson provides a compellingly written and authoritative look at the Seven Years/French and Indian War. He goes deep into depth about the power politics of 18th century North America and does a good job of showing the Native Americans as both sophisticated societies and cultures that were very alien from that of the white settlers. He does a lot of work placing the war in the context of the world politics of the time. Anderson does come to some curious conclusions sometimes (such as his belief that the massacre of Braddocks troops was caused by their discipline and proffesionalism). There's also a slight Anglo-American bias in the book. While he goes deep into the thinking of the British leadership such as Pitt there is no discussion of policy making amongst the French leadership. Also curiously for a book which does so much to establish the Seven Years war as a world war Anderson stays mostly to the North American theatre. While he'll spend chpaters on single campaigns in the North American woods he will devote only a part of a chapter here and there to operations in Europe and elsewhere. Particularly bizzarre is his relegation of the British conquest of Bengal, perhaps the most significant event of the war, to only an offhand comment. Anderson also has a slight pro-American bias. The British commanders are all portrayed as somewhat stuffed shirts and it is Anderson implied conviction that the British needed to bend to accept the slipshod colonial realities rather than trying to instill some notion of civic duty in the unruly colonists. Still Crucible of War is a fine book and a very good source for anyone wishing to learn about the Frnch and Indian War.
Rating:
Summary: too much
Review: I thought this was a good book that could have done with leaving some footage on the cutting floor. The story is at times gripping, and Anderson has worked. But I felt in the end that I preferred the original Parkman take rather than this reshoot.
Rating:
Summary: A layout that's every history reader's dream!
Review: After reading "Crucible of War," my first question was "Why can't other history authors lay out books as reader-friendly as Fred Anderson?!"
Although Anderson's writing is not as interesting as Robert Massie and his information contains a few gaps in it, the beauty of this book is the layout. It has everything an avid history reader could ever want.
The first thing that will catch your eye is the maps in the first few pages. Anderson has included nine maps covering the areas he discusses in the 862-page book (746 pages of text) showing key cities, rivers, forts, easy-to-read topography, and indian tribal lands. Finally, a book where the reader doesn't have to scramble for an atlas every other page or use another book's maps to figure out where things are. Every key item Anderson hits on will be easily labeled in his maps. The only thing missing on the maps are troop movements, but with his descriptions in the text, it's easy to figure out where everybody is. The second thing about the layout is the quick referencing tools. Anderson has divided the book into 10 parts and 74 chapters. Before each part, he gives a one paragraph summary as to what the major events are in the section. Before each chapter, he lists the month and date in which the chapter's topic takes place, giving the reader an easy chronology to follow throughout the book. Another feature is the illustrations. Anderson has included over 50 illustrations of people and places spread throughout the book which gives the reader a view into what the towns looked like and the style of dress in the period. The pictures also help to put a face on the major players in the book. The book can also be an outstanding reference tool for college students. Aside from the quick references within the chapters, in the back is an 85-page Notes section and a 25-page Index. The Notes section contains more information on the chapter footnotes and where Anderson got the information in case the reader would like to further delve into the topic. What more could a student ask for? As for Anderson's writing, I found it to be generally easy reading (in comparison to other history works) that has a wealth of information. He's very complete in discussing his selected topics and I never found his work to be dragging. And although he skips back-and-forth between the colonies and the continent, it never was confusing.
If there was one thing missing, it was more coverage of the war in Europe. Anderson includes information on who was fighting whom and who won which battle, but he does not go into the depth of the battles like he does for the conflicts in the colonies.
The last section of the book covers the impending crisis that was brewing for the British in North America. It reminded me very much of Massie's "Dreadnought," where it covers the escalating tensions, but very appropriately stops short of getting into the actual armed conflict. I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in colonial history, the founding of the United States, or military history. And if you're a college student, you will not find a better reference work!
Rating:
Summary: Rather long.
Review: This is a rather large book (746 pages in the main body, another 88 pages of footnotes). Actually, I only finished the first portion - a bit over half - up through Amherst's capture of Montreal, which effectively ended French control of Canada (or New France). The second part of the book deals with continuing conflicts with Indians and the growing unrest of the British colonies. Maybe I'll come back to that some day.
There is a tremendous amount of detail in this book, covering a period about which I know relatively little. It starts off with an incident in Jumonville's Glen in the Ohio Valley in May 1754. A small Virginia military force led by Lieutenant Colonel George Washington ambushes a small party of French regulars. The French quickly surrender, but events get out of control. Before Washington can stop it, Indians accompanying his force massacre the French commander (Lt. Jumonville) and several of his men. This is the spark that ignites the French and Indian War.
There are a few drawbacks to the book. On the plus side, there are several maps towards the beginning of the book that include just about every locale mentioned in the text. Sprinkled throughout the text are a collection of fine contemporary maps and sketches of the various forts and battlefields mentioned in the text. These are extremely interesting. However, there is a deficit of maps depicting approach marches and topography. This is a relatively minor inconvenience, however.
An interesting point Anderson makes is his contention that General Wolfe's capture of Quebec was really just dumb luck rather than a masterstroke by a military genius. In fact, he contends that General Wolfe was so ill and demoralized that he landed above Quebec and engaged the French in order to die a military death - to commit suicide, as it were - and then let his second in command, whom he despised, extricate and withdraw the force. In the event, the battle becomes the pride of Great Britain, and he gets a hero's death far beyond anything he could have expected. Anderson also downplays the importance of the fall of Quebec, subordinating it in importance to the naval battle of Quiberon Bay in which the Royal Navy defeated France's capability to succor the survivors of Quebec and thereby dashed France's hopes of retaking it.
This is an excellent book, although I would have preferred more coverage of Rogers' Rangers. It's length, however, couldn't hold my interest
Rating:
Summary: Early American history in context
Review: Can a professional historian produce a book that represents both a contribution to scholarship and a narrative interesting and accessible to the reading public? Fred Anderson answers the question affirmatively in his "Crucible of War" a comprehensive narrative of the Seven Years' War. The great value of Anderson's work is that it places the Seven Years' War in context. The French and Indian War, as it has come to be known in American historiography, was but part of a larger, global struggle for imperial supremacy. The great value of Anderson's study is that he places the war in the context of this larger conflict. Ample (and justified) attention is paid to political developments in England, to battlefields in continental Europe, in India and the Carribean. The result is that the reader learns much of the differing British and American perspectives preceding the American revolution. Anderson's narrative proceeds in a chronological fashion (as well it should) and is filled with vivid descriptions of the battles, political maneuverings and major personalities which animated the War. For one relatively uninformed about American colonial history, I found this work fascinating, very well written and a welcome analysis of the antecedents of the Revolutionary War period. It is also a much more manageable read than the cumbrous, multi-volume study of Lawrence Henry Gipson, upon which Anderson relies heavily. This will surely be regarded as the best one-volume synthesis of the Seven Years' War in North America for many years to come. I would recommend it to anyone interested in American colonial history, the British Empire or even 18th century military history.
Rating:
Summary: Have A Drink ...
Review: Before you begin a session reading this one, have a drink -- you'll need it. This is basically a reference book with a plot and that plot is to get you thru the war. If you need to know the exact details of every person, place, and thing at the expence of ease and entertainment factor then this is the book for you! I would say it is best considered a reference book than anything else and in that capacity it is very good.
Rating:
Summary: Long, but worth the effort
Review: Let's get one thing straight at the onset: this is not an easy book to read. For me, there were numerous references to unfamiliar American Indian tribes, unknown British generals, and a host of geographical names that all sounded exactly alike; consequently, I had to backtrack several times to clarify who was fighting whom and where. It was, however, a very rewarding book to read and worth the extra effort. It completely revamped my previous (misguided) impressions of the French and Indian War, impressions, granted, that lingered from elementary and high school history classes long ago from which I gathered the idea that the war was a local, American conflict in which George Washington showed the British how they should fight the American way, and which led to the colonists realizing they did not need England any longer so a few years later, they declared independence. (Naive, yes, but some of those ideas instilled early on die very hard.) In a logical, stepwise manner, Anderson explains how the French and Indian War was part of a global conflict, illustrates the social conflict between the colonists and British soldiers, and clarifies the different allegiances of various tribes of American Indians (to mention but three of the many well-developed themes in this book). At the same time, he gives detailed descriptions of the battles, political infighting in England, and simultaneous European developments. Pulling all of these strands together is no small task, but Anderson accomplishes it admirably and, best of all, in extremely readable prose. There are also ample pictures and maps (to help sort out all the place names), a detailed index, and extensive end notes.
Rating:
Summary: Crucible Falls Short of being Deffintive work on this Subjec
Review: This is an admirable effort to cover all aspects of the Seven Years War in North America. Most readers are not familar with the size and scope of this world wide conflict in the 18th century which had far reahing results beyond the America's. What the author has tried to do is tie in all the conflicts that were going on in Europe, the Carribean, and India, and relate them to events occuring in North America. This is an admirable concept, and one which needs to be done in order to have a greater understanding of the period. The author has also tried to carry the story beyond the French and Indian War and explain the gradual drift that lead toward eventual Revolution in Britain's colonies. The author's main thesis is that for too long we have simply studied the events leading up to the American Revolution without considering the earlier period. This is all laudable and good, but where the book falls short is in its military descriptions of the French and Indian War itself. Many of the battles and campaigns described are scant in their details. The author also spends too much time with rather dull Indian negotiations. True these were important events, but their description is too long. I would have preferred a more comprehensive account of the war itself, which has not been done in any recent works. For a book comprising over 700 pages, one should emerge with a very complete account of the conflict. The book would have done better with just the French and Indian War and perhaps Pontiac's rebellion. There has already been alot written about colonial America working toward Revolution with Britain. A glossary of British and French regiments which served during the conflict also would have been nice. Notwithstanding these shortcomings, this is still an impressive historical work. The writting is clear and flows nicely. But it is not the deffinitive work on the subject. Those wanting that should still refer to Francis Parkman and his volumes on the French and Indian War.
|
