What do you think?
Rate this book
1812: War with America
Listen to a short interview with Jon Latimer
Chris Gondek | Heron & Crane In the first complete history of the War of 1812 written from a British perspective, Jon Latimer offers an authoritative and compelling account that places the conflict in its strategic context within the Napoleonic wars. The British viewed the War of 1812 as an ill-fated attempt by the young American republic to annex Canada. For British Canada, populated by many loyalists who had fled the American Revolution, this was a war for survival. The Americans aimed both to assert their nationhood on the global stage and to expand their territory northward and westward. Americans would later find in this war many iconic moments in their national story--the bombardment of Fort McHenry (the inspiration for Francis Scott Key's "Star Spangled Banner"); the Battle of Lake Erie; the burning of Washington; the death of Tecumseh; Andrew Jackson's victory at New Orleans--but their war of conquest was ultimately a failure. Even the issues of neutrality and impressment that had triggered the war were not resolved in the peace treaty. For Britain, the war was subsumed under a long conflict to stop Napoleon and to preserve the empire. The one lasting result of the war was in Canada, where the British victory eliminated the threat of American conquest, and set Canadians on the road toward confederation. Latimer describes events not merely through the eyes of generals, admirals, and politicians but through those of the soldiers, sailors, and ordinary people who were directly affected. Drawing on personal letters, diaries, and memoirs, he crafts an intimate narrative that marches the reader into the heat of battle.
Chris Gondek | Heron & Crane In the first complete history of the War of 1812 written from a British perspective, Jon Latimer offers an authoritative and compelling account that places the conflict in its strategic context within the Napoleonic wars. The British viewed the War of 1812 as an ill-fated attempt by the young American republic to annex Canada. For British Canada, populated by many loyalists who had fled the American Revolution, this was a war for survival. The Americans aimed both to assert their nationhood on the global stage and to expand their territory northward and westward. Americans would later find in this war many iconic moments in their national story--the bombardment of Fort McHenry (the inspiration for Francis Scott Key's "Star Spangled Banner"); the Battle of Lake Erie; the burning of Washington; the death of Tecumseh; Andrew Jackson's victory at New Orleans--but their war of conquest was ultimately a failure. Even the issues of neutrality and impressment that had triggered the war were not resolved in the peace treaty. For Britain, the war was subsumed under a long conflict to stop Napoleon and to preserve the empire. The one lasting result of the war was in Canada, where the British victory eliminated the threat of American conquest, and set Canadians on the road toward confederation. Latimer describes events not merely through the eyes of generals, admirals, and politicians but through those of the soldiers, sailors, and ordinary people who were directly affected. Drawing on personal letters, diaries, and memoirs, he crafts an intimate narrative that marches the reader into the heat of battle.
656 pages, Hardcover
First published September 1, 2007
About the author
Jon Latimer
38 books5 followersEducated at Christleton County High School in Chester, Jon Latimer studied for a geography degree at University College, Swansea but switched course to graduate in oceanography. He worked as an oceanographer until becoming a full-time writer in 1997.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
October 3, 2012
If what you know about the War of 1812 amounts to a bunch of pretty embarrassing American losses in Canada (and pretty much elsewhere), a few wins at sea, and oh, yes, the burning of Washington, D.C....well, you have it in one.
No, I don't count the "Battle of New Orleans" as a win (the song or the battle).
But there's so much more to the story, so much nuance. 1812: War with America lays it all out. Take the New England Federalists who traded with the British throughout the war (and the wartime American crops that went to feed Wellington's troops). They were paid in specie, a rare commodity at the time, and those New England riches went on to fund the American Industrial Revolution.
It may not be obvious from the title, but this is a rare history of the War of 1812 (the American War, to the British at the time), written from a British point of view. It's the most thorough history of the war I've ever read, and I've read a few.
The book is really only 408 pages (not 656). The rest are notes, AMAZING notes, and bibliography. The notes alone make this book worth the investment. I spent as much time perusing them and discovering sources that I want to read as I did reading the actual text.
There are places where I bristled. I think I'm open-minded and skeptical, but some national heroes/myths die hard. Every time I felt I was getting little annoyed or wondering about British bias (a complaint I'd seen in Amazon reviews), I stopped and realized that my bias was what was causing the cognitive dissonance. It was painful to realize how far astray I'd been led.
(However, I'm still pissed off about the sack of Washington. The Library of Congress! Bastards!)
Definitely a must-read if you love American history, especially during these bicentennial years. Truly masterful. (It's also the only history that I've read and thought, "Damn, I wish I'd written this.")
No, I don't count the "Battle of New Orleans" as a win (the song or the battle).
But there's so much more to the story, so much nuance. 1812: War with America lays it all out. Take the New England Federalists who traded with the British throughout the war (and the wartime American crops that went to feed Wellington's troops). They were paid in specie, a rare commodity at the time, and those New England riches went on to fund the American Industrial Revolution.
It may not be obvious from the title, but this is a rare history of the War of 1812 (the American War, to the British at the time), written from a British point of view. It's the most thorough history of the war I've ever read, and I've read a few.
The book is really only 408 pages (not 656). The rest are notes, AMAZING notes, and bibliography. The notes alone make this book worth the investment. I spent as much time perusing them and discovering sources that I want to read as I did reading the actual text.
There are places where I bristled. I think I'm open-minded and skeptical, but some national heroes/myths die hard. Every time I felt I was getting little annoyed or wondering about British bias (a complaint I'd seen in Amazon reviews), I stopped and realized that my bias was what was causing the cognitive dissonance. It was painful to realize how far astray I'd been led.
(However, I'm still pissed off about the sack of Washington. The Library of Congress! Bastards!)
Definitely a must-read if you love American history, especially during these bicentennial years. Truly masterful. (It's also the only history that I've read and thought, "Damn, I wish I'd written this.")
April 13, 2015
An excellent, comprehensive history of the War of 1812. Latimer provides in-depth coverage of all the issues involved, such as the New England federalists that traded with the British during the war and considered secession.
Latimer’s book is particularly strong on the Anglo-Canadian perspective and also does a good job setting the war in the context of the Napoleonic Wars. Latimer does a good job covering the American political factions that supported England (who in reality did not actually impress that many Americans on the high seas), France (even though Napoleon arguably caused more harm to US interests than the British), or neutrality to whatever extent, as well as the War Hawks.
Latimer does a good job describing how unprepared the US was for war; the US army was easily one of the worst in existence at the time. And unfortunately for the US, the army’s more able officers such as Winfield Scott or Jacob Brown were unable to contribute much due to their confinement to relatively unimportant theaters.
Latimer’s book is particularly strong on the Anglo-Canadian perspective and also does a good job setting the war in the context of the Napoleonic Wars. Latimer does a good job covering the American political factions that supported England (who in reality did not actually impress that many Americans on the high seas), France (even though Napoleon arguably caused more harm to US interests than the British), or neutrality to whatever extent, as well as the War Hawks.
Latimer does a good job describing how unprepared the US was for war; the US army was easily one of the worst in existence at the time. And unfortunately for the US, the army’s more able officers such as Winfield Scott or Jacob Brown were unable to contribute much due to their confinement to relatively unimportant theaters.
November 5, 2009
A good history of the War of 1812 seen from the British point of view.
February 17, 2026
The history of this conflict is undoubtedly taught in schools on both sides of the 49th parallel. North of the border, we were taught that we were invaded by our neighbours to the south, that we kicked their asses and went down and burned their White House, whereupon we returned and invented hockey. We also gained two national heroes in the process, Tecumseh and Sir Isaac Brock, both of whom perished in the conflict. Brock's tiny uniform sits in the Canadian War Museum to this day: I have seen it several times, a study in scarlet with a huge hole dead centre.
South of the border, I assume they concentrate on teaching about the redcoat assault on Fort McHenry and they undoubtedly make much of the British defeat at New Orleans where, according to Johnny Horton, alligators were used as ordnance.
As the reader will learn from Latimer's excellent book, there is truth in both versions, except the alligator bit. In fact, the reader will be taught that the war was a vast conflict covering the southern half of North America, the Great Lakes, and much of the Atlantic. Privateers ranged over the oceans, ports were blockaded, villages burned. Indians took up the tomahawk on both sides of the conflict, and black men escaped from slavery played their part in the fray. It was an eye-opener for me; I thought I was reasonably well-informed on the war but this thing was much bigger than anything we were fed in school.
Mr Latimer must have spent years researching this very detailed account, as the notes and Appendices account for about a third of the thickness of the book. He was good enough to provide diagrams showing the disposition and movements of troops for the major battles. The takeaway is this: the Yanks lost. They were the aggressors, having invaded and being driven back. They abandoned their own Capitol which we entered, and where we were entertained by locals, and departed after about 24 hours. Unlike the Yanks who had a habit of laying waste to everything, the redcoats burned only official government buildings or private dwellings from which they had received fire.
In the end, American aggression achieved nothing; none of their war aims were realized. Two years of conflict and the loss of so many lives and the expenditure of vast quantities of money ended up with the situation being exactly the same as it was before hostilities commenced. And as for the much-heralded victory at New Orleans....it was pointless too, as a peace agreement had been signed almost a month before the battle. Communication being what it was in those days, all casualties on both sides were for naught.
I did learn something I found alarming (but not surprising) in the later pages of the book. Apparently there existed a War Plan Red in which the USA had approved, in theory, a plan to attack Canada yet again. Heavy bombardment of Ottawa, Montreal, and Halifax was considered as a preamble to the conflict, and the use of poison gas was also on the table...for humanitarian reasons, of course. I have no doubt another plan is in place, and President Trump's recent comments about making us the 51st state may not be as far-fetched as we think. Let's face it, 10 years of leftist rule have left us an international laughing stock and cozying up to China makes us an existential threat. Our military is a joke and private citizens are being disarmed. I doubt that we could prevail in another contest.
South of the border, I assume they concentrate on teaching about the redcoat assault on Fort McHenry and they undoubtedly make much of the British defeat at New Orleans where, according to Johnny Horton, alligators were used as ordnance.
As the reader will learn from Latimer's excellent book, there is truth in both versions, except the alligator bit. In fact, the reader will be taught that the war was a vast conflict covering the southern half of North America, the Great Lakes, and much of the Atlantic. Privateers ranged over the oceans, ports were blockaded, villages burned. Indians took up the tomahawk on both sides of the conflict, and black men escaped from slavery played their part in the fray. It was an eye-opener for me; I thought I was reasonably well-informed on the war but this thing was much bigger than anything we were fed in school.
Mr Latimer must have spent years researching this very detailed account, as the notes and Appendices account for about a third of the thickness of the book. He was good enough to provide diagrams showing the disposition and movements of troops for the major battles. The takeaway is this: the Yanks lost. They were the aggressors, having invaded and being driven back. They abandoned their own Capitol which we entered, and where we were entertained by locals, and departed after about 24 hours. Unlike the Yanks who had a habit of laying waste to everything, the redcoats burned only official government buildings or private dwellings from which they had received fire.
In the end, American aggression achieved nothing; none of their war aims were realized. Two years of conflict and the loss of so many lives and the expenditure of vast quantities of money ended up with the situation being exactly the same as it was before hostilities commenced. And as for the much-heralded victory at New Orleans....it was pointless too, as a peace agreement had been signed almost a month before the battle. Communication being what it was in those days, all casualties on both sides were for naught.
I did learn something I found alarming (but not surprising) in the later pages of the book. Apparently there existed a War Plan Red in which the USA had approved, in theory, a plan to attack Canada yet again. Heavy bombardment of Ottawa, Montreal, and Halifax was considered as a preamble to the conflict, and the use of poison gas was also on the table...for humanitarian reasons, of course. I have no doubt another plan is in place, and President Trump's recent comments about making us the 51st state may not be as far-fetched as we think. Let's face it, 10 years of leftist rule have left us an international laughing stock and cozying up to China makes us an existential threat. Our military is a joke and private citizens are being disarmed. I doubt that we could prevail in another contest.
October 19, 2025
What I remember being taught in school about the War of 1812 is that the cause was primarily the British kidnapping of American sailors and disruption of free trade with Europe and that the Americans won the war. What I learned in this book is that many of the kidnapped sailors were formerly from the Royal Navy and deserted to US merchantmen for higher pay and better working conditions. Much of the free trade was with France, with whom the British were at war and had blockaded. Also, the primary American objective of the war was to assume complete control over Canada, something I don't remember being taught.
As far as winning the war, I'm not sure one could declare the winner to be the protagonist who had his capital seized and burned, lost almost all of the land battles and failed to accomplish any of his objectives. When the war ended, things remained pretty much as they had been at the start.
This is the most thorough of the books I have read on this subject. I found it very enlightening after being fed a lifetime of spin in my education.
As far as winning the war, I'm not sure one could declare the winner to be the protagonist who had his capital seized and burned, lost almost all of the land battles and failed to accomplish any of his objectives. When the war ended, things remained pretty much as they had been at the start.
This is the most thorough of the books I have read on this subject. I found it very enlightening after being fed a lifetime of spin in my education.
April 7, 2025
This work looks at the War of 1812, but from the British/Canadian perspective. This is primarily a military history, looking at the naval war between British and American ships and the various land fights between the US and Britain/Canada. The Canadian operations were of interest, as over 200 years later, there are once again some conversations about America trying to claim parts of Canada again. The US did have some military success, but they were also poorly lead, and by the end of the war, the US gained nothing of Canada. 1812 might go down as one of the dumber wars in US history, and this military history doesn't do much to dispel that sentiment. True, this war effectively ended the British military threat to the US, but perhaps that could have happened without the war. If you want just the military perspective, this one is for you.
May 27, 2017
This was Ok but could have been better. More of an introduction or transition between the American and Canadian perspectives, locations and times would have made it easier to follow. Some numbers were not internally consistent. Overall a nice non-american perspective.
November 21, 2022
The First academic book I ever read and somehow I couldn’t put it down. Only a few potential errors which don’t harm the quality of the narrative or scholarship
May 30, 2009
An enjoyable history which sometimes requires close reading to follow the thread of events. Slightly and pleasantly partisan after the manner of acolytes of the Georgian era. Sparkles in moments when the abatis of Latimer's historical detachment succumbs to the temptation of a sharp and undeniably witty remark. Example:
"Madison's self-congratulatory proclamation that the peace treaty was 'highly honorable to the United States, and terminates, with particular felicity, a campaign signalized by the most brilliant successes,' was a singular piece of political spin from a man who led to war a nation totally unprepared for it, and had recently been a bewildered refugee in back-country Virginia while his capital burned behind him."
Zing! Not exactly the kind of thing you'd read in a David McCullough book, and as refreshing at times as a nice pink gin. Enjoy in moderation.
"Madison's self-congratulatory proclamation that the peace treaty was 'highly honorable to the United States, and terminates, with particular felicity, a campaign signalized by the most brilliant successes,' was a singular piece of political spin from a man who led to war a nation totally unprepared for it, and had recently been a bewildered refugee in back-country Virginia while his capital burned behind him."
Zing! Not exactly the kind of thing you'd read in a David McCullough book, and as refreshing at times as a nice pink gin. Enjoy in moderation.
April 7, 2008
I liked that this book tells the story of the War of 1812 from the British point of view. Aside from that, I found it very hard to read. Difficult to tell which side the military commanders were on - references were made to people we seem expected to recognize. I spent a lot of time flipping back to figure out who someone was.
July 12, 2009
It... wasn't that interesting, I learned some stuff, but it wasn't exciting stuff. About all I can remember is the first British cammander in Canada was named Brock. I got so tired of it I didn't even make it to the burning of Washington D.C.
May 4, 2010
Not only did I learn about a war I don't know too much about, it was written by an Englishman, so it came from a point of view that you don't generally get to hear in this country.
August 21, 2013
Lots and lots of battles. Really just a long military narrative. Great if you are into this sort of history.
November 4, 2014
Very good overview of the conflict
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews