The Comanche Empire Summary

Scholarly reviews provide a reader with an analytical insight to an author’s analysis on a monograph. In The Comanche Empire, Pekka Hamalainen creates a thesis, which claims the Comanche Native Americans created a powerful empire in the Southwest. Assessing Hamalainen’s thesis, reviewers Joel Minor, Dan Flores, Gerald Betty, and Joaqin Rivaya Martinez present a variety of views on the monograph. Providing the strengths and weakness of Hamalainen’s text, each reviewer agrees and disagrees on several of the monograph’s points. The scholarly reviews provide a structured assessment, which offers the reader with an individual perspective of the monograph under review. Readers should identify the approaches to the text in each reviewer’s assessment

Identifying the common comparisons in the reviews allows the reader to analyze the structure and arguments in the monograph. A strength that three of the reviews recognize is the depth of research that Hamalainen provides on the Comanche. Recognizing the text’s detailed research, Flores states that its precise history makes it the leading text on the Comanche. Minor writes that Hamalainen’s thesis allows detailed research into the three eras of the Comanche. The rise, peak, and fall of the Comanche, Minor claims allow the readers with a comprehensive understanding of the expanse of the Comanche’s power in the southwest. Agreeing with Flores and Minor, Martinez believes Halamlainen’s advanced research allows the monograph to stand out. Two common weaknesses that the reviewers share involve the structure of the text. The reviewers agree that the contradictions Halamlainen makes towards the citations used in the text leads the reader to question the validity of the progression of the monograph’s arguments. Lastly, another flaw that Flores and Minor highlight is the writing style of the text. Minor states that the text is “dry”, which he believes may turn many readers away from the book. Flores confirms that while Hamalainen offers a detailed history, the author writes it from an academic

The reviewers take a historical, academic, and causal approach in assessing the monograph. The various approaches allow both academic and causal readers to analyze and understand the text. Summarizing the reviews, each author raises distinct questions on Hamalainen’s points and arguments. A comparison of the text enables the audience with an awareness of the monograph’s strengths and weaknesses. Evaluating the reviews provides the reader with multiple perspectives on what each reviewer identifies as a flaw or highlight of the Hamalainen’s