Download
1 / 64
640 likes | 865 Views
The American Revolution: Background and Initial Military Campaigns. Teaching American History. Overview of the American Revolution . Was the American Revolution the single most important event in American History?
E N D
The American Revolution:Background and Initial Military Campaigns Teaching American History
Overview of the American Revolution • Was the American Revolution the single most important event in American History? “The American Revolution is the single most important event in American history. Not only did it create the United States, but it defined most of the persistent values and aspirations of the American people. The noblest ideals of Americans – the commitments to freedom, equality, constitutionalism, and the well –being of ordinary people – came out of the Revolutionary era. The Revolution gave Americans the consciousness that they were a people with a special destiny to lead the world toward liberty.” • Gordon Wood, The Great Republic: A History of the American People, 229.
Overview of the American Revolution (continued) • “Objects of the most stupendous magnitude, measures in which the lives and liberties of millions, born and unborn are most essentially interested, are now before us. We are in the midst of revolution, the most complete, unexpected, and remarkable of any in the history of the world.” • John Adams, quoted in David McCullough, John Adams, (New York: Touchstone Books, 2001), 127.
Overview of the American Revolution (continued) • Continued for Eight Years. Longest American conflict prior to Vietnam. No one, incidentally, went into the war believing that it would last so long. The British thought that they would be greeted as liberators and that they would have significant loyalist support. • About 25,000 Americans were killed or 1% of the population. As a percentage of the total population more Americans were killed in the American Revolution than in any other war but the Civil War. • Battles were eventually fought across entire United States. Americans from different states encountered each other for the first time. They often held intense regional prejudices. By no means did the Revolution eradicate these loyalties, but it was essential to the formation of an American Identity, a sense of national unity or continental consciousness that had not previously existed. In Congress during the Revolution, a group of “nationalists” formed who saw the difficulties that regional loyalties and the absence of a true central government – with the power to raise revenue and regulate commerce – created for the troops and the war effort. These nationalists later almost uniformly supported the Constitution of 1787. • Part of the Battle for Global Supremacy between Britain and France. The American Revolution was initially a civil war, then a war between two nations, but once France entered on the side of the Americans, the American Revolution became an important part of the battle between France and Great Britain for global supremacy that last some 2 centuries.
Causes of the American Revolution (The End of “Salutary Neglect”) • Beginning in 1763 with the end of the French and Indian War, the period of “salutary neglect” was over and the British begin to impose themselves into the colonies to an unprecedented degree. This imposition created resistance that was unexpected by the British. But the colonists had already developed their own views and policies, especially about trade, taxation, and western settlement. • The regulatory efforts of the British are often described primarily in terms of new taxation policies that were imposed to pay for the costs of the French and Indian War. This is, in part, true. “As of January 5, 1763, the British national debt 122,603,336 pounds with an annual interest of 4,409,797 pounds.” (Middlekauff, The Glorious Cause, 61). Something had to be done to pay this debt and the colonies seemed to both King and Parliament to be particularly prosperous and thus able to bear the burden. Nevertheless, the series of regulations that Parliament and the King imposed on the colonists after the end of the French and Indian war were by no means entirely economic. They were part of a systematic reform of the British imperial system that was undertaken by Parliament and the Crown. Furthermore, they were designed to address a number of profound and far reaching changes and challenges that the British empire faced in its North American colonies.
Causes of the American Revolution: Changes and Challenges (Population Growth and Movement). • The number of English colonists in British North America increased remarkably during the 18th century - from about 1 million in 1750 to 2 million in 1770. (Slaves constituted approximately another 500,000 people.) This increase in population caused pressure for land in the American colonies, which had until this point been basically confined to the eastern seaboard. The end of the French and Indian War led to the exodus of France from North America and opened up the possibility of settlement of the vast trans-Appalachian area. Many land hungry colonists wanted to settle in this area but migration of colonists to the interior led to profound conflict with Native Americans who still numbered some 150,000 at mid - century.
The Development of Anti-authoritarian attitudes and the breakdown of deference. • Migrations throughout the interior also led many Americans to be placed outside the authority of the British imperial structure and eventually unwilling to abide by that authority or much of any authority.
Economic Expansion • Trade between the colonies and GB exploded during the mid 18th century. North American colonists were responsible for absorbing roughly a quarter of Britain’s exports and the value of colonial exports to GB and imports from them rose rapidly. This “consumer revolution” empowered ordinary Americans and thus also broke down patterns of deference within the colonies and created general contempt for authority. Furthermore, as the debt of the colonial gentry increased, they become beholden to and resentful of British creditors.
In short, the taxes and regulatory measures of the 1760s and 1770s were British responses to population growth, land fever, Indian conflict, economic expansion, and war debt.
Imposition of a Standing Army • In early 1763, the British government made a decision to introduce a standing army into the colonies. This decision was controversial in the colonies because of the widespread, traditional belief that standing armies posed a profound threat to liberty. This army was twice the size of the British army that had been in the colonies prior to the French and Indian War and was very expensive to maintain. Revenue raised from Tea and Stamp Acts never came close to paying for its expense. Parliament and the King believed, quite plausibly, that a standing army was the only way to help insure peace between the colonists and the Native Americans. Trade with Native Americans was an essential source of revenue and goods for the colonists and yet exploitation was great and caused conflict. Troops were also necessary to keep colonists from stealing Indian land, thus sparking violence and war. Finally, the Spanish were in the Floridas and French Catholics (recent enemies) were in Canada. The ministry believed troops stationed on American soil, to defend British subjects in America, should be paid for – at least in part - by British subjects in America.
Western Lands Policy: Response to Migration by Land Hungry Colonists • On October 7, 1763, the Greenville ministry issued a proclamation that closed the West between the Appalachian mountains and the Mississippi River to white occupation. This proclamation turned the vast trans- Appalachian region – land so desired by the land-hungry colonists - into an Indian reservation.
Economic Regulations and Taxation Policies • April 1764 – Sugar and Currency Acts – Sugar Act was a comprehensive regulatory and taxation measure (see below). The Currency Act forbade colonies from issuing paper money as legal tender. This made paying back debts extremely difficult in the colonies where specie was scarce. • April 1765 – Stamp Act – tax on all printed material – newspapers, legal documents, licenses, and even dice and playing cards. • May, 1765 – Quartering Act – forced colonists to pay to house troops in the colonies and allowed that they be quartered in private residences in the colonies. • March 1766 – Parliament repealed the Stamp Act, but then passed the Declaratory Act reasserting the sovereign authority of Parliament to pass laws “in all cases whatsoever” for the colonies. • June, 1767 – Townsend Acts imposed duties on glass, lead, paints, paper, and tea. • April, 1770 – Townsend Duties were repealed except for the duty on tea. • 1773 – Tea Act passed. Gave the East India Company a monopoly on tea. • 1774 – Coercive or Intolerable Acts and Boston Port Act – Imposed troops in North America as a response to the Boston Tea party and closed Boston Harbor. • 1774 – Quebec Act - Granted toleration of Catholicism to Quebec’s French inhabitants and allowed them to live under French civil law. Also, transferred land regulation and control of Indian trade to the province of Quebec.
Sugar Act of 1764 (As a Navigation Act) The Sugar Act was, in part, a navigation act designed to curb smuggling and corruption. American shippers were required to post bonds, list what was aboard their ships, and obtain certificates of clearance before they could set sail and conduct trade. The list of products that had to be shipped directly to Great Britain was expanded to include not only tobacco and sugar, but also hides, iron, and timber. Lumber was one of the most valuable items in colonial trade. The Sugar Act also gave customs’ officials greater authority. The Navy was granted greater inspection powers over colonial vessels, including the greater use of “writs of assistance” or warrants to engage in searches. Vice-admiralty courts were broadened to address custom’s violations. Heretofore, smuggling charges and shipping violations had been heard in colonial courts of record. These trials were heard before juries of colonists who were not unsympathetic to smuggling. With the passage of the Sugar Act, these trials were not heard in Vice -admiralty courts which did not use jury trials but rather judges who were appointed by the Crown. These judges took the crime seriously and imposed stiff penalities.
Sugar Act (as a Taxation Act) • Sugar Act was also, in part, a taxation act. It imposed duties on foreign cloth, sugar, indigo, coffee, and wine. Most famously, it reduced the tax on foreign molasses from six pence to three pence on the assumption that this reduction (when combined with stricter enforcement) would discourage smuggling, lead the colonists to pay the tax, and thus raise more revenue. Previously, colonists had simply refused to pay the six pence tax and had bought their molasses from the West Indies (not from British producers). Avoidance of any tax had made it possible for them to produce cheap rum and then trade that rum for other goods. The imposition of this reduced tax made it difficult for colonists to manufacture rum that was competitive on the market and thus deprived them of essential sources of revenue and goods.
Stamp Act of 1765 • Taxed legal documents, almanacs, newspapers, and virtually all paper used in the colonies. Taxed even playing cards and dice. • Had to be paid in British sterling, not colonial paper money. This created difficulty for the colonists because specie was very rare in the colonies. • Although stamp taxes were used in Britain and colonial assemblies had imposed them in the 1750s, Parliament had never before imposed such a tax directly on the colonies. The Sugar Act was viewed as onerous; this tax was viewed as an absolute abomination.
Declaratory Act (1766) • The repeal of the Stamp Act in 1766 leads to the passage of the Declaratory Act to reassert the sovereign authority of Parliament to pass laws “in all cases whatsoever” for the colonies. This act has a precedent in history where it has been used, in the eyes of the colonists, to subjugate the Irish.
Quebec Act (1774) • The culminating act of regulation by the ministry took place after the 1st Continental Congress had met and conflict was already beginning to brew. In 1763, British victory in the Seven Years War had led to the cession of Canada to Britain by France. But the former French citizens of the area that would become Canada were Catholic (not Anglican) and were used to a French legal system. Former enemies of the British, the Frenchmen and women of the Canadian territory were not particularly loyal to the British and were unsatisfied with a supporting a religious establishment contrary to their faith and being governed under a foreign code of law. Passed in 1774, the Quebec Act was meant to appease French Canadians and engender greater loyalty among them to the Crown. It granted toleration of Catholicism and reestablished French civil law. This act also transferred land regulation and control of Indian trade to the province of Quebec. Many colonists resented toleration to Catholics and opposed any regulations that interfered with their ability to freely settled the trans–Appalachian region and to continue to exploit Indians.
The British Perspective – “How Dare They” • Pay for the cost of administration of the colonies, including protecting the colonists from Native Americans. • Pay off the war debt – The French and Indian War had been fought for and, in part, in the American colonies. • Theory of Mercantilism – Mercantilism suggested that there is a fixed amount of wealth in the world. For wealth to increase in one place, it must decrease elsewhere. Wealth thus results from exploiting colonies, primarily for their mineral resources but also as an outlet for exports. (At the eve of the Revolution, the British North American colonies accounted for 25% of the imports of British goods.) Mercantilism also conceives of state power in terms of the economic relationship of an imperial center to its colonial peripheries. Colonies are “dependencies”; they are inferior to the mother country and exist to increase its wealth and power. Regulations of trade passed in the 17th century had been unapologetically designed to benefit British merchants. • Colonists were better off than Englishmen • “Virtual Representation” – Response to “no taxation without representation.” Representation is not linked to geography or even elections. 9-10ths of Englishmen in England do not elect members of Parliament. Every member of Parliament represents the entire British empire and is concerned only with the good of all. • Administrative structure involved the subordination of colonies: the King appointed royal governors who reported to and was sympathetic to the King; Parliament made up laws for the colonies that were then administered by the Board of Trade; some independence was given to colonial assemblies, but the Privy Council reviewed statutes passed by colonial assemblies and the King retained a veto over all colonial laws. This is the way that it was, should be, and always had been. • Most broadly, the British viewed the colonies as dependencies or even children. The language used to talk about the colonies is maternal and paternal. The colonists’ reaction to regulation and taxation was considered selfish, immature, uncivilized, and the height of ingratitude. “How Dare They”
The British Perspective (continued) • Colonial policy was made by a number of different persons and administrative bodies. The King and Parliament were of course central makers of colonial policy as was the Privy Council, the Secretary of State for the Southern Department, and the Board of Trade. The Board of Trade was the most consistently important of these bodies as the Privy Council and the Secretary of State for the Southern Department had other responsibilities and interests. In 1768, the office of the Secretary for Colonial Affairs was created to supervise the colonies. This complex and cumbersome system of administration led to administrative inefficiency, ineptitude, misunderstanding, and unpopular policies. The British could not understand the colonists wants and needs and the colonists found it difficult to influence policies and to locate responsibility for them.
The Colonial Perspective • Accustomed to self-rule • “No taxation without representation” “It is inseparably essential to the freedom of a people, and the undoubted rights of Englishmen that no taxes should be imposed upon them, but with their own consent, given personally, or by their representatives.” - Stamp Act Congress. • “The power to tax is a power to destroy.” • Colonists initially differentiated between “external” taxes such as those imposed by the Sugar Act that flowed from the power of Parliament to regulate commerce (and were, according to the colonists, justifiable) on the one hand and “internal” or “direct” taxes such as those imposed by the Stamp Act that, they argued, violated the right of colonists for self-government. Eventually, the colonists denied altogether the right of Parliament to tax them. • Inevitability of Independence “Can an island be expected to govern a continent?” Thomas Paine, Common Sense
The Colonial Perspective (continued): Republicanism and “Corruption” • As Bernard Bailyn has established, the American Revolutionaries were heavily influenced by the “radical social and political thought of the English Civil War” as it had been set forth by a group of 17th and even more 18th century “coffee house radicals and opposition politicians.” The political thought of these radicals, Bailyn argued, included the beliefs that republics are fragile and easily degenerate into tyrannies and that “power” (understood as “the dominion of some men over others” was aggressive, ever expanding, and inherently antagonistic to liberty. It also included the beliefs that “virtue” (defined as the voluntary subordination of self-interest to the public good) is necessary to the preservation of republics and conversely that “corruption” (the pursuit by citizens and rulers of private gain at public expense) must be avoided. With their thought conditioned and limited by this Whig variation of classical republicanism, many colonists could not help but look upon the series of events that took place during the 1760s and 1770s as evidence that a conspiracy had been launched against their liberties and that the English Constitution and government had been unbalanced and corrupted. The continuing efforts of the Episcopal church to erect an establishment in the colonies, the increasingly rigorous measures passed by Parliament including the Stamp Act, Sugar Act, Townsend Duties, and eventually the Tea Act and Boston Port Act, the flooding of Parliament and the colonies with placemen whose wages and thus loyalties were tied to the King, the opposition of the British government to the efforts of the colonies to secure an independent judiciary - none of these events alone signaled the nefarious designs of the Parliament and the King. Together, however, they were undeniable evidence that the mixed government had become unbalanced and "corruption" had overtaken the English government.
The Extent of Parliament’s Authority in the Colonies • As colonists and the British government struggled to understand each other, a central question emerged, “What was the proper extent of Parliament’s authority in the colonies?” This question had never really been thought about extensively before the 1760s and 1770s. When taxes were imposed, colonists initially argued that they were excessive, harmful to the colonial economy, and would create economic hardship. As the conflict evolved, however, colonists developed the distinction between internal or revenue raising taxes (which were unauthorized) and external or regulatory taxes which were designed to regulate shipping and were acceptable. Eventually, colonists insisted that only their own directly elected legislatures had the right to tax them. British authorities were genuinely puzzled and then infuriated by the assertion that Parliament did not have the authority to tax the colonies. The more this claim was made, the more the British insisted on rejecting it outright.
The Unraveling of Authority, 1764-1775: American Response to British Measures
Protests, Petitions, and Collective Action • The colonists began to respond with organized inter-colonial protests in 1764. In 1764, eight colonies issue formal petitions claiming that the Sugar Act was harming the economy. Colonists began to organize protest associations, non-importation agreements (boycotts), to have town meetings, and to write numerous pamphlets and newspaper editorials. The political sphere is greatly enlarged beyond “Gentlemen” who normally rule to include ordinary Americans who participate in politics for the first time. Women form an important part of the resistance to the British by participating in boycotts and by making their families’ clothes and other goods.
American Response to British measures (continued) • The “Stamp Act Congress” - In October, 1767 thirty seven delegates from nine colonies meet in New York and draw up a set for formal declarations denying the right of the Parliament to tax them.
Mob Violence • Another response to unpopular British regulatory and taxation measures was Mob Violence. Mob Violence was conducted in Boston , Newport, Rhode Island, and Charleston, South Carolina in protest of the Stamp Act. The “Sons of Liberty” was formed to carry out a number of activities. Royal officials were burned in effigy; British officials were intimated into conducting business without “stamps”; non-importation agreements were organized; and those who refused to abide them were censured or intimated.
British Responses to American Resistance and Violence • In 1768, two British regiments were dispatched to Boston to quell American resistance and violence. By 1769, there were nearly 4,000 British troops in this seaport city of 15,000 people. On March 5, 1770, eight British soldiers fired into a crowd that was harassing them and killed five civilians.
Paul Revere’s (Peter Pelham’s) Engraving of the Boston Massacre (What’s Wrong with this Picture?)
What’s wrong with this picture? (continued) • The “Boston Massacre” happened at night, not during the day. • The British did not fire volleys from their ranks into a crowd. The event is more accurately described as a skirmish among a small number of individuals. • The first person shot – Crispus Attucks – is depicted as white.
Burning of the Revenue Cutter, Gaspee (1772) • The Gaspee was a cutter sent to the colonies in March, 1772 to enforce the Stamp Act and prevent smuggling. Under the leadership of Lt. William Dudingston, it harassed colonial ships, often delaying even ships that had passed inspection. On June 9, 1772, it gave chase to a packet sloop named Hannah that was going from Newport to Providence. Captain Lindsey of the Hannah deliberately led the Gaspee into shallow waters where it ran aground on a sandbar. When Lindsey reported this to townspeople, a plan was launched to destroy the Gaspee. Eight longboats were rowed out to the vessel and Dudingston and his crew were captured. The ship was then set afire on June 10th, 1772. Although relatively neglected by historians and not a part of American folklore, this act was an important part of the prelude to the Revolution. It showed the colonists’ audacity, organization, and determination to resist taxation and excessive regulation. It also showed their unity.
Tea Act (1773) • In 1773, Parliament passed an act giving the East India Company the exclusive privilege of selling tea in America. This act also gave the East India Company the right to sell to colonial merchants that they chose. Merchants not chosen by the East India Company were outraged and the act highlighted to the colonists their antipathy to the existing tax on tea. Colonists in several ports refused to let ships with tea unload their cargo. The family of Massachusetts’ Governor Thomas Hutchinson was one of the merchants given favored status by the East India Company and when colonials tried to prevent a ship from unloading its tea in Boston Hutchinson refused to let the ship sail until it had unloaded its tea. This provoked one of the great acts of political theater in American history,…..
Boston Tea Party • Samuel Adams and the “Sons of Liberty” were of course instrumental in orchestrating the Boston Tea Party. The event itself took place on Thursday, December 16, 1773. It was purposefully limited to the destruction of tea. A padlock broken during the event was replaced. The rebels meant to show at once that they were not going to pay the tea tax and that they were not rabble. Eventually, over 90,000 lbs or 45 tons of tea in 340 chests worth about 10,000 pounds was thrown into Boston Harbor. This was accomplished in about three hours. So much tea was dumped into the harbor that it continued to wash up on the shores for several weeks.
British Respond Four Acts that Become Known as the Coercive Acts (to Parliament) and the Intolerable Acts (to the colonists). • Closed the Boston Port until the Tea was paid for. • Reorganized the government of Massachusetts and altered the charter of the government. Royal governors were given expanded power to appoint judges and sheriffs and new power to appoint members of the upper house or Council. • Governor was given the power to take over private buildings for the quartering of troops. • Royal officials charged with capital offenses were tried in England.
The Establishment of Informal Government • “By the end of 1774, in many of the colonies local associations were controlling and regulating various aspects of American life. Committees manipulated voters, directed appointments, organized the militia, managed trade, intervened between creditors and debtors, levied taxes, issued licenses, and supervised or closed the courts. Royal governors stood by in helpless amazement as new informal governments gradually grew up around them. These new governments ranged from town and county committees and the newly created provincial congresses to a general congress of the colonies – the First Continental Congress, which convened in Philadelphia in September 1774.” Wood, The American Revolution: A History, 48.
Loyalists (Patriots?) • Scholars estimate that approximately one third to 40% of the colonists were loyalists, one third or so were for the independence, and one third undecided or indifferent. Local committees intimated loyalists, sometimes confiscated their property, tarred and feathered those who spoke against the Revolution, and made them swear oaths of allegiance. Many loyalists went back to Britain, but more went to Canada.
Ist Continental Congress (Philadelphia in September 1774) • 55 delegates (including John and Samuel Adams, John Hancock, Patrick Henry, and Richard Henry Lee) from 12 colonies (Georgia was the exception) met in Philadelphia to discuss what to do. Most of the delegates were not yet ready for Independence. Pennsylvanian Joseph Galloway proposed a grand colonial council made up of delegates from each colony. Acts passed by either the council or Parliament would be subject to the approval of the other body.
2nd Continental Congress • May, 1775 – Delegates passed the “Olive Branch” petition that pledged loyalty to the King and asked him to break with the ministers who were plotting against the colonists. As they denied the right of Parliament to legislate in the colonies, the colonists increasingly came to identify the King as their spokesmen in the mother country. • Even as they issued the “Olive Branch Petition,” the 2nd Continental Congress also issued “Declaration of the Causes and Necessities of Taking Up Arms.”
2nd Continental Congress (continued) • After the battles of Lexington, Concord, and Bunker Hill, the 2nd Continental Congress appointed George Washington as Commander of the Continental Army. The delegates also appointed fourteen other generals and authorized the invasion of Canada. Note: Congress authorized the invasion of Canada before it declared independence.
George Washington Takes Command
Washington takes control of the Continental Army • Summer of 1775 • Washington’s prior service – Regimental colonel for the Virginia colony, but denied a commission in the British army. British historians like to say that had Washington been given a commission in the British Army that he might have fought to quell the rebellion. Fought in the French and Indian War. Served with Braddock and then under General John Forbes. Washington had never moved large numbers of troops or conducted a siege on a fortified position. He had been retired from the military for fifteen years. • Washington was supported by John Adams because he realized that it would help bring in some Southerners who were suspicious of the fanaticism of Massachusetts’ delegates. Having Washington as commander helped to cement the union. • Washington attended Congress in uniform. • Though hardly unknown, Washington was not yet an American hero in 1776. But by 1779, Americans are celebrating Washington’s Birthday. • Washington is often derided as not being an intellectual on par with Hamilton, Madison, or Jefferson, but he learned quickly, was extraordinarily disciplined and mastered areas of knowledge as he needed, and was in a number of ways quite progressive. One of his first decisions as commander of the Continental Army was to have his troops inoculated for small pox. Joseph Ellis suggests that this was one of his most important decisions.
Washington (continued) • Commanded tremendous respect. Earned as a result of his dress, conduct, physical prowess (including height, strength, grace, and appearance), and even more self-command, determination, and character. The flip side to this is that he is sometimes characterized as wooden. He was tall and always impeccably dressed. He was also extremely strong and one of the best horsemen of his day. He loved fox hunting and did so for hours. He also loved to dance and did so with great ease and impression.
Washington’s Physical Strength (Story of Charles Wilson Peale) • “One afternoon, several young gentlemen, visitors at Mount Vernon, and myself engaged in pitching the bar, one of the athletic sports common in those times, when suddenly the Colonel appeared among us. He requested to be shown the pegs that marked the bounds of our effort; then, smiling, and without putting off his coat, held out his hand for the missile. No sooner did the heavy iron bar feel the grasp of his mighty hand than it lost the power of gravitation, and whizzed through the air, striking the ground far, very far, beyond our utmost limits. We were indeed amazed, as we stood around all stripped to the buff, with shirt sleeves rolled up, and having thought ourselves very clever fellows, while the Colonel, on retiring, pleasantly observed, “When you beat my pitch, young gentlemen, I’ll try again.” Quoted in Garry Wills, Cincinnatus: George Washington and the Enlightenment (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Co., 984), xxii.
Washington’s Character (Washington as Cato) • Washington loved the theater and his favorite play was Joseph Addison’s “Cato” which he had performed for his soldiers at Valley Forge. This was a very popular play among Revolutionary leaders and probably the source of Nathan Hale’s dying words, “I regret that I have but one life to live for my country” The play contains the lines “what pity it is/ That we can die but once to serve our country.” It is also probably the source of Patrick Henry’s famous declaration “Give me liberty or give me death.” In 1775, Patrick Henry said "I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!“ In Act 2, Scene 4, Cato says “It is not now a time to talk of aught. But chains or conquest, liberty or death.” • In Addison’s play, Cato the Younger, is a Roman Senator who refuses to submit to the tyranny of Julius Caesar and is exiled to Utica where he and his allies await an invasion from Roman soldiers. Cato exemplifies sound judgment, morality, dignity, and cunning in dealing with a group of traitors who surround him. He is eventually a martyr for liberty. There is little doubt that Washington modeled himself on Cato, indeed lived the play, and punctuated his correspondence with lines from it. His favorite line was “'Tis not in mortals to command success, But we'll do more, Sempronius, we'll deserve it.”
Washington’s Character (“His Excellency, George Washington”) • Early in the war, the British tried to treat American soldiers and commanders as riotous British citizens, not equal combatants from a recognized nation who were guaranteed the rights of war. In 1776, General Howe tried such a tactic with Washington by sending him a letter under flag of truce entitled “George Washington Esq.” Washington refused to read or sign it. After seeking advice from his fellow officers, he decided that he would receive correspondence only under the title “His Excellency, George Washington. This is how he came to be called by that title.
Washington’s Hold on His Men • Washington inspired to such a degree that he rarely had to command, but he could raise fear in the hearts of men and he did not accept being treated familiarly by many. One story, perhaps apocryphal but certainly illuminating of all involved, is told of an offer that Alexander Hamilton extended to Gouvernor Morris. Hamilton told Morris that he would buy him dinner if Morris would slap Washington on the back and say “My dear General, I am glad to see you looking so well.” Morris slapped Washington on the back and won the bet, but he later said that the stare that Washington gave him made it the worst day of his life and he would not do it again for a thousand dinners.
Washington’s Generals • Nathaniel Greene- Rhode Islander who proved himself in battle and to George Washington and became one of Washington’s chief advisers. In 1780, Greene took over command of the Southern Department and was remarkably successful in the counterinsurgency against British successes in the South. • Benedict Arnold – Led parts of the Canadian campaign at the beginning of the war. Made a miraculous and famous journey to Quebec up the Kennebec to capture Fort Ticonderoga. Later, Arnold was wounded at the Battle for Quebec. Given command of Philadelphia in 1778, but then court-martialed in 1779 because of corruption in his army. Acquitted of most charges, he was given command of the military fort at West Point in 1780. Involved in the traitorous plot to turn West Point over to the British army for twenty thousand pounds and a military commission. Fought for the British in Virginia in the southern campaign and died as an infamous traitor in England. • Horatio Gates – Washington’s rival. Attempted to have him replaced with himself. “Conway Cabal.” Becomes the Hero of Saratoga but the goat of Camden. • Charles Lee – Washington’s “unoffical” second in command and another rival. Had expected to be named the commander in chief of the American cause, but wanted compensation for English property that he owed. Also, very coarse, sloppy, and untutored. Extremely critical of Washington and directly disobeyed him at Monmouth – an action for which he was court-martialed, though later reinstated. • Henry Knox – rotund, jocular, but immensely successful commander who came to Washington’s attention early in the war and became his friend. Captured cannons at Fort Ticonderoga and then dragged them 300 miles across streams and up mountains to Boston in one of the most heroic feats of the war. The positioning of these cannons on Dorchester Heights persuaded the British to leave Boston. Fought along Washington in most of the most important early battles of the war, including New York and New Jersey campaigns. Was in charge of Washington’s crossing of the Delaware. • Israel Putnam – Colorful folk –hero of the American Revolution. Instrumental in planning and battle at Bunker Hill. Retreated at Long Island.
Washington’s Army • The ordinary troops in Washington’s army were mostly farmers and craftsmen. As David McCullough emphasizes in 1776, they knew hard work and were extremely resourceful. They also proved to be much braver than the British, who hold them in contempt, expected. One problem that the American army faced – even in its leadership – was extreme regional prejudices. Northern and southern leaders and rank and file often do not get along and explain their differences in terms of regional alignments.
