What do you think?
Rate this book
With Musket and Tomahawk #1
With Musket and Tomahawk: The Saratoga Campaign and the Wilderness War of 1777
A comprehensive look at the brutal wilderness war that secured America's independence . . .
With Musket and Tomahawk is a vivid account of the American and British struggles in the sprawling wilderness region of the northeast during the Revolutionary War. Combining strategic, tactical, and personal detail, this book describes how the patriots of the recently organized Northern Army defeated England's massive onslaught of 1777, thereby all but ensuring America’s independence.
Conceived and launched by top-ranking British military leaders to shatter and suppress the revolting colonies, Britain’s three-pronged thrust was meant to separate New England from the rest of the nascent nation along the line of the Hudson River. Thus divided, both the northern and southern colonies could have been defeated in detail, unable to provide mutual assistance against further attacks.
Yet, despite intense planning and vast efforts, Britain's campaign resulted in disaster when General John Burgoyne, with 6,000 soldiers, emerged from a woodline and surrendered his army to the Patriots at Saratoga in October 1777.
Underneath the umbrella of Saratoga, countless battles and skirmishes were waged from the borders of Canada southward to Ticonderoga, Bennington, and West Point. Heroes on both sides were created by the score, though only one side proved victorious, amid a tapestry of madness, cruelty, and hardship in what can rightfully be called "the terrible Wilderness War of 1777."
MICHAEL O. LOGUSZ has served in both the Regular and Reserve branches of the U.S. Army, most recently during Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2007–08. He holds a B.A. from Oswego State College and an M.A. in Russian Studies from Hunter College in New York. The author of numerous articles and a previous book on WWII, Lt. Colonel Logusz has personally examined the ground of each battle he describes. He currently lives in Florida.
Table of Contents
The Wilderness War of 1777
1 The Strategic Dilemma in the Northern Theater
2 Lord Germain’s Proposal
3 Burgoyne’s Plan to Advance on Albany
4 The British Army in Canada
5 The Northern Campaign Commences
6 British Moves and Patriot Uncertainty
7 Burgoyne Advances and Fort Ticonderoga Falls
8 Cries of Retreat and Forest Combats
9 The Battle of Hubbardton
10 Fighting Off Marauders and Raiders
11 Samuel Chaplain and Intelligence Agent
12 Burgoyne’s Plan to Reach Fort Edward
13 Bolstering Forces on Both Sides
14 Burgoyne Hacks His Way South
15 The Tragic Case of Jane McCrea
16 The Battle of Bennington
17 Schuyler Is Relieved of Command
18 The Patriots Raid Fort Ticonderoga
19 The First Battle of Freeman’s Farm
20 Troops Dig In and Patriot Generals Collide
21 Burgoyne’s Strategy Unravels
22 The Second Battle of Bemis Heights
23 The British Begin to Collapse
24 Burgoyne Surrenders
Acknowledgments
Notes
Bibliography
Index
With Musket and Tomahawk is a vivid account of the American and British struggles in the sprawling wilderness region of the northeast during the Revolutionary War. Combining strategic, tactical, and personal detail, this book describes how the patriots of the recently organized Northern Army defeated England's massive onslaught of 1777, thereby all but ensuring America’s independence.
Conceived and launched by top-ranking British military leaders to shatter and suppress the revolting colonies, Britain’s three-pronged thrust was meant to separate New England from the rest of the nascent nation along the line of the Hudson River. Thus divided, both the northern and southern colonies could have been defeated in detail, unable to provide mutual assistance against further attacks.
Yet, despite intense planning and vast efforts, Britain's campaign resulted in disaster when General John Burgoyne, with 6,000 soldiers, emerged from a woodline and surrendered his army to the Patriots at Saratoga in October 1777.
Underneath the umbrella of Saratoga, countless battles and skirmishes were waged from the borders of Canada southward to Ticonderoga, Bennington, and West Point. Heroes on both sides were created by the score, though only one side proved victorious, amid a tapestry of madness, cruelty, and hardship in what can rightfully be called "the terrible Wilderness War of 1777."
MICHAEL O. LOGUSZ has served in both the Regular and Reserve branches of the U.S. Army, most recently during Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2007–08. He holds a B.A. from Oswego State College and an M.A. in Russian Studies from Hunter College in New York. The author of numerous articles and a previous book on WWII, Lt. Colonel Logusz has personally examined the ground of each battle he describes. He currently lives in Florida.
Table of Contents
The Wilderness War of 1777
1 The Strategic Dilemma in the Northern Theater
2 Lord Germain’s Proposal
3 Burgoyne’s Plan to Advance on Albany
4 The British Army in Canada
5 The Northern Campaign Commences
6 British Moves and Patriot Uncertainty
7 Burgoyne Advances and Fort Ticonderoga Falls
8 Cries of Retreat and Forest Combats
9 The Battle of Hubbardton
10 Fighting Off Marauders and Raiders
11 Samuel Chaplain and Intelligence Agent
12 Burgoyne’s Plan to Reach Fort Edward
13 Bolstering Forces on Both Sides
14 Burgoyne Hacks His Way South
15 The Tragic Case of Jane McCrea
16 The Battle of Bennington
17 Schuyler Is Relieved of Command
18 The Patriots Raid Fort Ticonderoga
19 The First Battle of Freeman’s Farm
20 Troops Dig In and Patriot Generals Collide
21 Burgoyne’s Strategy Unravels
22 The Second Battle of Bemis Heights
23 The British Begin to Collapse
24 Burgoyne Surrenders
Acknowledgments
Notes
Bibliography
Index
426 pages, Hardcover
First published April 19, 2009
205 people are currently reading
223 people want to read
About the author
Michael O. Logusz
7 books10 followersMICHAEL O. LOGUSZ has served in both the Regular and Reserve branches of the U.S. Army, most recently during Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2007–08. He holds a B.A. from Oswego State College and an M.A. in Russian Studies from Hunter College in New York. The author of numerous articles and a previous book on WWII, Lt. Colonel Logusz has personally examined the ground of each battle he describes. He currently lives in Florida.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews
February 4, 2017
Fiction Masquerading as History
Historical fiction contains fictional elements woven into a background of actual historical events. Typically the author does extensive research, but the reader does not expect academic precision.
A work of history is an interpretation of facts, based on primary and secondary sources. The author may express her or his opinion, but should always be able to back up the writing with fact.
"With Musket and Tomahawk" by Michael Logusz is neither of these. It is advertised as history, but sadly the author has a complicated relationship with the facts.
I read other reviews that criticized this book for the author's peculiar habit of attributing thoughts to characters from history. This is an effective technique in historical fiction, but it is poor scholarship for a historian. The author simply can not know what John Burgoyne or Simon Fraser were thinking at particular times, so he should not put thoughts in their heads.
Being forewarned, I was prepared to accept the use of supposed thoughts. I was not prepared for sloppy use of terms and downright fabrication.
The author's lack of familiarity with, or imprecise use of, terms like "regiment" or "brigade" is distracting to a student of military history and retired soldier. As the author is an Army officer himself, I find these errors incomprehensible! These words have precise meanings, and his continuous misuse of them undermined my confidence in his research and competence. My confidence was further eroded by his clear lack of understanding of how period weapons worked. In his description of the culmination of the Battle of Freeman's Farm, Logusz has German gunners switching from canister to solid shot, and lobbing the shot over their grenadiers to explode in the rear of American formations. The problem is that solid shot does not explode. This is just one more in a long line of questionable details.
The final straw for me was the story of "The Witch of the Wilderness." The author uses several paragraphs to describe an alleged incident after the Battle of Bennington in which an American woman dragged 16 Tory prisoners into the woods, tied them up, and danced around them with a tomahawk, killing them one at a time, except for two whom she allowed to escape to spread the tale. Having read extensively about Bennington and Saratoga, but never having read such a story, I checked Logusz' sources. (I also struggled to accept that a single woman could herd sixteen grown men, all trained soldiers, away from the American forces and to their deaths.) I found that his single citation was from Richard Ketchum's "Saratoga." Having a copy handy, I looked at the page cited, and the closest I could come was: "...and in a single mass grave he found he found thirteen Tories, most of them shot in the head." No witches there! This is at best incredibly poor scholarship; at worst it is sensational fabrication. I can't tell for sure, but in either case i feel it disqualifies this book as a legitimate work of history.
"With Musket and Tomahawk" is the worst kind of history book: it is fiction posing as history. It would be poor historical fiction; advertised as history...well...I want my money back!
Historical fiction contains fictional elements woven into a background of actual historical events. Typically the author does extensive research, but the reader does not expect academic precision.
A work of history is an interpretation of facts, based on primary and secondary sources. The author may express her or his opinion, but should always be able to back up the writing with fact.
"With Musket and Tomahawk" by Michael Logusz is neither of these. It is advertised as history, but sadly the author has a complicated relationship with the facts.
I read other reviews that criticized this book for the author's peculiar habit of attributing thoughts to characters from history. This is an effective technique in historical fiction, but it is poor scholarship for a historian. The author simply can not know what John Burgoyne or Simon Fraser were thinking at particular times, so he should not put thoughts in their heads.
Being forewarned, I was prepared to accept the use of supposed thoughts. I was not prepared for sloppy use of terms and downright fabrication.
The author's lack of familiarity with, or imprecise use of, terms like "regiment" or "brigade" is distracting to a student of military history and retired soldier. As the author is an Army officer himself, I find these errors incomprehensible! These words have precise meanings, and his continuous misuse of them undermined my confidence in his research and competence. My confidence was further eroded by his clear lack of understanding of how period weapons worked. In his description of the culmination of the Battle of Freeman's Farm, Logusz has German gunners switching from canister to solid shot, and lobbing the shot over their grenadiers to explode in the rear of American formations. The problem is that solid shot does not explode. This is just one more in a long line of questionable details.
The final straw for me was the story of "The Witch of the Wilderness." The author uses several paragraphs to describe an alleged incident after the Battle of Bennington in which an American woman dragged 16 Tory prisoners into the woods, tied them up, and danced around them with a tomahawk, killing them one at a time, except for two whom she allowed to escape to spread the tale. Having read extensively about Bennington and Saratoga, but never having read such a story, I checked Logusz' sources. (I also struggled to accept that a single woman could herd sixteen grown men, all trained soldiers, away from the American forces and to their deaths.) I found that his single citation was from Richard Ketchum's "Saratoga." Having a copy handy, I looked at the page cited, and the closest I could come was: "...and in a single mass grave he found he found thirteen Tories, most of them shot in the head." No witches there! This is at best incredibly poor scholarship; at worst it is sensational fabrication. I can't tell for sure, but in either case i feel it disqualifies this book as a legitimate work of history.
"With Musket and Tomahawk" is the worst kind of history book: it is fiction posing as history. It would be poor historical fiction; advertised as history...well...I want my money back!
July 27, 2013
Oy.
The good is that this is indeed interesting with the kind of campaign detail that you'd expect from a career military author. And, and, well, lets go to the negatives.
Minor factual errors lead me to question the veracity of the rest.
-- Daniel Webster did not create the dictionary. That was unrelated Noah Webster.
-- Twice, at least, he asserted that the colonists were not fighting to support the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. No kidding, since they weren't written and adopted until a decade or so later.
And so that went....
The narrator, Dennis Johnson, was terrible. He took a breath every four or five words. Audibly. And with a slight pause so the phrasing sounded like a Sousa march.
I have the second volume of this which subject is of greater interest to me. I will listen to it but with little anticipation. And double check my facts.
The good is that this is indeed interesting with the kind of campaign detail that you'd expect from a career military author. And, and, well, lets go to the negatives.
Minor factual errors lead me to question the veracity of the rest.
-- Daniel Webster did not create the dictionary. That was unrelated Noah Webster.
-- Twice, at least, he asserted that the colonists were not fighting to support the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. No kidding, since they weren't written and adopted until a decade or so later.
And so that went....
The narrator, Dennis Johnson, was terrible. He took a breath every four or five words. Audibly. And with a slight pause so the phrasing sounded like a Sousa march.
I have the second volume of this which subject is of greater interest to me. I will listen to it but with little anticipation. And double check my facts.
June 6, 2020
Naïve, ill-informed, illogical and over-reaching.
August 31, 2025
First, everyone who hates this book and one stars it go look at their profile picture. all of them are old, fat, former military (who did nothing in a war we lost anyway), and are wannabe historian nerds who think they know it all. Literally, not a single one of them could meet combat physical readiness standards, win a fist fight, and shoot a gun. Its like a bunch of nerds think that their opinion on war matters. It doesn't.
Now, for this book, absolute masterpiece. 10/10 will reread. Makes you proud to be an american, makes you appreciate having the ability to form militias, and is written by a combat proven officer who walked every battlefield (eat your heart out fat nerds).
The book touches a bit on each officer and regiment, making me want to learn more and even goes as far as to bring old wives tales soldiers heard about the Americans in the war. A great bit of history, that leaves me hungry for more.
Also will make you want to buy a tomahawk and a musket, based.
im not reading anything by anyone with no profile picture, a BMI over 15%, or looks like they would of voted for Jimmy Carter for a 2nd term.
Now, for this book, absolute masterpiece. 10/10 will reread. Makes you proud to be an american, makes you appreciate having the ability to form militias, and is written by a combat proven officer who walked every battlefield (eat your heart out fat nerds).
The book touches a bit on each officer and regiment, making me want to learn more and even goes as far as to bring old wives tales soldiers heard about the Americans in the war. A great bit of history, that leaves me hungry for more.
Also will make you want to buy a tomahawk and a musket, based.
im not reading anything by anyone with no profile picture, a BMI over 15%, or looks like they would of voted for Jimmy Carter for a 2nd term.
June 29, 2015
Three stars is a little bit of a stretch. The quality of the writing is not polished and much of it is too melodramatic in style for a serious work of history.
Never the less, this book relates a very detailed. and interesting history of the British expedition from Canada south to capture Albany. The grand strategy here was to meet up with British forces coming north from New York City. This action would then cut off the Americans in New England from Washington's army in the south, and thereby end the revolution.
Two big things went very wrong. First, the British had no conception of how hard it was going to be to move an army south from Canada through the northern wilderness.
Second, the British forces in New York City failed to come and attack from the south.
The result was the defeat and capture of the British forces at Saratoga NY and a huge psychological victory for the Americans.
Never the less, this book relates a very detailed. and interesting history of the British expedition from Canada south to capture Albany. The grand strategy here was to meet up with British forces coming north from New York City. This action would then cut off the Americans in New England from Washington's army in the south, and thereby end the revolution.
Two big things went very wrong. First, the British had no conception of how hard it was going to be to move an army south from Canada through the northern wilderness.
Second, the British forces in New York City failed to come and attack from the south.
The result was the defeat and capture of the British forces at Saratoga NY and a huge psychological victory for the Americans.
July 19, 2025
A great book about the Revolution in the wilderness of New York. The book really showcases the violence of the era and the brutality of warfare in the Revolution, especially the use of Tomahawks and the up close fighting.
October 20, 2023
oddities from the Amazone
Fiction mixed with history
If you want facts no the book for you, if your looking for a movie version of history highly
Darran
---
Disappointing
Poorly written. Amateurish.
Far too much speculation particularly regarding the thoughts and motivations of various individuals.
The ebook contains numerous typographical errors.
fred f
---
very disappointed in this book
I am very, very disappointed in this book. I expected a good history of Burgoyne's campaign of 1777. What I got didn't come close.
To start with, the editing is very sloppy. Words are misspelled, sentences end with a word left off and the wording of some chapter titles doesn't match with headings for chapter footnotes.
That's not the worst of it.
The author writes with a redundancy which becomes annoying. "Suddenly" was one word I found used 2 and 3 times in a single paragraph time and again.
Also, the word was used to create a false sense of drama. "Suddenly the bullet struck him!" Duh, it's a battle that's how bullets strike. In summary, the quality of the writing is at a high school level at best.
Annoying as all this is, the worst is Logusz's apparent disregard for historical fact and historical inuendo/ myth. After the Battle of Bennington he writes about Catherine Esther Montour tomahawking "traitor's" skulls "deep in the wilderness".
I checked his footnote for the whole, very long, paragraph and found no reference was made in his cited source to any such event.
To make matter's worse this "legend" occurred after the fight at Wyoming a full year later
In conclusion I can't trust this book for anything which isn't generally known information.
Roger Tory
---
Strangely written
I'm about a quarter of the way through, and I find this author puzzling. Even as someone who has read numerous books on the Saratoga campaign, there is much here that is new to me.
But the writing... Not good, to be kind.
He repeats information frequently, obsesses over details- he reports constantly on the relative numbers, among other details that aren't completely important.
Whether there were 7500 soldiers in Burgoyne's army of 7800 isn't important.
His footnotes also repeat themselves, and that's assuming that the match up with the text... which they don't always do.
I don't know if the book simply needs a competent editor, or a more competent author, but reader beware!
******
Edit: still reading it. Just came on a reference to a colonIal officer named Ebenezer Webster, “whose son, Daniel, would later be known for creating the famous dictionary”.
Uh, no. That would be Noah, who created the dictionary. Daniel was someone else entirely. That the author of a “history” book makes such an egregious error is disheartening.
On the other hand, the same paragraph referred to “the prized weapon of the wilderness”.
Anyone care to guess what it is? (If you guessed rifle-which would be my first choice- you’d be wrong).
At this point, the footnotes are useless, since they don’t match the text.
It’s getting so ridiculous that I’m not sure there’s any reason to keep reading, other than curiosity about what literary/historical trainwrecks lie waiting for me.
And my smartaleck desire to perhaps, write a modified “live blog” of this book.
*****
Final edit: I originally gave this book 3 stars. After finishing it, and thinking about all the different errors, of fact and of style, I rethought my overall review.
Basically, I feel that a poorly written and researched book, which also has stylistic and formatting issues, is pretty much "below average" by definition.
In my mind, and I believe in the wider world 3 stars is about "average"
Since I think it's less than that, I changed it from 3 stars to 2.
Corso
---
Not Well Written
Interesting period, but the book is badly written and amateurish.
casey
---
Strange mix of good and poor
The book is not especially well written and definitely needs a good editor to take it in hand. A lot of basic typos, choppy spots, and repetition mar it badly.
The author has some strange fixations - he seems to have a macabre fascination with the tomahawk as a weapon and many times repeats the same theme about it.
At one point he seemed to be about to write an ode to gun ownership, which made no contribution to the narrative and seemed oddly out of the flow of the story.
The fact that trees in old growth forests could be 15 feet in diameter gets repeated.
In much the same way he seems to have a deep concern that African American participants in the action should be acknowledged. To make sure, he stops the flow of the narrative to mention them. He does this more than once and each time it feels like someone criticized the first draft and he was trying to make up for forgetting.
He puffs quite a bit about things other authors did not do, or did badly, but I don’t feel he really plowed any new ground here. This is not a scholarly history.
It also is poorly titled. He mentions the various initiatives the British undertook, but really only narrates the Saratoga Campaign.
The others are merely mentioned in passing.
If this is about the Wilderness Campaign it would seem appropriate to discuss the entire British effort, as he started to do and then trailed off into Saratoga.
Definitely a ‘pop history’, it is a reasonable effort overall, but the story has been done elsewhere and I think better.
m allen
Fiction mixed with history
If you want facts no the book for you, if your looking for a movie version of history highly
Darran
---
Disappointing
Poorly written. Amateurish.
Far too much speculation particularly regarding the thoughts and motivations of various individuals.
The ebook contains numerous typographical errors.
fred f
---
very disappointed in this book
I am very, very disappointed in this book. I expected a good history of Burgoyne's campaign of 1777. What I got didn't come close.
To start with, the editing is very sloppy. Words are misspelled, sentences end with a word left off and the wording of some chapter titles doesn't match with headings for chapter footnotes.
That's not the worst of it.
The author writes with a redundancy which becomes annoying. "Suddenly" was one word I found used 2 and 3 times in a single paragraph time and again.
Also, the word was used to create a false sense of drama. "Suddenly the bullet struck him!" Duh, it's a battle that's how bullets strike. In summary, the quality of the writing is at a high school level at best.
Annoying as all this is, the worst is Logusz's apparent disregard for historical fact and historical inuendo/ myth. After the Battle of Bennington he writes about Catherine Esther Montour tomahawking "traitor's" skulls "deep in the wilderness".
I checked his footnote for the whole, very long, paragraph and found no reference was made in his cited source to any such event.
To make matter's worse this "legend" occurred after the fight at Wyoming a full year later
In conclusion I can't trust this book for anything which isn't generally known information.
Roger Tory
---
Strangely written
I'm about a quarter of the way through, and I find this author puzzling. Even as someone who has read numerous books on the Saratoga campaign, there is much here that is new to me.
But the writing... Not good, to be kind.
He repeats information frequently, obsesses over details- he reports constantly on the relative numbers, among other details that aren't completely important.
Whether there were 7500 soldiers in Burgoyne's army of 7800 isn't important.
His footnotes also repeat themselves, and that's assuming that the match up with the text... which they don't always do.
I don't know if the book simply needs a competent editor, or a more competent author, but reader beware!
******
Edit: still reading it. Just came on a reference to a colonIal officer named Ebenezer Webster, “whose son, Daniel, would later be known for creating the famous dictionary”.
Uh, no. That would be Noah, who created the dictionary. Daniel was someone else entirely. That the author of a “history” book makes such an egregious error is disheartening.
On the other hand, the same paragraph referred to “the prized weapon of the wilderness”.
Anyone care to guess what it is? (If you guessed rifle-which would be my first choice- you’d be wrong).
At this point, the footnotes are useless, since they don’t match the text.
It’s getting so ridiculous that I’m not sure there’s any reason to keep reading, other than curiosity about what literary/historical trainwrecks lie waiting for me.
And my smartaleck desire to perhaps, write a modified “live blog” of this book.
*****
Final edit: I originally gave this book 3 stars. After finishing it, and thinking about all the different errors, of fact and of style, I rethought my overall review.
Basically, I feel that a poorly written and researched book, which also has stylistic and formatting issues, is pretty much "below average" by definition.
In my mind, and I believe in the wider world 3 stars is about "average"
Since I think it's less than that, I changed it from 3 stars to 2.
Corso
---
Not Well Written
Interesting period, but the book is badly written and amateurish.
casey
---
Strange mix of good and poor
The book is not especially well written and definitely needs a good editor to take it in hand. A lot of basic typos, choppy spots, and repetition mar it badly.
The author has some strange fixations - he seems to have a macabre fascination with the tomahawk as a weapon and many times repeats the same theme about it.
At one point he seemed to be about to write an ode to gun ownership, which made no contribution to the narrative and seemed oddly out of the flow of the story.
The fact that trees in old growth forests could be 15 feet in diameter gets repeated.
In much the same way he seems to have a deep concern that African American participants in the action should be acknowledged. To make sure, he stops the flow of the narrative to mention them. He does this more than once and each time it feels like someone criticized the first draft and he was trying to make up for forgetting.
He puffs quite a bit about things other authors did not do, or did badly, but I don’t feel he really plowed any new ground here. This is not a scholarly history.
It also is poorly titled. He mentions the various initiatives the British undertook, but really only narrates the Saratoga Campaign.
The others are merely mentioned in passing.
If this is about the Wilderness Campaign it would seem appropriate to discuss the entire British effort, as he started to do and then trailed off into Saratoga.
Definitely a ‘pop history’, it is a reasonable effort overall, but the story has been done elsewhere and I think better.
m allen
December 19, 2018
This book reads like your old man telling you about a bar room brawl. Michael demonstrates the history of the Champlain valley with esprit de corp. He shined a lot of light into the hills and valleys I hunted growing up. Dennis Johnson dose a wonderful job on the narration. Worth the money on audible I've listened a few times.
May 10, 2017
This book walked through the 1777 Saratoga Campaign in which British General John Burgoyne made his way south from Canada down Lake Champlain to Fort Ticonderoga and finally to Saratoga, where he surrendered to American forces.
February 21, 2019
Narrative of how the Battle of Saratoga began and ended.
Well written narrative examination of the actions culminating in the surrender of the British at Saratoga. Definitely worth the read.
Well written narrative examination of the actions culminating in the surrender of the British at Saratoga. Definitely worth the read.
May 14, 2025
I bought the entire trilogy without looking at any reviews or testing the first book; jokes on me. As others pointed out, this is fiction masquerading as history (to steal someone else’s line).
Facts are inferred, embellished, or completely made up. For example, the author talks about a woman who leads a bunch of British Soldiers into the woods and massacres all of them. His citation is Ketchum’s Saratoga. I happen to own a copy and checked the citation, and there’s absolutely nothing about a woman massacring Redcoats. He constantly talks about the tomahawk being the “prized weapon of the wilderness” yet provides almost no evidence to support this. It’s likely that the tomahawk was a common and prized weapon, but doesn’t cite first hand accounts of what Soldiers carried, evidence of the tomahawk’s use, or really anything else to substantiate it. As a small negative, the authors is a former Army officer and yet he gets the Army’s birthday wrong. The Army was established on June 14, 1775, NOT 1776. It’s even on the Army’s flag!!!!
The author constantly puts thoughts into participants heads such as Burgoyne, Gates, and others. Unless it was documented by contemporaries we have no way of knowing their thoughts.
The writing style is atrocious. He constantly uses passive voice. He uses the same phrases over and over again like “all of a sudden.” Then he uses cliffhangers as if this isn’t a historical event and we don’t already know the outcome. Even if you aren’t a student of the American Revolution, everyone knows the Americans won.
If you are interested in the Saratoga campaign I can’t recommend Ketchum’s book enough. It’s easily one of the best books on this era that I’ve read. Save your money and avoid this trilogy.
Facts are inferred, embellished, or completely made up. For example, the author talks about a woman who leads a bunch of British Soldiers into the woods and massacres all of them. His citation is Ketchum’s Saratoga. I happen to own a copy and checked the citation, and there’s absolutely nothing about a woman massacring Redcoats. He constantly talks about the tomahawk being the “prized weapon of the wilderness” yet provides almost no evidence to support this. It’s likely that the tomahawk was a common and prized weapon, but doesn’t cite first hand accounts of what Soldiers carried, evidence of the tomahawk’s use, or really anything else to substantiate it. As a small negative, the authors is a former Army officer and yet he gets the Army’s birthday wrong. The Army was established on June 14, 1775, NOT 1776. It’s even on the Army’s flag!!!!
The author constantly puts thoughts into participants heads such as Burgoyne, Gates, and others. Unless it was documented by contemporaries we have no way of knowing their thoughts.
The writing style is atrocious. He constantly uses passive voice. He uses the same phrases over and over again like “all of a sudden.” Then he uses cliffhangers as if this isn’t a historical event and we don’t already know the outcome. Even if you aren’t a student of the American Revolution, everyone knows the Americans won.
If you are interested in the Saratoga campaign I can’t recommend Ketchum’s book enough. It’s easily one of the best books on this era that I’ve read. Save your money and avoid this trilogy.
July 27, 2024
A decent account of the Saratoga campaign. The “Wilderness War” involved a clash of many nations, English, French Canadians, Natives, and Germans on both sides, and descended into savagery. The author shows how much of a civil war the Revolution was, with cousins killing each other on the battlefield, and civilians navigating between personal conviction and family ties. Logusz is too eager in my opinion to assign grand motivations to the Patriots, I think in a lot of cases men chose to fight for the Patriot cause because of kinship links. Or out of a sense of revenge, as in the Jane McCrae case. Likewise, the British soldiers and the German mercenaries of Burgoyne’s army often showed a worrying lack of loyalty to their ostensible cause, given their high rate of desertion. Burgoyne’s army ended up exhausting itself chasing the mirage of a Loyalist “moral majority” just over the next mountain range. They were not seen as liberators, as Burgoyne would have styled them, and men of New York, New Hampshire, and New England gathered together and soundly beat them. Looking forward to the other two volumes in this series!
April 21, 2019
DETAILED HISTORY OF WAR IN THE NORTH IN 1777.
The author presents a well researched and even-handed account of the pivotal campaign by General Burgoyne against the nascent US Army and militias in 1777, culminating in his defeat in the environs of Saratoga, New York. Detailed accounts of troop strengths and movements allow the reader to understand how such an unlikely outcome came about. Generous vignettes of those involved, taken from journals and other contemporary sources, give depth to the participants whose names we may have learned in history classes, but whose personality has been omitted.
The author presents a well researched and even-handed account of the pivotal campaign by General Burgoyne against the nascent US Army and militias in 1777, culminating in his defeat in the environs of Saratoga, New York. Detailed accounts of troop strengths and movements allow the reader to understand how such an unlikely outcome came about. Generous vignettes of those involved, taken from journals and other contemporary sources, give depth to the participants whose names we may have learned in history classes, but whose personality has been omitted.
January 11, 2024
This is volume one of a two volume set. It primarily discussed the planning deployment and execution of the British attempt to separate New England from the rest of the colonies. This would be done by taking Albany along the Hudson River. The Bits did not plan for the overwhelming response they received from the defenders of the Northern Army.
The story is an interesting one but the author has a annoying habit of repeating points again and again. If I read about how skilled the woods men or soldiers in the American forces were with knives and tomahawk again I would choke.
The story is an interesting one but the author has a annoying habit of repeating points again and again. If I read about how skilled the woods men or soldiers in the American forces were with knives and tomahawk again I would choke.
December 16, 2017
Interesting book, lot of detail, but the writing style and errors made it at times painful to read.
e.g.
"Most who fought in the terrible Wilderness War of 1777 had little to no notion of what the American Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, or the Constitution stood for."
...not surprising I guess, since the Constitution was drafted on September 17, 1787, and the Bill of Rights was created on September 25, 1789.
e.g.
"Most who fought in the terrible Wilderness War of 1777 had little to no notion of what the American Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, or the Constitution stood for."
...not surprising I guess, since the Constitution was drafted on September 17, 1787, and the Bill of Rights was created on September 25, 1789.
July 22, 2021
An interesting accounting of the revolution as it happened in upstate NY and I don't mean Yonkers or Westchester. Notable to me is that the American forces were NOT comprised of the fat, dumb and happy NY City dwellers to whom freedom most likely only meant an opportunity to amass more personal wealth. The farmers and country "bumpkins" made up the bulk of the fighting forces and fought with conviction, courage and at times maniacal dedication.
April 8, 2019
Unique look at the battle of the wilderness
A unique look at the battle of the wilderness, more on on the individual stories of than on tactics and leaders .
In my opinion a nice look at history from a slightly different perspective.
A unique look at the battle of the wilderness, more on on the individual stories of than on tactics and leaders .
In my opinion a nice look at history from a slightly different perspective.
July 14, 2019
The prose is somewhat pedestrian, and occasionally one is overwhelmed with too much detail, but the narrative overall is engaging. This seldom-told story is worth knowing, whether for American or English or military history.
February 15, 2019
A REAL spoiler: we won!
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
April 1, 2019
Battle to remember
A great story well told. The movements and actions are very well illustrated. Brave patriots created a successful plan and executed their plan under very adverse conditions. It is interesting to note the adverse effects of politics.
A great story well told. The movements and actions are very well illustrated. Brave patriots created a successful plan and executed their plan under very adverse conditions. It is interesting to note the adverse effects of politics.
January 24, 2023
A good look at the Saratoga campaign. Looking forward to reading Vol II!!
July 18, 2025
Very detailed and interesting book. Brings history to Life.
April 2, 2016
THE BRITISH ARE COMING!!
Michael O. Logusz brings to the forefront a little followed section of the American Revolution. When we think of the American Revolution, we think George Washington and his amazing and daring tactics in bringing the British to their end in the American colonies. However, there is much more to this war than many are familiar with.
As we move through the many facets of the Wilderness Campaign, it can get really easy to get bogged down with some of the details. If you are looking for a novel read, this book is NOT for you. But if you want to get a deeper understanding of the Wilderness Campaign of 1777, the major players AND the mistakes that plagued both sides, then this is a MUST READ!! Logusz breaks down the campaign by days, not just notable markers. You get to know the mindset of not only the American Continental Army, but the British Officers as well. Taking the day by day approach, readers are treated to not only to maps and details from correspondence between the leaders, but to the fears and the doubts that plagued both sides. As the troop movements commenced and the Wilderness Campaign heated up, the Northern Army operated as well as they could. Supplies and moral were in place. However, on the British side, things were much different. Lack of supplies, risky intelligence, lack of knowing the area, and loyalist advisors who were in it for themselves, a reader can almost feel as though they are marching through these forests themselves.
Michael Logusz brings readers not only the big picture of how the Wilderness Campaign was lost, but the smaller and finer details that often escape other writers. From some of the first snipers in American history to the murder of Jane McCrea by Native Americans fighting for the British, the nitty-gritty details are brought to the front.
As General John Burgoyne began to prepare for his foray into the war, he studied the maps and what little intelligence that they had concerning the wilderness areas of the colonies. What they did not realize was that their maps were completely out of date and what they were being told from some of the loyalists that were still residing in the areas was not always completely true. According to the maps, what should have been a straight and narrow shot through the countryside was in fact, full of ravines and other obstacles that had not been noted. The British considered the American Patriots weak, and thought the war was won before they even started. As they moved into their first battles with the patriots, they were shocked at the tactics that they employed. To this point, British regulars had only been faced with pitched battles where each side would come out and meet each other head on. Instead, the patriots borrowed from their Native American counterparts, and began to use more guerilla tactics. They hid, they jumped up and fired, then ran. General Burgoyne kept waiting for the many loyalists that he had been told were waiting for the British before they would join but those loyalists never fully materialized. As for the American Patriots who were opposing the British, they were entrenched and more determined than they were given credit for. Even though they lost Fort Ticonderoga early, they managed to not give up much more.
As you read through there are several details that will catch you and make you thumb back a few pages. This is not a bad thing! The facts are such that you have to almost view British and American thought side by side, and Logusz does just that! Grab the book and join the Wilderness Campaign today! From triumph to hesitation, “With Musket and Tomahawk” will take you on a journey that will have you wanting to dive deeper in.
**The one historical discrepancy in the book was the statement that Daniel Webster wrote the dictionary. Noah Webster wrote the dictionary. There is no relation between the two men. **
Michael O. Logusz brings to the forefront a little followed section of the American Revolution. When we think of the American Revolution, we think George Washington and his amazing and daring tactics in bringing the British to their end in the American colonies. However, there is much more to this war than many are familiar with.
As we move through the many facets of the Wilderness Campaign, it can get really easy to get bogged down with some of the details. If you are looking for a novel read, this book is NOT for you. But if you want to get a deeper understanding of the Wilderness Campaign of 1777, the major players AND the mistakes that plagued both sides, then this is a MUST READ!! Logusz breaks down the campaign by days, not just notable markers. You get to know the mindset of not only the American Continental Army, but the British Officers as well. Taking the day by day approach, readers are treated to not only to maps and details from correspondence between the leaders, but to the fears and the doubts that plagued both sides. As the troop movements commenced and the Wilderness Campaign heated up, the Northern Army operated as well as they could. Supplies and moral were in place. However, on the British side, things were much different. Lack of supplies, risky intelligence, lack of knowing the area, and loyalist advisors who were in it for themselves, a reader can almost feel as though they are marching through these forests themselves.
Michael Logusz brings readers not only the big picture of how the Wilderness Campaign was lost, but the smaller and finer details that often escape other writers. From some of the first snipers in American history to the murder of Jane McCrea by Native Americans fighting for the British, the nitty-gritty details are brought to the front.
As General John Burgoyne began to prepare for his foray into the war, he studied the maps and what little intelligence that they had concerning the wilderness areas of the colonies. What they did not realize was that their maps were completely out of date and what they were being told from some of the loyalists that were still residing in the areas was not always completely true. According to the maps, what should have been a straight and narrow shot through the countryside was in fact, full of ravines and other obstacles that had not been noted. The British considered the American Patriots weak, and thought the war was won before they even started. As they moved into their first battles with the patriots, they were shocked at the tactics that they employed. To this point, British regulars had only been faced with pitched battles where each side would come out and meet each other head on. Instead, the patriots borrowed from their Native American counterparts, and began to use more guerilla tactics. They hid, they jumped up and fired, then ran. General Burgoyne kept waiting for the many loyalists that he had been told were waiting for the British before they would join but those loyalists never fully materialized. As for the American Patriots who were opposing the British, they were entrenched and more determined than they were given credit for. Even though they lost Fort Ticonderoga early, they managed to not give up much more.
As you read through there are several details that will catch you and make you thumb back a few pages. This is not a bad thing! The facts are such that you have to almost view British and American thought side by side, and Logusz does just that! Grab the book and join the Wilderness Campaign today! From triumph to hesitation, “With Musket and Tomahawk” will take you on a journey that will have you wanting to dive deeper in.
**The one historical discrepancy in the book was the statement that Daniel Webster wrote the dictionary. Noah Webster wrote the dictionary. There is no relation between the two men. **
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 15, 2015
Fantastic!
For those interested in the details of the Northern Army campaign of 1777, this book brings those events to life. Day by day, hour by hour the details of both the British and American forces are fleshed out on the pages. The author does a great job using source letters, journals, historical documents, and other sources to not only bring the characters to life, but to make them be remembered. From riflemen to drummer boys, page by page the action explodes. I thoroughly enjoyed this book. Well worth the read.
For those interested in the details of the Northern Army campaign of 1777, this book brings those events to life. Day by day, hour by hour the details of both the British and American forces are fleshed out on the pages. The author does a great job using source letters, journals, historical documents, and other sources to not only bring the characters to life, but to make them be remembered. From riflemen to drummer boys, page by page the action explodes. I thoroughly enjoyed this book. Well worth the read.
January 23, 2023
A good read of the major events of the American Revolution in its northern theater from the time Burgoyne started up Lake Champlain, the fall of Ticonderoga, the rear guard action at Hubbardton, the battles of Bennington, Freeman's Farm, and Bemis Heights, culminating with the surrender of Burgoyne.
It is written using a journal format, where dates and times are notated along with the important events during that time. It is a good read and puts the major engagements in perspective in regards to the whole campaign.
It is written using a journal format, where dates and times are notated along with the important events during that time. It is a good read and puts the major engagements in perspective in regards to the whole campaign.
January 26, 2012
With Musket and Tomahawk covers the Wilderness War of 1777 and is a great book to read in conjunction with Willard Sterne Randall's Ethan Allen biography. Logusz provides a lot of interesting detail about the people and events leading up to Burgoyne’s surrender at Saratoga in October of 1777.
Read my full review at What Would the Founders Think?
April 22, 2013
Thank you Michael O. Logusz! Awesome book!
I have been researching my ancestor who was with Ethan Allen at the taking of Ticonderoga, fought at Hubbardton and Bennington, and took part in the Pawlet Expedition of 1777. I have been getting my information in little bits and pieces in books and from the internet. Finally I found a source that documents the events of 1777 in chronological order and makes sense.
I have been researching my ancestor who was with Ethan Allen at the taking of Ticonderoga, fought at Hubbardton and Bennington, and took part in the Pawlet Expedition of 1777. I have been getting my information in little bits and pieces in books and from the internet. Finally I found a source that documents the events of 1777 in chronological order and makes sense.
Read
May 3, 2011Read the intro, and a part of the first chapter. Good so far. Completed reading this excellent book. Very well written with good descriptions of the battles of the wilderness campaign of 1777. Just the chapter on the battle of Brayman's redoubt (depicted in the excellent cover art by the super artist Don Troiani) is well worth the read.
March 6, 2013
A straightforward account of the Saratoga Campaign. Written by a former military officer, some of the assumptions about the British military are flawed. Unfortunately, that taints the rest of the book.
August 29, 2010
Excellent reading that is well crafted. One should read this prior to reading Kenneth Roberts Rabble in Arms
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews