Animal Histories of the Civil War Era Edited by Earl J. Hess

Abstract

a draw. The limitation in Dishman’s approach is the absence of much in the way of political or cultural background. He touches briefly on Americans’ aversion to a standing army and to federal taxes as hindrances to the cause, along with the outright refusal of most state militias to cross state borders or the Canadian border. More discussion about these issues, as well as about the Republican–Federalist divide and the economic differences between U.S. states and regions would have helped to establish the context for the fighting at the border. In the same vein, Dishman underserves the Native Americans involved. He mentions them but does not adequately cover their specific connection to the war and the significance of their betrayal by their British allies. In contrast, Dishman’s recurring references to the demands that the Napoleonic wars placed on the British military demonstrate the effectiveness of widening the scope of a significant, though relatively narrow, frame of analysis. The War of 1812 is famously misunderstood and much-maligned, certainly in the U.S. and even more in the European historical literature. This monograph argues persuasively for the importance of long and tenuous supply lines, certainly not a glamorous topic but a useful one for scholars of this period, demonstrating that this war was anything but short, insignificant, or dull.