" Andrew Jackson and the Miracle of New Orleans" Topic

Just got this from my public library. Possibly the worse "history" book i have read. Over turns the last 50 years or More of serious research. How Do People get things like this published?

Brian Kilmeade?
He's Bill O'Reilly's disciple.

I have no idea who the author is. But poor research and creating cardboard characters i can understand.

link

How Do People get things like this published?

You've obviously never read "Fifty Shades of Gray"….

I haven't read it, but what specifically is wrong with it? It is easy to say it's poor research when it's written by a non "elite academic". Specifics please.

I thought it was a good (albeit lite) read.

Many thanks to 23rdFusilier and our esteemed editor for the warning.

Also on the subject of the Batle of New Orleans, I can recommend NOT to buy or read "Surrender At New Olreans" by David Rooney & Michael Scott.

First off, the title is a missnomer as the British did not surrender at New Orleans. Notwithstanding the severe beating they underwent in the three Chalmette field battles; the British withdrew intact without American interference nor follow up, soon to take Fort Boyer with view to eventually taking Mobile.

The second travestry is that of the 196 pages of the book only nine are about the Battle of New Orleans, the rest is is Harry Smith's biography (ADQMG to Ross and then Pakenham). In fact the book is really a distillation of the orginal book titled In Love and War about the lives Harry and Juana, his Spanish wife.

Thirdly, there are no footnotes and a skimpy bibliography that contain no primary sources and not even one secondary source book on New Orleans.

Clearly this book was miss titled and published to cash in on the 200th anniverary of the battle and its legendary quality and importance to Americans, to the detriment of good wrting and research. Shameless!

I have not read Kilmeade's book on Jackson. That said, I have read his book on the Barbary Pirates. While the book does not hold up to the academic standards once expected of a professional historian, it was an entertaining read. One should remember that Kilmeade's books are written for the general public and are meant to be as much entertaining as informative. I am a university professor. As a professional historian, sometimes the conclusions that Kilmeade draws or the analogies that he makes with modern events makes me cringe. However, his ability to peak the interest of the general public concerning events in history that are often overlooked should not be dismissed. While his standards may not be up to some of the experts in the field, they are certainly superior to most programs on the History Channel and most popular books that one finds in the category of Historical Non-Fiction. IronDuke596, I am not dismissing your criticisms. However, the sad fact remains, by today's standards Kilmeade's works are on par with many (if not most) books written by professional academics. This is why I assign mostly primary sources as reading in the classes that I teach. And most of other readings that I assign are at least 50 years old.

What put me off on this book? A number of things. First off looking at New Orleans and Jackson in isolation. No mention of the American victories in the Niagara in 1814 or Plattsburgh. How about North Point and Baltimore? Generals Brown, Smith, Scott and many others did something I think; like defeat British forces or fight them on a equal footing . American rifles won the battle of New Orleans? Last i read the American artillery did. But militia (rather then regulars with musiets) makes a better story. American being all good, British all bad and or evil is a turn off to me and a poor characterization.

John LaGale Horton's take on the Battle of New Orleans may have caused most of the misconceptions held by average Americans about The War of 1812.

YouTube link

Bad history is bad history. This book on New Orleans is nothing but hagiography on Jackson. This and the other two books by this same author are not very good nor are they accurate.

There are much better books on all three topics by authors who actually did their homework.

For New Orleans specifically, the best book on the subject is British at the Gates by Robin Reilly.

Just prior to the 200th anniversary reenactment of the Battle of New Orleans, a friend of mine sent me a copy of a PowerPoint presentation on the battle written by a history professor at one of the local universities with a request for a critique. Fortunately,the job didn't take very long; there wasn't a single accurate statement in the whole thing and this from a man teaching at an institution that is a five-minute drive from the battlefield.

The PBS documentary aired locally was just as bad, if only because it completely ignored the presence of Regular Army troops in Jackson's army.

A side note: am I the only person left in the English-writing world who knows that interest is "piqued", not "peaked". This runs a close second behind "all intense and purposes" on my list of solecisms that rate the death penalty.

LT

Interesting information, thanks for the explanations. I will definitely not expect too much from this book.

They've also done a documentary based on the book, it was on TV last night. I saw part of it, seemed OK.

Isn't that the battle where Charlton Heston, Yul Brynner and Charles Boyer all fought side by side?

Dan
YouTube link

You've obviously never read "Fifty Shades of Gray"….

That is that uniform reference book for Confederate armies 1863-65 right?

Isn't that the battle where Charlton Heston, Yul Brynner and Charles Boyer all fought side by side?

Charlton Heston's portrayal of Jackson was excellent. Charles Boyer was always excellent.

That's just about it for that movie.

The book on Jefferson and the Barbary Wars is nothing but blatant hero-worship of Jefferson, who does not deserve it.

It's a waste of paper and good printer's ink.

"The book on Jefferson and the Barbary Wars is nothing but blatant hero-worship of Jefferson, who does not deserve it."

thank you! Could not agree with you more!