The American Revolution Versus the French Revolution

The American and the French Revolutions were similar conflicts in some wats. However, the American Revolution is considered more successful in outcome than that of the French. In this article, Avery Scott breaks down the differences between the two revolutions and some of the reasons in which the American was more successful than the French.

French Revolution figure Maximilien de Robespierre. By Pierre-Roch Vigneron.

The American and the French Revolutions were similar conflicts in some wats. However, the American Revolution is considered more successful in outcome than that of the French. In this article, Avery Scott breaks down the differences between the two revolutions and some of the reasons in which the American was more successful than the French.

The American Revolution was fought from the years of 1775 to 1783. Primarily, tension rose over the representation of colonist in taxation legislation. Colonist rallied behind the banner of “no taxation without representation.” Colonist were not only angry at the lack of representation in taxation, but the governments lack of concern to their genuine grievances. The conflict erupted in the Battles of Lexington and Concord and ended with the surrender of Cornwallis at Yorktown and the successive Treaty of Paris.

The French Revolution began in 1789, with storming of the Bastille prison, and ended in 1799 with the overthrow of the Directory. The Directory was replaced by the French Consulate with Napoleon as first consul. Revolution occurred in French for a variety of reasons such as a weak economy, food shortages, unfair taxation, and a general discontent with the monarch King Louis XVI and his spendthrift wife, Queen Marie Antoinette.

The two revolutions were similar in principle, as they were both fought to free the individual from the authoritative rule of a monarch. But they differed drastically in execution and outcome. The American Revolution was a traditional war under the control of Congress and General George Washington. Ultimately this victory led to a new nation, and a democratic republic that stands to this day.  Conversely, the French Revolution was largely unsuccessful in its goal of removing a single monarch from power, as it led to Napoleon Bonaparte, an authoritative leader, rising to the status of Emperor. The revolution did spark a variety of productive social and economic changes, but this is a small consolation for the wanton bloodshed of innocent lives.

There are two key reasons that the French Revolution was less successful in the end goal than the American Revolution was.

Leadership

At the time of revolution, American colonists were accustomed to their system of government in which states held primary governing control and were only loosely banded together by a “federal” government. Prior to independence, this came in the form of Parliament (and the King). After independence it took the form of congress and General George Washington under the guiding principles of the Articles of Confederation. This was advantageous for the colonist, and the war, because it ensured they would not descend into mob rule when there was no longer a monarch or royal government in leadership. The lives of citizens would change little once a new, non-royal, governor was elected. The governor would, in conjunction with the state legislature, continue to run the state.

The French struggled to maintain order during the revolution as they had no leadership structure outside of the monarch and his appointed officials. They were accustomed to monarchial rule, and therefore had no plans in place to take control when he was removed. This led to mobs sending despotic leaders into power that would steer the country toward violence and/or personal agendas.  Because of this, few leaders retained power for any significant period, and each leader rose to power with a different strategic goal. Leaders’ ideology varied from that of Lafayette to Maximilien Robespierre and everything in-between. Often when a new leader was appointed, a new government was created (i.e., National Assembly, Committee of Public Safety, Directory). This constant turnover made governing very difficult and led to unproductive governments that were not accomplishing the will of the people. The lack of results led to frustration at the government. Then the frustration displayed itself in violent mobs that would often initiate an overthrow of the government – thus starting the process over. To make matters worse, the military was little use in maintaining order as they were frequently apart of the mob and used their weapons against anyone trying to stop them.

Scope

The second major difference in the two was the scope of the revolution itself. The American Revolution sought to separate the colonies from Britain and British rule. Americans wanted to rule themselves, tax themselves, and be free to conduct their personal and business lives without interference from the crown. However, Americans did not desire to change large portions of their laws or culture after independence. Therefore, much of this was left untouched - creating continuity between the two governments. It was not until the ratification of the constitution and the ascension of Washington to the presidency that a truly new form of government was established. However, even though the idea of a democratically elected president was radical, many similarities can be drawn between the British monarch and the American president of the eighteenth century.

The French were much more radical in their revolutionary aims. The sough to rewrite their country and culture from the ground up. Changes to religion, social status, taxation, war, education, politics, business, economy and voting rights were all key issues to the French. While many of these issues are important and needed to be in both countries, the breadth of issues made it difficult for the various French leaders to make any headway. Again, leading to frustration at the leaders and mob uprisings. Eventually the number of issues faced by the country would lead to Napoleon taking absolutist control of France, thus reversing the gains made by the revolution.

Conclusion

The American and French Revolution both achieved different goals at the official end of their conflicts. The American Revolution was very successful in resolving many of the problems that it set out to remedy. In contrast, the French Revolution was less successful in its resolving many of the initial goals. However, there were important changes that arose during the decade of hostilities that likely would not have occurred without the revolution. Because of this, I do not feel that either conflict was a failure. Rather, the revolution was a catalyst for years of change that would occur throughout the 19th century leading to the changes that were desired in 1789.

What do think of the differences between the American and French Revolutions? Let us know below.

Now read Avery’s article on John Adams here.

References

Lafayette by Harlow Giles Unger

Napoleon: A Life by Andrew Roberts

The Last King of America by Andrew Roberts

Washington by Ron Chernow

How did a Bunch of Farmers Beat the Most Powerful Military in the World?

The American Revolution sent shockwaves around the world, but how did the rebel Americans beat the British, arguably the most powerful military in the world at the time? Richard Bluttal explains by looking British weaknesses and American strengths.

A painting entitled The Battle of Long Island. By 21st century artist Domenick D'Andrea.

“The time is now near…” wrote Commander-in-Chief George Washington, which will “…determine whether Americans are to be Freemen or Slaves.” Over the course of the Revolutionary War, as many as 400,000 men from the ages of 16 to 60 fought against the British—about 25,000 gave their lives. Basic training was short, rations inadequate, and pay was poor. Some enlisted out of patriotism, some joined for the adventure, and others were drafted. Length of service varied from a few months to the duration of the war. Leaders like Washington soon discovered that instilling discipline and keeping an army of volunteers on the battlefield and off the wheat field (many soldiers were farmers who returned home during harvests without permission) was no easy feat. In 1778, the royal army consisted of nearly 50,000 regular troops combined with over 30,000 German (Hessian) mercenaries. George Washington, in contrast, never had more than 20,000 troops under his command at any one time. Most of these American soldiers were young (ranging in age from their early teens to their mid-20s), landless, unskilled, and poor. Others were indentured servants and slaves who were serving as substitutes for their masters and had been promised freedom at the war's end. Also in the Continental army were many women who cared for the sick and wounded, cooked, mended clothes, buried the dead, and sometimes served in combat.

The British seemed unbeatable. During the previous 100 years, the British had enjoyed triumph after triumph over nations as powerful as France and Spain. At first glance, the odds were clearly against the Americans. A closer look provides insight into how the underdogs emerged victorious.

Britain's military was the best in the world. Their soldiers were well equipped, well disciplined, well paid, and well fed. The British navy dominated the seas. Funds were much more easily raised by the Empire than by the Continental Congress. Some of those funds were used to hire Hessian mercenaries to fight the Americans.

The Americans had tremendous difficulty raising enough funds to purchase basic supplies for their troops, including shoes and blankets. The British had a winning tradition. Around one in five Americans openly favored the Crown, with about half of the population hoping to avoid the conflict altogether. Most Indian tribes sided with Britain, who promised protection of tribal lands.

So, we ask the question, how was it possible that the Americans could defeat the British. It certainly was a long shot, let’s see.

BRITISH WEAKNESSES

The British fought a war far from home. Military orders, troops, and supplies sometimes took months to reach their destinations. The British had an extremely difficult objective.  Distance was a huge, huge factor. And it wasn’t just about getting orders across the ocean. The British supply chain was simply too long. They could only compensate by looting the local people—which certainly didn’t help the public opinion of “the King’s men.” They had to persuade the Americans to give up their claims of independence. As long as the war continued, the colonists' claim continued to gain validity. The geographic vastness of the colonies proved a hindrance to the British effort. Another weakness of the British army was fighting on the wooded and hilly terrain of the American colonies. The British sought flat, open ground so that they could fight in the European style they were accustomed to, with lines of men blasting away at each other with muskets from 50-75 yards. (Although the British had defeated the French in the French and Indian War, their most crucial victory had been at Quebec, on the Plains of Abraham, where the two foes battled as they might have in France). American soldiers were much more willing to fight from concealment and retreat to fight another day, leaving the British, their supply lines growing ever attenuated and more perilous, chasing after them.

The British had just fought a difficult war with the French and their native American allies in the French and Indian War. The cost to Britain was enormous. There were constant debates in the British Parliament about the funding of this new conflict, thousands of miles from the homeland.

A related weakness for the British was the fact that it was difficult for the government to recruit men into the army, since there was no military draft, and few able-bodied British men wanted the hard and dangerous life of the army overseas. In order to fulfill Gen. William Howe’s wish for 50,000 men to defeat the colonials, the British government was forced to turn to German mercenaries from the then-province of Hesse-Cassell (whom the Americans therefore called Hessians). Thirty-thousand British and Hessian troops were in fact sent to North America 1776, but since mercenaries felt no loyalty beyond a paycheck, they were prone to desertion.

Another weakness of the British, especially at the outset of the war, was its disdain for the colonial fighters it was facing – Burgoyne would famously call the Americans “a rabble in arms" -- and be defeated by them at the battle of Saratoga. Gen. Thomas Gage, commanding 2,200 British soldiers at the Battle of Bunker Hill (really Breed’s Hill) in June of 1775, sent his men in frontal charges against this “rabble,” only to see the American stand their ground and kill or wound half of the British forces. Finally, the British faced a failure in coordinating strategic objectives -- their commanders, King George III and his ministers in England, were never quite on the same page as to the best way to defeat the Americans, in part because the same distances that made resupply difficult kept communication uncertain and lacking in timeliness.

AMERICAN STRENGTHS

With so many Americans undecided, the war became in great measure a battle to win popular support. If the patriots could succeed in selling their ideas of revolution to the public, then popular support might follow and the British would be doomed.

Even with military victory, it would have been impossible for the Crown to regain the allegiance of the people. Revolution would merely flare up at a later date.

In the long run, however, the patriots were much more successful attracting support. American patriots won the war of propaganda. Committees of Correspondence persuaded many fence-sitters to join the patriot cause. Writings such as Thomas Paine's "Common Sense" stirred newfound American nationalism.

As to the war strategy, the Native American allies taught the Americans a whole different kind of warfare, guerrilla or snake warfare. The greatest use of guerrilla warfare during the American Revolution took place during the Southern Campaign. Led by American general, Nathanael Greene, and aided by Baron Friedrich von Steuben, guerrilla warfare was used extensively in the later years of the war. In the forests of the South, Greene was able to draw British forces away from their supplies and then engage them with small fighting units in order to inflict damage. By dividing his forces, Greene was able to spread his soldiers across a wider area. As a result, British General Charles Cornwallis and the Southern detachment of the British Army often found extreme difficulty finding the Americans and successfully contending with them in skirmishes. Also, the Americans knew the country. They’d been fighting the Indians (sometimes accompanied by the French) for decades before the Revolution. They knew how to take advantage of terrain, and they did. And then, of course, you had the backwoodsmen, who generally had Kentucky rifles—which were an entirely different order of weapon from the smoothbore Brown Bess muskets the British had: they shot longer and straighter. Now if you’re a Patriot in a buckskin jacket, lying in the brush and aiming at a block of men wearing bright red coats in the woods, crammed together in Napoleonic squares (which was how European armies fought even before Napoleon), trying to shoot from daylight into shadow… who do you think is going to hit the target? Was this why the Americans were called ragtag soldiers?

Many politicians were calling this group of colonists, ragtag soldiers. I think James Volo (MA in Military History and Wars, American Military University) addresses this concept of ragtag soldiers very well. “The American were not a rag-tag bunch of farmers. They had been exposed to and part of the defensive forces of the several colonies since their founding. Most of the soldiers who fought for the English colonies prior to the final cataclysm of the French and Indian War were colonials. Only after 1759 were large numbers of regulars sent to the English colonies. However, these colonials were not formed into a simple citizen army but rather were regular provincial troops—formed into regiments and paid by the colony. From this point provincial regiments were established to replace the less formal militia units in major operations. In many colonies they became permanent organizations known as the Governor's Foot Guard, or Horse Guard. In later times, they became the Royal Americas or the Queen's Rangers. There remains in America the cherished romantic concept of the militia as "minutemen," a mythical army of self-trained and self-armed warriors springing from the colonial soil in times of trouble. This is not completely true. Most of the American officer of the Revolution — like Washington himself — had been officers or NCOs in the French Wars, and many of the Rev War NCOs (excepting the youngest) had served as soldiers in that war — Putnam, Stephen, Hazen, Pomeroy, Wooster, Stuart, Schuyler. Virginia established a system of paid, mounted rangers in the 17th century of almost 1,000 men. They patrolled the frontiers, held down depredations, and tried to keep abreast of the attitudes of the natives for a century. The New England colonies established a similar but less extensive system of rangers along their northern borders in the French and Indian War to protect the outlying settlers from the ravages of sudden attack. The best-known group of rangers was that raised by Robert Rogers from among the tough woodsmen of the New Hampshire frontier. Israel Putnam, one of the later and now a general in the American Revolution, had helped to inform the establishment of British Light Infantry. The British at the end of the war could not believe that a bookseller (Knox), and blacksmith (Greene) and a tavern keeper (Putnam) had beaten them.“

AVOIDING A KNOCK-OUT BLOW

Washington's strategy of avoiding large-scale confrontations with the royal army made it impossible for the British to deliver a knock-out blow. Only once during the Revolution (at Charleston, S.C. in 1780) did an American army surrender to British forces.

The direct assistance of France and Spain, and the indirect assistance of the Dutch was of great importance to the revolution. It also gave the Americans a fighting chance against the Royal Navy, battles like Penobscot proved that the Americans hadn’t much of a chance against the British navy. However, the intervention of French and Spanish navies changed this. The Americans also had the help of privateers. With the French and Spanish against them as well, Britain ended up fighting a war that they couldn’t win. From 1776 to 1783 France supplied the United States with millions of livres in cash and credit. France also committed 63 warships, 22,000 sailors and 12,000 soldiers to the war, and these forces suffered relatively heavy casualties as a result. The French navy transported reinforcements, fought off a British fleet, and protected Washington’s forces in Virginia. French assistance was crucial in securing the British surrender at Yorktown in 1781. Prior to the onset of the American Revolution, the original 13 colonies had no real naval force other than an abundance of merchant vessels that were engaged in domestic and foreign trade. The colonies' merchant service had vast experience with the open sea and with warfare, which included British naval expeditions against Cartagena, Spain, and Nova Scotia during the nine years of war with France (1754–1763). Thus, the importance of naval power was recognized early in the conflict. On 13 October 1775, the Continental Congress authorized the creation of the Continental Navy and established the U.S. Marine Corps on 10 November. By 1776, the colonies had 27 warships—in contrast to the powerful Royal British Navy, which had about 270 warships. Also problematic was that American commanders were often confronted by sailors and Marines who had not been adequately trained and lacked discipline.

Perhaps the single most important reason for the patriot victory was the breadth of popular support for the Revolution. The Revolution would have failed miserably without the participation of thousands of ordinary farmers, artisans, and laborers who put themselves into the line of fire. The Revolution's support cut across region, religion, and social rank. Common farmers, artisans, shopkeepers, petty merchants were major actors during the Revolution. Ex-servants, uneducated farmers, immigrants, and slaves emerged into prominence in the Continental Army.

The growth of popular participation in politics began even before the Revolution. In the years preceding the war, thousands of ordinary Americans began to participate in politics--in non-importation and non-exportation campaigns, in anti-Tory mobs, and in committees of correspondence linking inland villages and seaports. Many men joined groups like the Sons of Liberty to protest British encroachments on American liberties. Many women took the lead in boycotts of British goods; they also took up the spinning wheel to produce homespun clothes. During the Revolution itself, some 400,000 Americans, including at least 5,000 African Americans, served in the fighting for at least some time.

CONCLUSION

The Revolution had momentous consequences. It created the United States. It transformed a monarchical society, in which the colonists were subjects of the Crown, into a republic, in which they were citizens and participants in the political process. The Revolution also gave a new political significance to the middling elements of society-- artisans, merchants, farmers, and traders--and made it impossible for elites to openly disparage ordinary people.

Above all, the Revolution popularized certain radical ideals--especially a commitment to liberty, equality, government of the people, and rule of law. However, compromised in practice, these egalitarian ideals inspired a spirit of reform. Slavery, the subordination of women, and religious intolerance--all became problems in a way that they had never been before.

The Revolution also set into motion larger changes in American life. It inspired Americans to try to reconstruct their society in line with republican principles. The Revolution inspired many Americans to question slavery and other forms of dependence, such as indentured servitude and apprenticeship. By the early 19th century, the northern states had either abolished slavery or adopted gradual emancipation plans. Meanwhile, white indentured servitude had virtually disappeared.

What do you think of American strengths and British weaknesses during the American Revolution? Let us know below.

Now read Richard’s series of articles on trauma and medicine during war, starting with the American Revolution here.

Founding Father John Adams - Part 2: Diplomat

This three-part series takes on one of America's most important founding fathers, John Adams. John Adams’ contributions to the founding, development, and success of the United States was unrivaled by others of his generation. In this series, Avery Scott examines John Adams’ life and contributions to the United States from three perspectives. First, John Adams the patriot here. Second, John Adams the diplomat. Third, John Adams the Statesman.

Here, Avery looks more closely at John Adams as a diplomat across Europe.

A portrait of John Adams in 1785 (shown here in black and white). By Mather Brown

Introduction

John Adams served his country in the diplomatic service for much of his life. Eventually, becoming the most experienced foreign diplomat in service, he was called upon to negotiate some of the new nation's most difficult situations. Despite Adams future successes, his diplomatic career began with a torrent of failures.

Lord Howe

After the signing of the Declaration of Independence, the war took a turn for the worst with British forces commencing hostilities on New York. The troops under control of General Washington showed their inexperience and lack of discipline when attacked by professional soldiers. Many soldiers ran from their post, deserting the field and in their wake, leaving behind weapons and powder already in short supply. Fortunately, brave Marylander’s under the command of Lord Stirling guarded the retreating army, making a retreat possible - despite suffering heavy casualties.

Washington knew that his men had to reach safety quickly, as he expected a British armanda to arrive shortly to blockade his overwhelmed Army. Gen. Washington brilliantly developed a plan to retreat across the East river under cover of darkness and fog thanks to brave Massachusetts seafarers who conducted the soldiers' safe passage throughout the night. While the defeat was difficult, the escape was a small silver lining to an otherwise dark cloud. Washington saved the bulk of the Army to fight another day, but learned how weak the force was that he was defend the nation. Soon the news of the battle and escape arrived to Congress, as did paroled General John Sullivan bearing news of Admiral Lord Howe’s desire to speak with a delegation from the colonies regarding an “accommodation.” Adams stood firm that no such meeting should occur, however he was overruled by the greater majority of Congress. Ironically, despite his objections, Adams was selected as one of three members who should meet with Howe on Staten Island. The other two members selected were Benjamin Franklin and Edward Rutledge. So on September 11, 1776 the three commissioners met with Admiral Lord Howe to discuss Howe’s proposal of “re-union” of the colonies to their rightful allegiance to the crown. It was here that Adams began a diplomatic career that would change the fate of America.

France

After the meeting with Admiral Lord Howe, which proved to be a worthless endeavor, and the sting of the loss at New York fresh on their mind, Congress began deliberations to find new ways of recruiting and maintaining a professional Army. It quickly became apparent that America was in an untenable position, and needed an ally to assist in winning the war. Specifically, Congress needed an ally with access to men, supplies, and money. The delegates knew France was their best hope to be victorious. Adams was wary of this alliance, and stood firm that it must be purely militaristic in nature, and not entangle America in the future problems of France (a country that spent more time at war than at peace). Seeing France as their best option, Congress appointed Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson commissioners to France with the goal of assisting Silas Deane in negotiating a treaty of alliance. Thomas Jefferson was replaced by Aruthur Lee when Jefferson declined the appointment due to personal reasons.

Adams soon returned home to Braintree, and then back to Baltimore for another session of Congress. It was during this session that Adams was given the most dispiriting news of the war yet. Washington’s troops were bested by Howe’s forces at Brandywine Creek. Who could then march, unabated, the short distance to Philadelphia - routing Congress. Fleeing to York, Congress convened but many members, including Adams, soon departed for home. After enjoying the comforts of home for some weeks, Adams traveled to represent a client in his capacity as a lawyer. During his absence, Abigail received Adams commission to serve with Benjamin Franklin and Arthur Lee in France. He was being called to serve in place of Silas Deane who was recalled to answer to Congress for his actions as commissioner. Abigail, upon reading the commission, was furious with Congress and their attempt to make her life “one continued scene of anxiety and apprehension.” Despite her effort, he quickly accepted the appointment as he felt it his public duty. Adams would depart for France leaving behind his entire family - except John Quincy who would journey with his father. In secrecy, to avoid spies or attack, father and son departed their home waters aboard the Boston. Captain Samuel Tucker was to be responsible for transporting the Adams’ safely to France. Tucker accomplished this mission, albeit not without some difficulty on the way. Namely, the capture of the British cruiser Martha. But after six weeks and four days aboard ship, Adams was rowed ashore, leaving the Boston behind, and beginning what would become one of the greatest diplomatic careers in the nation's history.

Immediately after Adams arrival, he began to be introduced to French society by Benjamin Franklin. Franklin, being the most popular American in France, had many friends that he advised Adams befriend as well. Adams quickly became enamored with the culture and excitedly wrote Abigail regarding the experiences thus far. However, Adams also met Charles Gravier, Comte de Vergennes, the King’s Foreign Minister, who would become a thorn in the side of Adams’ diplomatic hopes. However, the first problem Adams encountered had nothing to do with diplomacy or the French. Rather, it was the ongoing turbulence between Franklin and Arthur Lee, which led both men to complain of the other to Adams in private. Despite personal differences, the men shared the common goal of an alliance with France. And the first step to this was to introduce the new Minister to King Louis XVI. In which Adams was struck by the importance of King Louis on the future of the Nation.Adams spent much of his time in France feeling as though he was accomplishing little, because the treaty of alliance he was sent to negotiate was already agreed upon prior to his arrival. And the Comte de Vergennes seemed disinterested at best or unwilling at worst to do anything additional to help America. Because of this, he spent the remainder of his first stay in Paris struggling with his fellow commissioners, the Comte de Vergennes, and frustration from Abigail regarding his continued absence. However, Abigail need not worry long, as Adams soon received the news that Franklin was appointed by Congress to be the sole Minister to Paris, with no direct instructions being given to Adams as to future assignments. Deeply hurt by the betrayal, Adams planned to sail home.

Home Again

Adams, despite frustration at Congress for the lack of communication, was deeply relieved to be home with the family he loved and his farm. He would not have much time to enjoy retirement as he was soon selected as a delegate to the Massachusetts state convention in order to form a state constitution. Once Adams completed his work for the state convention, and the new constitution was ratified, Adams was called back to Paris to serve as a Minister Plenipotentiary to negotiate treaties of peace with Great Britain. Adams was frustrated at the way he was treated by Congress, with Henry Laurens writing an apology to Adams stating he was “dismissed without censure or applause.” So as it were, Adams now set sail again to France, John Quincy in tow as he was before, but with the addition of his other son, Charles.

Holland

His time in Paris began with the first of many battles with Vergennes regardings his commision, and the appropriate time to reveal his intentions. This would not be the final battle between the two, as Vergennes eventually attempted to effect the recall of Adams. Even going so far as to employ Franklin in the attempt. Despite the treachery, it became a turning point in Adams’ career, as this is when he made the decision to visit Holland in an attempt to gain financial assistance. Adams trip to Holland was one of “militia diplomacy” in which he bent the rules of his new nation, and the customs long followed by all nations to affect his change. He had not been called to do so by Congress, but instead went on his own free will. Eventually, Congress officially voted for Adams to serve in this role. Which proved vital as Adams was very successful with the Dutch, with the Hague voting to recognize him as the Foreign Minister to the Netherlands on April 19, 1782, and the independence of America was also recognized. Eventually, trips to Holland would lead to a multitude of Dutch loans to America that allowed for the continuance of the war effort, and the ability to pay the balance of prior loans, and began to build American credit abroad. Additionally, on October 8, 1782, Adams negotiated, and signed, a Treaty of Commerce with the Netherlands.

Treaty with Britain

After negotiating the Dutch treaty, Adams was dispatched back to Paris for final peace negotiations. Unfortunately for Adams, he lost his appointment as sole Minister to France following the letters to congress from the Comte de Vergennes and Franklin. However, he was still on the team of diplomats responsible for such negotiations. This team included Adams, Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, John Jay, and Henry Laurens (Jefferson being absent for the time, and Laurens being in the Tower of London). Adams was in little rush to attend the negotiations, and ensured that he wrapped up all open business at the Hague prior to leaving - even doing some sightseeing on the way. Upon his arrival in Paris he was dejected to learn of Congress secret instructions to the negotiators to only push for concessions approved by the French government. Even Franklin, the member most beholden to the French, found this to be an untenable position to negotiate from. Eventually agreeing with the other delegates that they would proceed contrary to Congress instruction, and strike the best deal possible with Britain without prior approval from France. The men worked well together, gaining land for the US and reaching peace terms the British found agreeable. It was only on the point of private debts that the commissioners deferred. Jay and Franklin felt that private debt agreements between Americans and British merchants should be forgiven due to the damage the British inflicted upon their former colonies. However, Adams strongly argued, eventually winning, that private debts should be paid notwithstanding injuries from war. This was, however, more of a personal victory than a practical one. Because few individuals would make much attempt to repay the debts, and both state and national congress’ would do little to enforce it.

Adams' final stand came on the rights of American fishermen to fish in the waters off Nova Scotia. Adams was a Massachusetts man, and though not a seafaring man himself, grew up watching the value of cod and other fish to his region's economy - refusing the British to take away this right.

A preliminary treaty of peace was signed with the British on November 30, 1782. With the official treaty being ratified on September 3, 1783 thus ending hostilities. Following the treaty, in August of 1784 - Abigail joined her “dear Mr. Adams” in Paris. After a blissful reunion in Paris, Adams was eventually named the Ambassador to the Court of St. James. The goal of this post being to resolve outstanding issues between America and Britain following the Treaty of Paris. With sadness, Abigail and John left Paris to assume their new post as the first minister from America to King George III.  Adams' diplomatic career would continue for many years following the signing of the Treaty of Paris and his call to London. However, in the years following his arrival to France, Adams proved that he was no longer an inexperienced diplomat, and had now become a statesman….

What do you think of John Adams as a diplomat? Let us know below.

Now read Avery’s article on the role of privateers in the American Revolution here.

The American Revolution and The Role of Privateers

Privateers are private naval people or vessels that are used by authorities to do tasks such as attack and plunder enemy ships. For many centuries, privateers played key roles in times of war. Here, Avery Scott looks at the important role that privateers played during the American Revolution.

Captain Luke Ryan. From Hibernian Magazine in May 1782.

From the beginning of time, rivers, lakes, and the sea all formed highways that allowed men, supplies, goods, and money to flow from one location to another. In times of war, these superhighways became significantly more important, as those that controlled the sea, controlled the supply lines. Because of this, countries have always battled for control of the sealanes linking their country to others. However, the maintenance of a full navy is expensive, difficult, and, at times, impossible. The difficulty of maintaining a navy led to the rise of privateering commissions, or letters of marque. Letters of marque have played key roles in many periods in history, specifically from the 1500s to the golden age of piracy (1650-1730). Men like Sir. Francis Drake, Henry Morgan, and William Kidd all obtained letters of marque that allowed them the right to pillage and plunder enemy vessels during times of war, and to act as a proxy to the nations navy. Prior to the golden age of piracy, privateers were commonplace, at times replacing the country's navy. However, diplomatic relationships changed around the golden age of piracy, and less commissions were awarded. This led the formerly government sanctioned privateers to begin acting as pirates. Despite the number of privateer commissions decreasing, it did not rid the world of their operations entirely. They would continue to appear during times of war when a particular government found their dastardly services advantageous. And, fortunately for privateers, the American revolution would lead to the commission of hundreds of privateers and untold wealth for those brave enough to risk their lives against the powerful Royal Navy. These privateers, in many cases, are the untold heroes of the American revolution. While they did not have the direct impact of men like George Washington, John Adams, Benjamin’s Franklin, The Marquis de LaFayette, and Baron Von Steuben, they were a menace to the Crown.

The Black Prince

One such example of this is the story of Luke Ryan, and his ship the Black Prince. Ryan began his career as an Irish smuggler turned privateer for the British. However, Ryan was unable to shake his former habits, and returned to Ireland without completing his mission as a privateer, instead he returned with large amounts of contraband. His vessel, the Friendship, was quickly impounded by customs officials, and the crew was thrown into jail. Ryan, having already vacated the ship, was not among these. Ryan decided that he must break his crew out of prison, and quickly sail out of Irish waters. Early in the morning, the crew escaped out of the prison, stole several smaller boats which they rowed to their commandeered ship the Friendship. They proceeded to cut the anchor cables and confined the guards aboard. After escaping from the Black Dog prison, he renamed his ship the Black Prince, and headed for France to obtain a privateers commission from Benjamin Franklin.

Ryan faced a major challenge in obtaining this commission - he was Irish. Not only was Ryan Irish, but nearly his entire crew as well. Franklin could only grant commissions to vessels that had, at minimum, an American captain. However, it was not long before Ryan found Stephen Marchant, an American in France in search of a vessel to command. Ryan felt that Marchant could be easily manipulated into doing whatever Ryan and the other Irish sailors desired - essentially, giving Ryan total control of the ship, and Marchant nothing more than the appearance of a command. Only Ryan and his crew would be privy to the plan, which ultimately resulted in Franklin granting Marchant the commission. It was not long before the Black Prince became a successful privateer that struck fear in the hearts of British merchant vessels and seafaring towns alike. Soon after Marchant was informed of Ryan's plan, and was relieved of the modicum of command he currently maintained. Franklin also found out about the situation, but due to the overall success of the cruises he was unconcerned, even sending Ryan a gift to show his gratitude. In addition to his gift, Franklin was so impressed that he commissioned another vessel - the Black Princess. After another successful cruise, Franklin granted another commission, this one named the Fearnot. Again, these cruises were very successful. There were setbacks in the cruises, but these were minimal compared to the number of successes that each cruise produced. However, Ryans’ commissions were eventually recalled when it became apparent that privateers were hurting Franco-American relations due to a number of factors, not the least being Franklin's leniency in granting them. Overall, Ryan’s cruises amounted to 114 captured vessels and huge monetary damages from insurance rates, trade interruptions, and an overall distraction to the Royal Navy.

The Lee

Stories such as that of Luke Ryan happened frequently during the revolution, whether those privateers came from France or from American shores. Millions of dollars (billions in today’s money) of damages occurred as well as damage to the Royal Navy's morale, supplies, and productivity. Another benefit privateers offered the continental forces was their ability to obtain supplies needed by continental forces. Early in the revolution, in November 1775, the Lee, was patrolling near the coast of Massachusetts, when it came across a large vessel and decided to board. Captain John Manley sent several of his best sailors on board with concealed weapons, taking the British ship Nancy completely by surprise. The Nancy’s Captain Robert Hunter was excited to see the men, assuming they were there to assist the Nancy, as the ship had battled tough seas and was in need of repair. Hunter soon realized that Manley’s men were not there to help, but it was too late. Manley’s men drew their weapons, and Nancy's crew had to surrender. The Lee’s crew discovered a huge military cargo that was one of the most valuable of the war. The cargo included 2,000 muskets, 7,000 cannonballs, and 30 tons of shot, in addition to many other war time essentials. Washington was thrilled at the capture, calling it an “instance of divine favor.”

Conclusion

These two stories show how privateers played a pivotal role in winning the revolution. They helped to obtain goods needed for fighting the war and molested Royal Navy ships and merchantmen coming to resupply British troops. They expanded the size of the Navy, while reducing the financial burden of supplying a full time Navy. They caused huge financial woes for British citizens, merchantmen, and the government. Finally, they helped to create a war weary public that pushed for an end to the Revolutionary War. While often unacknowledged, ignored, or simply forgotten about, privateers were true heroes of the Revolutionary War, and victory would likely have not been possible without their brave contributions.

What do you think of the role or privateering in the American revolution? Let us know below.

Now read Avery’s article on Captain Henry Morgan and the escape from Maracaibo here.

References

Empire of Blue Water by Stephan Talty

Rebels at Sea by Eric Jay Dolin

The Republic of Pirates by Colin Woodard

Founding Father John Adams - Part 1: Patriot

This three-part series takes on one of America's most important founding fathers, John Adams. John Adams’ contributions to the founding, development, and success of the United States was unrivaled by others of his generation. In this series, I will examine John Adams’ life and contributions to the United States from three perspectives. First, John Adams the patriot. Second, John Adams the diplomat. Third, John Adams the Statesman.

Avery Scott starts part 1 below.

A 1766 portrait of John Adams. By Benjamin Blyth.

Introduction

John Adams' ascension to power was anything but smooth. He, unlike peers George Washington and Benjamin Franklin, was not born into riches. Rather, he was born to a working-class family in October of 1735. Adams was born in Braintree, Massachusetts to John Adams Sr. (Deacon John), a farmer and shoemaker, and Susanna Boylston. From an early age, Adams was a dreamer. He dreamt of being successful and prominent. Despite his dreams, Adams' weaknesses often hindered his ability to obtain his desired success. Frequently he complained of, “dreaming away the time” and wasting too much of his day on the frivolous. Fortunately for Adams, he was born in a time perfect for dreamers. Witnessing the French and Indian War, the effects of slavery, his time serving as a schoolmaster, and the oratorical and legal examples of men such as James Putnam played a major role in shaping the future president. Additionally, Adams' time at Harvard College enriched him, and provided him the liberal education that would become so necessary during his variety of roles in support of the United States. After Adams time at Harvard, he was struck with the decision of a career. Adams settled on the law, completing his legal education, and beginning his career in 1758. For some time he struggled, but eventually became a successful lawyer with a reputation for honesty, integrity, and hardwork. It is around this time in which Adams courts and marries Abigail Smith in 1764. This union would eventually produce six children - one being a future president himself. Unfortunately, the Adams family was not destined to enjoy a lavish lifestyle that would have likely occurred in other circumstances. Rather, at British Parliament's passing of the Sugar Act, Currency Act, Quartering Act, and the Stamp Act, they turned the reluctant to rebel Adams - into a Patriot.

The Patriot

After the passing of the Stamp Act, Adams began writing large political pieces in support of American rights. His first such writing titled, A Dissertation on the Canon and the Feudal Law, was one of his most successful. However, Parliament repealed the Stamp Act, allowing for relative calm in the colonies for the next few years. Despite the temporary calm, it was not long before Adams was thrust into the biggest moment of his personal and legal career - the Boston Massacre.

Legal Career

One year before the Boston Massacre, in April of 1769, Adams defended Michael Corbett, a sailor aboard the Pitt Packet, after he killed Lt. Henry Paton of the British Vessel Rose. After he attempted to press Corbett and three other men into British service, Corbett lobbed a harpoon at Paton, killing him. Troops from the Rose took the sailor into custody, who was tried in Boston on murder charges. John Adams expertly defended his client, just as he would during the Boston Massacre in 1770. Thus displaying his expert legal mind, and his affinity for the rights of man.

On March 5th, 1770, a British guard was being taunted by a throng of Colonists, unhappy with his presence. Eventually, a small squadron of troops, and their captain Thomas Preston, appeared as reinforcements. The unfortunate event ended with the British troops firing into the crowd of protestors, killing five. As if the incident were not stressful enough on the young Adams, he was soon asked to provide legal defense for the British troops. Despite his concerns, Adams agreed to provide the services at no charge. Adams spared all of the troops any prison time, and only minor punishments for two soldiers. While it may seem odd that this fervent patriot would defend those he despited,  it displays the principles that the rebels were fighting for in action. They felt that freemen have rights that must be honored, and not least of these is the right to legal counsel and fair trials. Patriotism, in the eyes of John Adams, did not mean that he would disgrace those he disagreed with. Rather, he would work tirelessly to ensure that their rights were also upheld.

Beginnings of Revolution

In December of 1773, the Boston Tea party was orchestrated by the Sons of Liberty in retaliation for the taxes charged on tea, and the crown sanctioned monopoly by the East India Company. In the act, 342 chests of tea were destroyed and dumped into Boston Harbor - infuriating the crown.  Adams was ecstatic to hear about the act and what it meant for America, but knew that at that moment that war would be imminent. As retribution, the crown closed the port of Boston in 1774 as a part of the Intolerable Acts, until the tea was paid for.

In the same year as the intolerable acts, Adams was elected to the First Continental Congress. The first Continental Congress was not nearly as exciting as the Second Continental Congress. However, there were important measures taken that showed the colonists' willingness to submit to British rule under the condition that they were given their due rights. Also, the congress approved such measures as a non-importation and a non-exportation agreements  in an attempt to hurt the British economy. Eventually the First Congress adjourned in October of 1774, and shortly after in 1775 the Second Continental Congress was held.

The Second Congress

The Second Congress saw some of the biggest contributors to the revolutionary cause come together, to make some of the biggest decisions America has ever seen. First and foremost, Adams nominated George Washington to serve as Commander of the Continental forces. A decision that, despite Adams later comments about Washington, was one of the biggest of both their careers. A strong presence was needed to support the Colonies in their attempt to defend against British rule, and Washington fit the mold. Also, Washington was a Virginian, which was important due to Virgina being the largest and wealthiest of all the colonies. Congress felt that the leader of the United Colonies should hail from that state. Additionally, The second Congress also voted to outfit privateers, disarm Tories, and build frigates for a new Navy. Each of these was of major importance, and played a key role in the development of the war.  Finally, a committee of five, made up of John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Robert Livingston, and Roger Sherman, were appointed to draft a Declaration of Independence from Britain. After some planning and discussion, Jefferson was tasked by the committee as a whole to write the majority of the document with only input and minor changes from the others. After completion of the document, much debate ensued regarding the act of independence.  During the debate Adams displayed his true patriotic valor, defending the document and pushing for independence from Britain. There were many members of congress that were not yet ready to commit to independence, but Adams' resilience, passion, and hard work convinced many of the delegates that independence was necessary. And on July 2, 1776, the Second Continental Congress voted to approve the Declaration of Independence.

Once independence was agreed upon, some painful revisions to the Declaration were necessarily undertaken by Congress, at times decimating the document that Jefferson worked so diligently on. One of the biggest sections removed, and one that Adams felt the strongest about, was the chastizement of the King for bringing slavery into the Colonies. This section was removed at the urging of other members of Congress, because slaves and the slave trade were directly associated with the livelihoods and economic status of many members. It is in this debate, that we see the Patriot Adams stand to defend, not only white colonists, but also African Americans. Adams hated the thought of slavery, and never personally owned a slave. He felt strongly that people fighting for freedom should not be holding others in bondage. Unfortunately, Adams lost this debate and on July 4, 1776, the official wording and document was approved for publication. But it was not until August 2, 1776 that the document would be officially signed. Once independence was declared, a host of other issues became necessary to address. Questions of laws, governance, finance, arming of troops, and administrative duties had to be attended to. Just as Adams was a fervent patriot in fighting for independence, he fought the same for these issues.

What do you think of John Adams as a patriot? Let us know below.

Sources

John Adams by David McCullough

The Indispensables: The Diverse Soldier-Mariners Who Shaped the Country, Formed the Navy, and Rowed Washington Across the Delaware by Patrick K. O'Donnell

Washington: A Life by Ron Chernow

Patterns, Processes, and People in History - And How they Come Back Around

History often repeats in itself in different ways. Here, Michael Cho gives his take on how patterns processes, and people interact - and come back around throughout history.

Washington Crossing the Delaware, an 1851 painting by Emanuel Leutze.

The study of history has altered my perspective of how and why the world in which I live changes the way that it does through repetition and influence. World history is a constant repetition of patterns of change with the constant rise and fall of different nations, rulers, and ideals. Through the repetitions in history, a deeper understanding of the basis and core of modern society can be found because of the constants that emerge. If history has a pattern, the constants revealed by history can also be the base of understanding of the present and the future in order to explain how and why change occurs. Ideas spark revolutions, single decisions spark war, and actions taken by one person can influence the world for generations to come. The study of history has allowed me to understand the world in which I live in because its patterns reveal the core constants that shape human interactions, allowing me to understand my society today through past societies.

Change can be measured in a pattern of repetition and influence since the beginning of known history. Decisions made affect future generations, nations are made with similar ideals and fall in the same manner, and revolutions inspire other revolutions. A perfect example of this were the Atlantic Revolutions taking place from the 1760s to the 1830s. The Atlantic Revolutions included the: American Revolution, French Revolution, Haitian Revolution, and the Revolutions in Latin America. These revolutions which were both fought on the same ideals and were also heavily influenced by each other with some of the revolutions possibly never having occurred without each other. America’s revolutions came from the Enlightenment, the spread of ideas in Europe which sparked the spread of ideas of liberty, freedom, and constitutional government, changes that would lead to human development and a better future.

American Revolution

The American Revolution was fought between the American colonies and the British over the long period between 1765 and 1791 and reveals the constant of geography in the overall ebb and flow of history. Contrary to popular belief, the American Revolution was largely fought due to the restrictions on free trade that grew out of the geographic advantages the American colonies possessed. The Americans wanted free trade, liberty, freedom, and constitutional government and the geographic distance from Great Britain afforded the colonists the opportunity to develop an independent existence and redefine their relationship. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” They thought these ideals were worth fighting for and signed the Declaration of Independence on July 4th, 1776 and continued to fight for these ideals until the Treaty of Paris which declared the end of the revolutionary war was signed. This reveals how the influence of geography shapes society’s needs, wants, fears and desires, manifesting in the American desire for free trade as the nation moved literally and symbolically further away from the influence of Europe.

As geography shapes societies ambitions, the individuals who comprise that society begin to conceive of new ideas and perspectives to explain those motivations. The American Revolution heavily influenced the French Revolution and a lot of the grounds in which the French Revolution was fought for was a repetition of the American Revolution. French officials signed the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen which covered the same topics as the American Declaration of Independence. The first line of the Declaration of the Rights of Man, “1. Men are born and remain free and equal in rights. Social distinctions may be founded only upon the general good,” is a direct expression of the idea of individualism that was at the heart of the American Constitution and Declaration of Independence and redefined liberty and what was possible in a free society for French citizens.

When these French citizens then took action to change their world, the effects of this rippled across its colonial structures through the Haitian Constitution and the revolution of Latin America. Hearing about the end of slavery decreed by Napoleon Bonaparte around the completion of the French Revolution, the people of Haiti and Latin America decided to have their own revolution. Inspired by the previous revolutions and the Enlightenment ideas which had spread to these regions, the Haitians rebelled against the French monarchy and is remembered as the only successful slave-lead rebellion against the governing regime. In so doing, their Constitution applied those same rights to people of color, “There cannot exist slaves on this territory, servitude is therein forever abolished. All men are born, live and die free and French.” This entire ripple effect and process of change next inspired Latin American revolutions led by Simon Bolivar and reveals how geography and human nature interact to change the world.

Today’s world conflict seems unprecedented. War, pestilence, famine, and hate seems to ravage all corners of the Earth, it may seem as if these are unprecedented times. However, the patterns of change throughout history – geography and human nature – can help reveal that the world has endured these forces before and that positive change is possible, even through difficult times.

What do you think of the article? Let us know below.

Who Wrote the Book that led to the American Revolution? The life of Thomas Paine

Thomas Paine, or Tom Paine was born in 1737 in Britain and dies in 1809 in New York City – in a very different world to that he had been born in. Here, Douglas Reid tells us about Paine’s life, including his roles in the American and French revolutions, as well as his extremely important book – Common Sense.

A late 18th century painting of Thomas Paine. By Matthew Pratt.

John Adams, in a letter to Thomas Jefferson wrote: “Paine is the most extraordinary man, this age, or this world, ever produced.” But elsewhere Adams also said: “He was the greatest mischief-maker of the age. “ He made his presence felt as a citizen of three countries and two revolutions. His earthly debut came in 1737 in Thetford, England as the older son of Quaker parents.

Thetford is a mid-sized market town 35 miles north of London. Home for the Paine family was typical for working class folk of the time – a modest thatched cottage on the edge of the village. Young Tom, from his bedroom casement, looked out on a low, windswept landscape that led 200 yards to “Hangman’s Hill”, the scene of many ghastly executions - a harbinger of the time that would come when Tom participated in the French Revolution.

Boys of Tom’s class would typically receive a basic education to 12 years of age. But young Tom was something of a natural scholar. He became self-taught, and he especially liked the works of Daniel Defoe and Jonathan Swift. He was soon expected to work seven years at a trade, and gradually to be formally recognized as a journeyman. Young Tom Paine proved to be a flop at any trade he tried. At last, he was apprenticed as a corset maker under his own family. Tommy Paine – corset maker? No, that could never be. By age 17 young Paine decided he could hear ‘the call of the sirens’ and he left home and headed to sea.

Although young when he began to haunt various shipping berths along the Thames, Tom was not in quest of the thrills of adventure on the high seas. His motivation was financial, plain and simple. He felt his working class education had been inadequate and he was very much a knowledge seeker. While most of his shipmates received their share of a ship’s profits in the morning, only to be in debt by the same afternoon, Tom was paying modest fees to listen to the several lecturers in town. Most of these talks were political in nature and the young man listened carefully.

Political beginnings

Paine developed his political creed through his twenties working as a schoolteacher, a corset maker, and (especially) as an excise taxman. It was during this time that he met Ben Franklin who convinced him that the American Colonies were on the road to separation from King and country. Franklin also advised him that a young man of his sort belonged there and Franklin suggested that Philadelphia should be his destination. Indeed, near the midpoint of 1774 that is where Tom Paine landed.

It was in transit from England to America that Paine completed his extended essay “Pure Reason” which remained the working title until shortly after meeting Doctor Benjamin Rush. Dr. Rush was generally considered the most accomplished medical man in 18th century America. Rush suggested Paine’s essay should be entitled, “Common Sense”.  And possibly the world’s best-known essay was born.

The first of two Continental Congresses met in the Pennsylvania State House during the summer of 1774. They sought mainly to patch up differences with the mother country over excise taxes. The basic views of the delegates at this conference broke down as follows: Approximately one-third were in favour of holding on to Mother England regardless of tax squabbles, one-third sat on the fence, one-third were restless and eager to separate.  “Common Sense” was published and the world would never be the same.

Common Sense

Common Sense burst from the printing press like a bolt of lightning. It ran to seven editions in just a few hours.  A copy of the mercurial missive reached George Washington two days after its debut on the streets of Philadelphia. His take: “I find Common Sense is working a powerful change there in the eyes of many men.” The world has not seen, before or since, a document that mesmerized a people like this brainchild of Tom Paine. But nothing man-made lasts forever. 

Common Sense did not alter the result but it certainly sped things up. After the initial sensation of the tract Paine contributed many speeches to the cause of the Revolution. And it needs to be said that Paine could not hold others in thrall in person the way he could by his written word. His physical appearance alone put many off.

Tom Paine was of average size but he had a face with rosy cheeks. Throughout his life he had a face that burned with a steady, bright red colour. And his eyes released an incandescent black emanation that startled any interlocutor with menace. He was difficult to converse with but he was a genius with the written language. George Washington, for example, got Paine a job as a war correspondent. At the close of a day when negativity reigned following a loss in the field, Paine wrote on a drumhead by the light of a campfire:  “These are the times that try men’s souls.” And now France beckoned.

French Revolution

The firebrand orator soon made his voice known in a new arena – at the famed Tennis Court Oath of 1790. Later still he was to almost lose his head during the Reign of Terror. He had made the mistake of dressing like a Gironde. Lafayette was there to rescue him. Soon after this close shave, Paine fled across the channel to his country of birth but England was not large enough for Paine and George both. And soon he was back stateside, all the while crafting his burning prose. One more thing  - and this time it is of a personal nature.

During his French sojourn the omnipresent and stylish Lafayette presented the Brit turned American with a key - and not just any key. This long black key had been in long-time use at the centre gate of the Bastille.  Subsequently Tom gave the key to George Washington. Shortly after the death of the president, the key to the Bastille became a steady draw for visitors to Mount Vernon.

And I, lingering after hours was allowed to hold the key and feel the weight of it myself!

What do you think of Tom Paine’s importance in the American Revolution? Let us know below.

General Henry Knox in the US Revolutionary War: The Noble Train of Artillery at the Siege of Boston

General Henry Knox (1750-1806, US Secretary of State for War from 1789 to 1794) played a key role in the American Revolutionary War. During the 1776 Siege of Boston he had a brilliant idea that manifested into the perilous journey of his noble train of artillery. Elizabeth Jones explains.

A portrait of Henry Knox from the 1780s. Painting by Charles Willson Peale.

Henry Knox was larger than life. Clocking in at over six feet and weighing more than 300 pounds, he was a giant during his lifetime and remains a giant in Revolutionary War history over 200 years after his death. And not only was he big, but in November 1775, he also had big problems. He had to find a way to move over 60 tons of artillery and munitions across the frozen 300 miles between Fort Ticonderoga and the city of Boston, which was under siege by the Americans due to the occupation of Boston by British forces.

Needless to say, the outcome looked grim. Without the firepower provided by the cannons and howitzers captured at Ticonderoga by Ethan Allen and his Green Mountain Boys in 1775, the revolutionaries stood little chance of freeing Boston from her shackles. But Henry Knox wasn’t going to stand idly by while the British Army occupied his hometown.

Henry Knox, patriot and bookseller

Henry Knox was a first-generation American born in Boston in 1750. His formal education ended at age twelve when his father abandoned the family, and to support his mother he went to work as a clerk in a bookstore. As a result of his early and constant exposure to books, he became a voracious reader and educated himself on topics ranging from military strategy to advanced forms of mathematics.

Knox continued working in the bookstore, but he also made time for mischief, running with some of Boston’s notorious street gangs. At 18, Knox joined an artillery company presciently named The Train. He served in the company for several years, and once injured himself by shooting off two of his own fingers.

Knox opened his own bookstore in 1771 at the age of 21 and operated it until tensions between the British and their unruly American colonies reached a boiling point at Lexington and Concord on April 15 and 16, 1775.

Siege of Boston

The British forces took control of the city following the “shot heard ‘round the world” and Knox and his wife Lucy were forced to flee Boston, leaving the bookstore to be looted and vandalized. Knox immediately enlisted in the militia that was laying siege to the occupied city and served as an engineer, building fortifications.

Following the Battle of Bunker Hill, Knox was recognized for his work by the new Commander-in-Chief of the Continental Army, General George Washington, but he still remained without a commission into the Army proper. Still, he continued to serve valiantly, even though the siege seemed to be going nowhere fast.

Besides, he had an idea. One that just might be crazy enough to work.

The noble train of artillery

On May 10, 1775, not one month after the fighting between the British and the Americans began in earnest, Ethan Allen and his Green Mountain Boys (including then-Colonel Benedict Arnold) captured Fort Ticonderoga in upstate New York from the British, and with it an arsenal of heavy artillery. Ticonderoga was then largely managed from afar by Arnold and used intermittently by other American forces. But one man remembered.

Henry Knox, still without his commission, approached General Washington with the idea of ending the siege of Boston by using the 60-ton arsenal that remained at Fort Ticonderoga. The only problem was that the feat was a logistical nightmare, especially considering the level of sophistication of the transportation available at the time. But Washington believed in the still-green Knox and gave his plan the green light. So Knox set out from Boston with a team of men, animals, and vehicles to bring the guns of Ticonderoga to the city under siege in a convoy.

The recovery operations began in earnest on November 17, 1775, when the company left Boston. It arrived at Fort Ticonderoga on December 5th, and the team promptly began loading the nearly 60 guns and accompanying munitions and stockpiles. The easiest part completed, the company set back for Boston with the guns in tow in the midst of an 18th-century winter.

The elements were unforgiving, but the terrain was even more so. Bodies of water and mountain ranges stood between Knox and his destination, but Knox refused to be deterred. They reached the northern tip of Lake George on the cusp of it freezing, which would have made the crossing impossible. The guns were loaded onto the ships, with many of them being loaded onto a ship called a gundalow.

The challenges begin

The gundalow sank near the lake’s southern shore. Nearly 120,000 pounds of desperately-needed munitions lay on a ship near the bottom of a rapidly-freezing lake. Most people would have been disheartened and abandoned the entire endeavor, but Henry Knox wasn’t most people. The determined man worked with his team to bale out the sunken gundalow and recover the guns from Lake George.

The company reached the outpost of Fort George, and Knox found time to pen a quick letter to General Washington, stating that he hoped “to be able to present your Excellency a noble train of artillery”. The name stuck. Henceforth the expedition to bring the guns of Ticonderoga to Boston came to be known as the noble train of artillery.

Upon leaving the fort, the noble train of artillery had to cross a river, upon which sleds holding the guns were dragged. Suddenly the strong ice began to crack, and guns fell through the ice to the bottom of the river. Once again, Knox refused to abandon even a few pieces of artillery, and once again the guns were raised from the bottom of a body of water.

It would seem as if the worst was behind Knox and the noble train, but they still had to cross the Berkshires, an unforgiving mountain range that was covered in ice and snow. The crossing was difficult and the elements worked against them at every turn, but the noble train of artillery persevered, and they reached the other side of the mountain range, and on January 25, 1776, the company reached Boston, much to Washington’s relief.

Lifting the Siege

The guns gave the Americans a much-needed edge, but there was still work to be done. Artillery relentlessly pounded the city, until, in the dead of night, Washington ordered the guns to be positioned upon the twin peaks of Dorchester Heights in present-day South Boston. This strategy, along with Knox’s perseverance, led to the departure of the British from the city on March 17, 1776. To this day, March 17 is celebrated in South Boston as Evacuation Day.

Knox finally received his commission into the Continental Army and was eventually promoted to the rank of major general, becoming the youngest in the army. He served the majority of his Revolutionary War career as the American chief of artillery and was appointed by President Washington to become the first Secretary of War. Knox died on October 25, 1806.

Conclusion

General Henry Knox was more than just a trusted right-hand to General Washington and an able artillery chief for the Revolutionary Army. He was a visionary whose forward-thinking and willingness to take risks ended the Siege of Boston, ultimately moving the needle of independence forward.

What are your thoughts on General Knox? Was he brilliant or a mad-man, or both? Comment below to let us know what you think about the fabled bookseller-turned-general.

References

https://www.masshist.org/database/viewer.php?item_id=463&pid=15

1776 by David McCullough

Henry Knox: Visionary General of the American Revolutionby Mike Puls

The Most Important Reason for the American Revolution? How the French and Indian War Gave Birth to America

The French and Indian War (1754-1763) was fought in the modern-day USA between British America, France, and their Native American allies. It was truly a war for control of what was to become America, but its effects were longer lasting. Here, Ian Craig explains the importance of the war for the birth of the American nation.

A depiction of George Washington during the French and Indian War. By Charles Willson Peale.

It is hard to overlook how one war essentially led to the birth of a new nation.  However, the French and Indian War did just that.  Since the founding of the first permanent settlement of Jamestown in 1607, the British colonies in America were left to govern themselves with little interference from the British crown.  This continued even as the Pilgrims landed in New England in 1620.  The Mayflower Compact then symbolized America’s earliest form of democracy.  As more came to America to pursue a new life, the original thirteen colonies began to form stretching along the entire east coast of North America except for Florida and Canada.  For their part, the British government demanded very little from the American Colonies.  They wished only for the resources that America had to offer and spent little time in directly governing the colonies.  This concept has come to be known as salutary neglect.  Because of this, the American Colonies were left to create governments of their own which seemingly allowed for more participation and rights for their citizens.      

Then in 1651, Britain passed the Navigation Acts that forbade the American Colonies from trading with other nations besides Britain.  Goods exported from America were to be on British ships only.  However, the earliest versions of the Acts were not heavily enforced allowing trade to continue as it had for decades. Representing early attempts of Britain to exert its rule over the American Colonies, the Navigation Acts would not be fully enforced until 1750 when it became clear that large-scale smuggling had occurred.  In 1764, the year after the French and Indian War ended, the Navigation Acts were enforced even further.  Revisions of these acts represented early examples of how the British would impose their will on their colonies but demonstrates how this was not enforced until after the French and Indian War came to an end.  What would follow would be a series of tax acts designed to pay off the debt from the war at the expense of the American Colonies.[1]

The French in America

In 1754, when the war began, colonists in America demanded that the British government send troops to protect them. For years, their growth west had interfered with not just the Native Americans, but also the French who had laid claim to most of the interior.  The constant clash between these groups along the frontier led to war, one that would determine control of most of North America.  That same year, the colonial governor of Virginia sent a young George Washington to secure an area on land at the junction of the Ohio River.  His orders were to build a fort that could serve as a deterrent to the French.  However, when Washington arrived, he realized that the French had beat him to it and that he was vastly outnumbered.  Washington then took a calculated risk - although small in number, he attacked the French fort and retreated to build a makeshift fort called Fort Necessity. When the French counterattacked, Washington was forced to surrender but was later released as a warning to the British. This small skirmish made the British government realize the full threat of the French in America.

In 1755, the British sent Major General Edward Braddock to America in an effort to put a stop to French expansion. Braddock was appointed as commander-in-chief of all British forces in America with the sole mission of securing British dominance.  Although supported by the colonists, this action brought a considerable number of British soldiers to America.  This was only the beginning of British military expansion in the American Colonies. Braddock and the British government led by Prime Minister Thomas Pelham-Holles, the Duke of Newcastle, believed that a quick and swift attack on the French holdings along the Ohio Valley would prevent French reinforcements and end any future skirmishes.[2]  But, this would not be the case.  Braddock arrived in Virginia determined to take direct control of operations with the cooperation of the colonial governors.  He called for a meeting of the governors of New York, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Maryland.  This was a point in which British dominance began to reign over the American Colonies. Instead of asking for the governors’ cooperation he demanded their assistance and did not take their consul.  Instead, Braddock was infuriated with their continuing to trade with French Canada and their lack of true in interest in the military campaign.  He also opposed a plan by Massachusetts’ governor William Shirley that would have helped his cause greatly.[3]

Ambush

When Braddock left Virginia in the summer that same year, he had some 2,000 British regulars along with provincials from the colonies.[4]  His direct mission was to capture Fort Duquesne which was built on the same spot that George Washington had been the previous year, at the junction of the Ohio and Monongahela Rivers.  In addition, Braddock was to use the same path that Washington used along with Washington himself as his aide-de-camp.  Washington was there to provide guidance, as he knew the land and what to expect from the French and their Native allies.  However, Braddock ignored most of the advice that Washington gave and proceeded through the route cautiously, but also made too much noise.  The falling of trees for bridges and the clearing of forest gave notice to the French.  On the afternoon of July 9, 1755, Braddock’s army fell into an ambush of a combined French, Canadian, and Indian force.[5]  The battle that ensued was almost complete chaos.  Braddock’s troops were not prepared for the guerilla tactics of the French and her native allies.  Troops fired in all directions in an effort to gain control, Braddock himself tried in vain to control the situation, but was fatally shot.  Despite trying to hold their ground, the British troops, although greater in number, were forced to retreat.  General Braddock was buried in an unmarked grave in the mists of the retreat as to not allow the Natives to rob his grave.  The survivors of the battle hurried back towards Fort Cumberland. Some 500 British soldiers were killed while only a small number of the French force was.  Braddock’s defeat left a large stain on Britain’s attempt to eliminate French control in the American frontier.  It also led to a new British policy which would bring further government control to America.[6]   

Realizing that Britain had fallen into an all-out war with France over control of North America, the Duke of Newcastle’s government along with King George II needed time to build up their forces.  Britain underestimated the French resolve and the type of warfare demanded in North America. It wasn’t until 1757 under the direction of a new Prime Minister, William Pitt, did Britain’s strategy in America change.  All the while, under the direction of Lord Loudoun, the new commander in America, troops and supplies were steadily increasing in America.[7]This led to further tensions between the colonies and the British.  For his part, Loudoun established an embargo in trade between the individual colonies. His reasons were to prevent trade with Canada, however it backfired, and he was forced to lift the embargo.  But the damage had already been done as it hurt American commerce.[8]

Lasting Effects

As the war continued despite several setbacks in the British strategy, America felt the power of the British government.  In 1761, the Writs of Assistance case was presented to the Massachusetts Supreme Court. During the 17thcentury, Britain had allowed its courts to issue writs in order to search merchant vessels.  During the height of the war, British officials began to suspect smuggling from many colonial merchants.  With that, under the law, Writs of Assistance could be issued to search a ship’s cargo. This only angered the colonists further as many believed that once the war was over, the British would leave and everything would return to normal.[9]When the war came to an end in 1763 with the Treaty of Paris, Britain was proclaimed the victor gaining much of the land once controlled by the French.  Britain was also the dominant power in all of North America.  Despite the colonists’ wish that the British would leave, troops remained in the major cities and along the frontier.  

After winning such a costly war, Britain wanted to capitalize on its newfound conquest.  It had no intention of letting the colonies be alone again.  Later in 1763, after Pontiac’s War (a skirmish with the Ottawa chief Pontiac which left the British surprised again) King George III issued the Proclamation of 1763.  It barred colonists from moving west across the Appalachian Mountains to end confrontations with the Native Americans.[10]This single act was one of the causes of the American Revolution.  This was because many colonists were upset that they had fought for the right to colonize that land only be told that they could not by their own government.  At the same time, the British government had assumed a considerable debt in protecting the American colonies.  It was decided that the American colonies should help pay for the debt and in 1764, the first tax was passed.  The Sugar Act essentially took away the right of trial by jury if a merchant failed to pay the tax.[11]In addition, the government prevented the colonies from printing or coining their own money.  This was done to standardize the system, but in reality it led to colonial trade becoming stagnant as money was taken out of circulation. These efforts were opposed by the colonies because they believed that the British government did not have the right to tax them without their consent.  Due to the fact that they did not vote for Members of Parliament, it did not have the right to tax them.  This became the standard defense as many saw themselves slaves to the taxes of Parliament.

Revolution

In 1765, when the Stamp Act was passed, the colonists began to see the true intentions of the British government. After protesting the Act which led to riots in August of that year, the Stamp Act was repealed in 1766.[12]  However, in the years that would follow, several other Acts were passed and impressed upon the American Colonies including the Townshend Acts.  By 1776, the American Colonies had had enough of British control and declared independence.  Despite this, without the French and Indian War and its outcome, American independence might not have come.  The increased number of troops and supplies sent to America, along with British generals who refused to collaborate with the colonial assemblies, helped to spark an American hatred for its own government.  When the war ended, Britain severely underestimated America in thinking that it could tax them as it did the other colonies without conflict.  Its policy was no different than what it had done throughout the empire; however, its long absence in American affairs weakened its ability to truly govern the colonies.  So when the war came and ended, America was given a dose of reality to the true nature of the British Crown allowing it to seek independence and to be born as a new nation.

What do you think the most important reason was for the American Revolution? Let us know below.

[1]The American Revolution, “The Navigation Acts.” Our American Revolution, http://www.ouramericanrevolution.org/index.cfm/page/view/p0096(accessed Sept. 29, 2019). 

[2]Walter R. Borneman, The French and Indian War: Deciding the Fate of North America (New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 2006), 40-41. 

[3]Ibid, 47. 

[4]Ibid, 48. 

[5]Ibid, 51. 

[6]Ibid, 55. 

[7]Ibid, 84. 

[8]Ibid, 85.

[9]Robert J. Allison, The American Revolution: A Concise History(New York: Oxford University Press, 2011). 

[10]Ibid, 5. 

[11]Ibid, 6. 

[12]Ibid 8. 

Joseph Plumb Martin and the American Revolution: Yankee Doodle Dandy

In October of 1760, a young King George III of England’s reign began, marking a new birth for England and her colonies. One month later, a more humble figure, Joseph Plumb Martin, was born. Here Elizabeth Jones tells the story of Joseph Plumb Martin, the author of a very famous book about the American Revolution.

Jospeh Martin Plumb and his wife in the 19th century.

“Alexander never could have conquered the world without private soldiers. “ - Joseph Plumb Martin

Joseph Plumb Martin was born on November 21, 1760. He was raised by his grandparents in Connecticut. He lived the complicated life of a boy growing up in the storm brewing in colonial America. And like many other American boys in 1776, he enlisted in the militia following the battles of Lexington and Concord.

What makes Private Joseph Plumb Martin stand out in history?

For well over a hundred years, nothing. But in 1962, an obscure memoir of the experiences of an enlisted soldier in the Revolutionary War was republished as Yankee Doodle Dandy, and the world noticed.

Martin first published his account in 1830, titling it Narrative of Some of the Adventures, Dangers, and Sufferings of a Revolutionary Soldier, Interspersed with Anecdotes of Incidents that Occurred Within His Own Observations. It didn’t sell well. It probably had something to do with the title.

Whatever the case, the rebrand was successful, and history took notice. Martin’s narrative has since taken its place as one of the key primary sources of information about the Revolutionary War.

So what?

Private Martin carried around a quill and journal and, between arduous marches and ear-splitting cannon fire, kept a log of his experiences in Washington’s Continental Army. His memoir provides a unique perspective on the everyday life of an enlisted soldier.

Insights from Yankee Doodle Dandy

But how much insight can the dusty writings of a long-dead, stocking-wearing patriot provide? As it turns out, plenty. Below are some musings of a teenager coming of age during one of the most turbulent periods of history.

 

On martial life:

Enlisting at the start of the war and serving until after the Treaty of Paris was signed ending the war in 1783, Joseph Plumb Martin was a veteran of several major engagements that occurred during the Revolution. He served during battles and sieges, such as the inconclusive Battle of Monmouth and the climactic Siege of Yorktown. He describes his experiences as a Continental soldier in detail.

“As there was no cessation of duty in the army, I must commence another campaign as soon as the succeeding one is ended. There was no going home and spending the winter season among friends, and procuring a new recruit of strength and spirits. No—it was one constant drill, summer and winter, like an old horse in a mill, it was a continual routine.”

 

On Fort Mifflin:

In 1777, Private Joseph Plumb Martin was stationed at Fort Mifflin on the Delaware River just outside of British-occupied Philadelphia. The fort was under intense fire from the guns of massive ships, and Martin describes it in excruciating detail. The uncomfortable intensity with which he describes his experience makes it unflinchingly real.

“I was … sent to reinforce those in the fort [Mifflin], which was then besieged by the British. Here I endured hardships sufficient to kill half a dozen horses. Let the reader only consider for a moment and he will still be satisfied if not sickened. In the cold month of November, without provisions, without clothing, not a scrap of either shoes or stockings to my feet or legs, and in this condition to endure a siege in such a place as that was appalling in the highest degree.”

Martin adds:

“During the whole night, at intervals of a quarter or half an hour, the enemy would let off all their pieces, and although we had sentinels to watch them and at every flash of their guns to cry, "a shot," upon hearing which everyone endeavored to take care of himself, yet they would ever and anon, in spite of all our precaution, cut up some of us.”

 

On Valley Forge:

When Martin initially joined the fight for independence, he enlisted in the Connecticut militia for a short stint.

“I wished only to take a priming before I took upon me the whole coat of paint for a soldier,” Martin wrote prior to his first enlistment.

Martin’s Service

He served in the militia for the better part of a year until his term of service expired and he was discharged on Christmas Day of 1776 - the same day that the Continental Army was preparing to cross the Delaware and surprise the Hessians at Trenton.

But in 1777 he reenlisted, serving as a private in General George Washington’s Continental Army. The conditions were miserable and the pay, if it arrived at all, was laughable. So why did Martin reenlist?

“If I once undertake, thought I, I must stick to it, there will be no receding,” he wrote. Martin marched with Washington’s Army to Valley Forge, where they encamped for the winter of 1777-78.

 At times and in places in his memoirs he is dark about the war, its leaders, and the overall cause, but he stays true and is insightful when he talks about how important he feels that the war is:

"Our prospect was indeed dreary. In our miserable condition, to go into the wild woods and build us habitations to stay (not to live) in, in such a weak, starved and naked condition, was appalling in the highest degree. But dispersion, I believe, was not thought of, at least, I did not think of it. We had engaged in the defense of our injured country and were willing, nay, we were determined to persevere as long as such hardships were not altogether intolerable."

 

Conclusion

Joseph Plumb Martin’s account of his time in the Revolutionary Army has helped historians gain a clearer picture of the everyday drudgeries of a Continental Soldier, bringing to light details that had long been lost to history. The importance of Martin’s impact on the study of the American Revolution for both the professional and hobby historian cannot be overstated.

Find out more about Elizabeth and her work at https://elizabethmjoneswrites.com.

References

1776by David McCullough

The Adventures of a Revolutionary Soldier by Joseph Plumb Martin

http://www.ushistory.org/march/phila/mifflin.htm