Patriot Battles: How the Revolutionary War was Fought [NOOK Book]


Drawing on hundreds of specialist sources, contemporary and archival, Patriot Battles is the comprehensive one-volume study of the military aspects of the War of Independence. The first part of the book offers a richly detailed examination of the nuts and bolts of eighteenth-century combat: For example, who fought and what motivated them, whether patriot or redcoat, Hessian or Frenchman? How were they enlisted and trained? How were they clothed and fed? What weapons did they use, and how effective were they? When...

See more details below
Patriot Battles: How the Revolutionary War was Fought

Available on NOOK devices and apps  
  • NOOK Devices
  • Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 NOOK 7.0
  • Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 NOOK 10.1
  • NOOK HD Tablet
  • NOOK HD+ Tablet
  • NOOK eReaders
  • NOOK Color
  • NOOK Tablet
  • Tablet/Phone
  • NOOK for Windows 8 Tablet
  • NOOK for iOS
  • NOOK for Android
  • NOOK Kids for iPad
  • PC/Mac
  • NOOK for Windows 8
  • NOOK for PC
  • NOOK for Mac
  • NOOK for Web

Want a NOOK? Explore Now

NOOK Book (eBook)
$12.60 price


Drawing on hundreds of specialist sources, contemporary and archival, Patriot Battles is the comprehensive one-volume study of the military aspects of the War of Independence. The first part of the book offers a richly detailed examination of the nuts and bolts of eighteenth-century combat: For example, who fought and what motivated them, whether patriot or redcoat, Hessian or Frenchman? How were they enlisted and trained? How were they clothed and fed? What weapons did they use, and how effective were they? When soldiers became casualties or fell ill, how did medical services deal with them? What roles did loyalists, women, blacks, and Indians play?

The second part of the book gives a closer look at the war's greatest battles, with maps provided for each. Which men were involved, and how many? What was the state of their morale and equipment? What parts did terrain and weather play? What were the qualities of the respective commanders, and what tactics did they employ? How many casualties were inflicted? And no less important, how did the soldiers fight?

Throughout, many cherished myths are challenged, reputations are reassessed, and long-held assumptions are tested. For all readers, Patriot Battles becomes not only one of the most satisfying and illuminating works to be added to the literature on the War of Independence in many years but also a refreshing wind blowing through some of its dustier corridors.

Read More Show Less

Editorial Reviews

Publishers Weekly

A former editor of the Military Book Club, Stephenson (Battlegrounds) aims to strip away "the slow accretion of national mythology and popular history" that has "embalmed" the American Revolution. The result is a well-documented, entertaining and mildly revisionist military history in two parts. In the first, Stephenson examines "The Nuts and Bolts of War," answering basic questions about who fought, how and why. He concludes, unsurprisingly, that "the war was not revolutionary in any military sense." What's intriguing is how similar the American and British armies were—Stephenson notes that for each, "It was like gazing into a mirror." To analyze prosaic details like supply and transport, weapons and medical care, the author uses an array of statistics and technical data—muzzle velocities, shot weights, equipment lists, etc.—but wisely leavens them with anecdotes. In part two, Stephenson turns to an analysis of the major battles of the war, from the opening skirmishes at Lexington and Concord to the climactic showdown at Yorktown, and concludes that the Continental Army's victory was always predicated on its numerical superiority. This excellent popular history should attract a wide audience with its fresh perspective. 16 maps. (Apr.)

Copyright 2006 Reed Business Information.
Library Journal
Stephenson (Battlegrounds) seeks to reinvent the wheel. His objective is to explain who fought the battles of the American Revolution, how, and why—topics better explained long ago in superior texts. Part 1 covers "The Nuts and Bolts of War," with chapters analyzing such topics as who constituted the various military forces involved, the equipment they carried, and the food they ate. Parts 2 and 3 describe the battles occurring in the North and South, respectively. Battles are described well enough, but there is little explanation of events transpiring in between. The result is a series of case studies with little context. Throughout, Stephenson is prone to injecting absurd phrases and strange references. He refers to some British officers as "deadbeat young twits," compares a burned-out soldier to a computer's frazzled motherboard, and draws a parallel between the Revolution's financier Robert Morris and today's Halliburton. The absence of a conclusion is another problem. Does the author not have a point he wishes to reinforce? This is not a bad book; it is merely unnecessary. Readers would do better to select one of the more standard secondary sources Stephenson references, such as Robert Middlekauff's The Glorious Cause. An optional purchase for public libraries.
—Matthew J. Wayman
Kirkus Reviews
An iconoclastic, provocative study of the Revolutionary War that invalidates a few chestnuts-including the one that the surrendering British played "The World Turned Upside Down" at Yorktown. "There is no hard evidence," writes former Military Book Club editor Stephenson (ed., Battlegrounds: Geography and Art of Warfare, 2003), that the British played anything other than a slow march, befitting the mournful occasion. There is plenty of evidence, though, that the war was a tough business for all concerned. Proceeding cautiously, Stephenson makes a case that will induce teeth-gnashing on the right-wing talk-show circuit, namely that, inasmuch as "colonial wars share a certain geometry," it is not beyond the pale to liken the rebel colonial struggle in America to nationalist insurgencies in places such as Vietnam and Iraq, where American soldiers now take the place of the imperialist lobsterbacks of old. (In case the point is lost, Stephenson notes that George Bush is more George III than George Washington.) Whatever the parallels, Stephenson observes that an army with a home-field advantage has vastly better odds of survival than one in a different country and culture; moreover, it is part of that geometry that militias will take it as a priority to crush loyalism, wherever it might be encountered. In the American colonies, this meant civil war on several fronts, though the loyalists were at their strongest in New York and New Jersey, one reason the British tried so hard to center the war there, where they could count on the help of friends. After examining such matters as the lives of officers, who had it easier than the enlisted men if only because they could resign without being hangedor beheaded as deserters, and the musket-and-mutton material world of the soldiery, Stephenson turns to more familiar ground, analyzing the war's most important battles and sometimes, as with Trenton, musing about why things didn't work out disastrously for the American cause. Contrarian and well-written-a welcome remedy to Parson Weems-ish tales of the past.
Read More Show Less

Product Details

  • ISBN-13: 9780061870002
  • Publisher: HarperCollins Publishers
  • Publication date: 10/13/2009
  • Format: eBook
  • Pages: 448
  • Sales rank: 506,649
  • File size: 2 MB

Meet the Author

Michael Stephenson is the former editor of the Military Book Club and the editor of National Geographic's Battlegrounds: Geography and the History of Warfare. He lives in New York City.

Read More Show Less

Read an Excerpt

Patriot Battles How the War of Independence Was Fought
By Michael Stephenson HarperCollins Copyright © 2007 Michael Stephenson
All right reserved.

ISBN: 978-0-06-073261-5

Chapter One "A Choaky Mouthful"

The American Soldier

After the first heady flush of enthusiasm following the spectacular successes over the British at Lexington, Concord, and Bunker's Hill during that glorious spring and summer of 1775 when close to 20,000 American patriots of all stations of society from the New England states had snatched up their motley collection of arms to support the insurrection, worthy patriots refused to join the ranks in impressive numbers. From that time on, the war, far from being a populist, "democratic" affair, became a military burden shouldered almost exclusively by the poorest segments of American society. No matter how persuasive the rhetoric of freedom, the siren call of self-interest and the urgent demands of survival were often more compelling. John Adams, writing on 1 February 1776, saw it clearly, if ruefully.

The service was too new; they had not yet become attached to it by habit. Was it credible that men who could get at home better living, more comfortable lodgings, more than double the wages, in safety, not exposed to the sicknesses of the camp, would bind themselves during the war? I knew it to be impossible.

And it would drive George Washington into regular conniptions throughout his tenure as commander in chief.

How did some and not other Americans end up looking down the business end of the barrel of a musket across that fateful fifty yards of killing ground? There were essentially three organizations in which they could volunteer or be forced to "volunteer." The first was the states' militias; the second, the states' troops who were normally drafted or "levied" from the militia for short terms of service and for specific tasks, such as guarding strategic points within the state; the third, after Congress "adopted" the "motley Crew" of citizen-soldiers on 14 June 1775 who were besieging the British at Boston, the Continental army-the regulars. All three types might appear on the monthly returns of regular army strength if militia and state troops had been co-opted to serve with the Continentals.

The Militia

The institution of the militia had been built into the fabric of the earliest colonies. The necessity not only to protect their settlements but also, where expedient, to expand their holdings, meant that technically every able-bodied man from the ages of sixteen to sixty was required to turn up, armed, for regular training and, if necessary, make himself available for longer periods of service. For example, the Patriot Committee of Frederick County, Virginia, proclaimed in the spring of 1775: "Every Member of this County between sixteen & sixty years of Age, shall appear once every Month, at least, in the Field under Arms; & it is recommended to all to muster weekly for their Improvement."

In the beginning it had been a decidedly convenient arrangement for Britain to set up what were essentially trading satellites charged with the responsibility of defending themselves with little financial drag on the mother country. It was only after the French and Indian War (1754-63) that the cost/profit ratio of Britain's American empire shifted in an uncomfortable direction. Britain's national debt rose from u75 million to a whopping u130 million. And in part, it was Britain's attempt to balance the increasingly wayward ledger books of its colonial investment that drove the colonies into insurrection.

Within each state not all were equally bound by the militia contract. Some, the lowest of the low in colonial society-slaves, Indians, white indentured servants and apprentices, and itinerant laborers-were exempt, not from some humanitarian impulse on the part of the white oligarchy but because it would too dangerous to arm groups that might at some future time turn their military experience in the wrong direction. In any event these people were property, someone else's property, and the rules and rights of property were at the sacrosanct heart of colonial society. It would be only during the severest pressures of the war that these rules would be bent or broken. At the other end of the social scale the more powerful could escape the inconveniencies of militia service by paying a fine or hiring a substitute, an avoidance long established in the colonial tradition: "No Man of an Estate is under any Obligation to Muster, and even the Servants or Overseers of the Rich are likewise exempted; the whole Burthen lyes upon the poorest sort of people," wrote Governor Alexander Spotswood of Virginia to the Board of Trade in 1716.

A comparison of the original 1669 militia ordinance and the 1774 Militia Act for North Carolina shows how wide a gap had opened between the generally inclusive demands of the original ("all inhabitants and freemen ... above 17 years of age and under 60") and the much more lenient expectations of the latter which excluded many categories of freeholders, including clergymen, lawyers, judges, millers, overseers, and constables. The hierarchy of Virginia was acutely aware of the political fallout if too many militia obligations were placed on what we would now call its "core constituency," and the General Assembly regularly restricted militia service to those who were "not free-holders or house-keepers qualified to vote at the election of Burgesses."

Even back in the 1750s when George Washington was colonel of Virginia's state troops, he would get a taste of the problems that would gall him throughout the War of Independence. With the exemption of what he would have described as the "right sort of people," Washington was forced to draw "upon the lowest orders of society, whom he once portrayed as 'loose, Idle Persons that are quite destitute of House and Home.'" And it would be just such as these who were to carry the main burden of the patriot cause whether in the militia battalions or Continental army. Most of the time, in those days of his colonelcy, the militia simply did not turn up (like trying to "raize the Dead," he wailed), and when they did turn up they were aggravatingly "bolshie": "Every mean individual has his own crude notion of things, and must undertake to direct. If his advice is neglected, he thinks himself slighted, abased, and injured; and, to redress his wrongs, will depart for his home."


Excerpted from Patriot Battles by Michael Stephenson Copyright © 2007 by Michael Stephenson. Excerpted by permission.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.

Read More Show Less

Table of Contents

List of Maps     xi
Acknowledgments     xiii
Introduction     xv
The Nuts and Bolts of War
"A Choaky Mouthful": The American Soldier     5
The Militia     6
The Continentals     19
Lobsterbacks: The British Soldier     36
Britain's German Auxiliaries     48
Loyalists     52
"Men of Character": The Officer Class     63
What Made Men Fight     79
Feeding the Beast     101
The Things They Carried: Weapons, Equipment, and Clothing     119
The Big Guns: Artillery     154
The Sanguinary Business: Wounds, Disease, and Medical Care     162
"Trulls and Doxies": Women in the Armies     177
Cuff and Salem, Dick and Jehu: Blacks in the War     183
"The Proper Subjects of Our Resentment": Indians     190
The Great Battles
The War in the North
Ambush: Lexington and Concord, 19 April 1775     203
"A Complication of Horror...": Bunker's Hill, 17 June 1775     211
A Vaunting Ambition: Quebec, 31 December 1775     222
"We Expect Bloody Work": Brooklyn, 22-29 August 1776     230
Fire and Ice: Trenton I, 25-26 December 1776; Trenton II, 30 December 1776; and Princeton, 3 January 1777     251
The Philadelphia Campaign: Brandywine, 11 September 1777; Germantown, 4 October 1777; and Monmouth Courthouse, 28 June 1778     267
The Saratoga Campaign: Freeman's Farm, 19 September 1777; and Bemis Heights, 7 October 1777     288
The War in the South
The Laurels of Victory, the Willows of Defeat: Camden, 16 August 1780     313
The Hunters Hunted: Kings Mountain, 7 October 1780; and Cowpens, 17 January 1781     323
"Long, Obstinate, and Bloody": Guilford Courthouse, 15 March 1781     332
"Handsomely in a Pudding Bag": The Chesapeake Capes, 5-13 September 1781; and Yorktown, 28 September-19 October 1781     341
Notes     355
Select Bibliography     385
Index     397

Read More Show Less

Customer Reviews

Be the first to write a review
( 0 )
Rating Distribution

5 Star


4 Star


3 Star


2 Star


1 Star


Your Rating:

Your Name: Create a Pen Name or

Barnes & Review Rules

Our reader reviews allow you to share your comments on titles you liked, or didn't, with others. By submitting an online review, you are representing to Barnes & that all information contained in your review is original and accurate in all respects, and that the submission of such content by you and the posting of such content by Barnes & does not and will not violate the rights of any third party. Please follow the rules below to help ensure that your review can be posted.

Reviews by Our Customers Under the Age of 13

We highly value and respect everyone's opinion concerning the titles we offer. However, we cannot allow persons under the age of 13 to have accounts at or to post customer reviews. Please see our Terms of Use for more details.

What to exclude from your review:

Please do not write about reviews, commentary, or information posted on the product page. If you see any errors in the information on the product page, please send us an email.

Reviews should not contain any of the following:

  • - HTML tags, profanity, obscenities, vulgarities, or comments that defame anyone
  • - Time-sensitive information such as tour dates, signings, lectures, etc.
  • - Single-word reviews. Other people will read your review to discover why you liked or didn't like the title. Be descriptive.
  • - Comments focusing on the author or that may ruin the ending for others
  • - Phone numbers, addresses, URLs
  • - Pricing and availability information or alternative ordering information
  • - Advertisements or commercial solicitation


  • - By submitting a review, you grant to Barnes & and its sublicensees the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable right and license to use the review in accordance with the Barnes & Terms of Use.
  • - Barnes & reserves the right not to post any review -- particularly those that do not follow the terms and conditions of these Rules. Barnes & also reserves the right to remove any review at any time without notice.
  • - See Terms of Use for other conditions and disclaimers.
Search for Products You'd Like to Recommend

Recommend other products that relate to your review. Just search for them below and share!

Create a Pen Name

Your Pen Name is your unique identity on It will appear on the reviews you write and other website activities. Your Pen Name cannot be edited, changed or deleted once submitted.

Your Pen Name can be any combination of alphanumeric characters (plus - and _), and must be at least two characters long.

Continue Anonymously
Sort by: Showing all of 5 Customer Reviews
  • Anonymous

    Posted August 15, 2009

    Good for One Who Has Good Knowledge about The American Revolution

    Having read many books about the American Revolution, this title caught my eye. It provides good insight into the lives of the American and British soldiers (their social classes, how they were dressed at all levels, their daily lives, how they fought, etc.) as well as brief synopses of the major battles. It can be looked at in two ways: as a simple introduction for later, more detailed reading about the Revolution or as a condensed description for more detailed books on the subject later on. I did find several comments that compared the war for independence with the current war on terror, using unobjective comparisons; it is easy to figure out on what side of today's political aisle the author resides. That was the only damper on this book. Mr. Stephenson, please leave your political thoughts out of future books! Alvin Gritz

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted April 28, 2009

    New perspectives on a well worn subject

    As a college history major who grew up near the Yorktown battlefield I was surprised by the amount of new information and perspectives in this book. Other than the War Between the States and, perhaps, the assassination of John Kennedy, the American War for Independence has been analyzed by so many authors that it appeared that a valid, fresh approach was impossible. The author has made the book extremely readable. His frequent use of quotations from everyone from Burgoyne to American militiamen not only makes the reading more interesting but helps to validate the conclusions. Overall, very much recommended for both casual readers and those seeking new insights on a familiar subject. I have not provided detailed ratings in some cases because I did not feel that they were applicable to this category of book.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted August 17, 2007

    Informative, but . . .

    In Patriot Battles, Michael Stephenson attempts to do two things: first, provide detailed bits of information regarding the 'nuts and bolts of the military aspects of the War of Independence' and second to explode a few persistent myths about the war. I'd say he was successful to a certain extent regarding the former, but had more success with the latter. Patriot Battles purports to be a one volume study of the military aspects of the war, but the entire book seemed to read like a well researched (and lengthy) article by any news magazine. The book is certainly informative, but in no way is it a page turner. The first half of the book is devoted to such topics as who the soldiers were, the motivation of the soldiers, and weapons used by the soldiers. None of these subjects is particularly comprehensive but will give you a decent understanding of each. The second half of the book is devoted to individual battles of the war. Again, none of the covered battles are even remotely comprehensive or detailed (under the book¿s circumstances, how could they be?) but certainly give the reader a basic view of how the battles were fought and the casualties sustained. Finally, some have been critical of Stephenson¿s comparison of events, tactics, etc. of the war to other wars involving an insurgency. I do not know Stephenson¿s politics (and I doubt the critics do either), but I did not find the comparisons unfair or inappropriate in anyway. In fact, some comparisons seemed shockingly similar to what the US has experienced more recently. If you want a basic foundation about the military aspects of the war, then I recommend it. If you¿re looking for an informative and page turning drama, then there are better books.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted October 31, 2010

    No text was provided for this review.

  • Anonymous

    Posted December 30, 2009

    No text was provided for this review.

Sort by: Showing all of 5 Customer Reviews

If you find inappropriate content, please report it to Barnes & Noble
Why is this product inappropriate?
Comments (optional)