Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Review: "Patriot Battles," Michael Stephenson


By Paul Carrier

Patriot Battles is an unusual addition to the ever-growing list of Revolutionary War histories because it focuses in large part on the "how" of the war, its mechanics and logistics, rather than the "who" and the "why."

So, while George Washington and Co. make an appearance or two, much of the book deals with the seemingly mundane facts of life as they were experienced by the rank and file, including weaponry, foodstuffs, uniforms, etc.

This uneven book is divided into two parts, the first of which examines such particulars as the opposing forces; medical care; the wartime roles of women, Indians and African-Americans; and the nuts and bolts of feeding, equipping and arming 18th-century armies.

The second section takes a close look at the strategy and tactics that were used in key battles, each of which gets a short chapter of its own. The inclusion of maps in this section showing troop placements and movements is very helpful, making it much easier to visualize what is described in the narrative. 

Patriot Battles is not without flaws, some of which are quite irritating. More attentive editing would have improved the end result.

For example, author Michael Stephenson defines the "port" side of a ship for the nautically illiterate, which is fine, but includes no definitions of several much more arcane military terms.

At times, Stephenson displays a dizzying fondness for statistics, tossing them about so freely that the reader becomes bogged down in a sea of numbers.

And Stephenson writes at one point that disease accounted for "80-90 percent of all casualties" during the war, only to claim a few pages later that 10,000 of the roughly 25,000 military deaths during the war were attributable to disease. That's more like 40 percent of the casualties.

Perhaps the author did not intend to use "casualties" and "deaths" as synonyms in those passages, but that is not made clear, and the ambiguity is frustrating. Stumbling upon such lapses leaves the reader wondering if the book also includes other, less easily detected, errors or omissions.

An intriguing topic and an interesting read, but a mixed bag.