I received my book very fast and the book is in good condition as described.

I received my book very fast and it is in good condition as described. Thank you.

I'm in 11th grade AP U.S. History and this is the text we are using. Definetely worth it. Dives into every depth that this nation can exhibit.

James Martin and co-author Mark Lender demonstrate that the Continental Army--more so than the militia--won the Revolutionary War. After the battle of Breed's Hill (AKA Bunker Hill) in which the militia surprised the British Regulars, the Continental Army became increasingly important to the revolutionary cause. Without a decisive victory against Washington and the Continental Army the British could not win the war. Martin and Lender repeatedly drive this point home with well researched facts and quotes that tell a compelling story of the 'Continentals.' "A Respectable Army," however, isn't just about battles and military strategy, it also describes the character (i.e. socioeconomic background) of the men who comprised the ranks of the Continental Army. It also demonstrates the significance of Washington's leadership to the American military tradition. Overall, Martin and Lender do a fascinating job of fusing military history with modern "social history" in creating a brilliant history of the Continental Army. If you like John Keegan's "Fields of Battle" and PBS's "Civil War," you'll enjoy "A Respectable Army."

I bought this book because of the enthusiastic reviews it received on the Amazon.com website. Having looked through it, I am thoroughly disappointed. The author is apparently either unaware of the great novels dealing with Benedict Arnold, beautifully and accurately written in the 1930's by Kenneth Roberts,or has chosen to ignore them. I find this totally unacceptable, since much of what we know about the march to Quebec, the retreat and near loss of the Northern Army on Isle Aux Noix, and the Battle of Valcour Island came to light in "Arundel" and "Rabble in Arms". Martin apparently wanted to write an academic version of Arnold's life, but his failure to cite Roberts renders the Martin book intellectually dishonest. Further, that Martin could have failed to mention Roberts' collection of diaries entitled "The March on Quebec" is truly mind boggling. If it would be possible to give the book zero stars, I would do so for it doesn't deserve the one I had to give it.

Martin's biography demonstrates the complexities of Arnold's mercurial character, but falls short of the completeness needed to become the "authoritative Arnold". The author syphons through 2 centuries of myth to find the true Benedict Arnold: a complex human being with amazing military talent, caught over and again in a web of politicking which he neither understood nor approved. Arnold's treason becomes more heroicly tragic than dastardly. Indeed, the reader cannot help but see similarities of today's "look out for my own best interests" philosophy in business, sports, and politics. It would seem Arnold may be the ultimate example of American individualism.

While Martin's work is well written, interesting, and highly readable, it is far too incomplete to be anything other than a suplementary source. Martin ignores key activites in Arnold's life, most importantly his time spent as commandant in Philadephia, and also ignores the romance and marriage to Peggy Shippen. Col. Andre is mentioned in only a cursory manner. The treason itself is barely touched upon. The book essentially ends after the Battles of Sarasota, when Arnold was badly wounded. What emerges is an interesting but incomplete portriat of General Arnold.

This book would be a great Volume One, if Martin were to continue the biography by addressing these other events in Arnolds life. But for one who is interested in learning about Arnold for the first time, this book is best left on the shelf for after a more thorough biography.

I began this book with the preconceived notion that I think most American's have that Arnold had absolutely no redeeming qualities. This book dispels that myth but at the same time offers no apology for Arnold's treason. The extent of James Kirby Martin's research and analysis is the book's strongest point. Up until Arnold's treason, his contributions to the American Revolution were substantial yet largely unappreciated. Martin documents in great detail the heroic and selfless actions taken by Arnold in the early part of the war, and then dissects Arnold's disillusionment with the independence movement and descent into betrayal. Arnold's distaste for the independence movement centered on the Continental Congress, where decisions were made to placate regional interests and to appease petty egos rather than to reward meritorious conduct on the battlefield. The ironic thing is that Arnold had the unwavering loyalty of the one person who counted: George Washington. Arnold was unable to appreciate this. Washington, like Arnold, had his many detractors in the Congress, yet Washington, unlike Arnold, was not consumed by it in the end. This book is not an apology for Benedict Arnold's attempt to hand West Point over to the British. Rather, it is a compelling acknowledgement that Arnold was a complex individual who had many virtuous qualities and who poured every ounce of his being into the quest for independence until he was consumed by his disillusionment. I wholeheartedly recommend this book to all persons who are interested in American History. James Kirby Martin challenges what we learn about Benedict Arnold as children, yet never requires us to conclude that Arnold's treason was either laudable or excusable.