[austingirl]

Thank you for posting the facts about this supposed plaigarism by this great author. I never knew the details and it seems to have been a gross exaggeration to say the least.

[Chemnitz]

I have published quite a bit. Taking Ambrose at his word, I cannot call that plagiarism. In a few cases he failed to use proper citation methods. To footnote without quotation marks is not very careful, but it was not his standard behavior. In contrast, Kearns seems to have used the work of others without attribution.

[The Person]

The text in comment 4 aren't THE FACTS about Ambrose's republishing other people's words as his own. This is Ambrose's rather feeble defense. He repeatedly copied language from other books, footnoted it, but presented the words as his own. Perhaps it was an accident, perhaps not.

If you want to read about it, go to the History News Network and search for "Ambrose":

http://hnn.us/search.php

There are about 40 articles about him.