That came into town, to try to find them housing, to find them jobs, and to basically get through the war years and all of the fears that existed back then together. For more information on booktvs recent visit to long beach, and the many other destinations on our cities tour, go to cspan. Org cities tour. Tonights program is a presentation of the guggenheimlehrman prize in military history. A 50,000 price jointly administered by the hari Frank Guggenheim foundation and the New York Historical society. It is thanks to the leader shouppe of of great trustee, the lincoln and financial history scholar, lehrman, that we have joined with the hari Frank Guggenheim foundation this year in trying to engage Greater Public discourse in wartime studies. I want to acknowledge mr. Lehrmans vision of the importance of understanding military history for aural educated systems and his work on behalf of our great institutions and its many intellectual endeavors. Thank you so much. [applause] i also want to acknowledge the encouragement and support of our extraordinary board chair, pam shaffler, an historian herself. Pam has seen and understood vividly how the study of step to war, the conduct of military campaigns and diplomatic responses to war can play an essential part in the quest for a more peaceable future. Thank you so much, pam, for all you have done. [applause] i also want to recognize other trustees in the audience this evening. Glen louis and russell penoir and thank them for their work and i want to acknowledge the work of my colleague, our Vice President and library director, michael ryan, and the administration of this prize. Tonights program will last an hour. There will be a reception following the program. In our smith gallery outside. And copies of the nominees books well be available for sale in our museum store. We are pleased to welcome Andrew Roberts back to the New York Historical society. He is a distinguish edlerman fellow at the Historical Society and a director of he harry Frank Guggenheim foundation in new york and the chair of the 2015 judging committee for the guggenheimlehrman prize in military history. In 2012 Andrew Roberts wars weighedded the william penn prize, and in 2007, he delivered the prestigious white house lecture, roberts book, was the 2014 winner of the grand prix and 2015 winner of the Los Angeles Times limes biography prize. Andrew robert this author and editor or 12 books, including master and commanders, 1941 to 1945. We are also thrilled to welcome the nominees for the 2015 prize. Matthew j. Davenport, for the first over there. David preston for brad doms defeat the road to revolution published by Oxford University press. Nicholas for the german war, a nation under arms, 1939 to 1945, published by basic books. And t. J. Stiles for a life on the frontier of a new america. Published by knott i would like to welcome our friend, president of the harry graphic guggenheim foundation, the Foundation Supports sponsors Scholarly Research on problems of violence, aggression, and violence, providing grants to established scholars and dissertation fellowships to graduate students during the dissertation writing year. Just before i welcome him to the stage, i remind you to please switch off anything that makes a noise like a cell phone, and now, please do join me in welcoming Josiah Bunting to the stage. [applause] thank you, louise. And let me use the opportunity to extend in behalf of just about everybody in manhattan a bouquet. Her work, and their colleagues, in the transforming of this wonderful Old Institution into what it is today, is absolutely fantastic. We are all in your debt. This is beyond any argument the best state Historical Association in this country. And its a real pleasure for us to be affiliated with you, louise, and with roger and with all of you. You have heard a brief introduction of our chairman. Im going to reintroduce him and all of our judges. Our chairman and good friend, Andrew Roberts, known to most of you as quite simply the best diplomatic historian now writing. Not only is he a great writer and great researcher burt one of these people who appears like Charles Dickens to be able to write all the time ceaselessly, and the quality of the writing and the history and the research and all of that kind of thing is always of a piece. So, we look forward to hearing you, andrew. We have a wonderful panel of judges. Id like them to stand when i introduce them. Flora frazier, a published biographer, currently bestselling writer, the current bestseller biography of the washington family in america. General charles brouwer. Former head of the department of history at west point, academic dean at the Virginia Military institute, and author of what is regarded as the definitive history of americas war Second World War in the pacific. Ralph peters, prolific civil war novelist, a regular whose face must be familiar too many of you on fox news and a columnist for the new york post. Finally w. Patrick language who could k. Patrick lang, who could not be here, the father of arabic studies at west point. This is a wonderful opportunity for us this evening. I would like to say one last thing about this program in military history. Its godfather is lewis lehrman, as you heard earlier. Our debt to him is insystemmable. Military history occupies a relatively low caste on the academic cachet totem peel at most of our prestigious universities. Right down there with homeec and speech. As you say in a university that you have an interest in military history they think you must be a relative of dick cheney or you want to bomb somebody. But in fact, when the american secretary of state in 1947 was asked to speak at the 200th 200th anniversary of the founding of princeton university, almost all of his speech was about probably the greatest military and political and historian who ever lived. Politics and war in those things which lead us into Armed Conflict are part of the human condition, and we ignore our obligation to familiarize ourselves with our history and the history of military affairs and wars at our great peril. Thats why we are here this evening, to recognize its foremost practitioners. Roberts. Dr. Roberts. Ready . [applause] ladies and gentlemen, its a great honor to be back here at the New York Historical society. Last time i was here, a couple of months ago, with a very kindly allowed me to sell copies of my book and lady came up and said, i had the authentic accent of a british hollywood villain. And which the great thing was i think she meant it as a compliment, i hope so anyhow. Today were going to be interviewing the four men who have written really superb history books. Absolutely any one of them the judges agreed today could have won the prize there isnt a second rate work amongst them, this is all really first class history writing, and military history writing, and im going to be interview interviewing all of them. I will call them up. The first of them is matt davenport, who has written about the battle of in 1918. This is matt. Matt fought nor the u. S. Reserves and this is a fascinating book about the first battle that American Forces from the American Expeditionary force fought in the First World War. Our next finalist is t. J. Stiles, the pulitzer prizewinning biographer of general custer. [applause] next id like to introduce to you david preston, who wrote a book about a battle that im not going to pronounce correctly. You have to tell me. Is it month mr. Preston. And mr. Preston is a professor at the citadel in south carolina, and lastly, i would like to introduce to you who was written a book called the german war a fascinating insight into German Society between 1939 and 1945. Thank you very much. I want to ask you a question that everybody likes to know. What led you to write this particular book at this particular stage in your careers . Matt . This is your first book. So, what made you choose this particular subject . I knew a veteran of the battle when i was growing up. He was a friend of my grandfathers, who fought Second World War, and he they bought fought with the big red one, except this man had fought in the First World War and used to say i was first of the first. And on his veterans cap was i pronounced it like an american phonetically, a 12yearold, i said kantigni. I didnt know what it was and years later in a history of world war i i saw the name and learned it was americas first battle and victory against the german army in the either world war and it wanted to do more. And every learned more. David preston. My first book dealt with the iroquois people, and the book grew out of that oject. I gained first of all healthy respect for the significance of brad docks defeat at a Pivotal Moment and became very intrigued by the set of characters who were at braddocks defeat in 1755 and also went on to significant careers during the American Revolution. Obviously George Washington first and foremost, but also horatio gates, the victor of saratoga, daniel morgan, a victor, charles lee and also thomas gauge, the future commander in chief of the british army. So, the project first began as more kind of a collective biography that would tell the story of the french and indian war, and its connection to the American Revolution through the lives of these individuals. However, as i started to research the book, including here at the New York Historical society, i came to see that there was still so much to be told about the story of braddocks defeat and the decisions of all of the different players, the french and the british empires, the different indian peoples drawn from half the continent. Especially the french and the indian side of this whole story had never been fully explored, and the nick louse, nicholas, you have been writing this book i wasnt going to write this book at all. The previous one was daunting enough, which was an attempt to write the history of the war and he holocaust through childrens eyes. And i didnt want to do the shortcut of interviewing rather elderly documents about their childhood. I wanted to go and look for drawings which i found first in prague. That was the suckin if you like for that project. Found the drawings, extraordinary pictures mainly by teenaged girls, age 13, 14, from before the war deported to auschwitz where they were gassed. And that was something id never thought about. And i wanted to use them as historyol sources and set off on this hairbrained project which took ten years and after that it foreswore anything to do with the holocaust, nazis, children, and i kept almost none of those resolutions because i got intrigued about one thing which was as part of the work, if you want to situate german children in Second World War you situate them against the parents parentd against society and its become increasingly clear to me that German Society had gone on with the war virtually to utter defeat. But the dominant historical theme in germany decried that and didnt want to talk about it, and had this thing which increasingly sounded like an alibi, all germans had been defeated from stall stalingrad on ward. And the armies are you huge defeat was the turning point, and it was as if you couldnt say you werent there but you could say we didnt want to be there and were waiting for it all to be over. As soon as you ask yourself, how does a whole society go on with total war for an over two more years . Huge periods of time and huge amounts of commitment. Well be coming on to that at well. T. J. , what brought you to custer . I began with failure. Failure was my starting point. I was im very fascinated and have been throughout my writing career with the way in which the American Civil War and the reconstruction period are so often separated and yet theyre really one. The United States enters the door at one end and enters as a place completely different than anyone imagined and its the war and the consequences of the war carried United States by the military that completely change American Society and americanals. After writing about jesse james, which is a civil war and reconstruction story, and vanderbilt, about the rise of the corporate economy and that transformation in the same period. I wanted to write about the idea of civil rights, of racial equality as it was written into the constitution of the civil war generation, and i couldnt come up with a book that would succeed in doing that. So i began thinking about the larger expanse of the United States, i began thinking in terms of biography, which i love to write, and how we can develop great themes in biography, and i went from thinking about how custers life is a great travel log to this person. We have the rise of modern wall street at one end, the death of slavery in the south, and still have prenomaddic people, and custers life carries you bath back and forth. Then i realized that his life was a about the temporal frontier that in many ways, including many suspects of his military aspects of his military career, he life was about the birth of the modern United States and this personal difficulty in adapting to these changes. You do go into the central fact that his death, the one thing that we know so much about, the ultimate failure in a sense, not just because he died but because he lost the battle as well, and is you have it as your rather than a central feature of his existence. Id like to ask, both you and also you, david, because obviously youre boat writing about battles that the indians won, and won so successfully to massacre for all intents and purposes, first at little big horn. Hasnt it been historically pretty racist to present these great indian victories as effectively having been the result of mistakes made by the made by their white opponents . Strikes me that both at the reno inquiry and also just very term braddocks defeat, which was originally given to it in the 18th century. There will almost in both cases sort of attempting to sort of take away from the inherent truth which is that the indians won the battles sue personally superbly. Thats absolutely correct. The way in which i examined the little bighorn is through this court that was held two years later, and i leave aside the battle entirely and come back to it the way americans try to reconstruct it, rather than having an omniscient narrator who cares you through the battle and its in dispute every access to the process of discovery, the fact it takes place off stage after a very intimate narrative of the figure, who recorded his life so well, and that tellouts what the narrative is. What did we do wrong . So from the u. S. Military and then from the selfconsciously white United States, thinking about how it had messed up, and custer himself is one reason why that battle is famous. Nelson miles or other figures at an equivalent level had died there i dont think it would have become quite the cultural touchstone Stocker Custer going into it is significant. Again, with custer is this controversial figure in his lifetime, the army wants to know what it did wrong, and we overlooked the essential fact that as the historian of the indian wars noted, its not so much that the army lost or custer lost is the indians won. That brings us on to braddocks defeat. What extent was braddocks defeat as oppose told the french and the indians victory . Right. The historians who have written about braddocks defeat have always approached it from a angelo send anglocentric perfect and thats partly a function of ethnocentrism as you observe. The earliest accounts of the bat that emerged, the reason they were shocking in the minds of many brittons was that the earliest accounts suggest thread were only maybe as many as 300 native warriors, and so the shock was that such a large British Force could be so decisively beaten by so small a number of native warriors. Nonetheless the battle is very much a testament to the real military power that native people still possessed in 18th 18th century america. The other way that reinforces the anglocentric perspective is simply the source material, that for the british, irimagine as well for the u. S. Army, and the 1870s there was a lot to explain. A lot of fingerpointing, a lot of blame. One of the things that all four of these books have is an awful lot of slager. And we have slaughter. We have the 66 of people who of braddocks army who were killed or wounded. 100 , of course in the case of custer and the group around custer at the little bighorn, 10,000 german soldiers a day dying in the 1945 up until the end of the war in 1945, and some 1600 out of the 4,000 american soldiers being killed or wounded at cantigny. Can you give us a sense what it was like to fight day after day, a or two and a half day battle and much more going on afterwards when youre losing, where the attrition is Something Like a tenth of the people getting killed and a quarter getting wounded. Well, its tough to get a sense without, as dave discussed, getting into the source histories and taking it on its own terms and hearing what the survivors actually wrote about the experience; they started with 2500 and got reinforced by about 1500 more, and they had to hold lines for two and a half days exposed to german artillery. This was new for americans. We at the time could not conceive of the loss that had been going on for over three years, that of course the english and at the french had been experiencing, and this battle weeks in over the top and they dont lose many in the initial attack but the french army, the supporting artillery, has to pull out because the germans renewed their senses. This was not foreseen by the planners, chief among them was george marshall, a young lieutenant colonel. So they pushed through the village into these exposed lines and dont have any of the big guns from the french to keep the german artillery under counterbattery fire. So, they just get pummeled for two and a half days and cant be reinforced, cant be resupplied, and i cant imagine what its like to be pushed up against my human limits after most units were literally decimated, ten percent killed, almost, and a third wounded. And they have to hold these trenches next to the wounded and dead lying next to them. Its difficult to imagine, which is why thighed go source histories and their descriptions are brutal. Niklas, you have dealt with hundreds of source histories in your book, with regard to this very same thing but with civilians. Rather than men on the battlefield. You as well as 10,000 who died per day in 1945, there were 5,750 who died at the end of 1944 as well. So, the central question, both for your book and this question is, why did the germans and how did the germans hold out for so long . And that phrase, hold out, if you could talk about that phrase. Im very when matt was talking about how i was thinking back to when was it that they first face this, and i think the answer is probably 1941. The campaign against poland is two or three weeks before its clear theyve won and takes four weeks to capture warsaw. The campaign against france is six weeks. Suddenly the campaign in the soviet union opens up a limitless war, and the wheels come off really in the winter of 194142. The first german defeat. The retreat from moscow in the snows. Everybody imagines themselves back in 1812. A very strong napoleonic fear. Everybody on the russian side is ready war and peace but on the other side theyre talking about tolstoy and theres a deep fear that it would collapse and little retreat, little breakthroughs will become huge ones, and its also a period of this kind of change of life and expectations because the problems of keeping armies supplies means that theyre having to bring up munitions at the expend of winter clothing, which is held back. Families are sending Winter Clothes themselves, which are going through the sort of little parcel posts, which is one of the key things that keeps morale going, is letters and parcels from families. And you see this in the letters and diaries of the men that they feel this, not only is it practical assistance but also as a kind of patriotic tie. That patriotism is rooted in the family and this level of Family Support proves it to them think havent been abandoned. These thin gray lines stretched oust against the snow very shallow, very easy to break through, you would think at that moment, can be held. And so one of the key things in the book, think, was thinking about this, military and civilian experience of war is being punk wait it by crises, and the crises are transformative. So the battle emerges from the winter crisis is one which is learn to be more ruthless than ever before, and frontline units participate in the mass killings of civilians you. Get some of the crises on the home front which we can talk about. Well, one of them that is i was expecting to be a crisis when i read about it but tillly it turned out to strengthen the regime, was the assassination attempt of to the from of july 1944 of hitler. That did not demoralize the german people in the way that it might have, did it . Not at all. And i think the conspiracyists knew they would be treated australitors by the bulk of the population, and they knew the chances or their succeeding were very slim, and they knew that they didnt have the bulk of either society or the military on their side, and that part of why the plan went wrong, because the troops who were being moved aroundber anyone under operation were being used in an operation which was there in sealed orders. As soon as they found out this was not its real purpose they started to arrest the conspiracists so there is a strange way in which those people what interested me was to find that many patriotic germans were reading exactly the same poets and the same writers and using the same cultural formation to explain to themselves why they should go on. And i got very interested in hour young men but outs how young women wrote about the war experience while the war is still on. In cases they didnt survive to improve the story, and they see it as a right roof progress. This. It seems, the whole of the rest of your book is a story of tremendous pragmatism. We are not certain. I placed both sides of in the book, but certainly the men of his unit think that he was working for the germans with a plan. One battalion of the pivot site front before the battle this into Raiding Party of about 50 troops across, and when they came across the most important thing was the members of this battalion cannot get captured by the. They start running back patting him on the back the little suspicious. They shot all the dead in no mans land. And what is interesting is that man was never named. It was redacted. Even the original report. Had to find in the letter that one of the Monroe Tallman said, soandso from wisconsin was apparently working for the other side. Ninetyfive, 96 years later i finally uncover to this was. His name is on all the monuments of the 28th infantry fallen. He was born of prussian immigrant parents. Not certain but pretty sure he was working for the germans. And another fascinating thing about all of these books is that they have a very powerful sense of place. These writers have all been to the places that they write about. It is very important, of course, for writers to do that. The david as well as listing the battlefield his canoe down some of the rivers. How important for you earning your book was this idea that you would walk the battlefield, much of which of course is now. When i saw the vestiges of braddocks road my scars of the road, canoeing down some of the principal french waterways like french creek, allegheny river, those experiences were truly like an epiphany. They changed how i was reading the sources because you understood this year difficulties of logistics and 18th century for both the french and british, how the french managed to move canoes and supplies 700 miles from montreal down before duquesne was a staggering achievement. And so it highlighted that the french had logistical difficulties, to equal to those of the british trying to get across the appellation. So it very much revolutionized. It was a critical part of the process. Pj, one of the things that we were very impressed with was your objectivity about general custer. You give the reader every opportunity, it strikes me, to think that this man was a bit of a monster really. The way he treated his wife, the way he used tell sarcasm with people, the fact that he was a get rich quick capitalist of the worst kind , he was, he really did treat people appallingly badly and yet, and yet, of course, he was a division commander. How did your feeling about custer change in the course of researching and writing your book . That is a difficult question. You left out a few other things. We dont have enough time this evening. You believe, as do others , that he slept with injured prisoners of war that he captured which historically is to be seen pretty much as rape and a war crime. In the massacre, of course, was a worship to, thats a workaround as well. Absolutely. This is a very interesting question because if you fall into the prosecution mode, which is so common in biography, either identify with the subject or to become committed to revealing the problems, you lose the complete picture and you begin to lose the complete picture which means you dont understand who the person was under significant central and it is limiting as a literary endeavor. I believe that biography and history in general actually is both a scholarly and a literary endeavor which means you are seeking not only to analyze research but to carry the reader into the experience. With custer the question for me is not whether he was either appealing, what keeps me interested as a biographer is what is happening until the end. So we were actually having this discussion beforehand about how to use the phrase when he was writing about textile workers, how they suffered enormous condescension, and it is actually a phrase that can be applied to all kinds in which they get dismissed in their actions are viewed in light of derision and condescension by later generations instead of being understood on their own terms. We find that some of the same qualities that made custer a very compelling and very effective combat man also are the flipside of his insecurities and his craving for attention, his fears about his own limitations, his desire to contemplate what he feels like our intrinsic weaknesses and so seeing the person in their entirety makes them more significant. If we dismissed his abilities as a combat commander we would not understand his objectively Important Role in helping to when the American Civil War in helping to read american indians. If we go to the other side we miss how controversial he was in his own time. You do. Out how political the war was and how generals were politicians, not all of them obviously. People got off the greasy pole duties of politics as well as being good commanders. And he also used people on became the project of commanders and very much dumped anybody, not mcclellan but others were going downhill politically. He also say that race was for him up essential to his views, as they work. But kind of political views, his attitude toward abolition and also what he did in the reconstruction. This is a fascinating story eliminated for me by document i found was people only search. Clearly the day after the march at the end of the american he was deported to texas almost became occupation duty of the only major confederate state that not been talking by the indian army. Because of that slavery had grown stronger. Slaveholders had sent the human property taxes. Africanamericans became a larger portion of the state. So he enters the state with no sense of having been conquered and with a very Large Population of africanamerican english slavery was still being pursued a practical level even though legally it had been abolished. He found the case of a nine yearold girl who had left the plantation where she was being held across 23 miles of countryside find a mother. And this is the central element of how the military played this continuing role during reconstruction, the federal tool for pursuing federal policies and developing the map for the American Civil War. Custer himself as a product of the culture, deeply conservative which is crucial to understanding why reconstruction failed. There is this moment in which a generation transforms the constitution and yet we end up with in the jim crow era. We see someone who helps and destroy slavery. Has to administer justice as the Occupying Authority and yet he is deeply conservative and release sent to the civil authorities. There is no justice for the scroll. A much larger story of the United States the civil war to reconstruction. The way in which they knew anyway, the extent to which they dealt with this and how they dealt with the psychologically. Completely sucked into it. It is similar but different. But we have to think about is that the deportation of European Jews to the killing fields the east, especially the death camps start at the end of 1941 and takes place mainly in 1942. The beginning of 1942 theyre still live and by the end most of those who will be killed have been. The 2nd wave of deportation come almost a separate holocaust. So what you have to think of is it starts with the beginning of the war against the soviet union with these mobile killing squads behind the german reich which collectively serves over 2 million people. It was genocidal which is very important. Death camps are meant to be secret and of course they cant be. What people no immediately and the bystanders to take photographs of the Mass Shootings and hangings and burnings on the eastern front. Person poland and 39 and 40 and in the soviet territories. And germany is awash with private information about these things. Every photograph which is taken is sent to a family member, takes it to a pharmacy word is developed, gives it back. Tell the photograph returns it has gone through numerous hands command these things are not secret. What is interesting is the moment where people decide to talk about it in public. It doesnt happen for over a year later. The summer of 1943 call late july and hamburg is bombed by the British Royal air force and it unleashes this firestorm of unprecedented kursk. A couple of weeks earlier. The 3rd event which happens at this time of the 1st stage is, mussolini is deposed by the fascist grand council in italy, and the two events in italy and germany immediately come together and people Start Talking about the need for a change in regime. When youre talking about the assassination attempt there is good counterfactual cases are thinking it happened and 43 during a huge crisis after the bombing. It might have had more traction. Theres a period which people talk for four or five weeks openly about the need to change the regime. And they see the Italian Military dictatorship as a beacon of hope these what they want to do is to have a separate piece in order to win the war against the soviets decisively. They dont want to make peace with everybody. But what emerges from this which is how the holocaust comes about his people immediately and hamburg talk about the bombing as retaliation for what we did to the jews and do it not in a positive sense but in the highly hospitable way. It only we had not killed the jews then this would not be happening to us. So it is both goebbels and the Propaganda Machine want to somehow escalate things and make people feel culpable in order to get there backs to the wall and make them hold out. People talk in public exactly the opposite way. The make the same connection. Somehow the allied bombing is connected. But the draw the wrong conclusion. If only we could get out rebels were often cite this battle as evidence that the redcoats could be beaten. It would overtly talk about the types of tactics that the french and indians used to employ against the colonists during the french and indian war, and it also became a symbol of an emerging american identity. The american provincial troops at braddocks defeat had behaved in a more disciplined and more combat effective manner than the famed british redcoats. And for the americans they also remember that, that they are kind of this hybrid force that can fight against the french on their terms and can fight against the indians on their terms. When George Washington is farming mcconnell army he very much wants a conventional army because he knows that is the phone he will have to deal with is the british army. However, washington consistently towards a type of hybrid army where he cooperated with militias, irregulars in the 18th century parlance. He consistently sought indian allies, and i think that was one of the principal lessons for the americans, this flexibility and being able to fight conventionally. It is nothing easy for an englishman to read. Tell us about the conclusions the people who from the fact that the 1st battle was a victory. It was big news. Was a surprise. You had to think this happen 13 months after america enters the war. That seems quite a long time for britain at least. It took a long time. Army at the time was roughly the size of romanias army. It was very small. Just over a hundred thousand in uniform. In the short space if you think about the numbers we had 2 million men on the western front. I have been a war going on. A politically and militarily. It was a big deal to solve the puzzle of the western front. America had to be tutored by the allies in modern weaponry, modern artillery. Many of the amen and never seen an airplane. American military fighting with the support of tanks, airplanes, the 1st combined arms offensive and really it is the birth of our modern army. And so even though small operation it was the 1st american didnt an impregnable armor of the western front. Putting in the context of spring of 1918 the series of german offense is have begun. You can exaggerate how close the allies came to be knocked out. Three waves of german offenses put, push the western front 40 miles. American and sometimes pronounce it continued. The 1st mile toward victory. It was a big deal. And debate amongst historians about whether or not the commanderinchief learned enough from the british and french. The form of fighting which had not been in existence as the battle. How his lieutenants were able to learn. Great deal of autonomy to coalition commanders. Committed the 1st division decided to Pay Lip Service the general pershings instructions on of warfare, the rifleman in the bayonet but was tutored appreciate the knowledge that have been gained under fire by the french in particular on the importance of firepower and artillery. This is very much a trench warfare western front operation. And that is the story. Most of our successful operations follow the allied tactics that have been learned and try to enter up to that point. Before i announce the winner can you give a good round of applause . It will be drinks afterwards in the foyer. And without further ado i would like to announce that the winner of the 2015 them and guggenheim 50,000 prize at the New York Historical society is david preston. [applause] am truly speechless, but let me begin by thanking the foundation and the New York Historical society for administering this price and all that it represents and all that endeavors to do in a sense this is a homecoming for this book. I want to give a heartfelta heartfelt thanks to the institute which made possible the research fellowship, the Historical Society as well as the Public Library that had a profound effect on the project as it unfolded. I would also like to extend my thanks to the very distinguished panel of judges and thank you for this distinguishing honor when i considered the very distinguished military and academic and professional careers of the judges i am even more deeply humbled my fellow finalists in my mind are so deserving equally if not more so, i am deeply humbled. I also want to recognize a very fine editorial staff. My editor is here with us now and he had a huge shaping hand on the project. Finally, my family could not be here tonight, but i certainly want to thank and acknowledge them. My wife and three children lived in, nathaniel commend alister. Thank you so much. [applause] please join us in the foyer for drinks. Book tv tapes hundreds of author programs throughout the country all year long. Here is a looka look at some of the events we will be covering this week. A monday we take a critical look at us counterterrorism efforts the national to local level. Then on tuesday Harvard Bookstore in cambridge massachusetts as stephen cost will recall a smallpox outbreak that had boston in 1721 and the groundbreaking use of inoculations. How School Policies have a negative impact on black female students. From busboys and poets in washington dc. We stay in the nations capitol for the event at the Brookings Institution where founder and ceo emerging markets management will argue the next hotspot for low motivation are in americas rust belt states. Thursday at Norwich UniversityNorthfield Vermont for the kobe award presented annually to a firsttime author or book a military history intelligence operations for international affairs. This years lecture will be delivered by the 2016 recipient of author of midnights furies of the deadly legacy of indias partition and next saturday and sunday live in the 21st annual Los Angeles Times festival of books the campus of the university of Southern California all they coverage will include author panels in your calls. That is a look at some of the author programs book tv will be covering this week