The Wars of America--By Robert Leckie
- Thread starter SHARK
- Start date
You make a great point, WizarDru. All those exotic mounts have been tamed (after being born in the wild), not domesticated (for generations, on a ranch).Sure you can, they're all just tamed. Elephants are a great example of this: they can be tamed, but can't be domesticated. Now, with Dire and greater animals...you're on your own.
On the other hand, the kind of thing we want to ignore is that very, very few animals have the necessary traits to be either tamed or domesticated. Most won't happily graze in a fenced in area, and most won't treat a human as the alpha leader of the pack.
jgbrowning
Hero
mmadsen said:
and from your above post "A Catholic US Marine, no less! Gasp!"
I was just reminding the folks here that one of the best methods of scholorship is to compare individual accounts from various sources in order to try and remove as much authorial bias as possible. When all recorded records are mostly from one side only, you must be aware of a large authorial bias. My statement really has nothing to do with PC'ness, unless sound historical research methods are considred PC.
I can just as easily see this quote, and i think this shows how quotes only really show how one side of an arguement views a conflict, "They are not men, they are wolves!" an Afgan man yelled, after describing how 26 of his family members were killed by an US bomb.
Not to be inflamatory, but autorial bias is pretty much the number one thing to be aware of when reading ANY historical text.
joe b.
Last edited:
jgbrowning
Hero
not to go overboard
not to go overboard here but, as i havent read the book and this could be false information......
the first reviewer from amazon said this....
"For the non-historian, this book is a good read. It shows the reader how war shaped the American character as much as it made America itself.
The book's flaws are numerous, however. Drawing only from secondary or tertiary sources, many parts of the book are filled with inaccuracies of names, dates, and small details. As serious history for the professional, this book is to be avoided.
On the other hand, this book does do a great service in capturing the ethos of the American fighting spirit. Through countless engagements and battles, Leckie illuminates the individual commander or soldier."
I'm always wary of any book that uses only secondary and tertiary sources... doing so is more akin to a research paper than actual history.
joe b.
not to go overboard here but, as i havent read the book and this could be false information......
the first reviewer from amazon said this....
"For the non-historian, this book is a good read. It shows the reader how war shaped the American character as much as it made America itself.
The book's flaws are numerous, however. Drawing only from secondary or tertiary sources, many parts of the book are filled with inaccuracies of names, dates, and small details. As serious history for the professional, this book is to be avoided.
On the other hand, this book does do a great service in capturing the ethos of the American fighting spirit. Through countless engagements and battles, Leckie illuminates the individual commander or soldier."
I'm always wary of any book that uses only secondary and tertiary sources... doing so is more akin to a research paper than actual history.
joe b.
Last edited:
SHARK
First Post
Greetings!
I tend to think that Mr. Leckie's "bias"--such as it is--is refreshing. Mr. Leckie has written a fine book, one that I think certainly stands well with any other work, and Mr. Leckie has proven to be skilled in writing and in his scholarship.
I think that Mr. Robert Leckie's style will in and of itself, engender those who may be hostile to his writing, and thus it is to be expected that those of such countenance would have such negative views of Robert Leckie's writing.
I can't say I'm surprised at all. Still, Mr. Leckie has made an excellent contribution by way of a fine one-volume book on the history of America's Wars.
A different reviewer posted this:
____________________________________________________
Quote:
": Charles F. Hawkins (see more about me) from Kent Island, Maryland
The taste of the delicious thoughts in Robert Leckie's comprehensive history of America's wars is high treat for the intellectual palate. "Though America can become martial," Leckie informs, "she has never been militarist. The distinction is a great one, and it is hoped that a knowledge of American military history may help us to maintain it." One finishes "The Wars of America" with a sense of wanting more. Leckie has done his job.
A Marine veteran of World War II, Leckie has lived part of the history he relates. First published in 1968, it is good to see updated editions available ... testimony to the staying power of the kind of brisk, insightful history that Leckie presents.
"The Wars of America" is as solid a historical foundation as is available, and provides a splendid starting point for more detailed examinations of different periods of American military history. Although Leckie purposefully did not list his bibliographic sources (they would have been too voluminous to publish), he does cite the primary ones in the introduction. A few cross reference checks show that his research was indeed extensive and his knowledge impressive.
I truly hope that you enjoy this work as I have."
____________________________________________________
End Quote.
It seems that by far the reviews of Mr. Leckie, including my own, are more balanced and accurate concerning Mr. Leckie's writing. I highly recommend the book for everyone to read!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
I tend to think that Mr. Leckie's "bias"--such as it is--is refreshing. Mr. Leckie has written a fine book, one that I think certainly stands well with any other work, and Mr. Leckie has proven to be skilled in writing and in his scholarship.
I think that Mr. Robert Leckie's style will in and of itself, engender those who may be hostile to his writing, and thus it is to be expected that those of such countenance would have such negative views of Robert Leckie's writing.
I can't say I'm surprised at all.
Still, Mr. Leckie has made an excellent contribution by way of a fine one-volume book on the history of America's Wars.A different reviewer posted this:
____________________________________________________
Quote:
": Charles F. Hawkins (see more about me) from Kent Island, Maryland
The taste of the delicious thoughts in Robert Leckie's comprehensive history of America's wars is high treat for the intellectual palate. "Though America can become martial," Leckie informs, "she has never been militarist. The distinction is a great one, and it is hoped that a knowledge of American military history may help us to maintain it." One finishes "The Wars of America" with a sense of wanting more. Leckie has done his job.
A Marine veteran of World War II, Leckie has lived part of the history he relates. First published in 1968, it is good to see updated editions available ... testimony to the staying power of the kind of brisk, insightful history that Leckie presents.
"The Wars of America" is as solid a historical foundation as is available, and provides a splendid starting point for more detailed examinations of different periods of American military history. Although Leckie purposefully did not list his bibliographic sources (they would have been too voluminous to publish), he does cite the primary ones in the introduction. A few cross reference checks show that his research was indeed extensive and his knowledge impressive.
I truly hope that you enjoy this work as I have."
____________________________________________________
End Quote.
It seems that by far the reviews of Mr. Leckie, including my own, are more balanced and accurate concerning Mr. Leckie's writing. I highly recommend the book for everyone to read!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Last edited:
The Iroquois, however, could only make forays or raids. A battle was won or lost in an instant's rush. Stealth and surprise comprised their tactics. A siege was to them an incomprehensible bore, to maneuver in the open a madness. Even so, skulking in the forests by day, charging with a yell out of the dark by night, the Iroquois struck terror into the hearts of the French and came close to achieving the extermination of their enemies.
I'm taking notes for my Goblin Kingdom.
I'm taking notes for my Goblin Kingdom.
I enjoyed this bit on the logistics of Indian-king Philip's war against the white colonists:
He had no solid base of operations, no impregnable position to which he might return to regroup and replan. he had no stores. His war parties lived off the land. Now it was spring and the Indians, denied old hunting and fishing lands, needed to search out new ones if they were to prevent their women and children from starving. And so, one by one, the war parties slipped away, to be defeated piecemeal by the rallying colonists or to brought over to the English cause.
He had no solid base of operations, no impregnable position to which he might return to regroup and replan. he had no stores. His war parties lived off the land. Now it was spring and the Indians, denied old hunting and fishing lands, needed to search out new ones if they were to prevent their women and children from starving. And so, one by one, the war parties slipped away, to be defeated piecemeal by the rallying colonists or to brought over to the English cause.
This quote from the start of Chapter 2 (of Part 1) says a bit about Leckie's gung-ho jingoism:
In American folklore the myth of "the most peace-loving nation in the world" still persists. But the fact is that American history is not ony concurrent with the annals of American arms, but is as firmly woven into it as a strand of hemp in a rope.
Hmm...seems fairly balanced to me. Actually, Leckie opens his preface with an anecdote on our built-in biases, and how his conversation with a Pakistani fellow opened both of their eyes.
In American folklore the myth of "the most peace-loving nation in the world" still persists. But the fact is that American history is not ony concurrent with the annals of American arms, but is as firmly woven into it as a strand of hemp in a rope.
Hmm...seems fairly balanced to me. Actually, Leckie opens his preface with an anecdote on our built-in biases, and how his conversation with a Pakistani fellow opened both of their eyes.
