Walsh's section on the trial is informative.

I think it speaks volumes about the author that on page 69 of his work he adds a footnote informing the reader that the lower arm of the Hudson River has regular tides as it is part of the sea. "This fact and its bearing on the Andre story has escaped almost all previous writers. None dwell on it." On one hand I am glad that Walsh mentions the point becuase it does make clearer why two men were needed to row a boat out to the Vulture. On the other hand it seems as if he stops his story to take a bow. It left me a little confused.

I suggest instead J.T. Flexnor's "The Traitor and the Spy".

There are many conclusions and arguments in this book that I disagree with. I don't agree that Andre was so selfserving and so manipulative that everything he did was for effect. Evangelist did not make a persuasive case for me. I was not pursuaded to conclude that it was solely due to Andre's manipulation that his three captors are routinely disparaged by historical writers. I still don't know what to think about the captors.I don't think the author made his case that Washington's views did not affect the outcome of the trial.Subsequent actions of Washington lead me to believe that he had lost his usual clear thinking when it came to Benedict Arnold's treason.

However, the author made me seriously think about all of these issues, and more. This is not the best revolutionary war history of the year and it is unlikely to win any awards. I recommend it because it raises questions and provokes serious thinking. At least it did so for me.

Walsh's book, however, may not be the best place to turn for it. There was a lot of interesting material in the work, but I had trouble enjoying it, largely as a result of the organization, focus and style of Walsh's writing. Instead of presenting material in chronological order, Walsh begins with the trial of Andre, I suspect because it best illustrates his thesis that Andre was not the paragon of virtue that he styled himself. However, his choice to begin with the trial colors the reader's interpretation of events, causing the reader to have to revisit his conclusions as Walsh discloses more information during the progression of the book. Also, after the trial, it's hard to read the rest of the book without feeling like it's superfluous.

I was disappointed with Walsh's focus on Andre's character, as well. The story is a captivating, if much written-about, one. While the author does cover some new ground, I kept wishing for him to cover other areas; I couldn't help but feel that his evaluation of Andre's character and motives, while well supported, was trivial compared to other facets of the events and people involved.

Finally, I found myself bothered by Walsh's writing style. Walsh omits the use of quotation marks when presenting dialog. This is easily enough overlooked, but the book become more complicated to understand when the author begins to reconstruct dialog (and later even thoughts) of the historical persons involved, when it's not apparent that there's any source to support it. With apologies to the author, even after re-reading the introduction and scanning the endnotes, I couldn't discern dialog that normally would be quoted from that which was reconstructed from sources other than direct quotes. Worse yet, some of it seems to be entirely speculative, but I just couldn't tell. I have to admit that it all confused me and was a significant distraction.

There's some interesting material in this book, but I just couldn't enjoy it. Unless this specific topic is a major interest area, I have to strongly suggest that prospective readers turn to another source for this history.

This book is another wonderful book. The Andre/Arnold story is one of those romantic stories that never gets tired in the telling.

There has been one myth that has always been somewhat cruel. The men who captured Andre and saved West Point have been treated as theives who were in the right place at the right time. Walsh sets the record straight and shows how that view came from Andre's manipulation of the record. Walsh also places the blame for Andre's failure where it should be, that is on Andre himself. He made blunder after blunder and was only really interested in self-promotion.

I would have liked to read a bit more about Andre's reltationship with General Clinton, his superior. There has always been gossip about it, and I would want to hear Walsh's take on it.

Still this is another great book from John E. Walsh.