Reviews ★ Amerikastudien / American Studies 59.4 N E , 1812: War and the Passions boosted American patriotism and why it has of Patriotism (Philadelphia: U of Pennsylva - been publicly remembered as an American nia P, 2012), xvii + 315 pp. success story. Paul Gilje, Professor of United States History at the University of Oklahoma, A L , The Challenge: Britain in the third book under review in this article, Against America in the Naval War of 1812 by contrast, seems at rst glance to keep up (London: Faber and Faber, 2012), 538 pp. the traditional American narrative of the War P G, Free Trade and Sailors’ Rights in of 1812 when emphasizing Britain’s violations the War of 1812 (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, of American neutral rights and impressment 2013), 437 pp. on the high seas as the causes for America’s declaration of war. Possibly without intend - The traditional American narrative of the ing to do so, however, he also raises troubling War of 1812 emphasizes that British maritime questions about the legacy of the American practices—mainly interferences with Ameri - Revolution when he implies that the asser - can neutral trade and the impressment of sea- tion of the democratic principles that lie at the men from American merchant ships on the bottom of American identity and that were high seas—caused severe Anglo-American symbolized by free trade and sailors’ rights al - tensions in the early nineteenth century such lowed for no other alternative than to declare that Republicans—in power in the United war against the former mother country. In this States since 1801—felt the need to declare war way, Gilje’s monograph also, albeit indirectly, against the former mother country in 1812 undermines the standard interpretation by in order to defend the nation’s honor. In the nding the war’s origins in Americans’ demo - following so called ‘Second War of Indepen - cratic mentality rather than in British mari- dence,’ the U.S. Navy was able to win some time practices. impressive naval battles against the hitherto Eustace tries to explain why the war be - undefeated Royal Navy, the traditional story came “a popular success” (xi) by analyzing it continues, and thus made Great Britain ac - not as a “military” but as a “cultural event” knowledge American sovereignty in the Trea- (x). According to her, the United States went ty of Ghent in 1814. The War of 1812 produced to war primarily to expand westwards and to military heroes such as James Lawrence, Da - drive Indians off their lands in the West. The vid Porter, Stephen Decatur, and Andrew displacement of the Native populations, more - Jackson and thus promoted American na - over, was a goal that united white Americans tionalism, such that the initially divisive war of all stripes. Eustace analyzes how Republi - ushered in the so-called Era of Good Feel - can war supporters portrayed Indians as ruth- ings, the classical American interpretation less savages that mercilessly butchered white concludes. children and abducted and raped white wom - On the occasion of the bicentennial of the en and how Republicans thus felt justied to conict, three works appeared that fundamen - expel Indians from their lands or even to ex - tally call the assumptions of this narrative into terminate them. “The tale of the bloodthirsty question. Nicole Eustace, Associate Professor savage bent on violating women and children of History at New York University, called the in the pursuit of a population competition that war “a grave American embarrassment” (31), bordered on genocide usefully projected U.S. in which diplomatically and militarily the goals and tactics onto the nation’s enemies” United States achieved nothing and which was (151). As their resistance was broken in the marked by disastrous military failures on the war and as they lost protection by the British American side. Andrew Lambert, Professor who did not insist on taking their Indian al - of Naval History at King’s College, London, lies’ interests into account in the peace nego- found that “after a litany of defeats all along tiations, Republicans felt that their most im- the Canadian border, the capture and destruc - portant war aim had been achieved. tion of Washington, bankruptcy and the loss In a fascinating chapter on the public inter - of several warships, including the national pretation of the Battle of New Orleans—fought agship; the peace settlement had been a for - in January 1815 after the so called ‘Christmas tunate escape” for the American government Peace’ of 1814 had already been concluded— (1-2). As both authors concur that America Eustace exposes that Republicans falsely did not ‘win’ the War of 1812, they seek to claimed that the British soldiers had allegedly understand—yet in different ways—why it been promised the women of New Orleans as Amerikastudien / American Studies 59. Jg., ISSN 0340-2827 © 2015 Universitätsverlag WINTER GmbH, Heidelberg Amerikastudien / American Studies 59.4 ★ Reviews their reward if they won against the American for future territorial expansion and Indian re - forces. Republicans concluded that Ameri - moval. The overall consequence of Indian de- can victory in the Crescent City thus ensured feats and the assertion of American manhood the safety of Louisianan women. As a result, was the strengthening of white American the War of 1812 could be depicted as a suc - reproductive facilities, territorial expansion, cess, even though the original war aims—free and American nationalism and consequently trade and sailors’ rights—had not even been Americans came to regard the War of 1812 as mentioned in the Treaty of Ghent, because—it a great victory. would appear—“American men had protected By turning away from Anglo-American their women” (216). Moreover, Eustace ar - relations and instead focusing on white gues that the claim that it was only through American perceptions of Native Americans, Jackson’s victory at New Orleans that Ameri - Eustace offers a convincing explanation for can women had been protected from sexual why Americans considered the war a vic - violence by British soldiers reinforced gen - tory despite their failure to attain any war der inequalities and contributed to the con- aims with regards to Great Britain and the tinuous denial of women’s right to politically maritime issues. After all, large-scale Indian participate in the American nation: “Framing resistance against whites’ expansionism was Jackson’s victory at New Orleans as a strike broken once and for all. Whereas diplomatic against sexual assault helped men maintain historians have shown that alleged British the proposition that, even in the absence of support for Indians attacking settlers on the any other economic or political rights, wives frontier played no role in the coming of the owed unquestioned allegiance to their hus - war and that the Madison Administration bands and their nation in return for simple only added the accusation that Great Brit - protection from rape” (218). ain was behind Indian warfare to the list of According to Eustace, the major results of complaints to make the war declaration more the War of 1812 therefore have little to do with justied, Eustace shows that—whatever their the maritime disputes between the United reasons for supporting or opposing the war in States and its former mother country. Most 1812—Americans tended to unite behind ef - importantly, U.S. troops had decisively beaten forts to displace Native Americans once war Indians in the Northwest and Southwest and operations had commenced. By stressing In - thus opened the areas to white settlement, as dian cruelties and threats to white American the British chose to withdraw their demand civilians, Republicans could generate support for an independent Indian buffer state in the for a deeply divisive war. In other words: they peace negotiations, preferring quick peace in tried to make Americans turn their eyes from North America after more than two decades of the East to the West. It remains an open ques - warfare in Europe against rst Revolutionary tion, however, how inuential the discourses and then Napoleonic France, thus effectively Eustace discovered in presidential speeches, betraying their Indian allies: “The decision to newspaper editorials, political cartoons, nov - do nothing at Ghent meant everything to the els, plays, poems, and tavern songs actually Indians who faced certain dispossession from were. Critics of the ‘expansionist thesis’—the that day forward” (227). The second impor - claim that the United States declared war tant result of the War of 1812, Eustace argues, in order to conquer Canada—maintain that was of a domestic nature. As Republicans problems along the frontier concerned mostly portrayed the war as a conict between vir - Westerners and that those residing along the tuous and brave American men and sexually Atlantic seaboard were more concerned with depraved Indians and Britons, it contributed trade. Moreover, Federalists remained vehe - to the continued exclusion of women from full mently opposed to the war until the British citizenship. As American men had protected destroyed the American capital and demand - them from assault, women were encouraged ed territorial concessions in the peace nego- to marry soldiers who had defended their tiations in 1814. It is doubtful whether the Re- country and serve as ‘reward’ for their brav - publican propaganda efforts emphasizing the ery. Moreover, after men had performed their Indian threat had much purchase with them. military service to the country and opened Lambert dissects the traditional Ameri - the western land for settlement, women were can narrative of the War of 1812 by taking a expected to produce progeny for the emerg - “British perspective, focusing on the develop - ing American nation and lay the foundation ment of policy and strategy in London and Amerikastudien / American Studies 59. Jg., ISSN 0340-2827 © 2015 Universitätsverlag WINTER GmbH, Heidelberg Reviews ★ Amerikastudien / American Studies 59.4 the conduct of war at sea” (3).