War Under Heaven: Pontiac, the Indian Nations, and the British Empire

The book was well written and I found Dowd's argument convincing. His narration is clear, though there are times when it could have been shortened. The complaint... Dowd does a decent job explaining the British Navy as an advantage at Fort Detroit. It is possible, and probable that many of the people on the ships were not trained sailors that the royal navy is accustomed to. However, the British certainly knew how to handle their ships. In fact, I would suggest that Pontiac had little to no chance at Fort Detroit. Now, here is the complaint. Where Dowd does a good job showing how the greatest navy in the world would be too much for Pontiac to handle; he fails to point out the reality of England's army. The English had probably the worst land army in Europe at the time. During the 7 years war it was Prussia who kept England ahead in Europe. English armies were battered by France in America. The English enforced discipline, but their army was not elite. For obvious reasons, the royal navy was of more importance. Why is this a complaint? Well, Dowd appears to give Pontiac's warriors a good deal of credit, and rightfully so, but Indian warriors armed with European weapons placed them theoretically on the same "playing field" as the English. The English army was horrible, and Dowd should have pointed this out. The army was not as well trained as the French or Prussians. This is seen as certain captains, commanders, etc. are seen creating their own rules. What I am suggesting is, the weakness of the British army contributed more to Pontiac's success than it is shown. Complaint aside, the book is definitely worth buying. If you are a history student (European or US) I would suggest it--particularly if you plan to focus on colonial history. Another good book from this period is "Subjects unto the Same King: Indians, English, and the contest for authority in colonial New England" by Jenny Hale Pulsipher

Uncolored by prevailing thought, Dowd's impression of Col. Bradstreet is more objective than most. For instance, most historians have unfortunately taken Sir Wm. Johnson's "Remarks on the Conduct of Col. John Bradsteet" letter to Gen. Gage as sound criticism, which it is not. The enraged Johnson permitted his personal dislike and his resentment for Bradstreet (his usurping of his powers to make treaties)to overwhelm him. It caused him to make rash assumptions and exaggerations. As an example, careful examination of "Bradstreet's Disaster", utilizing only Capt. Montresor's joural and Mantee's "Late War in America", reveals that virtually every accusation of Johnson's regarding that event is false or exaggerated. It has colored historians' opinions of Bradstreet in a major way ever since. Gregory Dowd is to be congratulated for his seeing beyond the historically tainted impressions.

this fast read is good for understanding the "benign neglect" policy of the British government during the pre-AmerRev period.Traditional interpretatins of the Proclamation of 1763(which restricted white european settlement west of the Appalachians) blame poor land hungry European settlers for the violation of the treaty and make the British government appear as mediators. Dowd asks the "big question",that is,with all that land and resources and human greed,would the British actually believe the Proclamation Line would mean anything to anyone except the Indian nations in the disputed territories?The answer is no, the Proclamation Line of 1763 was intended as a stalling tactic until the British government could figure out a way to gobble the land west of the Appalachians,legally or at least with little actual cost.White squatters forced the Indians out however before the British government could get their,"greasy paws" on it. Pontiacs'War as i interpret Dowd, is a sideshow, though interesting and tragic to the coming of the American Revolution.After reading the book I was reminded of a warning that an American Indian gave to fellow Americans at a convention,he said,"You Americans better keep a close watch on your immigration policy,cause us Indians sure didn't"!!!!!

I am going to offer a rave review, (admittedly of a favorite period), and want to disclaim the need for a disclaimer --- I do not know the author or have any connection to his University or publisher. Gregory Dowd can hardly be accused of writing inaccessible history only to other historians on an obscure topic. The linkages in British Colonial Indian policy between the end of the French and Indian War and the Revolution are interesting in their own right. This account covers all perspectives, dealing with French attitudes; Pontiac's turbulent, adroit yet ultimately unpopular leadership; and above all the cultural and emotional influences at work in the era. Not merely about Pontiac's War, this work is aptly subtitled: Pontiac, The Indian Nations and the British Empire.Of particular import is Dowd's sophisticated analysis of British policy paralleled with a sober yet, when appropriate, complimentary account of the methods of the Indian Nations. Dowd provides new insight in his focus on the issue of status and dignity as a motivating factor in Pontiac's War -- without ever collapsing into easy platitudes on the plight of Native Americans. Wholistic in the best sense of the word, the impact of Indian religion and its interaction with Christianity is also assessed.Expert, well written, well researched, non-polemic; War Under Heaven, also offers seamless assessments of the work of other historians. The fact that Dowd accomplishes so much in just 275 pages of text is a testament to good writing and the tightness of the text. Just as accessible to newcomer as to student of the era.