Pitt the Elder: Man of War

by Edward Pearce

Groundbreaking in its approach, this is the definitive biography of William Pitt the Elder—a brilliant, yet tragic, British statesman  Weaving together military history and political biography, Edward Pearce provides a portrait of Britain's leader during the Seven Years' War. Alongside detailed descriptions of battles in Europe and North America, we follow Pitt's career as a politician—one that was closely intertwined with General James Wolfe at Quebec; American independence; and, the slow mind of George III and the quick one of the rake and outsider John Wilkes. Posterity has invested Pitt with a mystique and presented him as heroic, a titan, a brilliant statesman, and military strategist. This book scrutinizes the reputation and investigates the extent to which Britain's victories and imperial advances can be credited to Pitt alone or to a coalition of commanders, naval administrators, and foreign allies. Pitt the man is also revealed—vain, ruthless, tortured with physical illness, succumbing to mental collapse. This is a masterful portrait of arguably the most powerful minister ever to guide Britain's foreign policy and of an age that marked a new epoch in history, when the balance of power in Europe and the world was set for almost two centuries.

Genres: Biography, History

400 pages, Paperback

First published January 7, 2010

About the author

Edward Robin Pearce was an English political journalist and writer, known for being a leader writer for The Daily Telegraph and The Guardian, and writing a number of biographies of political figures.

Reviews

[Mick · Rating 3 out of 5]

Edward Pearce doesn't set himself an easy task in Pitt the Elder: Man of War, promising a revisionist take on the political career of the 1st Earl of Chatham (1708 – 1778) with a particular eye to his conduct during the Seven Years' War. It's certainly a big task, and not one that Pearce completely succeeds in pulling off.

The result is two books in one. The first of these is Pearce's examination of Pitt the politician, which is done very much in the style of a political reporter (which Pearce was). Pearce seems to rely heavily on the assumption that the reader knows all the players and events and can keep up, providing minimal context for the blow-by-blow political plays. Because of this I (being like, one assumes, most potential readers, not overly familiar with the most minute details of British parliamentary politics in the mid-1700s) had to consult other texts at times just to be sure of what was supposed to be happening.

Pearce is better when discussing the war itself. His descriptions of the Battle of Quiberon Bay and the campaigns in Germany and Canada are the strongest, and most conventional, part of the book. Perhaps this is because he is forced to abandon the messy parliamentary trivia (and Pitt) and instead tell a story. Throughout all of this Pearce's writing style gets in the way of his argument. The constant flow of trivia with little room for context, the strange asides and references to later political figures and events, and even Pearce's use of "we" (the author is English, but it's strange to see this used in reference to events which took place centuries before he or the reader was born), all serve to distract from the subject at hand. The result is a messy book, but an intriguing one, and while it certainly goes a fair way towards debunking the popular myth of Pitt as the great British war-leader, it fails to do so in a novel way or to tell us anything new about the man. It's more a polemic than biography.

[Czarny Pies · Rating 2 out of 5]

As one other Goodreads reviewer has noted a major problem with Edward Pearce's "Pitt the Elder: Man of War", is that Pearce assumes that the reader is already familiar with the events and the leading political players in 18th Century England. The reader who lacks such familiarity will have considerable trouble following Pearce's narrative and understanding what points he is trying to make.

Pearce seems to have done some archival research but there are many sections notably those dealing with the principal battles of the Seven Years War where he appears to rely heavily if not solely on secondary literature. His success at synthesizing the works of the military historians is very uneven. He does a very good job of explaining the challenges of fighting wars on the North American frontier and explains the basic strategies pursued by the British quite effectively. However, his descriptions of the sieges of Louisbourg and Quebec however are thoroughly muddled.

While the research is both thin and suspect, I find myself agreeing with many of Pearce's conclusions. His stated goal is to debunk the myth of Pitt as the great man responsible for the triumphs of the the Seven Years War that made Britain the world's leading Imperial power for the next 180 years. Pearce sees Pitt rather as a belligerent jingoist very similar to Kaiser Wilhelm II. He was reckless to push Britain into war. The extraordinary success were not due to Pitt's leadership which was inconsistent but to the remarkable generalship of Frederick II of Prussia and the incredible bungling of the French in the colonial theatres. In Pearce's view Pitt excelled above all in taking credit for the achievements of others. There is certainly

While many of Pearce's opinions seem quite valid, I do not feel that he supports them very well. I would advise readers wishing to understand either Pitt or the Seven Years War to look elsewhere.

[George Brownfield · Rating 2 out of 5]

I won't repeat what others have said - but they are right. You need background - like maybe growing up in Britain - and this is why it's a hard read without the context. Bought it because it was a deal at Half Price Books - and it's going right back to them.

[Pj Mensel · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not a bad biography

But written in a somewhat affected style. Also more a history of the 7 years war with a wrapper about Pitt himself. Could have saved hundred pages with a good summary

[Bill George]

This book is terrible and one wonders how it got into print. Did it have an editor? It's a rambling mess. Save your time and money and find a better book on Pitt and this important era.

[Patrick Quinn · Rating 1 out of 5]

A book so boring the Carnegie Library Of Pittsburgh doesn't carry.