web site hit counter The Naval War of 1812 (Complete Edition): Causes & Declaration of the War, Maritime Forces of Great Britain and the U.S., Naval Weapons and Technologies, ... on the Ocean and the Great Lakes) - Ebooks PDF Online
Hot Best Seller

The Naval War of 1812 (Complete Edition): Causes & Declaration of the War, Maritime Forces of Great Britain and the U.S., Naval Weapons and Technologies, ... on the Ocean and the Great Lakes)

Availability: Ready to download

The Naval War of 1812, written by the former president Theodore Roosevelt, deals with battles and naval technology used during the War of 1812 between the United States and the Great Britain. Roosevelt's history is considered as one of the best on this particular topic and it had a great impact on the formation of the modern day U.S. Navy. At the beginning, the author give The Naval War of 1812, written by the former president Theodore Roosevelt, deals with battles and naval technology used during the War of 1812 between the United States and the Great Britain. Roosevelt's history is considered as one of the best on this particular topic and it had a great impact on the formation of the modern day U.S. Navy. At the beginning, the author gives the insight of the political and social conditions in Great Britain and America prior to the war. Roosevelt, then, discusses the naval war on both the Atlantic Ocean and the Great Lakes. Finally, the last chapter covers the Battle of New Orleans, the final major battle of the War of 1812.


Compare

The Naval War of 1812, written by the former president Theodore Roosevelt, deals with battles and naval technology used during the War of 1812 between the United States and the Great Britain. Roosevelt's history is considered as one of the best on this particular topic and it had a great impact on the formation of the modern day U.S. Navy. At the beginning, the author give The Naval War of 1812, written by the former president Theodore Roosevelt, deals with battles and naval technology used during the War of 1812 between the United States and the Great Britain. Roosevelt's history is considered as one of the best on this particular topic and it had a great impact on the formation of the modern day U.S. Navy. At the beginning, the author gives the insight of the political and social conditions in Great Britain and America prior to the war. Roosevelt, then, discusses the naval war on both the Atlantic Ocean and the Great Lakes. Finally, the last chapter covers the Battle of New Orleans, the final major battle of the War of 1812.

30 review for The Naval War of 1812 (Complete Edition): Causes & Declaration of the War, Maritime Forces of Great Britain and the U.S., Naval Weapons and Technologies, ... on the Ocean and the Great Lakes)

  1. 5 out of 5

    Ron

    As history this may rate four or five stars, but its poor readability will repel all but the most numbers-oriented naval history buffs. Considering that Roosevelt's goal was to correct representations and misinterpretations on both sides of the Atlantic, perhaps his didactic style can be excused. That and the fact that he started Naval War while still in college. Even given those excuses, this is not a readable tome. Many chapters repeat information and arguments given in previous chapters. And R As history this may rate four or five stars, but its poor readability will repel all but the most numbers-oriented naval history buffs. Considering that Roosevelt's goal was to correct representations and misinterpretations on both sides of the Atlantic, perhaps his didactic style can be excused. That and the fact that he started Naval War while still in college. Even given those excuses, this is not a readable tome. Many chapters repeat information and arguments given in previous chapters. And Roosevelt's dogged destruction of certain previous historians comes across as approaching a personal animus. He may have had a point. Despite over a century having elapsed since he first published and two centuries since the events many of the battles--land and sea--of that conflict remain cartoon misrepresentations rather than fact--even in what passes for history books in today's schools.

  2. 5 out of 5

    Mitch PITEO

    So far, The CV of TR is such that I want to kill myself for lack of effort in life - I have done nothing...yet. John Burroughs the Nature-Writer wrote "Roosevelt was a many-sided man and every side was like an electric battery..." So far, The CV of TR is such that I want to kill myself for lack of effort in life - I have done nothing...yet. John Burroughs the Nature-Writer wrote "Roosevelt was a many-sided man and every side was like an electric battery..."

  3. 4 out of 5

    Eric S

    Interesting read but not for someone who isn't into history and doesn't have at least a passing knowledge of how sailing ships operate. The language is very much 19th Century. The author does a very good job of presenting both sides. The descriptions of vessel weight, tonnage, crew strength and armament are as complete as existing documents allow and are very careful to give both the British and American differences in how ships were rated. A major drawback is the author is very repetitive in his Interesting read but not for someone who isn't into history and doesn't have at least a passing knowledge of how sailing ships operate. The language is very much 19th Century. The author does a very good job of presenting both sides. The descriptions of vessel weight, tonnage, crew strength and armament are as complete as existing documents allow and are very careful to give both the British and American differences in how ships were rated. A major drawback is the author is very repetitive in his denouncement of previous works that are so biased as to be useless. He does a good job the first few times to prove how biased previous authors were but after awhile it gets old. The book shows that after 200 years some things don't change. From the War Department to today's Department of Defense here's a very apt quote, "and the administration of the War Department continued to be a triumph of imbecility to the very last."

  4. 5 out of 5

    Mer

    David McCollough mentioned this book during an interview at the 2017 National Book Festival. I don't recommend it as a light read as it goes into incredible detail of each ship on the various sizes and explains why one ship type, combination of fire power, or crew did better than the others. David McCollough mentioned this book during an interview at the 2017 National Book Festival. I don't recommend it as a light read as it goes into incredible detail of each ship on the various sizes and explains why one ship type, combination of fire power, or crew did better than the others.

  5. 5 out of 5

    Phrodrick

    Bully Plus Broadsides - Wooden Ships and Iron Men What most readers may not know is that this book was something of a standard history at the U S Navel Academy and in British universities. TR was a very much a superior historian, if still a man of his times. This is a critical history and not for light entertainment. TR makes a serious analysis of nearly every important engagement between American units and the British. In every case he is scrupulous about praising and blaming where he believe pr Bully Plus Broadsides - Wooden Ships and Iron Men What most readers may not know is that this book was something of a standard history at the U S Navel Academy and in British universities. TR was a very much a superior historian, if still a man of his times. This is a critical history and not for light entertainment. TR makes a serious analysis of nearly every important engagement between American units and the British. In every case he is scrupulous about praising and blaming where he believe praise and blame is appropriate. In every case he makes known his reasons. Unfortunately, he is furious at a previously published British analysis of the Naval WAR of 1812 and his often repeated damnation of the nationalistic bias of that edition bulks out this volume with too much recycled bile. The presumption that race maters is endemic in this text. There is some admission that -for example- the French built good (better) ships and when well lead could earn victory. In the main there is an assumption that the Americans were the better race, the British , close cousins to Americans were second and all other claimants trail according to how closely their national blood line mirrored the American blood line. For many readers this fact renders this book as unreadable. I suggest that: The Naval War of 1812 stands as document historic in its own right. And that the racism of TR makes it a case in point from which readers can document any number of personal viewpoints.

  6. 4 out of 5

    Lynne Marrs

    Brilliant! If anyone needed reaffirmation of Roosevelt's genius, this is the proof. He parsed an unintelligible war perfectly, including all the naval navigation. All of this and more when he was 22 and writing the book while on his honeymoon! What a guy, what a book! Brilliant! If anyone needed reaffirmation of Roosevelt's genius, this is the proof. He parsed an unintelligible war perfectly, including all the naval navigation. All of this and more when he was 22 and writing the book while on his honeymoon! What a guy, what a book!

  7. 5 out of 5

    Joseph Spuckler

    The Naval War of 1812: A Complete History by Theodore Roosevelt is a history of the US naval battles in the War of 1812. Roosevelt was the twenty-sixth President of the United States, and a leader of the Republican Party and of the Progressive Movement. He became the youngest President in United States history at the age of 42. He served in many roles including Governor of New York, historian, naturalist, explorer, author, and soldier (posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor in 2001 for his role The Naval War of 1812: A Complete History by Theodore Roosevelt is a history of the US naval battles in the War of 1812. Roosevelt was the twenty-sixth President of the United States, and a leader of the Republican Party and of the Progressive Movement. He became the youngest President in United States history at the age of 42. He served in many roles including Governor of New York, historian, naturalist, explorer, author, and soldier (posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor in 2001 for his role at the Battle of San Juan Hill in the Spanish-American War). A few things I remember about the battles of War of 1812. From school: The Battle of Lake Erie, the burning of the White House, impressment, and the Treaty of Ghent. From Johnny Horton, I learned of The Battle of New Orleans. Mostly, I learned it was the final test of American independence. America earned its place at the table of nations and like many wars, it one that diplomacy could have handled better. Roosevelt presents a dissertation on the naval war written at the age of 23. This book was carried on naval ships and used as a text book at the naval academy.  Roosevelt chooses to concentrate on the naval warfare as the land war was pretty disastrous. Although there was a national army most of the forces remained in states as militias. The navy had a more centralized command and with privateers was far more successful although woefully unprepared for war. Roosevelt provides more of a study of the naval battles than a history. Histories are readable in almost a story form. Here the information is more a debriefing or after action review. Ship tonnage, guns, crew and officers, and battle drawings are given. It is more of a study of tactics and how numerical superiority, strategy, and training play a role in victory and defeat. This was the height of British sea power, yet the unprepared United States had plenty of fight. Primary source material from both sides is used and text is heavily cited showing the depth of the work.  Roosevelt had a great interest in the navy and its role in US power projection and defense.   He served as Assistant Secretary of the Navy from 1897 -1898. He resigned to fight in the Spanish-American War.  In his short service, he was responsible reading the navy for war and as president responsible for the "Great White Fleet" tour of the world.  Perhaps, one of America's first role in power projection.  A well-written research project by a man responsible for the modernization of the US Navy and full-time Amerian naval power.  An excellent reference. 

  8. 5 out of 5

    Josh

    This is a work that deserves to be read (or listened to, in my case) on two levels. The first is simply as a piece of naval history, and on that front it is simultaneously thorough, rigorous, and a touch pedantic. Only the most ardent of naval history buffs or Patrick O'Brian enthusiasts will enjoy the detailed battle descriptions (I count myself among at least the latter camp, and I found my attention waning at multiple points). And yet Roosevelt manages to keep a narrative moving forward, and This is a work that deserves to be read (or listened to, in my case) on two levels. The first is simply as a piece of naval history, and on that front it is simultaneously thorough, rigorous, and a touch pedantic. Only the most ardent of naval history buffs or Patrick O'Brian enthusiasts will enjoy the detailed battle descriptions (I count myself among at least the latter camp, and I found my attention waning at multiple points). And yet Roosevelt manages to keep a narrative moving forward, and has moments of gripping military history combined with a mastery of his sources and even-handed evaluation that is remarkable. The second level at which this book should be read is as a window into the mind of TR, one of our most fascinating presidents. That he could produce such a work of first-rate history at a young age (if I remember Edmund Morris' biography correctly, he was working on this while serving in New York politics) and in the midst of a separate career is remarkable. Like reading Winston Churchill's historiography, the reader is treated to a bit of "history as autobiography," in which TR projects his own values on leaders from the past - yet that does not diminish the book's value as quality history, nor the remarkable gifting of the historian-statesman-leader who produced it.

  9. 4 out of 5

    Jeffrey Margolis

    Theodore Roosevelt was the most prolific of all of the US Presidents who wrote books. He was the author of over forty works that transcended his life from his years at college to his post presidency life. The Naval War of 1812 was Roosevelt's first book. It started as his senior thesis while at Harvard and was published after his graduation. The book goes into meticulous detail of the naval engagements during the war, including the names of the captains and officers, ship types and size as well Theodore Roosevelt was the most prolific of all of the US Presidents who wrote books. He was the author of over forty works that transcended his life from his years at college to his post presidency life. The Naval War of 1812 was Roosevelt's first book. It started as his senior thesis while at Harvard and was published after his graduation. The book goes into meticulous detail of the naval engagements during the war, including the names of the captains and officers, ship types and size as well as the nature of armaments on board. Roosevelt does not hide his disdain for Thomas Jefferson, on whom he places blame for not having an adequately prepared navy. The book was so successful that at one time a copy was required to be on board every American naval vessel. Over the years The Naval War of 1812 was required reading at the United States Naval Academy. The irony of this work is that Roosevelt became Assistant Secretary of the Navy and was able to have input into the development of the American fleet. Ultimately, when he became President of the United States, Roosevelt, as Commander-in Chief, would be able to add his own imprint 'The Great White Fleet."

  10. 4 out of 5

    Mark Mears

    The Naval War of 1812 is a classic of American literature. Theodore Roosevelt goes into great detail regarding the battles and decisions made during the war which was largely responsible for making the US Navy a significant force in the world. He also completed a very confident analysis of how the war had been covered by other historians on both sides of the Atlantic. He was quite critical of their biases for their own nations, and was rightly lauded for his efforts to be neutral. When reading t The Naval War of 1812 is a classic of American literature. Theodore Roosevelt goes into great detail regarding the battles and decisions made during the war which was largely responsible for making the US Navy a significant force in the world. He also completed a very confident analysis of how the war had been covered by other historians on both sides of the Atlantic. He was quite critical of their biases for their own nations, and was rightly lauded for his efforts to be neutral. When reading the book it has to be remembered the author wrote the narrative in 1882. Remember what he could not have known then. Also remember he was a 22-year-old college student who completed the work while at Harvard. The book goes into sometimes excruciating detail. Anyone can enjoy it, but at this point it is probably more the venue of history fans. It is brilliant, but not a swashbuckler. Its foresight would become required reading for Naval officers of the time.

  11. 4 out of 5

    Carol

    This rating has more to do with the version of the book that I read (Kindle) than the book itself. The Kindle edition had no readable charts (all lumped together & hard to read) or diagrams, which made understanding what was going on more difficult. It seems that the issue of the book was the historical accounts which had been written up til this book was written. There is constant commentary throughout the book on previous authors & their accuracy, based on government records. The British histo This rating has more to do with the version of the book that I read (Kindle) than the book itself. The Kindle edition had no readable charts (all lumped together & hard to read) or diagrams, which made understanding what was going on more difficult. It seems that the issue of the book was the historical accounts which had been written up til this book was written. There is constant commentary throughout the book on previous authors & their accuracy, based on government records. The British historian James was constantly rebuked! Just because an historian is closer in time to the occurrence doesn't mean he has all his facts straight! This took me too long to read, maybe because I don't understand nautical terminology all that well & have to keep looking things up...like I said, the diagrams would have been a great help!

  12. 4 out of 5

    Bobby

    This was a amazing book utterly impossible to accurately rate simply with stars. The writing is technically methodical and surprisingly eloquent but sophomoric compared to Teddy's later writings (something that will be obvious if you read the version with his additional chapter on the Battle of New Orleans written a decade or two after the first edition.) This is entirely excusable as he was 23 when it was published and all the more amazing considering he did not have significant navel experienc This was a amazing book utterly impossible to accurately rate simply with stars. The writing is technically methodical and surprisingly eloquent but sophomoric compared to Teddy's later writings (something that will be obvious if you read the version with his additional chapter on the Battle of New Orleans written a decade or two after the first edition.) This is entirely excusable as he was 23 when it was published and all the more amazing considering he did not have significant navel experience before beginning research for the book. Additionally, the obvious axe that the author had with William James becomes repetitive quickly. Those shortcomings aside, the book absolutely grabbed me. It made me want to read more about the great age of sailing ships. It caused me to spend an amazing amount of time pouring over old battle maps and looking up navel terminology. It has given me a new love, and that is a great compliment for any book.

  13. 4 out of 5

    David

    Very detailed, somewhat of a rebuttal to Sir James’ misstatements and misrepresentations in his particular account of the war, very scholarly ( for the most part) account of the war. His recounting of the battle of New Orleans however, is very colorful and literary, but nonetheless factual. Where he is not going by one particular set of facts or another, he is careful to explain his reasoning for presenting the information he does choose for these chronicles. This is a book with a ton of technica Very detailed, somewhat of a rebuttal to Sir James’ misstatements and misrepresentations in his particular account of the war, very scholarly ( for the most part) account of the war. His recounting of the battle of New Orleans however, is very colorful and literary, but nonetheless factual. Where he is not going by one particular set of facts or another, he is careful to explain his reasoning for presenting the information he does choose for these chronicles. This is a book with a ton of technical detail about the ships, the number type and length of cannon, the amount of weight each ship could throw, the number of men the number of casualty and what type of casualties.

  14. 4 out of 5

    Robin Banks

    A wonderfully engaging book about naval warfare. Most naval books are all great men doing great deeds on the high seas. In this book Roosevelt explains why the battles are won, and what the victory means, politically and militarily. An example, he says about several battles that hey show nothing more than that, when more people or cannons meet fewer, the more almost always wins. As an exception to this, he describes Andrew Jackson's victory at New Orleans by noting that he laid out his battlemen A wonderfully engaging book about naval warfare. Most naval books are all great men doing great deeds on the high seas. In this book Roosevelt explains why the battles are won, and what the victory means, politically and militarily. An example, he says about several battles that hey show nothing more than that, when more people or cannons meet fewer, the more almost always wins. As an exception to this, he describes Andrew Jackson's victory at New Orleans by noting that he laid out his battlements particularly well. My one complaint is that some aspects of naval gunnery and maneuvers are dull to the modern reader.

  15. 5 out of 5

    Mark Fallon

    It's amazing that Roosevelt wrote this when he was only 23 years old. His language foreshadows his actions as Undersecretary of the Navy and later as Commander In Chief. This was a difficult book to read, as I have no experience with ships or naval terms. However, it was enjoyable to read TR's castigation of the British historian William James. But he doesn't only tackle the Brits, but has some choice words for some American leaders, including Thomas Jefferson. It's amazing that Roosevelt wrote this when he was only 23 years old. His language foreshadows his actions as Undersecretary of the Navy and later as Commander In Chief. This was a difficult book to read, as I have no experience with ships or naval terms. However, it was enjoyable to read TR's castigation of the British historian William James. But he doesn't only tackle the Brits, but has some choice words for some American leaders, including Thomas Jefferson.

  16. 5 out of 5

    Dylan Frendlich

    As someone who isn’t a naval history buff this was a very difficult read not because the topic was not interesting but because of how poorly this was written don’t get me wrong it’s very well researched and sourced but it is very clunky. Honestly only read this if you are into Naval history or else you are just punishing yourself.

  17. 5 out of 5

    Jack Laschenski

    A literary and and scholarly triumph, written when Roosevelt was 23 years old. Britain had 1,100 warships. The U.S. had 15, including Old Ironsides. We won!!!

  18. 4 out of 5

    C. William

    Theodore Roosevelt is one of my heroes, But I just could not get into this book. Down the road Ill try again

  19. 4 out of 5

    Sarjoun Skaff

    More of a historical textbook than intended for a wide audience

  20. 5 out of 5

    Annm

    I can’t comment on Teddy Roosevelt’s presidency because I don’t know that much about it. But I can say that he was a very fine naval analyst.

  21. 4 out of 5

    George Polansky

    A good reference but not an easy read for the general public.

  22. 5 out of 5

    Peter Goodman

    “The Naval War of 1812,” by Theodore Roosevelt (Modern Library paperback, 1999). Ok, so Roosevelt was 23 when this was published. He had just been elected to the New York State Assembly; it was begun as his senior thesis at Harvard. Oy gevalt. Whatever. A masterpiece, for those of us who relish naval history. This is a remarkable piece of historical writing, based on original documents, ships’ logs, letters, official correspondence, study of blueprints and plans. He had to learn about sailing wh “The Naval War of 1812,” by Theodore Roosevelt (Modern Library paperback, 1999). Ok, so Roosevelt was 23 when this was published. He had just been elected to the New York State Assembly; it was begun as his senior thesis at Harvard. Oy gevalt. Whatever. A masterpiece, for those of us who relish naval history. This is a remarkable piece of historical writing, based on original documents, ships’ logs, letters, official correspondence, study of blueprints and plans. He had to learn about sailing while he was writing the book. Extraordinary detail. The previous accounts of the naval war were usually tendentious, biased either toward the British or the Americans, inaccurate, at some points essentially fiction. TR set out to remedy that, and he surely did. He describes each of the sea battles in crisp detail, including how the sails were set, which sails were used, the state of the sea, composition of crews, comparative weights of shot (American shot was underweight, French shot was overweight), training of crews, state of the ships, tactics etc etc. He acknowledges from the start that the American ships were in general better than the British---larger, better built, more heavily gunned. American captains, he says, chosen by merit, were superior to the British. The British, so long accustomed to near invincibility at sea, were very good---but the Americans were better. After a while the British stopped writing about the combats because there were so many defeats. TR says it is difficult to determine the exact tonnage and dimensions of the ships because the methods of measurement were so varied. TR gets in plenty of shots at Jefferson, whom he calls a terrible president, and whom he blames for almost destroying the American navy. He uses the book to severely criticize the state of the navy in 1881—he says it is not even in the top 10 in the world, and its ships wouldn’t stand a chance in combat. Better to spend money on defense and ships now and have them when you need them, he says. TR would have been a famous author without ever having held public office. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nava...

  23. 5 out of 5

    Mark

    Amazing fact 1: Theodore Roosevelt started writing this book as a college student (he was not allowed to use it as a thesis, as his professors wanted him to do something more "usual," like picking a Classical Greek or Roman subject). Amazing fact 2: This book helped him get his position as the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, and ultimately aided him in becoming Vice President (and then President upon McKinley's assassination). Amazing fact 3: This book is *still* considered one of the standard Amazing fact 1: Theodore Roosevelt started writing this book as a college student (he was not allowed to use it as a thesis, as his professors wanted him to do something more "usual," like picking a Classical Greek or Roman subject). Amazing fact 2: This book helped him get his position as the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, and ultimately aided him in becoming Vice President (and then President upon McKinley's assassination). Amazing fact 3: This book is *still* considered one of the standard works on the topic, over a century later. The style's a little dated, but not as much as one might expect. It's written very clearly and concisely, with an energy that carries you through the myriad details. Its principal weakness is Roosevelt's constant harping on British historian William James' competing history of the period... since TR wrote this book partly as a reaction to James, it's understandable, but it gets a bit old after the Nth iteration. Still, one is left amazed by his analysis, attention to detail and ability to articulate his thoughts.

  24. 5 out of 5

    Joe

    This is a thesis prepared by Roosevelt which is probably the most in depth analysis of the War and our Navy and Army. it is not a pleasure book and gets boring when the minutia of the war machines are analyzed and the analyzation is proved by exhaustive research. It is a read that is only reccomeded if you are really, really desireous to know all there is about the War. It deals with land, sea, Great Lakes and river battles that are ignored by most history books as unimportant and unromqntic. It This is a thesis prepared by Roosevelt which is probably the most in depth analysis of the War and our Navy and Army. it is not a pleasure book and gets boring when the minutia of the war machines are analyzed and the analyzation is proved by exhaustive research. It is a read that is only reccomeded if you are really, really desireous to know all there is about the War. It deals with land, sea, Great Lakes and river battles that are ignored by most history books as unimportant and unromqntic. It examines the nuts and bolts of ship design and building as well as fort placement and consruction. I read most of it skiming a lot of minutia. The war ends in a rather tie, but Britian doesn't want to bring the force to bear that it would take to win at a time when all Europe was in conflict and the Atlantic and the Mediterrain as well as the Caribean needed their attention. Teddy became Secretary of the Navy having this in his background. He desered it just for reserching this volume.

  25. 5 out of 5

    Frederick

    If you want details on virtually every naval engagement of the War of 1812 this is the book to read. Roosevelt studied official documents, letters, and histories to sort out conflicting information and try to establish, like a policeman at a crime scene, exactly what really happened. I was really impressed with his thoroughness and his scholarship. I'm sure, though, that other historians might disagree with his conclusions. He even discussed the views of other writers. This is a pretty exciting If you want details on virtually every naval engagement of the War of 1812 this is the book to read. Roosevelt studied official documents, letters, and histories to sort out conflicting information and try to establish, like a policeman at a crime scene, exactly what really happened. I was really impressed with his thoroughness and his scholarship. I'm sure, though, that other historians might disagree with his conclusions. He even discussed the views of other writers. This is a pretty exciting book, with all the ship to ship battles, and its great if you like the details. The weight that was thrown out by broadsides was an interesting fact I never thought about. Very heroic action. I recommend it.

  26. 4 out of 5

    Cole Schoolland

    A good read but really more supplemental to James' "Naval Occurrences...". He focuses a lot on breaking down the comparative force to try and give a more realistic picture of the engaging sides and examine what truly lead to victory. If you are into statistical analysis, this is great. However, for the narrative, I would still recommend James (he just needs to be taken with a grain of salt). Still, a fascinating and necessary addendum to this portion of American History. A good read but really more supplemental to James' "Naval Occurrences...". He focuses a lot on breaking down the comparative force to try and give a more realistic picture of the engaging sides and examine what truly lead to victory. If you are into statistical analysis, this is great. However, for the narrative, I would still recommend James (he just needs to be taken with a grain of salt). Still, a fascinating and necessary addendum to this portion of American History.

  27. 4 out of 5

    B.N. Peacock

    TR did a wonderful job setting the record straight on the various naval battles in the War of 1812. He strayed a little on the engagement between HMS Shannon USS Chesapeake. He was as eager to explain the British victory in terms of why the Chesapeake wasn't at her best that day as the British were to explain away their defeats. My only regret is that the Kindle version didn't list the various diagrams for the battles. TR did a wonderful job setting the record straight on the various naval battles in the War of 1812. He strayed a little on the engagement between HMS Shannon USS Chesapeake. He was as eager to explain the British victory in terms of why the Chesapeake wasn't at her best that day as the British were to explain away their defeats. My only regret is that the Kindle version didn't list the various diagrams for the battles.

  28. 5 out of 5

    Nat

    Just completed a re-read of this classic text. This is an excellent detailed documentation of the actions of the USN during the war. He details the many actions, both well and little known, to the general public. That said, Roosevelt wrote this in a style that is challenging to read and requires significant focus to complete. I gave this four stars for it's content, but would only give it a single star for readability. Just completed a re-read of this classic text. This is an excellent detailed documentation of the actions of the USN during the war. He details the many actions, both well and little known, to the general public. That said, Roosevelt wrote this in a style that is challenging to read and requires significant focus to complete. I gave this four stars for it's content, but would only give it a single star for readability.

  29. 4 out of 5

    Mike

    Highly technical, very dry. This is frankly not much fun to read, even if you are a TR or a War of 1812 enthusiast. Laborious is a better way to characterize it. Among other things makes repeated references to contemporaneous accounts of the war which are by now quite obscure and the critiques thus generally meaningless. If you are reading because you like TR, don't feel guilty for moving quickly on to his autobiography, Rough Riders, or other more interesting fare penned by him. Highly technical, very dry. This is frankly not much fun to read, even if you are a TR or a War of 1812 enthusiast. Laborious is a better way to characterize it. Among other things makes repeated references to contemporaneous accounts of the war which are by now quite obscure and the critiques thus generally meaningless. If you are reading because you like TR, don't feel guilty for moving quickly on to his autobiography, Rough Riders, or other more interesting fare penned by him.

  30. 4 out of 5

    Don

    Ppld.org: Published when TR was 23, bold refutation of earlier accounts of the war, brilliant analysis and balanced tone, inimitable style and robust narrative. A sailors detail of naval battles. Willful systematic perversion of facts, unsupported assertions by historians, scrupulous manipulation of facts, with humility courage and skill American Ships won, Jefferson too visionary, best offense is good defense for Jackson.

Add a review

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Loading...
We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.