NF Philip Thomas Tucker

[TallTallMan]

What is this? (That's the Amazon photo.)

 

[Belfoured]

He might be lurking. As Elmer Fudd would say, "be very, very careful!"

He might mistake @TTM for a wabbit ...

 

[Belfoured]

Been doing an Archive.Org investigation of Tucker and his book Irish Confederates (published by the McWhiney Foundation--you know, Attack and Die? Celtic heritage?) has a stupid statement in the FIRST PARAGRAPH:

View attachment 509789

Uh, what about the many fans of THIS GUY?!?!

View attachment 509790

Also, the introduction is 29 pages with only five pages of published sources, in big text.

That sounds like the ratio of pages to actual facts in his bio.

 

[Biscoitos]

I don't know enough about Tucker to decide whether he deserves condemnation or praise, but as I posted, I was satisfied with the one book of his which I bought and read.

I am currently reading one of Timothy Smith's Vicksburg campaign books.
Smith is a researcher and writer that I highly respect.
He cites two of Tucker's books in his footnotes: Westerners in Gray, and the Forgotten Stonewall of the West.
Exactly what that means, I am not sure.

 

[TallTallMan]

I don't know enough about Tucker to decide whether he deserves condemnation or praise, but as I posted, I was satisfied with the one book of his which I bought and read.

I am currently reading one of Timothy Smith's Vicksburg campaign books.
Smith is a researcher and writer that I highly respect.
He cites two of Tucker's books in his footnotes: Westerners in Gray, and the Forgotten Stonewall of the West.
Exactly what that means, I am not sure.

Citing a book isn't a problem, I think. It just means he consulted it in the writing. Even if a book sucks, it still deserves a lookover when being an omnivore researcher

 

[TallTallMan]

He might mistake @TTM for a wabbit ...

I DO have a Bugs Bunny plush...

 

[Jamieva]

I don't know enough about Tucker to decide whether he deserves condemnation or praise, but as I posted, I was satisfied with the one book of his which I bought and read.

I am currently reading one of Timothy Smith's Vicksburg campaign books.
Smith is a researcher and writer that I highly respect.
He cites two of Tucker's books in his footnotes: Westerners in Gray, and the Forgotten Stonewall of the West.
Exactly what that means, I am not sure.

More than likely he used them as secondary sources. Primary sources are vital to writing about these campaigns but you also have to have consulted secondary sources to pass the scrutiny of peer review.

 

[Belfoured]

Citing a book isn't a problem, I think. It just means he consulted it in the writing. Even if a book sucks, it still deserves a lookover when being an omnivore researcher

Correct. It could be the blind squirrel/broken clock theory. If it's cited on a specific point Tucker may have gotten something right that others may have missed. It happens quite a bit. That doesn't mean the book overall is worth buying. As a thorough researcher Smith would not be doing his job if he simply refused to look at a 200+ page book. That's different from a glowing review.

 

[TallTallMan]

Correct. It could be the blind squirrel/broken clock theory. If it's cited on a specific point Tucker may have gotten something right that others may have missed. It happens quite a bit. That doesn't mean the book overall is worth buying. As a thorough researcher Smith would not be doing his job if he simply refused to look at a 200+ page book. That's different from a glowing review.

Some people can take it too far. I remember the 400+ works cited in Son of the Morning Star as being excessive, since some are just juvenile works or the numerous coffeetables of John M. Carroll. But Tucker may be a blind squirrel. I have avoided all of his works thus far to comment, though.

I think Tucker's pretty much the only biographer of JS Bowen, which is why Smith used him, most likely. It was also a University Press from 1997.

 

[TallTallMan]

His Amazon bio is less long than it apparently used to be:

Phillip Thomas Tucker, Ph.D., has earned widespread renown as "the Stephen King of History" for having authored nearly 150 groundbreaking books of history and more than 200 historical works both books and scholarly articles. These books have included national and state award-winners and three other books--Anne Bonny, Mia Leimberg, and Cathy Williams--that have been optioned for Hollywood films. In addition, other books are also being considered as possible films at this time. He was won acclaim as "America's most groundbreaking American Revolutionary War historian." Even more, Tucker has become the most prolific groundbreaking historian in America in the twenty-first century, while gaining a national reputation as a mythbuster.

A summa *** laude graduate from St. Louis University, St. Louis Missouri, with a Ph.D. in history, Dr. Tucker has also gained recognition as America's most prolific "New Look" historian in many fields of history. No author has produced more important books about military history, Black history, and Women's history in the last half century than the iconoclastic Tucker. He was a distinct penchant for finding rare gems in history and writing the first-time stories about some of the remarkable men and women in history around the world.

Gifted historian Perry D. Jamieson, Ph.D., wrote a fundamental truth about Tucker: "One of the Innovative, Hardest Working, and Diligently Productive Historians of His Generation." And Dr. Jamieson also penned how: "What separates [Phillip Thomas Tucker, Ph.D.] from other historians is that he is an innovative 'idea person.' I have known very few historians who can match his ability to conceive a topic, develop a fresh approach to it, and write about it in length." Tucker has earned three degrees in the field of history. In 1990, he earned a Ph.D. in history from prestigious St. Louis University, St. Louis, Missouri, the first Jesuit university of higher learning established west of the Mississippi River.

Tucker worked for more than two decades in the prestigious position of a Department of Defense civilian historian, including for the United States Air Force Chief of Staff at the Pentagon in Washington, D.C. and at military bases across the United States. Best known for presenting fresh perspectives and original ideas to demythologize outdated, traditional history, Dr. Tucker has authored more than 200 works in history, including scholarly articles and books, that have overturned established history.

The winner of prestigious national awards and well-known in the history field as a "creative, innovative thinker, who has a gift for conceiving and outlining original works in history in serious history," in the on-target analysis of one veteran historian, Dr. Tucker has emerged as America's most prolific, innovative, hardest-working, and groundbreaking historian in the 21st century.

I like that he is the most "groundbreaking historian" of our century. How much did he pay the cohort of Celtic Heritage Attacking and Dying to say that?

 

[TallTallMan]

Well, I do live in Central Fl, so he could come after me.

 

[Belfoured]

His Amazon bio is less long than it apparently used to be:

Phillip Thomas Tucker, Ph.D., has earned widespread renown as "the Stephen King of History" for having authored nearly 150 groundbreaking books of history and more than 200 historical works both books and scholarly articles. These books have included national and state award-winners and three other books--Anne Bonny, Mia Leimberg, and Cathy Williams--that have been optioned for Hollywood films. In addition, other books are also being considered as possible films at this time. He was won acclaim as "America's most groundbreaking American Revolutionary War historian." Even more, Tucker has become the most prolific groundbreaking historian in America in the twenty-first century, while gaining a national reputation as a mythbuster.

A summa *** laude graduate from St. Louis University, St. Louis Missouri, with a Ph.D. in history, Dr. Tucker has also gained recognition as America's most prolific "New Look" historian in many fields of history. No author has produced more important books about military history, Black history, and Women's history in the last half century than the iconoclastic Tucker. He was a distinct penchant for finding rare gems in history and writing the first-time stories about some of the remarkable men and women in history around the world.

Gifted historian Perry D. Jamieson, Ph.D., wrote a fundamental truth about Tucker: "One of the Innovative, Hardest Working, and Diligently Productive Historians of His Generation." And Dr. Jamieson also penned how: "What separates [Phillip Thomas Tucker, Ph.D.] from other historians is that he is an innovative 'idea person.' I have known very few historians who can match his ability to conceive a topic, develop a fresh approach to it, and write about it in length." Tucker has earned three degrees in the field of history. In 1990, he earned a Ph.D. in history from prestigious St. Louis University, St. Louis, Missouri, the first Jesuit university of higher learning established west of the Mississippi River.

Tucker worked for more than two decades in the prestigious position of a Department of Defense civilian historian, including for the United States Air Force Chief of Staff at the Pentagon in Washington, D.C. and at military bases across the United States. Best known for presenting fresh perspectives and original ideas to demythologize outdated, traditional history, Dr. Tucker has authored more than 200 works in history, including scholarly articles and books, that have overturned established history.

The winner of prestigious national awards and well-known in the history field as a "creative, innovative thinker, who has a gift for conceiving and outlining original works in history in serious history," in the on-target analysis of one veteran historian, Dr. Tucker has emerged as America's most prolific, innovative, hardest-working, and groundbreaking historian in the 21st century.

I like that he is the most "groundbreaking historian" of our century. How much did he pay the cohort of Celtic Heritage Attacking and Dying to say that?

Jamieson should know that he wasn't just writing a marketing blurb - he was writing "a fundamental truth". I think somebody needs to produce a biopic on this guy. Taking a cue from The Exorcist, the title can be The Demythologist.

 

[Biscoitos]

More than likely he used them as secondary sources. Primary sources are vital to writing about these campaigns but you also have to have consulted secondary sources to pass the scrutiny of peer review.

After TallTallMan's post, I spent quite some time looking through the Chapter notes, until I found one for each book. I didn't look for additional ones.
I did not backtrack to the pages in the text proper to see how he might have used them, but it must certainly
have been as a secondary source.

 

[TallTallMan]

I just read the one-star reviews for his Death at the Little Bighorn: A New Look at Custer, His Tactics, and the Tragic Decisions Made at the Last Stand, and they all say he repeats-over and over and over--his "new look" theory that Custer's target was not Custer Hill but the Minniconjou camp, which is Carhartian bizarreness.

Medicine Tail Ford Historical Marker

As soldiers descend Medicine Tail Coulee, the Minniconjou and Cheyenne camps were on the western bank. (A historical marker located in Crow Agency in Big Horn County, Montana.)

www.hmdb.org

One reviewer pointed out his constant waving (virtue signaling...?) of his Phd and questions if its insecurity. He also says he overuses the word "paradoxically". Or maybe these reviews are fake; it may be Wittenberg review bombing over and over, goshdarnit!

A historian I respect, Bob Boze Bell, praises it, and I pray he was paid to.

I'll do a look inside to report soon...

 

[TallTallMan]

Further...

 

[Jamieva]

Further...

View attachment 510756

View attachment 510754

Signs that he doesn't have an editor

and take a look at skyhorse publishing's wiki. Oh boy

 

[RedRover]

Further...

From Johnson's dictionary, 1768:

Thomas De Quincey, the British writer (and "Opium Eater" of 1821) opined in the early 19th Century that a paradox is frequently assumed to be hostile to the truth... but argues that they are just as likely to be hostile to falsehood...

 

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

take a look at skyhorse publishing's wiki

Wow.

I think the most revealing part was this quote from the company president:

"Maybe the role of publishers is to bring people closer. To encourage them to read things they disagree with, that make them angry, but ultimately to learn things that help them bridge the gap to what they thought they hated but may find some nuance in."

 

[Belfoured]

Signs that he doesn't have an editor

and take a look at skyhorse publishing's wiki. Oh boy

My anti-virus software will probably block it.

 

[Belfoured]

Wow.

I think the most revealing part was this quote from the company president:

"Maybe the role of publishers is to bring people closer. To encourage them to read things they disagree with, that make them angry, but ultimately to learn things that help them bridge the gap to what they thought they hated but may find some nuance in."

Proof that @Jamieva was on to something - he doesn't have an editor. Of course, it can't be easy to find an editor and pay them enough to tell this bird that he needs some significant manuscript changes.