The Weight of Vengeance: The United States, the British Empire, and the War of 1812

by Troy Bickham

In early 1815, Secretary of State James Monroe reviewed the treaty with Britain that would end the War of 1812. The United States Navy was blockaded in port; much of the army had not been paid for nearly a year; the capital had been burned. The treaty offered an unexpected escape from disaster. Yet it incensed Monroe, for the name of Great Britain and its negotiators consistently appeared before those of the United States. "The United States have acquired a certain rank amongst nations, which is due to their population and political importance," he brazenly scolded the British diplomat who conveyed the treaty, "and they do not stand in the same situation as at former periods."

Monroe had a point, writes Troy Bickham. In The Weight of Vengeance , Bickham provides a provocative new account of America's forgotten war, underscoring its significance for both sides by placing it in global context. The Napoleonic Wars profoundly disrupted the global order, from India to Haiti to New Orleans. Spain's power slipped, allowing the United States to target the Floridas; the Haitian slave revolt contributed to the Louisiana Purchase; fears that Britain would ally with Tecumseh and disrupt the American northwest led to a pre-emptive strike on his people in 1811. This shifting balance of power provided the United States with the opportunity to challenge Britain's dominance of the Atlantic world. And it was an important conflict for Britain as well. Powerful elements in the British Empire so feared the rise of its former colonies that the British government sought to use the War of 1812 to curtail America's increasing maritime power and its aggressive territorial
expansion. And by late 1814, Britain had more men under arms in North America than it had in the Peninsular War against Napoleon, with the war with America costing about as much as its huge subsidies to European allies.

Troy Bickham has given us an authoritative, lucidly written global account that transforms our understanding of this pivotal war.

Genres: History, American History, Nonfiction, Military History, War, World History, Naval History

340 pages, Hardcover

First published May 9, 2012

About the author

Troy Bickham is professor of history at Texas A & M University.

Reviews

[Pi · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this as one of the required books for a seminar on the early American republic. I knew almost nothing about the War of 1812, but his was my favorite of the required reading by far. The style was informative and engaging without be academic (unnecessarily complex). I felt like the author was explaining something and making an argument without being condescending like many the voices of many other history books. There were some good stories mixed in, not all narratives and facts and figures. I also liked how it gave many perspectives of the war. It's a good place to start if your are interested in the war or the early American republic.

[Rapidreader · Rating 5 out of 5]

Hands down the best overall book on the subject.

The War of 1812 remains one of the most misunderstood conflicts in modern history, at least partly because so few people had written about it. The result was a handful of historians in the U.S. and Canada dominating the history either with nationalistic drivel or detailed blow-by-blow military narratives. There are also a few dry high political narratives from the U.S. perspective from decades ago. The recent bicentennial brought some fresh perspectives, which was a welcome change from the rather tight and tiny circle of people writing on the subject beforehand. Much of the new history was rushed, presumably to cash in on the anniversary. But, some of it was not, and the contributions of historians who write more broadly on the era (either from an American or British perspective) were the most welcomed, because they offered much-needed context. Taylor's book is one example, but, like much of his writing, it tends to focus on telling a series of story--great for reading, but not so helpful in understanding the conflict as a whole. Bickham's writing is a good easy-to-follow style, but not as engaging as Taylor's. His strength is his ability to contextualize the war in the broader view of history by considering a variety of viewpoints and experiences--British, Canadian, Carribean, American, Native American, etc etc. If you are going to read one book on the subject, read this one. If you are going to read several, read this one first, then Taylor's, Budanski's, and some others.

I finished this book feeling like I had 1) A comprehensive understanding of conflict and 2) An appreciation for why it actually mattered.

[Captain Steve · Rating 5 out of 5]

Without a doubt the best overall book the War of 1812, and I have been reading most of them. It looks at a full range of perspectives and angles, not just the U.S. or military or politics. Also not overly dense or jingoistic. It is academic but still very readable.

If you are going to read just one book, or about to start a long reading list on the subject (like me) this may be the book for you.

[Tom Travels · Rating 5 out of 5]

Easily the best book on the subject in terms of readability and comprehensiveness. Offers a more nuanced view of the conflict than the others I have read. Looks at the conflict from various U.S. (it was a controversial war in the U.S. . . .), Canadian, British, Native American, etc. perspectives. Not strong on military operational history, but very strong on diplomatic, political, cultural, and public opinion.

[John · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent. This is worth reading by anyone interested in this so-called "forgotten war", but the book is much more than that. It's comprehensive on the origins, events and the various sides of the conflict. It's light on battles, but a main argument in the book is that the battles were not so important in determining the outcome of this short war. The Americans, after all, claimed victory (and the British at the time seemed to agree) despite not achieving any of their war aims. A good lesson for modern politics and understanding the differences between our understanding of history and what actually happened.

[Alessandro · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was in the author's American history intro class years ago. I was in the business school and only taking it as a requirement. I loved his class and now read history books for fun as a result.

This book reads like his lectures: an overall argument explored with both stats and facts but also powerful anecdotes that personalize the experience. There is also a fair bit of subtle dry humor.

Worth reading if you are interested in the subject or into history generally.

[Nigel · Rating 5 out of 5]

I do not usually read histories of wars and politics, but a friend had this on her shelf and recommended I try it. I found it surprisingly engaging, not the usual guns and generals but a thoughtful look at how a variety of people experienced a more-or-less sidelined war. I appreciated the author's effort for national and ethnic balance.

[Travis · Rating 5 out of 5]

Just finished reading for a class on the War of 1812. Loved this book after reading some others. Not perfect, but without a doubt the best book on the topic I've read. Loved that it looked at the war from so many perspectives, not just the elite or just the Americans. The author has an easy style with bit of dry humor.

[Brian Williams]

This book was reviewed in the July 10, 2012 Wall Street Journal.

[Asher Burns · Rating 5 out of 5]

The War of 1812 has often languished at the periphery of the public’s historical consciousness. Many Americans may only have a hazy recollection of learning about the war in grade school, while many a Briton has likely never heard of the war at all. Only in Canada, where it fits more neatly into the national mythos, it is perhaps more recognizable. In The Weight of Vengeance, Troy Bickham seeks to rescue the War of 1812 from the obscurity in which it sits. Bickham, a professor at Texas A&M University, holds a D.Phil in Modern History from Oxford University, and has previously published monographs on depictions of Native Americans in eighteenth-century Britain and the American Revolution’s portrayal in the British press. His expertise on early American and imperial Britain, as well as early modern print culture, is on full display in The Weight of Vengeance, as he skillfully paints of a portrait of the War of 1812 and the social and political forces that shaped and were shaped by it.

Bickham’s thesis is that the War of 1812, far from being an even then “peripheral” (9) conflict over now-irrelevant issues, was a high-stakes battle over whether the United States or Great Britain would achieve dominance in North America. Behind the stated reasons for the American declaration of war lay a desire for “equality of the United States among European nations and sovereignty over its own affairs” (21), while “for Britain the War of 1812 became a gamble for renewed empire in North America and the retention of British hegemony over the Atlantic world” (11). Because of this, Bickham adds, the War of 1812 was not a mere theater in the Napoleonic Wars, which were an intertwined but distinct conflict. Rather, it stands as “a rematch between Britain and the United States which sought to settle unresolved issues” (19). Bickham carries his thesis with aplomb, providing a treatment of the War of 1812 that is simultaneously engaging and enlightening.

One of the key features of The Weight of Vengeance is Bickham’s extensive use of contemporary newspapers as sources. Though he certainly utilizes other primary sources, such as personal correspondence and parliamentary and congressional debates, he “draws largely on newspapers to relate both what people were told about the conflict and how they responded to the news” (13). There is perhaps a risk to this approach, namely, that sensationalistic journalistic sources may prove unreliable in detailing the conflict. Bickham does well, however, to use an extremely broad range of newspaper accounts, and to balance them with the other types of primary sources. Further, Bickham’s overarching goal is not so much to detail the tactics of the military campaigns that composed the war, but to depict both its contemporary and modern significance. As such, his reliance on newspaper accounts provides an excellent window into how the contemporary society viewed the war.

In Chapter 1, Bickham examines the American case for war. He argues that while there was no “single catalyst that prompted the United States to declare war on Britain” (20), the various justifications offered all shared a common theme: a demand for “national sovereignty” (21). Bickham persuasively demonstrates that the three main rationales for the declaration of war —British interference with America’s maritime trade, especially through the Orders in Council, British impressment of sailors from American ships, and British incitement of Native Americans against the United States—while real, pointed more fundamentally toward a need to be respected as a sovereign and powerful nation. This analysis is especially helpful in explaining why the War of 1812 outlasted both the Orders in Council and the impressment of American sailors: these issues were never in themselves the driving reason for war. Rather, Bickham makes clear, the war was primarily an “attempt to redefine” the relationship between Britain and the U.S. and to “turn the United States into a leading protagonist” on the world stage (21).

In Chapter 2, conversely, Bickham considers the British case for war. If the U.S. sought to assert its sovereignty through the conflict, Bickham argues, Britain sought to put the upstart United States back in its place. As he demonstrates, Britain was deeply concerned with the rise of American influence, viewing the country as “a dangerous and unreliable nation that threatened British interests” (64). Bickham’s treatment of the economic element of the push for war is especially profitable. Alongside engaging in trade with Britain’s enemy, France, the growth of the American shipping economy “left the British government with a choice of either accepting the United States as the eventual preeminent merchant maritime power or taking direct action to stop it” (56). Bickham also brilliantly dispels any modern assumptions that the British public and government viewed American and the War of 1812 as a “sideshow,” citing British politicians, newspapers, and pamphlets to demonstrate that the country at large “cared deeply about the crisis and conflict with the United States” (49).

Chapter 3 details the run-up to the declaration of war itself. Bickham shows how each side stoked tensions and maneuvered to achieve an advantage over the other. As he notes, “both the British and the American governments underestimated each other’s resolve to go to war” (99). The willingness of each side to enter into the conflict, and their failure to arrive at any sort of peaceable compromise, supports his overall thesis that the war was a natural outworking of the collision between two countries seeking to function as the great power in North America. Bickham also helpfully sets the stage for why, militarily, the war would prove to go so poorly for the Americans: they failed to meaningfully prepare for it, and so “staggered into [the] war with scarcely a navy and the skeleton of an army” (85).

Chapter 4 describes the first part of the war, in which the United States took the offensive. Bickham differentiates, with good reason, between the land campaign and the naval campaign. The former was, largely, a disaster for the United States, while the latter, at least initially, proved more successful. His nuanced discussion of the naval campaign is particularly valuable. As he notes, a handful of American victories in single-ship actions were strategically insignificant in the grand scheme of things, given the overwhelming numeric superiority of the Royal Navy. However, there were real psychological benefits to these victories, which raised American morale while simultaneously depressing that of the British public. Further, American privateers captured between “6.3 and 25.8 percent of total [British] merchant tonnage” (129). While Bickham correctly states that privateering was “a mixed bag” (128), especially at an individual level, and that “the British took an equally heavy toll on American shipping” (129), the damage to the British economy and to British morale were significant, and factored into the eventual peace. Bickham perhaps understates this significance when he states that “Britain had won the Atlantic naval war by the end of 1813” (131), which, while tactically true, does not do full justice to what was strategically accomplished by American privateering.

Chapter 5 shifts focus to the war from the perspective of the British Empire. Bickham divides his analysis between Canada, the West Indies, and Britain itself. He argues persuasively that the War of 1812 helped to solidify Canada, which had to face down a ground invasion by the United States, as “an integral part of the British Empire” (152). The West Indies, meanwhile, faced great disruption due to American privateering, and were somewhat dependent on American trade to avoid further economic disaster, “highlight[ing] the colonies’ ongoing dependence on the United States, further driving home the strategic importance of either subjugating the United States or cultivating Canada” (158), a fact that ties quite effectively into Bickham’s thesis that the war was ultimately over dominance in North America. Ultimately, Bickham shows that, especially as the Napoleonic Wars drew to a close, Britain was able to dedicate more resources to the War of 1812, making eventual victory close to inevitable. After a bungled attempt at an invasion from Canada, however, the British government, under popular pressure, decided to make peace, “unwilling to continue the war another year or more to gain concessions from the United States” (169).

In Chapters 6 and 7, Bickham moves from offering a more chronological account of the conflict to examining American and British, respectively, domestic opposition to the war. In the United States, as Bickham demonstrates, the war was highly controversial for a gamut of reasons, including moral, religious, and practical concerns. Bickham also usefully elucidates how American antiwar sentiment helped to solidify the concept of “a loyal opposition” in American life and politics, which was “in its infancy” in the U.S. at the time (175). There are two extremely minor criticisms to make here. First, Bickham claims that “in no other American conflict would the press and state politicians so freely and absolutely condemn the wartime policies of a president” (176). While not essential to his point, it does seem a rather hard standard of evidence to meet, and Bickham does not really attempt to prove it. Conflicts like the Mexican-American War, the Vietnam War, and various American interventions in the Middle East all seem like challengers for this title. Later, Bickham laments that “unfortunately, few Baptist or Methodist sermons dealing with politics found their way into print and survived” (194). It seems possible that this is because, comparative to other denominations, politics was not as much of a concern. Both the Baptists and Methodists, as non-established churches, may have been reluctant to comment on matters of policy. Further, as evangelical churches amidst the Second Great Awakening, they may have been more inclined toward strictly spiritual matters. Regardless, Bickham does not offer any explanation for this lack in the record.

In many ways British opposition to the war mirrored American opposition. Economic self-interest was, naturally, one of the foremost arguments against the conflict, which, as Bickham helpfully shows, led to the repeal of the Orders in Council. Another argument was “that Americans were the cultural kin of Britons,” and that the war was therefore fratricidal (223). One antiwar argument that again supports Bickham’s overall thesis was that “the conflict itself would hurt Britain regardless of whether it won or not, because the war would spur the Americans into creating stronger and larger armed forces” (220). In the end, British antiwar sentiment caused the government to be willing to make peace even while it was at a military advantage.

The final chapter details the peace-making process and negotiations at Ghent. Bickham ably shows how the negotiation process reflected the cause of the war: “the Americans craved respect as a nation … while the British wanted tangible concessions that would limit American power” (230). In the end, the Treaty of Ghent resulted in the status quo ante bellum. Bickham points out that this outcome was, ultimately, favorable to the Americans, who were in a far worse position coming into negotiations. This was achieved, he argues persuasively, due to domestic pressure, as well as a desire to shore up Britain’s position in Europe. In a conclusion, Bickham asks: “who won the War of 1812” (262). He concludes, quite convincingly, that, given “the true primary issue of the War of 1812—whether or not the United States would be respected as a sovereign nation” (263), the U.S. were the victors. Through a mixture of pluck and luck, the country had held its own against the British Empire and ultimately walked away without any diplomatic concessions.

Bickham’s prose is both sophisticated and accessible, his command of the evidence remarkable, and his anecdotes engaging. This is a work of both scholarly merit and great readability at the lay level. The arrangement of the chapters feels natural and is easy to follow. Occasional usage of images, especially political cartoons, provide an extra dash of flavor from the period under discussion. Most importantly, Bickham robustly confirms his thesis, demonstrating that the War of 1812 was—both in actuality and in perception at the time—a highly significant conflict over who would hold sway in North America. The Weight of Vengeance should be on the bookshelf of anyone interested in the War of 1812 or the time period surrounding it.
________________________
Written for my Early American Republic class at Randolph-Macon College.

[Rob Kranski · Rating 5 out of 5]

I'm on the last chapter. I'm not normally a war history buff, but then this isn't really a muskets-and-cannon balls sort of history. I heard him on the radio, and liked is disarmingly straightforward answers. Unlike a lot of authors he tried to make his subject easier to understand rather than to smugly overcomplicated it.

The book is more about politics, the economy and public opinion than battles. The major pluses are that it is well-written, reasonable in length (summarizes parts that are not that important, expands on those that are), and balanced between all the actors--chapters on the British perspective, Canadian experience, U.S. controversies and even the Caribbean. I like the international take because makes the book about more than just this one conflict. The book explains a whole period. And it does so brilliantly.

If you're interested in this period of British Empire/early U.S./early Canadian history I strongly recommend this book. If you want a saber-waving nationalist epic, then look elsewhere.

[Sean DeLauder · Rating 5 out of 5]

While Bickham's book concerns the War of 1812, it is not a work in which individual battles or war strategies are discussed, as the author makes clear at the outset. Instead, it is a book that analyzes the causes of the war, the preparedness of the nations involved, the war aims, the support and resistance of the US and British public and politicians, the process of negotiating peace, and arguments as to who could be said to have won the war.

It's an eye-opening work for someone with only a high-school education on the topic, which focuses largely on the rare American victories and President Madison's (eventually irrelevant) purpose for the war--ending impressment of American merchant sailors by the British Navy, which was trying to recover its own sailors who left to avoid the war in Europe, end alliances with Britain-hostile Native Americans, and allow American ships free trade throughout the world. The US was arrogant enough to believe the war might earn them a slice of Canada as well. Britain was at war with Napoleon at the time of these machinations, and more than a bit peeved that the US took advantage of its neutrality to trade with both British allies and the French, whom the British were attempting to blockade.

A considerable number of Americans viewed war with Britain as unnecessary and undesirable, and US preparedness for such conflict was embarrassingly poor (failure to fund, train, equip, supply, etc.), resulting in reversals on nearly every front, and very quickly turning an offensive war into a defensive one after Napoleon was defeated and England turned its focus to the other side of the Atlantic.

Interestingly, the final result of the conflict, despite the clearly superior British forces, was a return to the status quo. From a military standpoint, the United States was overmatched in virtually every regard, particularly when the European war with Napoleon came to an end in 1814, allowing England to divert more forces to America.

This return to the starting point came largely from American intransigence, despite being nearly bankrupt, the shocking initial demands of England during the months of negotiations, and largely from developments in Europe as England partook in the negotiations surrounding the dissolution of the defeated French Empire and the current English parliament’s desire to stay in power in a war-weary and overtaxed nation (that benefited greatly from trade with the United States), which feared being too heavy-handed might start yet another engagement amongst the testy European powers.

It’s a deeply researched book taking content directly from the papers of the day, the diaries and documents of those involved, providing a magnificent understanding of one of the United States’ most embarrassingly badly waged conflicts and the circumstances that allowed it to emerge, apart from ignominious defeats and the burning of its capital city, unscathed. While the United States gained nothing from its war, it proved largely unpunished as well. And Great Britain, despite advancing on virtually all military fronts, provided none of its promised assurances and in no way punished the upstart nation that began the war by seeking to claim its territory in Canada.

[Jim · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting analysis of the American & British perspectives of the War of 1812. Why was this war fought and who really won? The author addresses those questions from both sides. American history buffs will enjoy reading.

[Frank · Rating 3 out of 5]

For those of you who are fond of reading textbooks, this is your kind of book. For the rest of us though, one could have imagined that the War of 1812 might have been a bit more exciting. True to academic form, the book is densely documented, to the point of distraction for the average reader. I'm sure Professor Bickham saw the need for a book of this nature because current literature must have left some voids. In this respect, the book must have satisfied some objectives. Only a student of the period, however, will be able to closely identify with this work.

[Jessie Saunders · Rating 4 out of 5]

A great overview. This isn’t a book about battles or generals but is a birds eye view of the culture and attitudes of the countries involved. He also puts into perspective common misconceptions of the war. He mentions a lot of details (dates, battles, places) that left me confused sometimes. Maps and/or a timeline of events would have been really helpful for a reference. He should have included those given the broad nature of the book.

[Sam]

Stopped in the middle of chapter 1. Very informative, but not narrative.

[Chris · Rating 2 out of 5]

As has already been mentioned in other reviews, the strength of this book is to offer different perspectives on the War of 1812 beyond the typical US-dominated, militaristic history of the war. I also appreciated that it gives more of a focus to the Canadian involvement in the war.

However, I was constantly perplexed by his unapologetic defense of the British Empire, accompanied by criticizing and questioning every action of a young America - even decisions and events that turned out well for America are explained away as luck, happenstance, or by some other excuse. Bickham's view of public opinion of the time and any historical accounts often seem a bit cherry-picked to be used as a defense of Britain's actions in the war and examples of the United States government's mismanagement.

It became apparent to me early on when he defends Britain's impressment of sailors as a legally just and perfectly reasonable practice of the time. Yet he repeatedly examines American atrocities with a contemporary moral lens. I do think we should look back on the horrors of early America more closely and honestly than we have through most of American history, but my issue was Bickham's need to vindicate every action and decision made by the British Empire, an Empire that committed untold atrocities around the globe. It continued through the entire book, and by the Treaty of Ghent almost started to seem petty.

At a certain point I had to look up the author to see if I could understand why he took such a pointed approach. Bickham seems to have a primary focus on the British Empire in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. My guess is he has some level of pride in his subject and as a result, shines too favorable a light on them. This happens with many biographers who begin to feel close to the person they're writing about - in this case it's an Empire.

On that note, I tend to prefer a more biographical view history and this book had little in the way of personality for the characters involved in the conflict. Not much color is given to the individuals in the story, and it instead presents itself more as a list of events that occurred, coupled with Bickham's opinions on why they were missteps for the US and justifiable for the British Empire.

I had hoped for more detail on certain figures like Tecumseh, William Henry Harrison, Andrew Jackson, and the military conflicts they were involved in, though I understand that not to be the point of this book. I would have liked to hear more about the Battle of New Orleans beyond the fact that the US won it after the treaty was signed and it was of no importance. This war helped Andrew Jackson become the first populist President of the United States which has had lasting effects on the country to this day.

While this book deserves praise for its fresh perspective on the War of 1812, I just couldn't get past the relentless defense of the British Empire.

[Amy · Rating 3 out of 5]

Ok, the thing is, while this book is impressive in that it looks at the War of 1812 from the British, American, Canadian, and to a lesser extent the French and Native American perspectives, and it places that war in a global historical context, this thing was as dry as unbuttered toast! I appreciated that the book examined the international political, economic, and public opinion aspects of this war, but I couldn't ever really get to the point of actually caring about what I was being told because there was nothing about the writing or storytelling that dazzled me. The approach this book takes to the War of 1812 is intriguing. I just wish the writing had captured my interest a bit more than it did. 2 stars for the writing, 4 for the angles from which the author approached this historical event.

[Rachel · Rating 5 out of 5]

Best yet. Comprehensive, well-written, looks at all sides, not just USA and military men. Finally someone including the US, Canada, and Britain in the same book! Good inclusion of Native Americans and African slaves, too, although they don't take center stage in the book. Even has the Caribbean.

I also liked the writing style. Good narrative, lots of colorful examples of the human experience. Excellent mix of sources--diaries, official letters, newspapers.

This is an audiobook, too. I started the paper copy then finished it on audiobook during a long drive. Lots of history doesn't transfer well into audio--to much bombarding of figures and dry narrative--but this one worked, because the author is a good WRITER and historian.

[Anne]

Tossing the hat in on this one. History just isn't my thing. The history of a war? UGH! It must have been delusions brought on by my recent visit to Canada (apparently, the only country around that cares about the war of 1812) that made me think I could read this. Nonetheless, I think I got a wee bit out of the first couple chapters. I thought it was written just fine. But, again, just not my cup of tea.

[Hannah · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was hoping for the story of the war of 1812 - this was the opinions of all the people who participated in the war of 1812. Good for what it was, but not a favorite. Interesting take on an important historical event and made me think about things a little differently.

[William Mego · Rating 3 out of 5]

Acceptable, but perhaps overly top down view, which I complain of only because there are others which accomplish the same. Otherwise a fine and sturdy accounting.