Anthony E. Carlson – författare

Taking its title from The Face of Battle, John Keegan's canonical book on the nature of warfare, The Other Face of Battle illuminates the American experience of fighting in “irregular” and “intercultural” wars over the centuries. Sometimes known as “forgotten” wars, in part because they lacked triumphant clarity, they are the focus of the book. David Preston, David Silbey, and Anthony Carlson focus on, respectively, the Battle of Monongahela (1755), the Battle of Manila (1898), and the Battle of Makuan, Afghanistan (2020)--conflicts in which American soldiers were forced to engage in “irregular” warfare, confronting an enemy entirely alien to them. This enemy rejected the Western conventions of warfare and defined success and failure-victory and defeat-in entirely different ways. Symmetry of any kind is lost. Here was not ennobling engagement but atrocity, unanticipated insurgencies, and strategic stalemate. War is always hell. These wars, however, profoundly undermined any sense of purpose or proportion. Nightmarish and existentially bewildering, they nonetheless characterize how Americans have experienced combat and what its effects have been. They are therefore worth comparing for what they hold in common as well as what they reveal about our attitude toward war itself. The Other Face of Battle reminds us that “irregular” or “asymmetrical” warfare is now not the exception but the rule. Understanding its roots seems more crucial than ever.

Taking its title from The Face of Battle, John Keegan''s canonical book on the nature of warfare, The Other Face of Battle illuminates the American experience of fighting in "irregular" and "intercultural" wars over the centuries. Sometimes known as "forgotten" wars, in part because they lacked triumphant clarity, they are the focus of the book. David Preston, David Silbey, and Anthony Carlson focus on, respectively, the Battle of Monongahela (1755), the Battle of Manila (1898), and the Battle of Makuan, Afghanistan (2020)--conflicts in which American soldiers were forced to engage in "irregular" warfare, confronting an enemy entirely alien to them. This enemy rejected the Western conventions of warfare and defined success and failure--victory and defeat--in entirely different ways. Symmetry of any kind is lost. Here was not ennobling engagement but atrocity, unanticipated insurgencies, and strategic stalemate. War is always hell. These wars, however, profoundly undermined any sense of purpose or proportion. Nightmarish and existentially bewildering, they nonetheless characterize how Americans have experienced combat and what its effects have been. They are therefore worth comparing for what they hold in common as well as what they reveal about our attitude toward war itself. The Other Face of Battle reminds us that "irregular" or "asymmetrical" warfare is now not the exception but the rule. Understanding its roots seems more crucial than ever.

Taking its title from The Face of Battle, John Keegan''s canonical book on the nature of warfare, The Other Face of Battle illuminates the American experience of fighting in "irregular" and "intercultural" wars over the centuries. Sometimes known as "forgotten" wars, in part because they lacked triumphant clarity, they are the focus of the book. David Preston, David Silbey, and Anthony Carlson focus on, respectively, the Battle of Monongahela (1755), the Battle of Manila (1898), and the Battle of Makuan, Afghanistan (2020)--conflicts in which American soldiers were forced to engage in "irregular" warfare, confronting an enemy entirely alien to them. This enemy rejected the Western conventions of warfare and defined success and failure--victory and defeat--in entirely different ways. Symmetry of any kind is lost. Here was not ennobling engagement but atrocity, unanticipated insurgencies, and strategic stalemate. War is always hell. These wars, however, profoundly undermined any sense of purpose or proportion. Nightmarish and existentially bewildering, they nonetheless characterize how Americans have experienced combat and what its effects have been. They are therefore worth comparing for what they hold in common as well as what they reveal about our attitude toward war itself. The Other Face of Battle reminds us that "irregular" or "asymmetrical" warfare is now not the exception but the rule. Understanding its roots seems more crucial than ever.

Wetlands—particularly swamps—have evoked contradictory responses from different groups in the United States, from the early republic to the end of World War I. White, enslaved, and Indigenous peoples alternately envisioned swamps as future agricultural paradises, uninhabitable wastelands, portals to freedom, spaces to gather vital resources, eugenic sanctuaries, and future homes for settlers. This contested, evolving thinking shaped how Americans interacted with swamps, and Perilous Waters addresses how those interactions influenced their management.Anthony E. Carlson shows how settlers demonized swamps as one of the gravest environmental impediments to agricultural expansion and the establishment of secure and stable communities. In doing so, they enlisted the knowledge, resources, and authority of the state to organize institutions that enabled drainage and erased any vestiges of prior occupation and usage. By the mid-nineteenth century, drainage had become a paramount public policy objective, giving rise to new social institutions and the mobilization of state resources to assist settlers in fashioning dry, healthy, and domesticated landscapes. After 1900, all levels of government worked to implement cooperative social institutions and systemize environmental and technological knowledge to facilitate drainage and accelerate the transformation of the nation’s wet spaces into farms and crop fields.

Wetlands—particularly swamps—have evoked contradictory responses from different groups in the United States from the early republic to the end of World War I. White, enslaved, and Indigenous peoples alternately envisioned swamps as future agricultural paradises, uninhabitable wastelands, portals to freedom, spaces to gather vital resources, eugenic sanctuaries, and future homes for settlers. This contested, evolving thinking shaped how Americans interacted with swamps, and Perilous Waters addresses how those interactions influenced their management. Anthony E. Carlson shows how settlers demonized swamps as one of the gravest environmental impediments to agricultural expansion and the establishment of secure and stable communities. In doing so, they enlisted the knowledge, resources, and authority of the state to organize institutions that enabled drainage and erased any vestiges of prior occupation and usage. By the mid-nineteenth century, drainage became a paramount public policy objective, inaugurating new social institutions and mobilizing state resources to assist settlers in fashioning dry, healthy, and domesticated landscapes. After 1900, all levels of government worked to implement cooperative social institutions and systemize environmental and technological knowledge to facilitate drainage and accelerate the transformation of the nation’s wet spaces into farms and crop fields.

Wetlandsparticularly swampshave evoked contradictory responses from different groups in the United States, from the early republic to the end of World War I. White, enslaved, and Indigenous peoples alternately envisioned swamps as future agricultural paradises, uninhabitable wastelands, portals to freedom, spaces to gather vital resources, eugenic sanctuaries, and future homes for settlers. This contested, evolving thinking shaped how Americans interacted with swamps, and Perilous Waters addresses how those interactions influenced their management.Anthony E.Carlsonshows how settlers demonized swamps as one of the gravest environmental impediments to agricultural expansion and the establishment of secure and stable communities. In doing so, they enlisted the knowledge, resources, and authority of the state to organize institutions that enabled drainage and erased any vestiges of prior occupation and usage. By the mid-nineteenth century, drainage had become a paramount public policy objective, giving rise to new social institutions and the mobilization of state resources to assist settlers in fashioning dry, healthy, and domesticated landscapes. After 1900, all levels of government worked to implement cooperative social institutions and systemize environmental and technological knowledge to facilitate drainage and accelerate the transformation of the nations wet spaces into farms and crop fields.