George Washington's Military Genius

by Dave Richard Palmer

George Washington’s military strategy has been called bumbling at worst and brilliant at best. So which is it? Was George Washington a strategic genius or just lucky? So asks Dave R. Palmer in his new book, George Washington’s Military Genius . An updated edition of Palmer's earlier work, The Way of the Fox , George Washington’s Military Genius breaks down the American Revolution into four phases and analyzes Washington's strategy during each phrase. " The British did not have to lose; the patriots did not have to triumph ," writes Palmer as he proves without a doubt that Washington's continuously-changing military tactics were deliberate, strategic responses to the various phases of the war, not because he lacked a plan of action. Confronting the critics who say Washington's battlefield success and ultimate victories were a function of luck, George Washington's Military Genius proves why the father of our country also deserves the title of America's preeminent strategist.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, American History, American Revolution, Military History, Biography, Military Fiction

320 pages, Hardcover

First published May 1, 2012

About the author

Lieutenant General Dave Richard Palmer is an American retired military officer, military historian and educational administrator. He served as Superintendent of the United States Military Academy at West Point 1986-1991.

Reviews

[Jake Hauser · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not at all the hagiography that the title might make one wary of...This proved to be a fascinating, well organized analysis by an eminently qualified theoretician, teacher (and practitioner) of warfare made on a broadest scope.

The many references to other scholarship concerning evolving principles and defining boundaries grand strategy, military strategy, and tactics etc, applied to the War of Independence are very helpful to anyone wishing to critically enter into an ongoing conversation bookended the perspectives of Clausewitz and a former Superintendent of West Point.

A great read.

[Schoppie · Rating 5 out of 5]

In this masterful book on George Washington's generalship, General Dave Palmer demonstrates he is the preeminent historian on Washington as a soldier. While Palmer avoids the jargon-filled treatment many professional soldiers bring to military history, he carefully and articulately brings his training to bear on on this study of America's first Commander-in-Chief. Palmer does not attempt to cover Washington's faults, but he explains them in the context of the changing events which defined the American Revolution. What other historians have done for U.S. Grant, Palmer does for Washington: this book illuminates Washington's long-term influence on the U.S. Army's strategic outlook. Palmer is my favorite historian of this era and the people who shaped it! I love this book!

[Bill Christman · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you are looking for a book on Washington in battle and such this book is NOT for you. The focus is on strategy. It does start a little slow but Dave Palmer is reminding the reader of what war in the 18th Century was really like. It was of maneuver out-flanking the opponent. Actually battle in an open field with compact lines shooting at each other from dueling range was a last resort on the battlefield.

I agree with the book's premise. At times it seemed Washington understood the war better than anyone else fighting it. Washington's strategy was if it had to be done, do it. It sounds simple but in war emotions, frustrations, and personality get in the war. It is clear from other readings Washington wanted to be far more aggressive commander than he was at points. The fact that he placed his desires secondary to the needs of the country is a sign of his patriotism.

Washington had to deal with 4 strategic phases according to the author and handled them all with aplum. His recognition of the phases had much to do with his viewpoint of what were the objectives of the war. Washington seemed to always have an eye on the endgame and what he wanted America to have at the end, not just independance but also a large part of North America. When we take this viewpoint of Washington, which the author does, then the way he handles the war becomes more clear, especially in hindsight.

George Washington generalship has been rated everywhere by historians. From lucky, to genius. Recently with more political and cultural analysis of the American Revolution one realizes it is George Washington who understood the moment perhaps better than anyone. His recognition of the Congress as his superior, the way he handled his men, the symbolism he used to rally the soldiers, and the way he used the army put him in a unique category. Because of the unusual circumstances of the revolution Washington was perfect for it. He was a man who did not live in a dream world utopia, he was practical, pragmatic and in knowing what he wanted in the end made him a superior general, a military genius.

[Lisa · Rating 4 out of 5]

The author provides a very articulate, readable, analysis of George Washington's use of strategy. The introduction provided a great history of war in the 18th century and its direct influence on fighting in the Revolutionary War. After years of research, the author has identified four distinct phases of the Revolutionary War, each requiring different strategies. He sheds a lot of light on the reasoning behind George Washington's motivations and decisions. He also discusses George Washington's ability to recognize the necessity of a strategy change and implement that change. That type of foresight is unusual, especially since George Washington was not formally educated on strategy. It would be many years before the United States began formally educating officers at West Point.

There is a section on the Battle of Saratoga that made me question the accuracy of conversations the author proposes happened throughout the war with Washington and his subordinates. The author states that on September 28th, Washington spoke of Burgoyne's capitulation. However, the Battle of Bemis Heights, British attrition and a British retreat attempt had not yet been made. Capitulation would not occur for another three weeks after all three played their parts in the British defeat. That being said, this isn't a book on Revolutionary War facts and trivia. It is a book with a deep dive on Washington's strategy. And for that, I gave it four stars.

[James King · Rating 3 out of 5]

Perhaps the title is over selling the content of the book just a bit. The author does eventually get to discussing Washington's wartime strategy, he does so after wading through an awful lot of background information for context. If you are looking for a book that is a good primer to the context of the Revolutionary War, this is a great book. If you are looking for a comprehensive examination of Washington as a military man - you will leave disappointed.

It is an excellent look at Washington from a strategic perspective, though at times I think the author is giving Washington credit for what others might explain away as blind luck. It is certainly a high level overview of the eight years of war, especially good at pointing out why the Continental Army could not simply be disbanded immediately.

If you keep your expectations in check this is a great read. If you expect to take away some knowledge of the military genius of Washington – I am afraid that the author never really made that case.

[KyleFromDuPage · Rating 4 out of 5]

1) What star rating (out of 5) would you give this book?
4

2) What did you like about the book?
There was a lot in this book, and I like how it didn't.

3) What did you dislike about the book?
Nothing. It was well done and tried to avoid everything you already know about Washington.

4) Would you read it again?
No.

5) Who is the intended audience of the book?
Anyone interested in US history or George Washington.

6) What could have been improved?
Nothing comes to mind.

7) What did you learn from reading this?
There was more than just one or two things to list, and that's good. As from the beginning of the book, Dave states his intent is to add more to the story of Washington than we all already know.

8) What did you think of the book’s length?
For the information shared, the perfect length.

9) What's another book this one reminds you of?
Plenty on Washington. None in terms of trying to cover what no one has before though.

10) What other books by this author have you read?
None.

[Roy Draa · Rating 2 out of 5]

Slow beginning, but does get into the various phases of the war and how GW adjusted to meet the requirements of the fledgling nation. Very little focus on Washington’s role as a service chief (i.e. Man, Train Equip) or his ability to move forces to support subordinate commanders (weighting the main effort) and task organize or make economy of force decisions. Far too much reliance upon quoting secondary sources. I expected this to delve more into Washington as a service chief and his consideration of the principles of war. A good read, but nothing new here.

[Bruce Cline · Rating 5 out of 5]

George Washington's Military Genius, by Dave R. Palmer (2012, 7 hr 45 min audiobook). This was a refreshing relook at and reassessment of General Washington and his military leadership during the Revolutionary War. The author won me over when he took the time to describe 18th century military practices, knowledge of which are critical to understanding how and why rebel and British armies acted the way they did. Additionally, this is as much a look at the numerous internal and external political calculations made by Washington as at his battlefield or strategic decision-making. Loved it!

[Daniel Byrd · Rating 5 out of 5]

4.5/5

George Washington is often (wrongly) portrayed as a sub-par general who won a war simply because the enemy lost it. In this analysis, Washington’s name offered with the likes of Hannibal, Napoleon, the Duke of Wellington, or any of the titans of the Second World War as a military great is laughable. Dave Palmer’s book does a fantastic job then of sifting through this historical myth and portraying Washington as he deserves to be looked at: a highly skilled general whose strategy held together the Revolution and ultimately won the war. I would highly recommend reading this book!

[Kirk Weikart · Rating 2 out of 5]

First, a significant portion of the opening chapters are devoted to an explanation of war strategies of the day with no real discussion of Washington.

Second, for using the word Genius in the title, there are large stretches in the book where Washington is described as guessing at strategy and exposing his inexperience.

All in all, this was somewhat dissatisfying to read. While I learned a lot of facts about the Revolutionary War, I came away wanting much much more.

[Donna Herrick · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a fascinating hybrid of a biography and a military history. As such, it is much better able to answer the question that motivates its writing. It effectively makes the case for Georgw Washington being a military genius. Evidently Washington had an appreciation for how national strategy and military strategy interact, and how his tactics, use of available resources and the nature of his foes all affected how to achieve victory.

[Chad Handley · Rating 5 out of 5]

Don’t let the title fool you - Palmer does a good job breaking down the ups and the downs of George Washington’s approach to strategy before a Clausewitz framework. The two war aims, independence and expansion, and the four phases of the war, show Washington as the leader he needed to be in each phase. This book is good at describing the National interests as compared to a traditional military book that gets bogged down in tactics.

[Jeff Andersen · Rating 1 out of 5]

Meh. Not impressed. Pretty dry. More like a textbook. Huge fan of George Washington so it was neat to learn a few more tidbits of history. Washington was clearly imperfect, but seemed to have some amazing experiences as a leader of Soldiers.

[Sean · Rating 3 out of 5]

Decent book focused on strategic vision of George Washington, maneuvering the early days of congressional oversight and executive powers.

This book will not bring you a deeply tactical narrative of the revolution war, if that is what you’re looking for.

[Mary-Sidney · Rating 2 out of 5]

Good information... Just laid out in a unorganized manner. The timeline skips around and there is a bit too much preamble before discussing Washington.

[Honor Phillips · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am pleasantly surprised by this book. It is well thought out, but the title doesn't quite do it justice.

[David · Rating 5 out of 5]

Having read a number of books about America's war of independence I wondered if I would learn much from this one. The focus of George Washington's Military Genius is to explore whether he was a strategic genius or a bumbling leader who was lucky and helped along by mistakes made by the British. It started out by explaining the state of the art in weaponry used by both sides and compares advantages and disadvantages of each which I found interesting. He details how long it took a soldier to reload after each shot and noted that someone who was particulary proficient could fire almost twice as many shots as average. The background and experiences of each of the key military officers was compared and then how Washington assessed all of the information at his disposal to make his decisions to attack or withdraw to fight another day. I think the author did a great job at listing and sorting through the critical information that went into Washington's decision making process. The book was a quick read that kept my interest. It also provides facts about what happened after Cornwallis surrendered at Yorktown that is generally recognized as the end of the war. But in reality Washington maintained his military as the final negotiations continued in Europe to reach agreements on many additional details about national boundaries, exchange of prisoners, evacuation of loyalists, etc. If these talks were to have broken down, the fighting would have started up again. Great read for anyone interested in the American Revolutionary War.

[Michael Bowman · Rating 3 out of 5]

Always glad to read a dissenting view on Revolutionary History. This was helpful. I am no worshiper of George Washington, I think that in many ways he was a glory monger. Yet I do have a respect for him, he was an impressive gentleman, and this book added to that respect.

[Lee · Rating 3 out of 5]

I am a huge fan of George Washington. I believe his name has become such an icon that most people just do not understand how important he was to the founding of the United States. George Washington set the tone for the Revolution and for how the country would be run and governed afterward. His significance to the United States cannot be over stated.

I was very eager to read this book. Unfortunately, for the most part I was disappointed in it. Mr. Palmer clearly knows his subject. He knows the Revolution and the time period very well. He knows what happened and the situation. He gives a lot of background information. That was part of what disappointed me. I was more than 100 pages into the book before he started giving anything specific about George Washington and his military genius and decisions. I have read numerous books on the Revolution and George Washington. In my opinion this book did not focus enough on George Washington and his specific actions and reasons for them. There were a few instances but not enough for me. The author clearly respects and admires George Washington. He did give a good summary of Washington's contribution in winning the war. I enjoyed the book as an outline and decent summary of the Revolutionary War but I expected more because of the title of the book.

[David R. · Rating 3 out of 5]

My own sensibilities parallel those of the author, i.e. that Washington was a better military mind than 20th century historians have declared. However, Palmer does not make the case that the general was a genius. Washington did learn from mistakes (the idiocy at Fort Necessity, the failures at New York in 1776) which elevated his performance later. And by and large he had good ideas. And indeed, no one else was his equal in the Revolution. I think Palmer makes a fine case for reappraising Washington, otherwise more is needed.

[Kamrud Jacobson · Rating 5 out of 5]

An innovative look at the strategy of Americas Father. Departing from both the demi-god her worship and revisionist dismissal of the Revolutions success as inevitable this book considers the military position of Washington at 4 distinct parts of the war and examines his actions to highlight a daring general with a firm grasp of his world, his own capabilities and how to use the rules of war to draw out, out maneuver, and batter a superior force while never exposing his own army to more than glancing blows. Military rope-a-dope writ large by The General.

[Joe · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was an enjoyable book. I never thought about the American Revolution being broken down into a four part affair, so that is a great observation and the author does a great job discussing those four parts. The scientist in me believes after reading this and a book about Washington's use of spies that he adapted (Darwinian adaptation) very well to these four phases. We will never know, but did the first president actually realize that the war may have passed from phase to phase?

[Gregsie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Palmer genuinely answers the question of Washington's military leadership ability in a clear and interesting manner. He explains the many factors that determine strategy, and throughout his overview of the war he shows how those factors influenced the war and Washington's understanding of them when planning his strategy.

Palmer seemlessly weaves the plethora of names, dates, locations, and other facts into the narrative of the story. The book is never dry or dull.

[Glenn Robinson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very interesting take on George Washington during the war. Not so much about Washington as about the strategy of both the Americans and the Brits, along with those of the French and the Spaniards. The war was broken down to 4 periods, each with their own challenges and benefits. There was enough new info in this book to make it worthwhile.

[Lee · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very favorable review of Washington's understanding of strategy, and how he applied it at different stages of the war. The breaking-down of the war into 4 stages was very useful in an understanding of the war in general.

[Kevin Goldsmith · Rating 5 out of 5]

The perfect combination of excellent and insightful. I had always assumed that General Washington was a badass, but many historians since the Revolutionary War have disputed that. Dave Palmer solidifies Washington's generalship as being "first in war." A must read for any history buff.

[Gregory · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have always been a George Washington fan, but scholars have not given him much credit as a military commander. Former West Point commandant General David Palmer provides a very favorable assessment of Washington, putting him in the context of the the 18th Century military thought and practice.

[Trevor Carlsen · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting read. The book provides a perspective of Washington purely from the point of military strategy and lays out the argument for Washington’s strategic genius by walking through the historical events. To its detriment, the book neglects any espionage and spy activity.

[Gerry · Rating 5 out of 5]

Well written by someone who understands what it takes to be at the head of an army. Helps us understand a little of not only Washington's genius but his overall greatness.

[Mark Widman · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good read