What do you think?
Rate this book
Winning of America #1
The Frontiersman (Narratives of America) by Allan W. Eckert
The critically acclaimed, award-winning author of A Sorrow in Our Heart brings to life an event that marked a major turning point in the history of the American frontier--the settling of the Ohio River Valley. "Compelling reading--an epic narrative history."--Publishers Weekly.
Mass Market Paperback
First published June 1, 1967
1267 people are currently reading
7774 people want to read
About the author
Allan W. Eckert
80 books293 followersAllan W. Eckert was an American historian, historical novelist, and naturalist.
Eckert was born in Buffalo, New York, and raised in the Chicago, Illinois area, but had been a long-time resident of Bellefontaine, Ohio, near where he attended college. As a young man, he hitch-hiked around the United States, living off the land and learning about wildlife. He began writing about nature and American history at the age of thirteen, eventually becoming an author of numerous books for children and adults. His children's novel, Incident at Hawk's Hill, was a runner-up for the Newbery Medal in 1972. One of his novels tells how the great auk went extinct.
In addition to his novels, he also wrote several unproduced screenplays and more than 225 Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom television shows for which he received an Emmy Award.
In a 1999 poll conducted by the Ohioana Library Association, jointly with Toni Morrison, Allan W. Eckert was voted "Favorite Ohio Writer of All Time."
Eckert died in his sleep on July 7, 2011, in Corona, California, at the age of 80.
Eckert was born in Buffalo, New York, and raised in the Chicago, Illinois area, but had been a long-time resident of Bellefontaine, Ohio, near where he attended college. As a young man, he hitch-hiked around the United States, living off the land and learning about wildlife. He began writing about nature and American history at the age of thirteen, eventually becoming an author of numerous books for children and adults. His children's novel, Incident at Hawk's Hill, was a runner-up for the Newbery Medal in 1972. One of his novels tells how the great auk went extinct.
In addition to his novels, he also wrote several unproduced screenplays and more than 225 Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom television shows for which he received an Emmy Award.
In a 1999 poll conducted by the Ohioana Library Association, jointly with Toni Morrison, Allan W. Eckert was voted "Favorite Ohio Writer of All Time."
Eckert died in his sleep on July 7, 2011, in Corona, California, at the age of 80.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 449 reviews
September 19, 2019
“The ugly image of Chief Logan's pregnant sister, who had been shot, hung by her wrists and her belly slit open, had not been forgotten. [Jacob] Greathouse and his wife had been tethered each to a different sapling with a loop running from neck to tree. Their bellies had been opened just above the pubic hairs and a loose end of the entrails tied to the sapling. They had then either been dragged or prodded around so that their intestines had been pulled out of their bodies to wind around the trees as they walked. Mrs. Greathouse had apparently died before getting much more than half unwound, but Greathouse himself had stumbled along until not only his intestines but even his stomach had been pulled out and wound into that obscene mass on the tree. They had been scalped and burning coals stuffed into their bodies before the Indians departed…”
- Allan W. Eckert, The Frontiersmen: A Narrative
In order to discuss Allan Eckert’s The Frontiersman, we must start with the very first line on the very first page. It is from the Author’s Note, and states with an admirable – and as it turns out, unearned – sense of confidence.
“This book is fact, not fiction.”
That is not true, unfortunately. And it is something that must be grappled with, in dealing with a beloved entry into the canon of early American history.
But before we get to what The Frontiersmen is not – to wit: fact – let us begin with what it sets out to be.
Starting in 1755 and ending in 1836, The Frontiersmen (the first entry in Eckert’s relatively famous The Winning of America series) covers a big swath of early American history. As the title implies, it is focused on the frontier, and of the Indian Wars that flared and spattered like grease fires at various points in the Northwest Territory. Eckert corrals this sprawling tale (despite the corralling, it is still 588 pages of text) by focusing much of the narrative on Simon Kenton, a contemporary of Daniel Boone who never quite achieved Boone’s ubiquity.
In attempting to determine why The Frontiersmen is so popular – at least relative to other histories of this era – I decided it has much to do with the choice of Kenton as protagonists.
Eckert was clearly enamored of the “big frontiersman,” and describes him in a drooling, fetishistic manner: Tall, blue-eyed, auburn-haired, and heavily muscled (the muscles lovingly delineated in the mind’s eye). When first introduced, Kenton is a powerful-but-ungainly youth. However, after a section that can only be described as a training montage, he levels-up in record time. Soon, Kenton is a crack shot; an expert at shooting and reloading while on the move; an endurance runner who can lope along all day without getting tired; and a master scout, who can track a fart in a hurricane.
Essentially, Kenton is a superhero, whose superpower is killing Indians. This might be a bit disconcerting for modern readers. Yet Eckert neatly avoids this trap by making the Indians, especially the Shawnee leader Tecumseh, into equal players in this drama. (I’d say this is an almost fifty-fifty dual biography. It skews heavily towards Kenton in the first half; then, as Kenton ages out, the storylines shift to Tecumseh). Eckert’s interest in the various Indian tribes is not feigned or patronizing. He is genuinely fascinated by their language, customs, and war aims. The Indians in The Frontiersmen are not hapless victims; they are geopolitical players. Thus, Eckert is able to present an old-fashioned golly-gee-whiz adventure of a white man in the woods, without having to deal with all the baggage that typically encumbers such a premise.
Even if we only accept a percentage of his escapades as true, Kenton lived a remarkable life, filled with bloody battles, close encounters, and thrilling chases. In my opinion, though, Eckert hides the essential elements in a plodding, often pedantic style. Instead of carefully picking and choosing the important moments to focus on, Eckert prefers to go step by step. There are whole sections in The Frontiersmen that are devoted to the naming of random counties in Kentucky.
Several times I came close to the point of quitting. But then, just when I was about to set this down, Eckert would deliver a gripping set-piece, such as the Battle of the Wabash or the graphic description William Crawford’s torture at the stake.
That said, it’s time to get back to that opening line: “This book is fact, not fiction.”
The most notorious aspect of Eckert’s style is his reconstructed dialogue, a technique that he explains in his Author’s Note. Essentially, he took the information he purportedly found in primary sources and used it to create dialogue for his characters, giving a novelistic flair to his scenes. Along with the dialogue, he adds internal thoughts and mannerisms that could not possibly be known to any but the historian skilled in seances.
If you are a purist, this is an academic crime, pure and simple.
In all honesty, it did not bother me too much. A lifetime of studying history (and over a decade parsing contradictory police reports as a criminal defense attorney) has taught me an important truth about truth: That no two people have ever perceived and remembered an event in the same way. What we think of as “objective” history is really just a best-guess based on the strongest evidence. That’s especially true when we are putting words into people’s mouths. We all want to believe that Nathan Hale uttered his famous “I only regret I have but one life to give for my country” before being hanged, but the actual evidence for this is…well, let’s just say that Eckert is probably more accurate with his “invented” dialogue than whoever started the Hale myth.
(An aside about the dialogue: It’s terrible! If you’re going to make something up, at least make it good. Eckert’s imagined conversations are either tonelessly expository, hopelessly leaden, or outright embarrassing. At one point, a male character says to a female character: “Your breasts are ripe melons.” I would love, love, love to know in what library Eckert found that particular historical chestnut).
So, let’s leave aside the fake dialogue, and get to the real problem. The shoddy history.
If The Frontiersmen is the only book you read about this particular period in American history, you can absolutely be forgiven for placing your trust in Eckert’s work. He claims to have spent seven years researching the thing; he has citations (though they are not pinpointed to claims made in the text); and he writes with absolute assurance.
But if you have read about this period outside of The Frontiersmen, you will notice that perhaps Eckert’s certainty is not wholly justified. At first, this manifested itself in small ways. To take one example – since I just crossed the 1,000 word mark – there is the issue of Jacob Greathouse. Eckert claims that it was Jacob who triggered Lord Dunmore’s War in 1774 by slaughtering relatives of the Mingo warrior Logan along Yellow Creek. However, other sources (such as Glenn Williams’s Dunmore’s War) attribute the massacre to Jacob’s brother, Daniel. Moreover, Eckert claims that Jacob was brutally tortured and killed (excerpted at the top), while other sources say that the unfortunate Greathouse torture-recipient was another brother, Jonathan.
These are quibbles, of course, but telling.
The biggest problem here – calling in to question so much else that Eckert has written – has to do with the Shawnee Chief Blue Jacket.
According to Eckert, Blue Jacket was actually a white man named Marmaduke Van Swearingen. When I first read that unlikely name, my BS detector hit DefCon 1. After further research, it turns out that the name is legit, and that a man bearing the colorful appellation was apparently captured by the Shawnee. This somehow morphed into the legend that Van Swearingen was Blue Jacket. That legend, however, came into being decades after the events recounted here, from sources virtually no serious historian trusted.
And for good reason. Marmaduke Van Swearingen was not Blue Jacket. Likewise, Blue Jacket was not Van Swearingen. This was demonstrated through DNA testing, a procedure ultimately documented in The Ohio Journal of Science.
A mistake, right? Well, yes. And admittedly, Eckert could not have known that DNA testing would eventually sink his battleship. (This was first published in 1967).
But you see, there are entire scenes (with dialogue, naturally), of Van Swearingen/Blue Jacket living his dual life. Eckert even has his version of Blue Jacket kill his white brother at the Battle of the Wabash! Where – you must ask – is all this coming from?
It didn’t happen. Science proved this. Thus, either Eckert made it up (which is not likely), or else he is extremely gullible in his choice of sources (which is probably what happened). Knowing that huge chunks of The Frontiersmen are simply and utterly wrong is fatal to any acceptance of this volume as serious history. (This is before we even get to the Rebecca Galloway/Tecumseh affair, which appears to be based on a Galloway family legend, but here is treated with a near-biblical certainty).
What then, is The Frontiersmen?
I guess I don't know. For me, it did not work as history, or as fiction, or as historical fiction or fictionalized history. Your mileage, I suppose, will vary according to how much poetic license you can tolerate.
(Reviewer’s Note: I originally read and reviewed this in 2009. My star-rating at that time was twice what it is now. Upon rereading this, I can only say that I was far less skeptical in my youth).
- Allan W. Eckert, The Frontiersmen: A Narrative
In order to discuss Allan Eckert’s The Frontiersman, we must start with the very first line on the very first page. It is from the Author’s Note, and states with an admirable – and as it turns out, unearned – sense of confidence.
“This book is fact, not fiction.”
That is not true, unfortunately. And it is something that must be grappled with, in dealing with a beloved entry into the canon of early American history.
But before we get to what The Frontiersmen is not – to wit: fact – let us begin with what it sets out to be.
Starting in 1755 and ending in 1836, The Frontiersmen (the first entry in Eckert’s relatively famous The Winning of America series) covers a big swath of early American history. As the title implies, it is focused on the frontier, and of the Indian Wars that flared and spattered like grease fires at various points in the Northwest Territory. Eckert corrals this sprawling tale (despite the corralling, it is still 588 pages of text) by focusing much of the narrative on Simon Kenton, a contemporary of Daniel Boone who never quite achieved Boone’s ubiquity.
In attempting to determine why The Frontiersmen is so popular – at least relative to other histories of this era – I decided it has much to do with the choice of Kenton as protagonists.
Eckert was clearly enamored of the “big frontiersman,” and describes him in a drooling, fetishistic manner: Tall, blue-eyed, auburn-haired, and heavily muscled (the muscles lovingly delineated in the mind’s eye). When first introduced, Kenton is a powerful-but-ungainly youth. However, after a section that can only be described as a training montage, he levels-up in record time. Soon, Kenton is a crack shot; an expert at shooting and reloading while on the move; an endurance runner who can lope along all day without getting tired; and a master scout, who can track a fart in a hurricane.
Essentially, Kenton is a superhero, whose superpower is killing Indians. This might be a bit disconcerting for modern readers. Yet Eckert neatly avoids this trap by making the Indians, especially the Shawnee leader Tecumseh, into equal players in this drama. (I’d say this is an almost fifty-fifty dual biography. It skews heavily towards Kenton in the first half; then, as Kenton ages out, the storylines shift to Tecumseh). Eckert’s interest in the various Indian tribes is not feigned or patronizing. He is genuinely fascinated by their language, customs, and war aims. The Indians in The Frontiersmen are not hapless victims; they are geopolitical players. Thus, Eckert is able to present an old-fashioned golly-gee-whiz adventure of a white man in the woods, without having to deal with all the baggage that typically encumbers such a premise.
Even if we only accept a percentage of his escapades as true, Kenton lived a remarkable life, filled with bloody battles, close encounters, and thrilling chases. In my opinion, though, Eckert hides the essential elements in a plodding, often pedantic style. Instead of carefully picking and choosing the important moments to focus on, Eckert prefers to go step by step. There are whole sections in The Frontiersmen that are devoted to the naming of random counties in Kentucky.
Several times I came close to the point of quitting. But then, just when I was about to set this down, Eckert would deliver a gripping set-piece, such as the Battle of the Wabash or the graphic description William Crawford’s torture at the stake.
That said, it’s time to get back to that opening line: “This book is fact, not fiction.”
The most notorious aspect of Eckert’s style is his reconstructed dialogue, a technique that he explains in his Author’s Note. Essentially, he took the information he purportedly found in primary sources and used it to create dialogue for his characters, giving a novelistic flair to his scenes. Along with the dialogue, he adds internal thoughts and mannerisms that could not possibly be known to any but the historian skilled in seances.
If you are a purist, this is an academic crime, pure and simple.
In all honesty, it did not bother me too much. A lifetime of studying history (and over a decade parsing contradictory police reports as a criminal defense attorney) has taught me an important truth about truth: That no two people have ever perceived and remembered an event in the same way. What we think of as “objective” history is really just a best-guess based on the strongest evidence. That’s especially true when we are putting words into people’s mouths. We all want to believe that Nathan Hale uttered his famous “I only regret I have but one life to give for my country” before being hanged, but the actual evidence for this is…well, let’s just say that Eckert is probably more accurate with his “invented” dialogue than whoever started the Hale myth.
(An aside about the dialogue: It’s terrible! If you’re going to make something up, at least make it good. Eckert’s imagined conversations are either tonelessly expository, hopelessly leaden, or outright embarrassing. At one point, a male character says to a female character: “Your breasts are ripe melons.” I would love, love, love to know in what library Eckert found that particular historical chestnut).
So, let’s leave aside the fake dialogue, and get to the real problem. The shoddy history.
If The Frontiersmen is the only book you read about this particular period in American history, you can absolutely be forgiven for placing your trust in Eckert’s work. He claims to have spent seven years researching the thing; he has citations (though they are not pinpointed to claims made in the text); and he writes with absolute assurance.
But if you have read about this period outside of The Frontiersmen, you will notice that perhaps Eckert’s certainty is not wholly justified. At first, this manifested itself in small ways. To take one example – since I just crossed the 1,000 word mark – there is the issue of Jacob Greathouse. Eckert claims that it was Jacob who triggered Lord Dunmore’s War in 1774 by slaughtering relatives of the Mingo warrior Logan along Yellow Creek. However, other sources (such as Glenn Williams’s Dunmore’s War) attribute the massacre to Jacob’s brother, Daniel. Moreover, Eckert claims that Jacob was brutally tortured and killed (excerpted at the top), while other sources say that the unfortunate Greathouse torture-recipient was another brother, Jonathan.
These are quibbles, of course, but telling.
The biggest problem here – calling in to question so much else that Eckert has written – has to do with the Shawnee Chief Blue Jacket.
According to Eckert, Blue Jacket was actually a white man named Marmaduke Van Swearingen. When I first read that unlikely name, my BS detector hit DefCon 1. After further research, it turns out that the name is legit, and that a man bearing the colorful appellation was apparently captured by the Shawnee. This somehow morphed into the legend that Van Swearingen was Blue Jacket. That legend, however, came into being decades after the events recounted here, from sources virtually no serious historian trusted.
And for good reason. Marmaduke Van Swearingen was not Blue Jacket. Likewise, Blue Jacket was not Van Swearingen. This was demonstrated through DNA testing, a procedure ultimately documented in The Ohio Journal of Science.
A mistake, right? Well, yes. And admittedly, Eckert could not have known that DNA testing would eventually sink his battleship. (This was first published in 1967).
But you see, there are entire scenes (with dialogue, naturally), of Van Swearingen/Blue Jacket living his dual life. Eckert even has his version of Blue Jacket kill his white brother at the Battle of the Wabash! Where – you must ask – is all this coming from?
It didn’t happen. Science proved this. Thus, either Eckert made it up (which is not likely), or else he is extremely gullible in his choice of sources (which is probably what happened). Knowing that huge chunks of The Frontiersmen are simply and utterly wrong is fatal to any acceptance of this volume as serious history. (This is before we even get to the Rebecca Galloway/Tecumseh affair, which appears to be based on a Galloway family legend, but here is treated with a near-biblical certainty).
What then, is The Frontiersmen?
I guess I don't know. For me, it did not work as history, or as fiction, or as historical fiction or fictionalized history. Your mileage, I suppose, will vary according to how much poetic license you can tolerate.
(Reviewer’s Note: I originally read and reviewed this in 2009. My star-rating at that time was twice what it is now. Upon rereading this, I can only say that I was far less skeptical in my youth).
March 3, 2018
This is Allan Eckert's first book in his series "The Winning of America." It's the story of how Indian territory in the frontiers of the 1700s became the areas we now know as Kentucky, Ohio, and Indiana. It's told through the eyes of it's two main characters - Simon Kenton (who I somehow knew nothing about before this book) on the side of the frontiersmen, and Tecumseh on the side of the Native Americans.
I've read a lot of late 18th/early 19th century history, but this was my first time seeing that history (American Revolution, War of 1812, etc) through the eyes of Kentuckians/the frontier. Kenton and Tecumseh were the perfect people to tell this story through, as they were around for all of it. The way their lives continually intertwine is cool.
Ultimately what pushed this to 5 stars for me was finally learning about my local history. The founding of the town I live in - Danville, KY - is here, along with the beginnings of Louisville, Harrodsburg, Cincinnati, Lexington, Cleveland, Dayton, etc. In one battle alone there are the names of seven men who would go on to have Kentucky counties named after them - names I've heard my whole life but couldn't have told you a thing about them. I should really have known some of this stuff already!
I also somehow grew up never hearing about William Henry Harrison. There's a lot more interesting about him than his one-month presidency. And Simon Girty! What a great villain. This would make a great movie.
A couple of notes:
- I mostly read this on Kindle, because there are so many really good footnotes and Kindle makes it easy to flip back and forth between the notes and the text. On the other hand, the Kindle version has a bunch of errors in it and it doesn't have some of the maps and illustrations that the paperback version has.
- This book is really good, but fair warning - it is also really gory. Like really really gory. Frontier life was brutal.
- I read this with Google maps open. Some other reviewers have complained that there is too much geography in the book (especially in the footnotes), but it was one of my favorite parts! I loved tracking down these events to see where they happened/what the places look like today.
I've read a lot of late 18th/early 19th century history, but this was my first time seeing that history (American Revolution, War of 1812, etc) through the eyes of Kentuckians/the frontier. Kenton and Tecumseh were the perfect people to tell this story through, as they were around for all of it. The way their lives continually intertwine is cool.
Ultimately what pushed this to 5 stars for me was finally learning about my local history. The founding of the town I live in - Danville, KY - is here, along with the beginnings of Louisville, Harrodsburg, Cincinnati, Lexington, Cleveland, Dayton, etc. In one battle alone there are the names of seven men who would go on to have Kentucky counties named after them - names I've heard my whole life but couldn't have told you a thing about them. I should really have known some of this stuff already!
I also somehow grew up never hearing about William Henry Harrison. There's a lot more interesting about him than his one-month presidency. And Simon Girty! What a great villain. This would make a great movie.
A couple of notes:
- I mostly read this on Kindle, because there are so many really good footnotes and Kindle makes it easy to flip back and forth between the notes and the text. On the other hand, the Kindle version has a bunch of errors in it and it doesn't have some of the maps and illustrations that the paperback version has.
- This book is really good, but fair warning - it is also really gory. Like really really gory. Frontier life was brutal.
- I read this with Google maps open. Some other reviewers have complained that there is too much geography in the book (especially in the footnotes), but it was one of my favorite parts! I loved tracking down these events to see where they happened/what the places look like today.
July 7, 2008
One of the best written historical novels about the settling of the American "West" at the time of the Revolutionary War. Western Ohio that is.
I rated The Frontiersmen a five star because it changed my view of American history. Eckert is a master at transporting the reader back to a historical moment, creating a good story around the facts, and making the reader care. This book left me in awe of our ancestors' ability to survive. This was a ruthless time and both Whites and Native Americans did unthinkable deeds. Heroes in the movies we pay to see today, really did exist.
I read this book right after I read The Founding Brothers. (about what was happening in the Eastern colonies at that time) The two books married up very well.
My favorite book.
I rated The Frontiersmen a five star because it changed my view of American history. Eckert is a master at transporting the reader back to a historical moment, creating a good story around the facts, and making the reader care. This book left me in awe of our ancestors' ability to survive. This was a ruthless time and both Whites and Native Americans did unthinkable deeds. Heroes in the movies we pay to see today, really did exist.
I read this book right after I read The Founding Brothers. (about what was happening in the Eastern colonies at that time) The two books married up very well.
My favorite book.
February 12, 2018
Take that, short attention span! It might have taken over a year but I did it! It didn’t take over a year because it was boring (I don’t give boring books 4 stars) but because it’s the first prose book I started reading for pleasure in years (though I have read some other, shorter ones since as I discovered that I actually like a lot of prose even if I thought I didn’t for some reason), it has very small text and is long. Alright, let’s go!
What’s it about?
This book is a nonfiction story about a man named Simon Kenton and he was well… a frontiersman. He had many adventures with other frontiersmen including some that most people (Americans anyway) have learned about in history and of course he got in trouble with some indians which is pretty much what happened to pretty much every white guy back then and a lot of crazy s*** happens!
Pros:
The story is very interesting, never too slow, I really like that.
Simon Kenton is interesting and it surprises me that he isn’t more well known. I’m pretty interested in history and never heard of him until reading this book but he is one of the biggest bad-a**es of this time period, at least as far people I’ve heard of from back then go and it is very surprising and disappointing that he isn’t more well known.
This book is intense, exciting and has lots of action. Yeah, I know that it is maybe slightly f***ed up to say that it’s exciting and has lots of action because that action does involve real life pain and death but on the other hand, I hate when nonfiction (or fiction) is boring so yeah, I’m still gonna go ahead and say that it may not be a good thing entirely but it’s at least good for readers learning about this stuff.
I like when history books teach me about things worth giving a s*** about, this book definitely did that.
Since I didn’t know much about this story even though it’s nonfiction, it was still unpredictable.
This book is very well written. I like how the beginning of each part (not chapter, there are chapters but even they are divided into parts) includes the date of the events.
It is very clear that lots of research was done for this book, I really appreciate when authors do research on the history book they’re writing, especially since it shows that they put effort into it and the reader can be (mostly) sure that it’s historically accurate.
Cons:
There’s these notes about certain stuff in the back of the book which at first I thought was great. It turns out it’s not so great. It gets annoying having to flip to the notes when I’m trying to enjoy a story and a lot of the notes are things like “Present day (wherever)” which annoyed the s*** out of me. It’s like I went through the trouble of going to the back of the book only so the author can tell me it’s present day wherever which could may or may not be the case now considering how much geography and names of places change and this book was originally printed in the 1960’s… so there's a very good chance that some of that has changed. I will point out that some of the notes were very interesting it’s just: less geography please, really didn’t need that.
The text size in the edition I read was very small and often hurt my eyes, that’s part of why it took so long to read this book. I eventually had to get a special magnifying screen made for reading in order to finish this book.
It’s hard to keep track of the characters. Sure, it could be because I don’t have a great attention span and because I read multiple books at a time for that reason however, I’ve talked to other people who have read it and they had the same problem so even though the characters and story are interesting it’s a bit hard to keep track of , I think Eckert maybe should have included a character guide or something (though I think I mostly got it, just may not exactly be able to do a quiz on this book or anything like that).
Warning:
This book is extremely graphic! If you’re familiar with a comic and/or anime series called Berserk, this is just as brutal as that only it’s nonfiction and a detailed prose book so it ends up being even more f***ed up, I figured I should just throw that warning out there.
Overall:
Good book, I definitely recommend it for folks who can handle strong violence in books and are interested in history. I enjoyed this a lot, found it interesting and learned about things that I think more people should learn about. I had a few problems, sure but keep in mind, I tend to be a bit snooty when it comes to books (I hate admitting it but it’s true) so I would still recommend this one.
4/5
What’s it about?
This book is a nonfiction story about a man named Simon Kenton and he was well… a frontiersman. He had many adventures with other frontiersmen including some that most people (Americans anyway) have learned about in history and of course he got in trouble with some indians which is pretty much what happened to pretty much every white guy back then and a lot of crazy s*** happens!
Pros:
The story is very interesting, never too slow, I really like that.
Simon Kenton is interesting and it surprises me that he isn’t more well known. I’m pretty interested in history and never heard of him until reading this book but he is one of the biggest bad-a**es of this time period, at least as far people I’ve heard of from back then go and it is very surprising and disappointing that he isn’t more well known.
This book is intense, exciting and has lots of action. Yeah, I know that it is maybe slightly f***ed up to say that it’s exciting and has lots of action because that action does involve real life pain and death but on the other hand, I hate when nonfiction (or fiction) is boring so yeah, I’m still gonna go ahead and say that it may not be a good thing entirely but it’s at least good for readers learning about this stuff.
I like when history books teach me about things worth giving a s*** about, this book definitely did that.
Since I didn’t know much about this story even though it’s nonfiction, it was still unpredictable.
This book is very well written. I like how the beginning of each part (not chapter, there are chapters but even they are divided into parts) includes the date of the events.
It is very clear that lots of research was done for this book, I really appreciate when authors do research on the history book they’re writing, especially since it shows that they put effort into it and the reader can be (mostly) sure that it’s historically accurate.
Cons:
There’s these notes about certain stuff in the back of the book which at first I thought was great. It turns out it’s not so great. It gets annoying having to flip to the notes when I’m trying to enjoy a story and a lot of the notes are things like “Present day (wherever)” which annoyed the s*** out of me. It’s like I went through the trouble of going to the back of the book only so the author can tell me it’s present day wherever which could may or may not be the case now considering how much geography and names of places change and this book was originally printed in the 1960’s… so there's a very good chance that some of that has changed. I will point out that some of the notes were very interesting it’s just: less geography please, really didn’t need that.
The text size in the edition I read was very small and often hurt my eyes, that’s part of why it took so long to read this book. I eventually had to get a special magnifying screen made for reading in order to finish this book.
It’s hard to keep track of the characters. Sure, it could be because I don’t have a great attention span and because I read multiple books at a time for that reason however, I’ve talked to other people who have read it and they had the same problem so even though the characters and story are interesting it’s a bit hard to keep track of , I think Eckert maybe should have included a character guide or something (though I think I mostly got it, just may not exactly be able to do a quiz on this book or anything like that).
Warning:
This book is extremely graphic! If you’re familiar with a comic and/or anime series called Berserk, this is just as brutal as that only it’s nonfiction and a detailed prose book so it ends up being even more f***ed up, I figured I should just throw that warning out there.
Overall:
Good book, I definitely recommend it for folks who can handle strong violence in books and are interested in history. I enjoyed this a lot, found it interesting and learned about things that I think more people should learn about. I had a few problems, sure but keep in mind, I tend to be a bit snooty when it comes to books (I hate admitting it but it’s true) so I would still recommend this one.
4/5
August 28, 2018
One of my favorite areas of history is that of the founding of our country, it's earliest roots, it's struggle with British rule, our Revolution, and then the creation of our government and it's struggle to succeed. During my reading of that history of the nation's early years mention is made of the people in the Western area of the new nation. By Western area what was meant was the land between the Mississippi River the mountains of the East. From this area problems arose for the leaders of the original 13 Colonies. There was concern that Sectionalism would cause these Western residents to fall into the schemes of European nations or local political intriguers like Aaron Burr or James Wilkinson. There was even a Whiskey Revolt in Western Pennsylvania that had to be put down by Washington himself. There was also concern that probably masked jealousy on the part of the Original Colonies that when these territories became states they would push the old guard aside and put the country in the hands of amateurs at best and barbarians at worst. But this is the total of what I have seen mentioned about these territories in the histories that I have read until now. This book, "The Frontiersman", has demonstrated to me that there is a void in my knowledge of U.S. History of which I was unaware. This book did a great deal to fill in some of this void and arouse a curiosity for further delving into this area of history.
"The Frontiersman" reads like fictional history but the author goes out of his way to assure the reader that it is a genuine history and that everything reported did in fact occur. Reading some of the reviews and comments about the book as well as the author's note there seems to be some minor controversies about details and whether or not the author used a bit of artistic license in some areas. However, nobody seems to challenge the facts of the various events written about. In his notes the author does mention the extensive amount or source material used for the book and that there is conflict within these sources so I am willing to overlook imaginative reporting of details as long as the fundamental history is accurate. If I had any skepticism about the accuracy of this book it would be because of the exploits of the main character, Simon Kenton. Daniel Boone is frequently mentioned in the book but the activities of Kenton are every bit as noteworthy and as extensive as anything Boone is noted for. If this history is in fact accurate then why isn't Kenton as well known as Boone? I doubt that Boone had a better PR person than Kenton and they were both close friends and would never have attempted to steal anyone's thunder. I guess this is one of those mysteries about the reporting of history that simply can't be explained but it does appear that the memory of Simon Kenton has been severely shortchanged. Now what history does this book exactly cover?
The book's history spans the years beginning shortly after the French and Indian War up to the mid 1830's. The thread of this history follows the lives of primarily two people and to a lesser extent a third person. These three people are the Indian chief Tecumseh, and a frontiersman named Simon Kenton also known as Simon Butler. The third person is an adolescent named Marmaduke "Duke" Van Swearingen who voluntarily allows himself to be kidnapped and adopted into the Shawnee Indian tribe in order to spare his younger brother. Duke becomes a very successful Shawnee tribesman and rises to become a respected chief and contemporary of Tecumseh. In later years Duke, now known as Blue Jacket, is reunited with his now adult younger brother in a manner only a fiendish fate could have created. The exploits of these young men is followed through the settling of the Kentucky, Ohio, and Indiana area and vividly depicts what life was like in these wilderness areas in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. I greatly appreciated reading for the first time of what was happening in the West while our Revolution was being fought in the East and how alone and forgotten these settlers were because all military resources were focused on fighting the British. Indians supplied with guns and ammunition by the British made their lives a nightmare and their defense was entirely up to them.
Reading about the great events and personages of history is enjoyable but reading a history like this is far better. This book is about the ordinary people just trying to survive and build a life for themselves and their families. The difficulties they had to endure defy meaningful description but the author does an exceptional job. Every review of this book seems to make a point of warning the reader of the gruesome violence contained in these pages. Indeed the warnings are worth taking but the violence is typical of what you would encounter in reading any history of the conflicts whites had with our native Americans. What you might not expect is that the behavior of the whites toward the Indians is every bit as ugly and barbaric and neither side is able to claim victimhood in this history. The violence begat more violence until there was little difference between the parties of these disputes. The sad part is that the violence continued for another century and spanned the continent. Aside from the violence, however, the author fully reports the formation of small villages and hamlets that were to grow to the towns and cities we are familiar with today. An enjoyable feature of the book is the notes section of the book where the author has taken pains to locate the present location of the sites of the historic events depicted in the book. I cannot believe that every resident of Kentucky and Ohio, especially those living along the Ohio River, do not possess and are completely familiar with this book as it is their foundation history in all its muddy, bloody, and challenging detail. The only criticism I could have of this book is its length. At just under 600 pages of text the book is a daunting read but it is worth the effort. Enjoy.
"The Frontiersman" reads like fictional history but the author goes out of his way to assure the reader that it is a genuine history and that everything reported did in fact occur. Reading some of the reviews and comments about the book as well as the author's note there seems to be some minor controversies about details and whether or not the author used a bit of artistic license in some areas. However, nobody seems to challenge the facts of the various events written about. In his notes the author does mention the extensive amount or source material used for the book and that there is conflict within these sources so I am willing to overlook imaginative reporting of details as long as the fundamental history is accurate. If I had any skepticism about the accuracy of this book it would be because of the exploits of the main character, Simon Kenton. Daniel Boone is frequently mentioned in the book but the activities of Kenton are every bit as noteworthy and as extensive as anything Boone is noted for. If this history is in fact accurate then why isn't Kenton as well known as Boone? I doubt that Boone had a better PR person than Kenton and they were both close friends and would never have attempted to steal anyone's thunder. I guess this is one of those mysteries about the reporting of history that simply can't be explained but it does appear that the memory of Simon Kenton has been severely shortchanged. Now what history does this book exactly cover?
The book's history spans the years beginning shortly after the French and Indian War up to the mid 1830's. The thread of this history follows the lives of primarily two people and to a lesser extent a third person. These three people are the Indian chief Tecumseh, and a frontiersman named Simon Kenton also known as Simon Butler. The third person is an adolescent named Marmaduke "Duke" Van Swearingen who voluntarily allows himself to be kidnapped and adopted into the Shawnee Indian tribe in order to spare his younger brother. Duke becomes a very successful Shawnee tribesman and rises to become a respected chief and contemporary of Tecumseh. In later years Duke, now known as Blue Jacket, is reunited with his now adult younger brother in a manner only a fiendish fate could have created. The exploits of these young men is followed through the settling of the Kentucky, Ohio, and Indiana area and vividly depicts what life was like in these wilderness areas in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. I greatly appreciated reading for the first time of what was happening in the West while our Revolution was being fought in the East and how alone and forgotten these settlers were because all military resources were focused on fighting the British. Indians supplied with guns and ammunition by the British made their lives a nightmare and their defense was entirely up to them.
Reading about the great events and personages of history is enjoyable but reading a history like this is far better. This book is about the ordinary people just trying to survive and build a life for themselves and their families. The difficulties they had to endure defy meaningful description but the author does an exceptional job. Every review of this book seems to make a point of warning the reader of the gruesome violence contained in these pages. Indeed the warnings are worth taking but the violence is typical of what you would encounter in reading any history of the conflicts whites had with our native Americans. What you might not expect is that the behavior of the whites toward the Indians is every bit as ugly and barbaric and neither side is able to claim victimhood in this history. The violence begat more violence until there was little difference between the parties of these disputes. The sad part is that the violence continued for another century and spanned the continent. Aside from the violence, however, the author fully reports the formation of small villages and hamlets that were to grow to the towns and cities we are familiar with today. An enjoyable feature of the book is the notes section of the book where the author has taken pains to locate the present location of the sites of the historic events depicted in the book. I cannot believe that every resident of Kentucky and Ohio, especially those living along the Ohio River, do not possess and are completely familiar with this book as it is their foundation history in all its muddy, bloody, and challenging detail. The only criticism I could have of this book is its length. At just under 600 pages of text the book is a daunting read but it is worth the effort. Enjoy.
October 15, 2012
AMAZING. The research that went into this book is mind boggling, but when you add to it that this is just one in a series of SIX it is almost too much to fathom! I agree with the other reviews that say it is a tragedy that Simon Kenton isn't more well known, I developed a hardcore history crush on him as I read this book. :) A must read for anyone who is interested in the settling of Kentucky and Ohio!
May 8, 2014
I read this book long ago and really enjoyed it. It may be harder to track down now...but if you like historical fiction it's a good read. Really.
I plan to "re-read" this if I can make room on my list. I read it back in the '70s and liked it a lot. Hope I can work in a reread.
......update 5/7/14.......
I read this first in 1970 and always remembered it as a good read. It is, it's so good I've decided to up my rating to 5 stars.
This book is history but written with all the excitement and interest of a novel. While Mr. Eckert may put words in the mouths of the characters as he imagines conversation the events in the book are historically accurate. You'll come away from this book feeling as if you knew the people involved.
The picture here is also one of reality. The atrocities committed by both sides in the border/frontier war between settlers and "Indians" (and I use the word advisedly as it's the word the natives even used for themselves at the time when speaking with "Americans", "English" and "French"). There's no way not to come away with a better understanding of what happened to the Native Americans and what they lost.
Of course another thing we came away understanding is that to the settlers there was not the idea of robbing the natives they were just in a war. Like all people in all wars you end up fighting for the one next to you not some idea. Hatred blossomed between so many of the participants while others grew in respect for each other.
This is an exceptionally good book and a good history. If approached with an open mind I think a lot of insight can be had.
I recommend this and for that matter Allan W. Eckert's other work.
I plan to "re-read" this if I can make room on my list. I read it back in the '70s and liked it a lot. Hope I can work in a reread.
......update 5/7/14.......
I read this first in 1970 and always remembered it as a good read. It is, it's so good I've decided to up my rating to 5 stars.
This book is history but written with all the excitement and interest of a novel. While Mr. Eckert may put words in the mouths of the characters as he imagines conversation the events in the book are historically accurate. You'll come away from this book feeling as if you knew the people involved.
The picture here is also one of reality. The atrocities committed by both sides in the border/frontier war between settlers and "Indians" (and I use the word advisedly as it's the word the natives even used for themselves at the time when speaking with "Americans", "English" and "French"). There's no way not to come away with a better understanding of what happened to the Native Americans and what they lost.
Of course another thing we came away understanding is that to the settlers there was not the idea of robbing the natives they were just in a war. Like all people in all wars you end up fighting for the one next to you not some idea. Hatred blossomed between so many of the participants while others grew in respect for each other.
This is an exceptionally good book and a good history. If approached with an open mind I think a lot of insight can be had.
I recommend this and for that matter Allan W. Eckert's other work.
March 22, 2015
My first Eckert, and probably my second or third experience with this strange and hard-to-define "narrative" style. From my understanding, it exists in that esoteric space between fiction and non; it reads as a novel, but hews too closely to an academic vibe with use of primary sources, etc. to be lumped in with an ordinary historical novel or whatever you wanna call it. I like it! You can get the immersive, intense experience of a well-researched novel without the usual (necessary) factual sketchiness and outright invention. Eckert's prose is workmanlike but still pretty in a utilitarian way and he obviously has a deep love and knowledge of the Ohio area, which is crucial as people are constantly running around it doing all kinds of stuff and the details really bring it to life in your head.
The overarching plot is indeed about the settlement (read: conquest) of the Northwest Territory and thusly it has a sizable cast of people from all walks of life. However, it's particularly focused on two men: Simon Kenton and Tecumseh. Kenton is certainly an interesting figure...the consummate frontiersman; clever, resourceful, well-bearded, an excellent marksman and traveler and unquestionably brave and compassionate. That said, Tecumseh was unquestionably the more interesting of the two for me. After the Shawnees had been forced further and further west by the military victories and weak-ass duplicitous treaties of the whites, he was the best chance for a turning of the tides not only for the Shawnee but for many of the other native nations of the continent. He proves himself again and again to not only be a clever, brave and formidable statesman and warrior but to be compassionate, constantly speaking out against the brutal torture his fellow natives would put captured Europeans through...I have a clear and obvious bias for the native peoples here and fervently wanted Tecumseh to violently throw off the greedy yoke of the encroaching whites.
It's impossible to avoid discussing the horrible, horrible violence in this book. There are countless scenes of murder, torture and mutilation perpetrated by both sides and they are portrayed very vividly. I consider myself fairly desensitized to this kind of thing, as most people who enjoy history probably do. That said, there were several scenes in this book that just made my blood run cold as fucking ice, particularly the nauseating Gnadenhutten massacre. I imagine that for people living in this area today reading this book would be something like reading a news clipping about a particularly long and gruesome series of murders that happened a long time ago in your house. I really have to give humanity credit for the inventive and thoroughly disgusting ways we've managed to kill each other during our wonderful time on Earth.
All in all a very bittersweet experience. It's a grand story but it's also disturbing to read this stuff as a citizen of the country that is coldly hacking through and shitting on so much humanity in these pages. Maybe bittersweet isn't the world...the sweet side is sweet and the bitter side is more the flavor of a rotted corpse. Still, it's all very valuable reading to anyone interested in any of the numerous subjects it covers, even if you only have a passing interest like I did when I started it. As usual I have to give nerd credit to the multiple well-made maps and illustrations sprinkled artfully throughout the book. I'm certainly going to continue on with the series, but not until the trauma fades.
The overarching plot is indeed about the settlement (read: conquest) of the Northwest Territory and thusly it has a sizable cast of people from all walks of life. However, it's particularly focused on two men: Simon Kenton and Tecumseh. Kenton is certainly an interesting figure...the consummate frontiersman; clever, resourceful, well-bearded, an excellent marksman and traveler and unquestionably brave and compassionate. That said, Tecumseh was unquestionably the more interesting of the two for me. After the Shawnees had been forced further and further west by the military victories and weak-ass duplicitous treaties of the whites, he was the best chance for a turning of the tides not only for the Shawnee but for many of the other native nations of the continent. He proves himself again and again to not only be a clever, brave and formidable statesman and warrior but to be compassionate, constantly speaking out against the brutal torture his fellow natives would put captured Europeans through...I have a clear and obvious bias for the native peoples here and fervently wanted Tecumseh to violently throw off the greedy yoke of the encroaching whites.
It's impossible to avoid discussing the horrible, horrible violence in this book. There are countless scenes of murder, torture and mutilation perpetrated by both sides and they are portrayed very vividly. I consider myself fairly desensitized to this kind of thing, as most people who enjoy history probably do. That said, there were several scenes in this book that just made my blood run cold as fucking ice, particularly the nauseating Gnadenhutten massacre. I imagine that for people living in this area today reading this book would be something like reading a news clipping about a particularly long and gruesome series of murders that happened a long time ago in your house. I really have to give humanity credit for the inventive and thoroughly disgusting ways we've managed to kill each other during our wonderful time on Earth.
All in all a very bittersweet experience. It's a grand story but it's also disturbing to read this stuff as a citizen of the country that is coldly hacking through and shitting on so much humanity in these pages. Maybe bittersweet isn't the world...the sweet side is sweet and the bitter side is more the flavor of a rotted corpse. Still, it's all very valuable reading to anyone interested in any of the numerous subjects it covers, even if you only have a passing interest like I did when I started it. As usual I have to give nerd credit to the multiple well-made maps and illustrations sprinkled artfully throughout the book. I'm certainly going to continue on with the series, but not until the trauma fades.
July 15, 2017
This is really a novel-like biography of Simon Kenton. Soooooo good. It should be required reading in Kentucky and Ohio high schools. It reads easily, like fiction, but it is extremely well-researched and informative. If you have any interest in the settlement of the Ohio River Valley, you'll love it. Lots of adventure as well.
January 17, 2019
Even in the realm of narrative history, this is fairly unique. The Frontiersmen reads much like a novel, but it is as historically sourced as possible (and contains a fair number of endnotes, though more for explaining context rather than giving sources). Because of the format, Eckert is at pains to describe how he put his book together in a foreword.
And it works. It did take some getting used to, as my history-reading and novel-reading instincts clashed for a bit. The book presents much of the immediate feel of life on the frontier, which is something inevitably lost in most historical works, but well-conveyed by fiction.
The book largely covers the settlement of Kentucky, Ohio, and Indiana (~1770-1813), largely from the point of view of Simon Kenton. Kenton is one of the central figures of the American move across the Appalachians, though not as well known as contemporaries such as Daniel Boone (possibly because Boone came first, and naturally attracted much of the story telling of the time). As a partial balance, the book also traces Temcumseh's entire life. Overall, both sides of what was happening in the area is presented, with attention paid to atrocities perpetrated by settlers and Indians. It still concentrates more on activities of the settlers, but that is where the records are, and it is not Eckert's purpose to split hairs by finely examining archeology and oral traditions.
However, Eckert's book does suffer from its formatting. Each chapter consists of a large number of subchapters, each of which is dated. Normally, this works out well, and is handy to place the chronology, but there's plenty of sections that are just summaries of the previous few months, and towards the end there are entire years that are summarized with a 'December 31' entry.
I'd like to see more narrative history in general, and I think this format is good enough that it deserves to be used more than it has been. But while this is a good book, I can't help but feel like its still a little too limited.
And it works. It did take some getting used to, as my history-reading and novel-reading instincts clashed for a bit. The book presents much of the immediate feel of life on the frontier, which is something inevitably lost in most historical works, but well-conveyed by fiction.
The book largely covers the settlement of Kentucky, Ohio, and Indiana (~1770-1813), largely from the point of view of Simon Kenton. Kenton is one of the central figures of the American move across the Appalachians, though not as well known as contemporaries such as Daniel Boone (possibly because Boone came first, and naturally attracted much of the story telling of the time). As a partial balance, the book also traces Temcumseh's entire life. Overall, both sides of what was happening in the area is presented, with attention paid to atrocities perpetrated by settlers and Indians. It still concentrates more on activities of the settlers, but that is where the records are, and it is not Eckert's purpose to split hairs by finely examining archeology and oral traditions.
However, Eckert's book does suffer from its formatting. Each chapter consists of a large number of subchapters, each of which is dated. Normally, this works out well, and is handy to place the chronology, but there's plenty of sections that are just summaries of the previous few months, and towards the end there are entire years that are summarized with a 'December 31' entry.
I'd like to see more narrative history in general, and I think this format is good enough that it deserves to be used more than it has been. But while this is a good book, I can't help but feel like its still a little too limited.
May 7, 2025
For anyone interested in the history of Ohio-Kentucky in the late 1700s to early 1800s this was a fascinating read.
I have a couple take aways…
(1) Simon Kenton basically founded everything in Ohio-Kentucky
(2) Ohio-Kentucky used to be way cooler…
(3) Native American/Colonial American history is more brutal than I ever thought possible.
I have a couple take aways…
(1) Simon Kenton basically founded everything in Ohio-Kentucky
(2) Ohio-Kentucky used to be way cooler…
(3) Native American/Colonial American history is more brutal than I ever thought possible.
December 20, 2009
I've read the 'Frontiersmen' three or four times; it's a magnificent book. Be that as it may, I do find one shortcoming regarding Eckert's narrative. In the introduction, the author states that his book is fact, not fiction. Unfortunately, this is not entirely correct. Without a doubt, Eckert dramatizes a lot of the events that occurred during the time period in which 'The Frontiersmen' takes place. Too, he writes convincingly about a few incidents that have no basis for historical accuracy or certainty.
To Eckert's credit, however, he did make amends for some of his unsupported and erroneous 'facts' in 'The Frontiersmen' when he wrote his subsequent books 'A Sorrow in Our Heart,' and 'That Dark and Bloody River.'
To Eckert's credit, however, he did make amends for some of his unsupported and erroneous 'facts' in 'The Frontiersmen' when he wrote his subsequent books 'A Sorrow in Our Heart,' and 'That Dark and Bloody River.'
August 24, 2017
The writing style put me off immediately (the phrase “placental ejection” occurs in the first paragraph, and later a “deadly rain of blows” leaves our protagonist “groggy”). Still, I decided to stick with it for historical value. After all, Eckert promises that everything in here is authentic. But when I got to the story of Marmaduke van Swearingen, a white boy adopted by the Shawnee who later became the great war chief Blue Jacket, alarm bells went off in my head. Sure enough, a little digging reveals that Blue Jacket and van Swearingen weren’t the same people at all; as far as anyone can tell, Blue Jacket was 100% Shawnee.
Only 25 pages in and I’m not sure how much of this book can be trusted. It’s going back to the library—sorry!
Only 25 pages in and I’m not sure how much of this book can be trusted. It’s going back to the library—sorry!
September 21, 2022
To borrow the phrase my friend Levi likes to [over]use: “this book is required reading”. Especially for someone from the Midwest like me! This book put faces and stories to the names of every river, road, town, county, etc. My wife is exhausted with how often I talk about this book, and I’m sure my friends are or will be too soon enough. I honestly didn’t think a history book could be this fascinating—it blew me away. The Frontiersmen will easily be one of the first books I recommend to others from this day forward.
March 21, 2023
Honestly, I only read this book because my dad wanted me to. It is not my typical read. I did not really enjoy it, and I didn't read the last chapter (mostly because I ran out of time but I ran out of time because I didn't read it sooner because I didn't want to). I like to say that this book was 40% politics, 40% violence/acts of war, and 20% personal narratives. It's the pioneer America version of War and Peace.
December 22, 2016
Wonderful history that is "alive"
Has been criticized for that; the dialog is obviously invented but true to the events as known. Read it like a good novel historical extrapolation and enjoy. If you want boring history with just the facts, look elsewhere.
Has been criticized for that; the dialog is obviously invented but true to the events as known. Read it like a good novel historical extrapolation and enjoy. If you want boring history with just the facts, look elsewhere.
June 27, 2014
Great Book. Like Louis L'Amour, if Allan Eckert says it was there, it was there. :0)
Great story on the Life of Simon Butler Kenton!
Good History of the settlement of Kentucky and Ohio.
Great story on the Life of Simon Butler Kenton!
Good History of the settlement of Kentucky and Ohio.
March 5, 2010
This is a revisit to my childhood. I had to read this in middle school over the summer. At the time I hated it because of its sheer size (600+ pages). But, upon reading it as an adult, I thoroughly enjoyed it. The Frontiersmen chronicles the life of Simon Kenton (a Kentucky frontiersman) and Tecumseh (the leader of the Shawnee) and the events surrounding the white expansion into what is now known as Ohio and Kentucky. Unlike many historical books, Eckert uses various resources, journals, newspaper articles, etc to create a narrative of the life of the two main characters. The narrative writing style of historical events made this book incredibly informative while being easy/interesting to read.
Also, my new kitten is named after a random person identified in the book named Pemberton. So, props to that.
Also, my new kitten is named after a random person identified in the book named Pemberton. So, props to that.
February 17, 2014
What a great book. I think this should be required reading for for youth. Not just about interesting history, but human nature and Christianity. Ok, sure some controversy about BlueJacket and his genetics, and books statements, but I see as a small blemish. A lot to be learned in this book about the faults of humanity and incredible history.
March 6, 2021
Oh, this didn't hold up for me. My high school history teacher turned me on to this series in different, more credulous times. He believed that this was a collection of facts, as did I, until this reading, when I bothered to do some research. Reclassifying this in my head from "historical fiction" to "racist torture porn" and putting it down forever.
February 22, 2017
One of my all time favorite books that I have read several times. In fact, my last read... I marked all the places mentioned in the book and have traveled to most of them. What a trip. I am a big fan of Simon Kenton.
March 27, 2019
If you are interested in America's history from an unusual perspective this book is superb. Eckert's extensive research of actual documents of the time provide the backbone for the facts of the book and he uses them exceedingly well.
March 30, 2011
All of Eckert's books are classics. When the frontier was in the eastern United States. His books give us history, up close and personal.
January 28, 2012
This is probably the most violent book I've ever read, with the possible exception of Blood Meridian.
July 23, 2014
Very readable with the added interest of having taken place in an area I grew up.
August 9, 2016
Great book would recommend for anyone interested in the colonial period
November 24, 2020
I read this as a teenager, and I still have my dad's copy that he took on deployment in the early 80s, which was his Uncle Bobby's copy. (After decades of ownership in my family, the cover's fallen off, and I used that for a bookmark. . . .)
I remember finding this book really engrossing when I first read it, and it's still pretty interesting, though I must confess, thirty-something-year-old me is quite a bit more skeptical of Eckert's claim that the story is entirely historically accurate, including his fictionalized dialogue.
Some parts drag, other parts are a bit melodramatic, and there's a lot of really disturbing violence and torture that is not for the faint of heart, but it's an engaging look at when Kentucky and Ohio were considered the American frontier--as told through the eyes of frontiersman Simon Kenton and Shawnee chief Tecumseh. I frequently found myself reading far beyond what I intended to simply because of the twists and turns in the story.
Tecumseh's always been one of my absolute favorite historical figures, and this book was likely a big reason why.
William Henry Harrison's life during this time is also a lot more interesting than his brief stint as president.
I remember finding this book really engrossing when I first read it, and it's still pretty interesting, though I must confess, thirty-something-year-old me is quite a bit more skeptical of Eckert's claim that the story is entirely historically accurate, including his fictionalized dialogue.
Some parts drag, other parts are a bit melodramatic, and there's a lot of really disturbing violence and torture that is not for the faint of heart, but it's an engaging look at when Kentucky and Ohio were considered the American frontier--as told through the eyes of frontiersman Simon Kenton and Shawnee chief Tecumseh. I frequently found myself reading far beyond what I intended to simply because of the twists and turns in the story.
Tecumseh's always been one of my absolute favorite historical figures, and this book was likely a big reason why.
William Henry Harrison's life during this time is also a lot more interesting than his brief stint as president.
December 14, 2024
A tale of tragedy begetting tragedy, atrocity begetting atrocity, a tale as old as history itself. Eckert does a tremendous job bringing the setting of the Ohio Frontier to life and recounting its conquest and settlement. From 1775 to 1814 (epilogue excluded), we witness the events that occurred in this territory through the perspectives of Simon Kenton, Daniel Boone, Blue Jacket, Tecumseh, William Henry Harrison, and others. Eckert drew heavily from journals, documents, and other first-hand accounts, to keep this narrative as accurate as possible. Most of the time this book felt like a nonfiction retelling of the events. Dialogue is sparse, as are flowery details of scenery and combat. There are no superfluous details one might expect from a historical fiction novel. It is merely a retelling of the events that occurred on these given days and the people that perpetrated them. This, however, does not mean it is a bore to read. I found myself reading for extended periods of time, something I rarely do. Eckert's style is incredibly readable and engaging. Despite originally being published in the 60s, Eckert handles the Indian and white man conflict even handedly. Neither is placed above the other as acts of violence and clemency on both sides are recounted without bias.
I am looking forward to reading the other books in this series.
I am looking forward to reading the other books in this series.
August 24, 2020
A telling of the white man settling the Ohio River valley and the Native American response, mostly through severely underrated historical figures, Simon Kenton and Tecumseh. Though ultimately a narrative, the author claims every line of dialouge was taken from a historical source which was mind boggling and at times borderline impossible to believe. While time and research has nitpicked the book for inaccuracies here and there, I'm not sure he could have written a more well researched book when you look at the myriad of sources. I'm inclined to believe it's a great first order approximation of what really happened. I also appreciated him letting the story tell itself for the most part and leaving the moralizing up to the reader. The obvious and simple conclusion is that the whites did extreme wrong to the Native Americans, but not delving deeper does a disservice to the epic story behind the conclusion. I'm by no means an expert but I now have dumbfounded respect for Tecumseh and a better understanding of the tribes whose names are merely places where I live.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 449 reviews