The victory with no name The Native American defeat of the first American army

This book's title draws attention to the way in which US historical writing has for too long obscured the true character of the Ohio Indian confederacy's victory over the US Army under General Arthur St. Clair along the banks of the Wabash River on November 4, 1791. Scrupulous research in archival sources bolsters a well-organized and fluid narrative. Emphasizing the significance of the event as experienced and perceived by those involved, Calloway (Dartmouth) offers a detailed account of not only the battle itself, but also the broader historical context in which it occurred. He intends for this detailed case study to promote rethinking of the "inevitability" of the US conquest of Indigenous nations, and to encourage an alternative focus on moments where events trended in a different direction. The author reminds readers of the long history of Native peoples' commitment to the defense of their homelands in his concluding remarks on contemporary American Indian participation in the US military. Calloway's close analysis of a long-forgotten battle invites a critical rethinking of the early national period that will demand attention from a wide array of readers. Summing Up: Highly recommended. All levels/libraries. --Jon W. Parmenter, Cornell University

In this compact story centering on a single battle, historian Calloway (The Scratch of a Pen) puts a new spin on the old adage about the winners writing history. St. Clair's Defeat, or the Battle on the Wabash, was a vital 1791 military confrontation between Native Americans in northwestern Ohio and a still green U.S. Army, which has been all but written out of history books by its loser, the United States. The battle was widely written about in its day, analyzed for what it meant in terms of the very survival of a new country still threatened by not only the indigenous population but the land-grasping English and Spanish. Calloway crisply covers the battle in one chapter, framing it as part of a larger conflict over real estate that played out in the Ohio country during 1790-1791. This single issue-land ownership-drove an irreconcilable wedge between Native Americans and whites, cutting off any hope for interracial community and cooperation. Though this emphasis on land conflict isn't new, Calloway presents keen observations on the link between business interests and the government's land policy that, underpinned by its racial assumptions, made Gen. Arthur St. Clair's 1791 defeat a complex event. B&w illus. (Oct.) (c) Copyright PWxyz, LLC. All rights reserved.

History of the 1791 Battle of the Wabash, a largely forgotten clash that proved to be "the biggest victory Native Americans ever won and proportionately the biggest military disaster the United States ever suffered." At the time, official documents about the battle only made excuses for the army's loss. Calloway (Native American Studies/Dartmouth Coll.; Pen and Ink Witchcraft: Treaties and Treaty Making in American Indian History, 2013, etc.) concisely recounts this short-lived halt to America's westward expansion at the Maumee River. The Wabash Confederacy included not only many Native American tribes, but also traders and agents intent on preserving their homes. Penned in on the north, south and east, America was ready to move west, but it was already occupied by Native Americans. The English had ceded all land north of the Ohio River to the tribes, but Americans felt no need to honor that agreement and gradually encroached. The first few settlers were acceptable, but wealthy land speculators were looking to make their fortunes. Gen. Arthur St. Clair was sent to clear the areaif not by diplomacy then by total war. Pushed too far as villages and crops were burned, the tribes united in an effort to halt the encroachment. Now a coordinated army with a battle plan, their hit-and-run tactics easily routed the undisciplined Americans. The Founding Fathers' fear of a standing army left St. Clair with a force of only a few hundred old men, substitutes and young boys with little or no training. In addition to this poorly led army, graft and shoddy provisioning foretold a lossall true, but the simple fact is that the Confederation fought a better battle. The author ably explains the winner's side of this battlea herculean task since the Native Americans had no written records. Copyright Kirkus Reviews, used with permission.