What do you think?
Rate this book
The Hornet's Nest: A Novel of the Revolutionary War
The first work of fiction by a President of the United States -- a sweeping novel of the American South and the War of Independence
In his ambitious and deeply rewarding novel, Jimmy Carter brings to life the Revolutionary War as it was fought in the Deep South; it is a saga that will change the way we think about the conflict. He reminds us that much of the fight for independence took place in that region and that it was a struggle of both great and small battles and of terrible brutality, with neighbor turned against neighbor, the Indians' support sought by both sides, and no quarter asked or given. The Hornet's Nest follows a cast of characters and their loved ones on both sides of this violent conflict -- including some who are based on the author's ancestors.
At the heart of the story is Ethan Pratt, who in 1766 moves with his wife, Epsey, from Philadelphia to North Carolina and then to Georgia in 1771, in the company of Quakers. On their homesteads in Georgia, Ethan and his wife form a friendship with neighbors Kindred Morris and his wife, Mavis. Through Kindred and his young Indian friend Newota, Ethan learns about the frontier and the Native American tribes who are being continually pressed farther inland by settlers. As the eight-year war develops, Ethan and Kindred find themselves in life-and-death combat with opposing forces.
With its moving love story, vivid action, and the suspense of a war fought with increasing ferocity and stealth, The Hornet's Nest is historical fiction at its best, in the tradition of such major classics as The Last of the Mohicans.
465 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2003
About the author
Jimmy Carter
240 books511 followersLibrarian’s note: There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name.
James Earl Carter, Junior, known as Jimmy, the thirty-ninth president of the United States from 1977 to 1981, creditably established energy-conservation measures, concluded the treaties of Panama Canal in 1978, negotiated the accords of Camp David between Egypt and Israel in 1979, and won the Nobel Prize of 2002 for peace.
Ronald Wilson Reagan defeated Jimmy Carter, the incumbent, in the presidential election of 1980.
He served and received. Carter served two terms in the senate of Georgia and as the 76th governor from 1971 to 1975.
Carter created new Cabinet-level Department of education. A national policy included price decontrol and new technology. From 1977, people reduced foreign oil imports one-half to 1982. In foreign affairs, Carter pursued the second round of strategic arms limitation talks (SALT). Carter sought to put a stronger emphasis on human rights in 1979. People saw his return of the zone as a major concession of influence in Latin America, and Carter came under heavy criticism.
Iranian students in 1979 took over the American embassy and held hostages, and an attempt to rescue them failed; several additional major crises, including serious fuel shortages and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, marked the final year of his tenure. Edward Moore Kennedy challenged significantly higher disapproval ratings of Carter for nomination of the Democratic Party before the election of 1980. Carter defeated Kennedy for the nomination lost the election to Ronald Wilson Reagan, a Republican.
Carter left office and with Rosalynn Smith Carter, his wife, afterward founded the nongovernmental center and organization that works to advance human rights. He traveled extensively to conduct, to observe elections, and to advance disease prevention and eradication in developing nations. He, a key, also figures in the project of habitat for humanity. Carter particularly vocalizes on the Palestinian conflict.
http://us.macmillan.com/author/jimmyc...
James Earl Carter, Junior, known as Jimmy, the thirty-ninth president of the United States from 1977 to 1981, creditably established energy-conservation measures, concluded the treaties of Panama Canal in 1978, negotiated the accords of Camp David between Egypt and Israel in 1979, and won the Nobel Prize of 2002 for peace.
Ronald Wilson Reagan defeated Jimmy Carter, the incumbent, in the presidential election of 1980.
He served and received. Carter served two terms in the senate of Georgia and as the 76th governor from 1971 to 1975.
Carter created new Cabinet-level Department of education. A national policy included price decontrol and new technology. From 1977, people reduced foreign oil imports one-half to 1982. In foreign affairs, Carter pursued the second round of strategic arms limitation talks (SALT). Carter sought to put a stronger emphasis on human rights in 1979. People saw his return of the zone as a major concession of influence in Latin America, and Carter came under heavy criticism.
Iranian students in 1979 took over the American embassy and held hostages, and an attempt to rescue them failed; several additional major crises, including serious fuel shortages and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, marked the final year of his tenure. Edward Moore Kennedy challenged significantly higher disapproval ratings of Carter for nomination of the Democratic Party before the election of 1980. Carter defeated Kennedy for the nomination lost the election to Ronald Wilson Reagan, a Republican.
Carter left office and with Rosalynn Smith Carter, his wife, afterward founded the nongovernmental center and organization that works to advance human rights. He traveled extensively to conduct, to observe elections, and to advance disease prevention and eradication in developing nations. He, a key, also figures in the project of habitat for humanity. Carter particularly vocalizes on the Palestinian conflict.
http://us.macmillan.com/author/jimmyc...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 197 reviews
January 17, 2021
This felt more like a group of rather random biographies edited together than a novel. It was quite educational—we don't often hear about what happened during the revolutionary war in the south — but it was so dryly written that it was almost impossible to maintain interest. One interesting theme is the way the revolutionary war set up issues that wouldn't be resolved, or even begin to be resolved, until the Civil War.
December 14, 2022
Jimmy Carter has written many books, but only one of them has been fiction. And that is this one. Even with this ostensibly being fiction, it is clear that Carter did a lot of research in preparation of writing his story, as many of the events depicted here did actually occur. In addition, many but not all of the characters were real people. Carter employed a mix of completely fictional characters, people who were real but who history barely mentioned and thus left open to interpretation (or invention) most of their actions, and accurate depictions of historical individuals.
The main characters are mostly fictional. The nominal main character, Ethan Pratt, is absent for long stretches of the book. Even though Carter both starts and finishes the book with him, he didn't feel like the hub of the story. Carter had so many angles going (frontiersmen, British officials, Indians, Quakers) at the same time that Pratt seemed relegated to the background for about half of the book. I did not get too invested in him and that is probably why, although I also found him to be an unlikeable person. Carter does show how he transforms from someone who just wants to be left alone into a militant militiamen bent on revenge; someone who cheats on his wife and who also left a friend to die.
Then again, Ethan was not the only rough character here. Pretty much everyone is. Carter is really good at showing just how violent and crude most people were back then. Most of these people had little money; they were basically just getting by. Many of them were uneducated and intolerant. The few wealthy people (such as Joseph Maddock, the head of the Quaker settlement) were depicted as always looking to make a profit, whether it be out of the war or from someone in a weak position. The Americans do not come across well here, but then again the British were just as bad. Quite frankly, that mirrors my own view of the two sides during this time period - each were guilty of numerous atrocities against the other.
One of the major characters who was real but history had little about was Thomas Brown, who became the leader of the Florida Rangers on the British side. He was brutal, but he was also brutalized. Like Pratt, he became obsessed with vengeance and violence. Carter was able to bring both he and Pratt together to face each other towards the end, in effect wrapping up two storylines simultaneously.
There were a few areas where I thought that Carter fell short. One is with the Indians. Carter starts off by having one of his fictionalized characters, Newota, seem to be an important player. But Newota soon got relegated to the sidelines, and then all but disappears until close to the end, and even then he is only mentioned briefly. This mirrors what happened with the Indian storyline in general: Carter seems to forget about it. The Creeks and Cherokees (and a few other tribes) are frequently mentioned, but the scene never shifts to them. I would have liked to have seen either Newota have a bigger role, or for the Indian tribes to play a more prominent part in the events.
Similarly, the Quaker settlement storyline sort of peters out. The Quakers are a big part of the early chapters, with Ethan's wife Epsey being a Quaker, and the Pratts moving from North Carolina to Georgia with the Quakers, then setting up a homestead with their settlement. After that though there are only occasional brief scenes there the rest of the way. In a Q&A session at the end of the book, Carter says that he portrayed the Quaker settlement accurately - and I have no reason to doubt that - but I wish he would have explored their motives further.
Slavery is also touched on, with a chapter about Quash Dolly, a slave woman who helps the British. I wish Carter would have carried her story further. The chapter he does have on her is brutal - depicting the disgusting and degrading treatment doled out by whites against blacks. It is still difficult to believe that there was a time when people looked upon those of a different skin color as property. Humans possess an endless capacity to be cruel and inhumane towards other humans.
Carter does something that I think is rather bold: he kills off two major characters early in the book. Both Henry and Sophronia Pratt die, not at the same time nor of the same cause. Of course, being that this occurs early on, I have to somewhat question if they can really be classified as principal characters. When close to 400 pages remain, and those two have already died, how can they be considered as principal characters? Henry's death does have meaning and it contributes to later actions by Ethan, but Sophronia dies of smallpox. Still, it's a bold choice for a novelist.
What Carter excels at is painting the overall bleak picture of how daily life was like during the war. Food was scarce, disease was rampant, violence lurked in every corner, and communication was delayed. This was a time period where, unless you were wealthy, just day-to-day life was grueling. It is not a world that I would want to inhabit. Reading Carter's story is close enough. Carter has not written a sequel to this book, and given his advanced age now I would not expect one. Which is too bad, because he did a good - though not great - job with a difficult subject.
Grade: B
The main characters are mostly fictional. The nominal main character, Ethan Pratt, is absent for long stretches of the book. Even though Carter both starts and finishes the book with him, he didn't feel like the hub of the story. Carter had so many angles going (frontiersmen, British officials, Indians, Quakers) at the same time that Pratt seemed relegated to the background for about half of the book. I did not get too invested in him and that is probably why, although I also found him to be an unlikeable person. Carter does show how he transforms from someone who just wants to be left alone into a militant militiamen bent on revenge; someone who cheats on his wife and who also left a friend to die.
Then again, Ethan was not the only rough character here. Pretty much everyone is. Carter is really good at showing just how violent and crude most people were back then. Most of these people had little money; they were basically just getting by. Many of them were uneducated and intolerant. The few wealthy people (such as Joseph Maddock, the head of the Quaker settlement) were depicted as always looking to make a profit, whether it be out of the war or from someone in a weak position. The Americans do not come across well here, but then again the British were just as bad. Quite frankly, that mirrors my own view of the two sides during this time period - each were guilty of numerous atrocities against the other.
One of the major characters who was real but history had little about was Thomas Brown, who became the leader of the Florida Rangers on the British side. He was brutal, but he was also brutalized. Like Pratt, he became obsessed with vengeance and violence. Carter was able to bring both he and Pratt together to face each other towards the end, in effect wrapping up two storylines simultaneously.
There were a few areas where I thought that Carter fell short. One is with the Indians. Carter starts off by having one of his fictionalized characters, Newota, seem to be an important player. But Newota soon got relegated to the sidelines, and then all but disappears until close to the end, and even then he is only mentioned briefly. This mirrors what happened with the Indian storyline in general: Carter seems to forget about it. The Creeks and Cherokees (and a few other tribes) are frequently mentioned, but the scene never shifts to them. I would have liked to have seen either Newota have a bigger role, or for the Indian tribes to play a more prominent part in the events.
Similarly, the Quaker settlement storyline sort of peters out. The Quakers are a big part of the early chapters, with Ethan's wife Epsey being a Quaker, and the Pratts moving from North Carolina to Georgia with the Quakers, then setting up a homestead with their settlement. After that though there are only occasional brief scenes there the rest of the way. In a Q&A session at the end of the book, Carter says that he portrayed the Quaker settlement accurately - and I have no reason to doubt that - but I wish he would have explored their motives further.
Slavery is also touched on, with a chapter about Quash Dolly, a slave woman who helps the British. I wish Carter would have carried her story further. The chapter he does have on her is brutal - depicting the disgusting and degrading treatment doled out by whites against blacks. It is still difficult to believe that there was a time when people looked upon those of a different skin color as property. Humans possess an endless capacity to be cruel and inhumane towards other humans.
Carter does something that I think is rather bold: he kills off two major characters early in the book. Both Henry and Sophronia Pratt die, not at the same time nor of the same cause. Of course, being that this occurs early on, I have to somewhat question if they can really be classified as principal characters. When close to 400 pages remain, and those two have already died, how can they be considered as principal characters? Henry's death does have meaning and it contributes to later actions by Ethan, but Sophronia dies of smallpox. Still, it's a bold choice for a novelist.
What Carter excels at is painting the overall bleak picture of how daily life was like during the war. Food was scarce, disease was rampant, violence lurked in every corner, and communication was delayed. This was a time period where, unless you were wealthy, just day-to-day life was grueling. It is not a world that I would want to inhabit. Reading Carter's story is close enough. Carter has not written a sequel to this book, and given his advanced age now I would not expect one. Which is too bad, because he did a good - though not great - job with a difficult subject.
Grade: B
July 18, 2012
Fact-filled, but not well told
Regardless of your views on Jimmy Carter the politician, he is also Jimmy Carter the author. A good reviewer should separate his opinions, be they pro or con, about the politician from a politician's works of fiction. I will endeavor to do so here.
Carter's interest in his native state of Georgia has led him to write, The Hornet's Nest: A Novel of the Revolutionary War , a historical novel about the Revolutionary War in Georgia, the Carolinas and Florida. Admittedly, this is an area that is often ignored in favor of Boston, Valley Forge and Philadelphia so there is room for quality fiction in this area.
The problem with Carter's work is not a lack of attention to historical detail - it is too much attention to historical detail to the detriment of an actual story about fictional characters. Carter's storyline shifts from being a piece of historical fiction to being a rather dry local history throughout the work.
Carter's passion for historical detail often drowns out the narrative. The reader is treated to dry facts about the intricacies of the British command in Florida ad nauseum. We are repeatedly told some of the some details over and over again - sometimes multiple times on the same page! ...
Read more at: http://dwdsreviews.blogspot.com/2011/...
Regardless of your views on Jimmy Carter the politician, he is also Jimmy Carter the author. A good reviewer should separate his opinions, be they pro or con, about the politician from a politician's works of fiction. I will endeavor to do so here.
Carter's interest in his native state of Georgia has led him to write, The Hornet's Nest: A Novel of the Revolutionary War , a historical novel about the Revolutionary War in Georgia, the Carolinas and Florida. Admittedly, this is an area that is often ignored in favor of Boston, Valley Forge and Philadelphia so there is room for quality fiction in this area.
The problem with Carter's work is not a lack of attention to historical detail - it is too much attention to historical detail to the detriment of an actual story about fictional characters. Carter's storyline shifts from being a piece of historical fiction to being a rather dry local history throughout the work.
Carter's passion for historical detail often drowns out the narrative. The reader is treated to dry facts about the intricacies of the British command in Florida ad nauseum. We are repeatedly told some of the some details over and over again - sometimes multiple times on the same page! ...
Read more at: http://dwdsreviews.blogspot.com/2011/...
March 25, 2008
Pres. Carter's book treats in depth the Revolutionary War and its preceding altercations in Georgia, South Carolina and the British territory of Florida. I was glad to learn more about the most southern colonies' involvement since it hasn't received the historical attention that the mid-south and northern alliance has been given. Almost all of the characters were actual people. Carter has been critized by reviewers of novels because the interactions and conversations among participants seem stilted and unemotional. I personally found that this added to the realism since I believe people who led exceptionally hard lives, particularly if they were of Scotish/English extraction, were not given to much emotionalism.. except possibly anger. This is a novel because a few of the characters are fictional, but the events are not. And so it reads more like a history text...which is not a bad thing.
July 1, 2011
I really wanted to like this book more than I did. The fictionalized characters were interesting and I was wrapped up in their story, then Carter digresses to true historical accounts that took away from the story. Too many names, dates, and historical facts for a novel. I didn't quite get the end. I'm not sure if I, as the reader, am supposed to draw my own conclusion or if there is a clue to the ending that I am somehow missing.
On a happy note, I learned a lot about the Revolutionary War and it gave me a better understanding of how some of the problems we continue to face in America stem from that time. Maybe the things I learned are better than just an "ok" rating, but as a novel, it was just "ok."
On a happy note, I learned a lot about the Revolutionary War and it gave me a better understanding of how some of the problems we continue to face in America stem from that time. Maybe the things I learned are better than just an "ok" rating, but as a novel, it was just "ok."
May 1, 2014
I was a bit hesitant taking on this book, knowing it was the first novel by former U.S. President Jimmy Carter - widely known as one of the least successful U.S. Presidents. But, hey, it turns out that he makes for a pretty good author of historical fiction.
The writing is a bit weird in places, for example, Carter loves to start sentences with "The next day..." "The next week..." "The next month...". Also, I laughed out loud at the beginning of each chapter because of the chapter titles which basically give away/summarize what should have been the key "reveal" of each chapter. "Jimmy goes to war..." "Billy Gets Shot..." etc.
Having said this, once you get past some of the awkwardness, this is actually a really good book. Carter paints an extremely intriguing multi-decade picture of the events leading up to the Revolutionary War from the point of view of people in the Carolina's and especially Georgia. It's a part of the picture that most of us never hear about in school.
He also explains the relationship between the Native American tribes, the British, the colonists and even slaves in a very fascinating way.
Overall, great book!
The writing is a bit weird in places, for example, Carter loves to start sentences with "The next day..." "The next week..." "The next month...". Also, I laughed out loud at the beginning of each chapter because of the chapter titles which basically give away/summarize what should have been the key "reveal" of each chapter. "Jimmy goes to war..." "Billy Gets Shot..." etc.
Having said this, once you get past some of the awkwardness, this is actually a really good book. Carter paints an extremely intriguing multi-decade picture of the events leading up to the Revolutionary War from the point of view of people in the Carolina's and especially Georgia. It's a part of the picture that most of us never hear about in school.
He also explains the relationship between the Native American tribes, the British, the colonists and even slaves in a very fascinating way.
Overall, great book!
August 2, 2008
I am tempted to give this five stars, just because i am impressed Carter could write so well, but it isn't THAT good.
A well researched and brought to life history of the Revolutionary war in the South. While no expert on the Revolution, I am farily familiar with the history and there is a ton of stuff I did not know. I don;t know how accurate it is, but his characters are so realistic and human, and thr conflict is laid out without prejudice. Some supporting the British and some British themselves where at least honorable. I had no idea that the Quakers were semi loyalist. And I had no idea that some of the independence activists were pieces of shit. The connection with the native Americans and their role is fascinating. And the love story and down to earth style of writing make this a hard to put down book
A well researched and brought to life history of the Revolutionary war in the South. While no expert on the Revolution, I am farily familiar with the history and there is a ton of stuff I did not know. I don;t know how accurate it is, but his characters are so realistic and human, and thr conflict is laid out without prejudice. Some supporting the British and some British themselves where at least honorable. I had no idea that the Quakers were semi loyalist. And I had no idea that some of the independence activists were pieces of shit. The connection with the native Americans and their role is fascinating. And the love story and down to earth style of writing make this a hard to put down book
August 20, 2016
"The Hornet's Nest" is the first novel by President Jimmy Carter, and that fact alone makes this book a compelling read. It is a historical novel set in Georgia during the years leading up to and during the American Revolution. If this were a history rather than a historical novel, I would probably give this book a rating of four or even five, unfortunately this book lacks many of the elements that are indispensable to a great novel. A historical novel should be a great story placed in a historical setting. But this novel, like many novels written by historians, is essentially a history with a few fictional characters and events thrown in.
The first third of the book deals with a Quaker family who move to Georgia in the 1760s, and have to deal with the slavery, the relations with Native Americans and the hostility of the locals to the British colonial rulers that they found there. However, once the war begins, the novel drops the pretense of being a novel and simply sticks to relating the historical events that took place in the war. The Quaker family is lost from this point until almost the end of the narrative. Several other fictional characters are introduced, but there is no character development, the characters are simply used to narrate the events of the war. There really is no story here either. It's a shame because the writing is quite good, and I learned a lot about the events of the Revolutionary War in Georgia by reading this book. But it's not a novel per se. The reader should be aware of that.
Overall I would recommend this book to people with an interest in the colonial history of the American South, as well as fans of Jimmy Carter.
The first third of the book deals with a Quaker family who move to Georgia in the 1760s, and have to deal with the slavery, the relations with Native Americans and the hostility of the locals to the British colonial rulers that they found there. However, once the war begins, the novel drops the pretense of being a novel and simply sticks to relating the historical events that took place in the war. The Quaker family is lost from this point until almost the end of the narrative. Several other fictional characters are introduced, but there is no character development, the characters are simply used to narrate the events of the war. There really is no story here either. It's a shame because the writing is quite good, and I learned a lot about the events of the Revolutionary War in Georgia by reading this book. But it's not a novel per se. The reader should be aware of that.
Overall I would recommend this book to people with an interest in the colonial history of the American South, as well as fans of Jimmy Carter.
May 18, 2016
I'm really glad I read this book. I've read my fair share (and then some) of books about the Revolutionary War but it is most definitely true that there are only a few specifically about or from the perspective of the South. Carter does an excellent job of laying out the competing loyalties and the various tensions that existed for citizens of South Carolina and Georgia. It's amazing how little impact the war in the north and mid-Atlantic had on those two states; they were far more preoccupied with the Indians and the British incursions from Florida. In that regard, it was a fantastic and fascinating book.
I will say, however, that I found the book a little bit choppy and at times slow to read. Particularly in the beginning, when Carter is establishing the characters, I felt that it dragged. It seemed like Carter was trying to write in a style similar to that of Edward Cline, meaning great detail and information in a seemingly dense book but with character of the characters to move the story along and engage the reader. Unfortunately, until the last third of the book, there wasn't very much engagement for me and I found the characters to be slightly flat.
I will say, however, that I found the book a little bit choppy and at times slow to read. Particularly in the beginning, when Carter is establishing the characters, I felt that it dragged. It seemed like Carter was trying to write in a style similar to that of Edward Cline, meaning great detail and information in a seemingly dense book but with character of the characters to move the story along and engage the reader. Unfortunately, until the last third of the book, there wasn't very much engagement for me and I found the characters to be slightly flat.
July 4, 2009
A timely finish--4th of July! ;-)
Tho a "dry" read for me, I did find HORNET'S NEST very informative. I enjoyed learning about the Revolutionary War via a novel. President Carter's story helped me recall the things I learned back in high school and college classes, giving greater emphasis to the war in the south. Jersey Girl that I am, my focus was always, Washington crossing the Delaware on Christmas--Trenton, Princeton, Morristown (the places I viisted as a child) and north to Boston.
I appreciated learning more about the politics of the war--Whigs and Tories, French and British political tensions, treatment of Cherokee and Creeks (just saw a great program on this in DC at the Native American Museum), their lifestyles and what led to the Trail of Tears. Also, was interesting to read about Slave involvment (Quash Dolly), and the Negro Regiments during this war (I'd thought they had not be involved in military fighting until Civil Wat under Robert Shaw as seen in the movie GLORY).
Overall a good read. Can I give it a 2 1/2?
I will go down a different path for my next read, but still wish to get my hands on WIDOW's WAR, and possibly (time permitting) read Mike's 1776, by Mccullough
Tho a "dry" read for me, I did find HORNET'S NEST very informative. I enjoyed learning about the Revolutionary War via a novel. President Carter's story helped me recall the things I learned back in high school and college classes, giving greater emphasis to the war in the south. Jersey Girl that I am, my focus was always, Washington crossing the Delaware on Christmas--Trenton, Princeton, Morristown (the places I viisted as a child) and north to Boston.
I appreciated learning more about the politics of the war--Whigs and Tories, French and British political tensions, treatment of Cherokee and Creeks (just saw a great program on this in DC at the Native American Museum), their lifestyles and what led to the Trail of Tears. Also, was interesting to read about Slave involvment (Quash Dolly), and the Negro Regiments during this war (I'd thought they had not be involved in military fighting until Civil Wat under Robert Shaw as seen in the movie GLORY).
Overall a good read. Can I give it a 2 1/2?
I will go down a different path for my next read, but still wish to get my hands on WIDOW's WAR, and possibly (time permitting) read Mike's 1776, by Mccullough
August 13, 2013
I very much enjoyed this book not so much because it was great writing, but rather because it was an interesting story line and provided a tremendous amount of history about the revolutionary war in the southern colonies - primarily Georgia and South Carolina. Inasmuch as I was not that familiar with that piece of our nation's history it was fascinating. I did listen to the audio book on a long drive and it was very well performed by the reader, so I suppose that it may have been a bit more dry if I had just read it. Nevertheless, it is a good book and will surprise the reader regarding the good guys, bad guys and American Indians.
September 26, 2015
This story of the American Revolution written by former President Jimmy Carter was excellent as history; not so good as fiction. I learned a substantial amount about the War of Independence in the Southern states; but the characters were not as well developed as those in a novel should be. The love story was particularly thin and the relationship between Ethan Pratt, our hero, and his wife, Epsey is two dimensional and, even as a marriage of convenience, lacking any real feeling. I must assume, though it was never stated, that these folks are based on members of the author's family from that era. As for the historical part, I was completely ignorant of the War in the deep south and found that writing particularly interesting and that is what compelled me to complete the book. The writing style was generally easy going and the voice was pleasant; all history should be written this way (minus the fiction) to attract those who may not be experienced with reading history. It is, after all, a story.
Read
May 21, 2014This is a great novel which I just finished reading for the second time. What I most like about it is the fact that it is about the Revolutionary War from a southern perspective. It talks about the battles and events that occurred in Georgia and South Carolina during the war and to a lesser extent Florida.
I would recommend it to anyone who loves history - it is historical fiction - some characters are historical and some are fiction - some actions are made up and some are actual.
I would recommend it to anyone who loves history - it is historical fiction - some characters are historical and some are fiction - some actions are made up and some are actual.
May 1, 2017
I thoroughly enjoyed this book, probably for the same reason some of the reviews have been negative. The intricate detail of lives in the time period, this crisis in our history, made this book an extraordinary look into a part of American History we were not even aware of from a public school education. Thank you, Jimmy Carter, for sharing with us your love and knowledge of southern history.
June 30, 2009
Great book about the American Revolution. With real historical characters spiced up with fictional characters, this book takes you to the Southern colonies of Colonial America, where important events greatly effected the outcome of the war.
While it can be viewed as a history lesson, it is told as a story, and succeeds in being educational and very entertaining.
While it can be viewed as a history lesson, it is told as a story, and succeeds in being educational and very entertaining.
November 15, 2009
I read this because of my deep admiration for Jimmy. To be honest, it took me awhile to get through this book. Had to switch from hardcover to audio to finish it. It was educational.
July 10, 2016
Very well researched
January 13, 2024
Barely one star, Carter's book of fiction is a textbook with some dialogue thrown in. The characters are poorly developed and flat as plywood. It appeared as though it started as a good fictional story of the Revolutionary War but . . . after the first five chapters, it appeared as one of two things happened: the writing aspect became to tedious or the publisher pressured for a faster finish. Either way, the book takes a dramatic turn and begins to string large amounts of history together without plot and little to zero creative writing.
Another aspect that seemed to be a constant in the book was the very obvious fact that Carter thoroughly enjoyed writing about how magnificent the British were and how a bunch of hillbilly Georgia morans stumbled over a victory or two. Even the victory at Yorktown was snubbed, and reinforced in the book that it really wasn't that big of a victory. I continued to read, thinking that Carter, being a former President of the United States, would round something out or show a clear path of both sides. That did not happen. Even when surrendering American soldiers were butchered by Banastre Tarleton, it was mentioned briefly and dismissively; when on the same occurence with American soldiers doing the killing, they were "animals." It was at this point I almost put the book down, but I pressed on to give a qualified review of having read the entire book.
I just finished the book. I am still a little bewildered. I bet the Brits loved the book. Of course, when a former POTUS claimed to have written a book, the whole publishing industry will fist fight over the chance to be the publisher. Although it does not appear as though Schuster consulted their editorial staff.
Another aspect that seemed to be a constant in the book was the very obvious fact that Carter thoroughly enjoyed writing about how magnificent the British were and how a bunch of hillbilly Georgia morans stumbled over a victory or two. Even the victory at Yorktown was snubbed, and reinforced in the book that it really wasn't that big of a victory. I continued to read, thinking that Carter, being a former President of the United States, would round something out or show a clear path of both sides. That did not happen. Even when surrendering American soldiers were butchered by Banastre Tarleton, it was mentioned briefly and dismissively; when on the same occurence with American soldiers doing the killing, they were "animals." It was at this point I almost put the book down, but I pressed on to give a qualified review of having read the entire book.
I just finished the book. I am still a little bewildered. I bet the Brits loved the book. Of course, when a former POTUS claimed to have written a book, the whole publishing industry will fist fight over the chance to be the publisher. Although it does not appear as though Schuster consulted their editorial staff.
September 18, 2020
My husband found this discarded book for me. I understand why they didn’t want it. Much of the writing contained run-on sentences that had to be reread because they were confusing. It also jumped back and forth between British leaders and Americans, to the point where you didn’t know who was who. There was much to learn about the Revolutionary war that I never gleaned as a History major in college. It is astounding that we really did win.
February 13, 2018
This “warts and all” novel covering the Revolutionary War in Georgia kept my interest all the way through, even though we know how the history part is going to end. At the start it seemed like this might be “novelized history” — with some of the characters sitting around talking about the Stamp Act. But this didn’t affect my enjoyment of the novel. First, I love history; second, the history of the Revolution in this area is rather unfamiliar; and third, obviously we don’t know how individual characters will fare.
It would have been nice to know which parts are historical and which are fictional. Obviously there is some of each, but the division between the two was seamless to me. I have two ancestors from Georgia, in fact just in the main setting (the “hornet’s nest” area) that much of the action transpires in. One joined Elijah Clarke (one of the novel’s key characters) and fought at Kettle Creek and King’s Mountain, while his wife had to leave the area when loyalists burned their farm, evacuating the area with their six young children and begging their way across hundreds of miles to reunite with her husband. This novel suggests a different interpretation of these events and so was very intriguing to me.
Several things were striking to me and they’re all (as far as I know) quite grounded in actual events. To most of the characters, the war appears quite amorphous. The war has no precise beginning and no clearly defined “sides.” It just sort of gradually grows. It’s not clear to the characters what exactly is happening or who is supporting who; and people can switch priorities and allegiances. The action of the novel is rather distant from the conventional stories we’ve learned about Princeton, Saratoga, and so forth. In Georgia, the Declaration of Independence and the battles in the North seem to happen off-stage, and barely figure in any character’s awareness. The war begins years before Lexington and Concord, and continues after Yorktown. It’s also remarkable how small “Georgia” is: it’s not the state we think of today, but basically a few small towns, some farmers out in the middle of nowhere, and a lot of Indians.
The social dynamics of the revolution and the interactions of slavery and the Indians with the plot are also complex. The book is quite fair to the British side; there is an extensive discussion of the exploits of Thomas Brown and the Florida Rangers, who figure prominently in the story, and a chapter on a slave who helped the British capture Savannah (she is a historical character and was rewarded with freedom). The novel takes up outrages on both sides. I would have liked to hear just a bit more about the love relationships — was it possible at that time to just walk away from a marriage and hook up with someone else in the wilderness, as the ending suggests?
It would have been nice to know which parts are historical and which are fictional. Obviously there is some of each, but the division between the two was seamless to me. I have two ancestors from Georgia, in fact just in the main setting (the “hornet’s nest” area) that much of the action transpires in. One joined Elijah Clarke (one of the novel’s key characters) and fought at Kettle Creek and King’s Mountain, while his wife had to leave the area when loyalists burned their farm, evacuating the area with their six young children and begging their way across hundreds of miles to reunite with her husband. This novel suggests a different interpretation of these events and so was very intriguing to me.
Several things were striking to me and they’re all (as far as I know) quite grounded in actual events. To most of the characters, the war appears quite amorphous. The war has no precise beginning and no clearly defined “sides.” It just sort of gradually grows. It’s not clear to the characters what exactly is happening or who is supporting who; and people can switch priorities and allegiances. The action of the novel is rather distant from the conventional stories we’ve learned about Princeton, Saratoga, and so forth. In Georgia, the Declaration of Independence and the battles in the North seem to happen off-stage, and barely figure in any character’s awareness. The war begins years before Lexington and Concord, and continues after Yorktown. It’s also remarkable how small “Georgia” is: it’s not the state we think of today, but basically a few small towns, some farmers out in the middle of nowhere, and a lot of Indians.
The social dynamics of the revolution and the interactions of slavery and the Indians with the plot are also complex. The book is quite fair to the British side; there is an extensive discussion of the exploits of Thomas Brown and the Florida Rangers, who figure prominently in the story, and a chapter on a slave who helped the British capture Savannah (she is a historical character and was rewarded with freedom). The novel takes up outrages on both sides. I would have liked to hear just a bit more about the love relationships — was it possible at that time to just walk away from a marriage and hook up with someone else in the wilderness, as the ending suggests?
November 27, 2015
Some years ago Mr. Carter (whose career sort of blossomed after his stint as President) was on David Letterman’s “Late Show” touting “The Hornet’s Nest,” which he said he wrote because he was concerned that the populace wasn’t anywhere near as informed about the role of the South in the Revolutionary War (yes, Revolutionary War!) as they should. This is, to my knowledge, Mr. Carter’s only novel in some 17 or so books, and I was interested, and so picked it up at a book sale a number of years later, just got around to reading it.
The action takes place largely in Georgia and South Carolina, with some in Florida. The main character is Ethan Pratt, who moves from Pennsylvania to Georgia to establish a farm with his wife Epsy. They befriend their neighbors Kindred and Mavis Morris, and Kindred’s Indian friend Newota. They work the land and negotiate with the Native Americans, but become more increasingly and disturbingly aware of the encroachment of British rules/regulations, taxes and somewhat totalitarian approaches to these hardy people. For the most part, they tended to attemptwant to just farm their lands and stay out of the political situation. Indeed, having read Jim Webb’s “Born Fighting,” about the Scotch-Irish, I had gained an appreciation of the strong-willed, independent nature of this group of those who settled the mountainous areas of the South. And, hitherto, I had thought of pioneers as only being those who settled the West, so this book was truly an education for me.
I found the fictional characters appealing and cared for them and their fate, and I enjoyed the reading when they were present. However, when one writes historical fiction, one must needs put these characters in context, and I found the reading slow going when Mr. Carter was describing the various British and American historical characters and their political/military maneuvering. Indeed, I would have enjoyed the entire experience much more had the book been 150 or so pages shorter; I believe he could have described the period and its critical events of the period with sparer prose. An assertive stance by Mr. Carter’s editor could have assisted him with that process, I believe.
Nonetheless, I admire Mr. Carter’s ambition to bring a little-known area and its hardscrabble denizens to our attention; just wish he would have done so in a lesser number of pages. Four stars, recommended for fans of historical fiction.
The action takes place largely in Georgia and South Carolina, with some in Florida. The main character is Ethan Pratt, who moves from Pennsylvania to Georgia to establish a farm with his wife Epsy. They befriend their neighbors Kindred and Mavis Morris, and Kindred’s Indian friend Newota. They work the land and negotiate with the Native Americans, but become more increasingly and disturbingly aware of the encroachment of British rules/regulations, taxes and somewhat totalitarian approaches to these hardy people. For the most part, they tended to attemptwant to just farm their lands and stay out of the political situation. Indeed, having read Jim Webb’s “Born Fighting,” about the Scotch-Irish, I had gained an appreciation of the strong-willed, independent nature of this group of those who settled the mountainous areas of the South. And, hitherto, I had thought of pioneers as only being those who settled the West, so this book was truly an education for me.
I found the fictional characters appealing and cared for them and their fate, and I enjoyed the reading when they were present. However, when one writes historical fiction, one must needs put these characters in context, and I found the reading slow going when Mr. Carter was describing the various British and American historical characters and their political/military maneuvering. Indeed, I would have enjoyed the entire experience much more had the book been 150 or so pages shorter; I believe he could have described the period and its critical events of the period with sparer prose. An assertive stance by Mr. Carter’s editor could have assisted him with that process, I believe.
Nonetheless, I admire Mr. Carter’s ambition to bring a little-known area and its hardscrabble denizens to our attention; just wish he would have done so in a lesser number of pages. Four stars, recommended for fans of historical fiction.
December 5, 2015
This book was really interesting. I love Jimmy Carter so much that I was excited to read his fiction. The way he turns a phrase is often so delightful and, as always, he's very articulate and deliberate in the way he writes, which I love. The book starts off a little dry, after the initial meeting of the main characters, but it soon picks up again.
The third part of the book began to wane for me a little bit as I began to realize just how much I disliked the main character, Ethan Pratt. Carter writes him in a way that he's "every man", with a kind of neutral and familiar affection, but you slowly begin to realize as the novel wears on that Ethan is a selfish being who has a lot of morals, many of which conflict with each other, and a real desire to stay out of conflict not because he's worried about the safety and security of his own family, but because he's simply not bothered. He only becomes involved in the conflict later, when his own guilt about the death of a loved one propels him forward. Not to mention he needs to get out of town for a while because he's casting his eye on the recently widowed neighbor next door. At no point does he return the loyalty that everyone in his life - his wife, his friends, his son, his brother - show him. Nor does he ever listen to anyone's advice or guidance. I don't think he was a "bad guy", just very indicative of a character us Americans know well - a person who does nothing, and invests in nothing, until it suits him.
Carter's descriptions of Georgia, Florida and the Carolinas are lush and beautiful, and the way he handles the subject of Native Americans and their ill treatment by both sides of the conflict are informative and heartbreaking. A well written book.
The third part of the book began to wane for me a little bit as I began to realize just how much I disliked the main character, Ethan Pratt. Carter writes him in a way that he's "every man", with a kind of neutral and familiar affection, but you slowly begin to realize as the novel wears on that Ethan is a selfish being who has a lot of morals, many of which conflict with each other, and a real desire to stay out of conflict not because he's worried about the safety and security of his own family, but because he's simply not bothered. He only becomes involved in the conflict later, when his own guilt about the death of a loved one propels him forward. Not to mention he needs to get out of town for a while because he's casting his eye on the recently widowed neighbor next door. At no point does he return the loyalty that everyone in his life - his wife, his friends, his son, his brother - show him. Nor does he ever listen to anyone's advice or guidance. I don't think he was a "bad guy", just very indicative of a character us Americans know well - a person who does nothing, and invests in nothing, until it suits him.
Carter's descriptions of Georgia, Florida and the Carolinas are lush and beautiful, and the way he handles the subject of Native Americans and their ill treatment by both sides of the conflict are informative and heartbreaking. A well written book.
September 30, 2010
I first heard of this book when Carter himself mentioned it when he was being interviewed by Jon Stewart on The Daily Show. It sounded interesting, because I kind of specialize in early American history, and c'mon this is a novel written by an ex President. But to my disappointment, this book sucked. There's way too many main characters that Carter focuses on. And if there has to be a main character, which would be Ethan Pratt, he's absent for good part of the book. The characters all seem to have the exact same personalities as well and are mostly two dimensional. But each character brings a new conflict, a new side to the Revolution. Like Kindred shows the struggles of Indians, Quash shows the struggles of slavery and Brown shows the struggles of being a loyalist. But with a couple of these characters, they seem to be only token characters in order to show us this side of the story. Because once Carter is done showing us this side of the conflict, we never hear of them again. This book focuses on the American Revolution in the southern colonies like North and South Carolina and Georgia. But again, the main character, Pratt, doesn't even get into the war until long after the Congress declares us a Nation. It probably would have been better if the character would have been involved in the war sooner rather than later. This really could have been written better. Like other reviewers says, it really does read like a text book and sounds like non fiction. Apparently, Carter's actual non-fiction books are good so I don't want to give up on President Carter just yet. But this book was not a good first impression.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 8, 2010
I wanted to read something about the revolutionary war, and was trying to choose between The Hornet's Nest and 1776 for which to read first. As 1776 is a history, and The Hornet's Nest is fiction, I figured 1776 would be the dryer of the two, so should go first. As it turns out, I was wrong. Carter's book, while having a story and characters, is very dry in places. This is particularly true when he has his characters recite lists of historical facts. Throughout the book the characters' dialogue is dull and stilted, and in many cases repetitive. For instance, the book might tell us that the militia is poorly equipped, and describe details of this, and then a page later a character will tell someone that the militia is poorly equipped, and will describe those exact same details. It seems like Carter wanted to make sure to get across those historical facts, but didn't have an editor willing to cut out the repetitive parts.
It was slow going through the first 3/4 of the book because I wasn't motivated to read it. Near the end, though, things pick up. And whereas the beginning of the book was too much of a history lesson, the last bits present some very interesting history...interspersed with annoyingly boring fictional parts.
Overall, the book isn't that good. I think one would be better off with a simple history. The book could have been great, had there been better editing and perhaps someone to help Carter with the dialogue.
It was slow going through the first 3/4 of the book because I wasn't motivated to read it. Near the end, though, things pick up. And whereas the beginning of the book was too much of a history lesson, the last bits present some very interesting history...interspersed with annoyingly boring fictional parts.
Overall, the book isn't that good. I think one would be better off with a simple history. The book could have been great, had there been better editing and perhaps someone to help Carter with the dialogue.
September 25, 2011
I have always proclaimed the Revolutionary War as my favorite war. Probably because it is the easiest war for me to grasp both the concepts behind it and the strategies of combat. I spent a long period of my childhood on World War II because of the dominance of aircraft, but the concepts and strategies were so much more complex that it is hard to get a big picture on the war. Carter's book about the Revolutionary War does a good job of giving the big picture to the war. I have a better understanding about what life was like during that time of war where families were always on the lookout for danger. What I found inappropriate was the passages of textbook-like descriptions meant to span periods of time. I understand the need for them but it seemed like they just popped up in the middle of a chapter or times when I didn't expect them. They may have worked better as lead ins to new chapters or books.
March 5, 2011
As a novelist, Carter made a good president. This had no real plot, just action. It was basically the history of the entire Revolutionary War in the South, blow by blow, with a few fictional characters thrown into the mix here and there.
Little character development or conflict other than the purely historical. Too much covered, too many places, too many people, and not enough focus or personal drama.
In the end I read the first 200pp and skimmed the rest. Felt it was very didactic- almost read like a high school history text.
This was suggested for a f2f book group read by one of our few gents- he didn't stay with the group very long. I think we spent most of the session discussing how little most of us knew about this southern theatre of the Revolutionary War and Nathanael Greene who was an important figure here even though he was originally from good old Rhode Island.
Little character development or conflict other than the purely historical. Too much covered, too many places, too many people, and not enough focus or personal drama.
In the end I read the first 200pp and skimmed the rest. Felt it was very didactic- almost read like a high school history text.
This was suggested for a f2f book group read by one of our few gents- he didn't stay with the group very long. I think we spent most of the session discussing how little most of us knew about this southern theatre of the Revolutionary War and Nathanael Greene who was an important figure here even though he was originally from good old Rhode Island.
September 8, 2013
Great achievements in political lives are the result of a complicated mix of circumstances, timing and great will. Former presidents tend to have a rather myopic view of their contributions. As a result I tend to steer away from presidential autobiographies and memoirs. In his other books, Carter was no exception. The Hornet's Nest was different. While this book contained no great character development or extravagant prose, it did tell an amazing story of the South's role in the American Revolution. As a New Englander, I must confess to a certain parochialism in my understanding of the war. The complex relationships that existed between the warring nations and the Indian tribes, the siege of Savannah and the colonists escape are all stories to be told and Carter does well in telling them. I found it a substantial and valuable addition to my overall understanding of the war.
July 31, 2015
Carter is no Hemingway or Faulkner, but this was an interesting historical novel that presented the Revolutionary War as fought in Florida, Georgia, and the Carolinas. We usually associate Concord, Lexington, Yorktown, and other areas with the war, but a major part of it was fought in the South. The role of the Florida Rangers, led by Thomas Brown on the side of the British, I had not heard of before. For most of the war, the South was controlled by the British by using the Florida Rangers with their huge intelligence network and their friendship with the Native Americans. But the tide gradually turned, although the war in the South went on long after Cornwallis surrendered. Both sides committed tremendous atrocities. The characters were a little wooden in some instances, but I still found much to like about this book.
July 31, 2016
I love Jimmy Carter and his intelligence is obvious, even in his 80s. I found this book a difficult read, however, and partly because he is so much smarter than me.
The first 100 pages were intriguing and I also read the ending thoroughly, but most of the middle I had to skim through. It reads like a historical log, like a documentary, more than a story, with lots of names, lots of details, and seemingly only one voice for all the characters. He had a really good idea, just didn't narrate it well in my opinion. His main character, Ethan Pratt, is interesting but he goes hundreds of pages that have nothing to do with him, trying to tell the story of the revolutionary war. I did get a historical lesson out of it and his research and knowledge of that era in the south is really incredible. I just didn't find the narration itself fluid and readable.
The first 100 pages were intriguing and I also read the ending thoroughly, but most of the middle I had to skim through. It reads like a historical log, like a documentary, more than a story, with lots of names, lots of details, and seemingly only one voice for all the characters. He had a really good idea, just didn't narrate it well in my opinion. His main character, Ethan Pratt, is interesting but he goes hundreds of pages that have nothing to do with him, trying to tell the story of the revolutionary war. I did get a historical lesson out of it and his research and knowledge of that era in the south is really incredible. I just didn't find the narration itself fluid and readable.
February 18, 2008
This novel by the greatest ex president ever was a disappointment as a read. It felt too much like a history text and was light on the drama. Granted coming from memoir and nonfiction into historical fiction can be a challenge and it definitely was one that was met with mediocre results. The fictional characters felt like they stepped off the same middle school textbook page as the actual historical figures.
As well it ends like life. unresolved and dissatisfying. By reading this book you will learn of much of the revolutionary war in the southern colonies beyond Marion "The Swamp Fox" (can't remember his last name and no it's not berry). Francis Marion?
Pancho Maria, Liberatador de America.
As well it ends like life. unresolved and dissatisfying. By reading this book you will learn of much of the revolutionary war in the southern colonies beyond Marion "The Swamp Fox" (can't remember his last name and no it's not berry). Francis Marion?
Pancho Maria, Liberatador de America.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 197 reviews