War – American History to 1877

March 17, 2014

The War of 1812 and Western Expansion

Warning: Undefined variable $num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 126

Warning: Undefined variable $posts_num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 127

In chapter five of his The Rise of American Democracy, Wilentz convincingly debunked myths that the War of 1812 amounted to nothing more than a waste of resources. Declaring it a “bungled, needless, and costly effort,” while not a ludicrous accusation since the war was costly and messy, misses some important points (88). America had the worst of its troubles in the early stages of war, and even if the burning of Washington proved a “symbolic embarrassment,” it was followed by a number of accomplishments. The fledgling country displayed “skillful management of war debt,” returned many captured Americans to their homes, and at last established vital international credibility (88). While America did not win the war, I agree with Wilentz that this conflict was a pivotal moment in American history nonetheless. America had finally proven itself a viable nation amongst the other world powers. I therefore respectfully disagree with Charlotte’s assertion that the war was unproductive and accomplished little to nothing. I do not think Wilentz was attempting to argue this point, for he seemed more focused on providing counterarguments to similar statements from other historians. Instead, Wilentz identified the Indians and Federalists as the “losers” of the war while maintaining that it was an important success for the nation at large (88).

Wilentz also did an excellent job tracing the decline of the Federalist Party. I knew the party’s influence waned as the war they had failed to support drew to a close, followed by the so-called “era of good feelings,” but I was unaware of Federalist activity during the early stages of the war. Indeed, early on in the war, neither the outcome nor the level of support for the Federalist Party was yet clear. Many were, for good reason, skeptical of the war, and it was not clear until later that the Federalist Party would inevitably decline. As Wilentz described, Madison held a “vulnerable” position and incredibly limited military resources (77). Until Madison secured Pennsylvania in the election, DeWitt Clinton had a legitimate chance of winning the presidency and weakening the Democratic-Republican Party’s influence.

The outcome of the war is what ultimately solidified the Democratic Republican Party and doomed the Federalists to “political isolation” (80). I agree with Wilentz’s interpretation here, and I believe it raises the question: what if the war had ended differently? How might the political parties have been affected? Even in the last stages of the war, Madison was eager to proceed with peace negotiations due to a threat of secession from the New England Federalists. I cannot help wondering if the Federalist threat was a very real one, or if the Democratic-Republican Party would have emerged as the sole political party even under different circumstances. Thomas claimed in his blog post that the Democratic-Republicans’ ability to “grasp political power,” unlike the Federalists, defined the subsequent era in American politics. I would need to think about the issue more extensively before arriving to such a conclusion. Especially in an era where political parties were virtually nonexistent, exactly how important was the winner of this struggle? Would a Federalist rise to power have changed everything or almost nothing?

As for Frederick Jackson Turner’s suggestion that the frontier defines much of American history, this exact thesis was the focus of my American history class a few years ago. I may even have read excerpts from this same article, although I cannot be sure. At any rate, it’s an idea to which I have already devoted a great deal of thought, and I think it is a very useful way to approach American history. The best way to study history, in my mind, is to take a number of different approaches. Giving careful consideration to Turner’s argument alongside other viewpoints ultimately provides the best sense of history, one that encompasses a variety of theses.

February 16, 2014

The Changing Role of the Indians

As Taylor says, both the French and English realized that the help of the Indians would be essential in the battles over colonial territory. The Indians could prove most useful and to lose their support would also hinder a side greatly. The French were out numbered and tried very hard to win the favor of the Indians. The English were less friendly, but non the less tried to gain favor as well. The support of the Indians gave to the Indians a bit of power, at least until their services were no longer needed.

The Indians were able to gain some power as their services were needed. Both the French and English saw that the Indians were essential and so they had to ask for help. This help came in a few forms, mostly better trade agreements for the Indians. Many tribes helped both sides. Taylor mentions that Indians had to ask themselves which trade would prove more favorable before choosing a side. The English had better goods for decent prices, but they were not as welcoming as the French, who were not as well off trading wise. So the Indians basically had to choose between better goods, or better relations.

The Indians thrived at gorilla warfare, a type of warfare that many were resistant to change to. The officers of the British armies much preferred the open field battles they were used to and often fell easily to the Indians attacking in the woods. For this reason the English worried about the use of Indian soldiers. The Indian advantage of the French could not, however, overcome the superior numbers of the English and their colonists.

As the war progressed and ended the Indians lost any of the power they may have gained by allying with either power. As Wang points out in the last post, the Colonists started to see all Indians as the enemy, even those who were in good relations with them. Colonists would openly attack or kill Indians of any tribe for any reason. Such men also would be free from persecution. This new attitude towards the Indians on the colonial front meant almost constant bloodshed and increasing costs to the British empire. The colonists’ desire for new land and their attitude towards the Indians, led them to take more and more land.

The Indians profited initially from the conflict between the French and English, but as time passed their power was diminished to an even lower margin than before the conflict began. This change of power showed the Indians the true intentions of the colonists and gave insight to the future relations with them. Parliament tried to stop the conflicts by restricting the growth of the colonies westward, but that was not enough to deter the desires of the colonists. The Seven Years War, and the following conflicts, set the fate of the Indians as one filled with conflicts with the English and, to a lesser extent, the French colonists.

February 16, 2014

Britain’s Rise To Power

In Chapter 18 of American Colonies, Taylor focuses on Britain’s conflicts and wars, particularly with the French and Spanish. He clearly outlines Britain’s ascent to power in the New World, paying particular attention to their dominance of the trade industry with the native peoples. As Taylor states, the British simply offered superior goods to the French and Spanish at extremely fair prices. While the French treated the native people with more respect, tribes were forced to barter with the British in order to procure their superior merchandise.

I feel as if the post “Colonial Origins of the American Dream,” does a good job on focusing in on Taylor’s main argument in this chapter. Throughout the narrative, Taylor clearly highlights the rise of British dominance in the New World. After the 7 years war with the French, the British clearly set themselves apart from the French and Spanish as the premiere colonial power. Ultimately, the British invested the most capital into establishing a firm base of colonies in North America, and inevitably they reaped the rewards. Their trade industry flourished and their capital increased, which allowed the British army and navy to reach a new level of dominance.

Taylor does a particularly good job of highlighting the role of Native Americans in Chapter 18. I found the change of their allegiances to the British and the French fascinating, as well as their eventual decline in power. Previously, I failed to realize how much the Native Americans played the British and the French off of each other in order to maintain relevance in North America. As Taylor shows, the Natives played a key role in advising the French and British military leaders. Moreover, although many Native Americans shifted their allegiance to the French, without the expertise of native guides the British never would have mastered warfare in North America. However, with the defeat of the French, Native Americans lost much of their power, as they now relied solely on the British for trade opportunities. Something the British ruthlessly exploited to their benefit.

Overall, I feel as Taylor does a fantastic job of describing Britain’s ascent to prowess in the New World. Although, as mentioned in other posts, he forsakes his previous style of a social narrative for more of a direct military history in Chapter 18, I find the change of pace refreshing. He clearly allows the reader to understand how economics, native relations, and social policy played a role in Britain’s domination of North America. Additionally, in this chapter he does a good job of foreshadowing colonial independence, paying particular attention to taxes and the free spirit of the 13 colonies.

February 16, 2014

Military History in the New World

This is the first time Taylor describes the New World’s conflicts in great details. Like Rebecca said in her previous posts, American Colonies reads more like a social history, but this chapter shifts gear and presents us with the standard military history. Moreover, this chapter sets the stage for the Independence War, like Max suggested in his post. For someone who is not really familiar with colonial American history while reading the first couple of pages, I was hoping that the Native American would rise up and take advantage of the chaotic situation to claim their land. Instead, the conflict prepared for more British colonization and eventual dominance in the region via the American Revolutionary War.

The huge disparity in number of soldiers between France and England made the natives play an important role in the balance of power within North America. They were skilled at guerrilla warfare so they dominated the forest passages between the rival empires. They also exploited the strategic position between the French and the British colonies by receiving favorable prices and presents from both sizes. The French were more diplomatic and generous with the Indians because they needed them as allies to counter the British colonial numbers. However, the British offered better trade goods in better qualities and prices, obligating more Indians to make peace with British officials to obtain more goods. Therefore, the French lost the war without enough combatants; it was 75,000 French men versus 1.2 million English soldiers.

After the English defeated the French, they treated all Indians as their enemies and believed it was a waste of money to sell low priced goods to them. In 1761, British colonial forces invaded the Cherokee country, one of the largest tribe with 40 villages in the southern Appalachian Mountains. As British colonizers enjoyed their victories, English Parliament had to institute more taxes to compensate for the massive debt it incurred. Consequently, it tightened its policies to the colonizers. As some of the colonists travelled back to their homeland, they realized how much liberty and freedom they had enjoyed over the years. The imperial war actually made the British colonizers realize their own power and ideal of establishing a free society. Again, from defeating the French and colonizing the natives, the British colonizers had gained tremendous confidence in their own ability to survive in the New World. Therefore, the war to fight for independence was inevitable.

February 16, 2014

War War War

This chapter focuses on the imperial policy of Britain. As I read, it seemed to me that a lot of tension was occurring in North America. Between the English, French, Spanish, and the Indians, some sort of war was almost always occurring. Taylor mentioned the Seven Years War, one of the first in America. This war began as a competition between France and Britain. They constantly tried to outdo each other by building bigger forts. Here we first hear about George Washington. It is cool to see how the presidents come to power, because I know very little about them. It is ironic that his first battle was a failure and that he barely made it out alive.

Leadership is extremely important in war. Taylor talked about Edward Braddock, a leader for the British. He was known to be arrogant, and said about the Indians, “These savages may, indeed, be a formidable enemy to your raw American militia, but upon the king’s regular and disciplined troops, sir, it is impossible to believe they should make any impression.” (429) This inexperienced attitude led to a defeat by the Indians and the French, setting the British back. William Pitt took over, and turned it around. Overall, Britain destroyed France, and obtained land in Canada, the Great Lakes, the Ohio Valley, and Florida. Taylor mentioned that in some ways, the loser of the war benefited more than the winner. This paradoxical statement is true because Louisiana, New France, and Florida made France and Spain spend excessive amounts of money, and now they could focus on the more valuable colonies in the Caribbean.

Because of the abundance of war, Britain was in debt. They needed to make money, and North America had been seen as “virtually untaxed beneficiaries of imperial trade and protection.” (442) Britain believed that the colonists had had it too easy, and they should be taxed the same amount as the British people were. This started an antagonistic idea in the minds of the colonists. As my classmate mentioned below, this is the start of the American Dream. People immigrated to the New World in hopes of a better life. They wanted to work hard, and have property of their own. They wanted to have freedom. Once Britain started to tax them, this freedom diminished. These thoughts are the fundamental ideas for the America Revolution. I love learning about the revolution because it is so exciting to hear about an underdog feeling so passionate and eventually beating the biggest, wealthiest nation in the world.

January 29, 2014

Old Conflict and New Order

Today’s reading is particularly interesting because it zoomed in on the specific events happened between English colonizers and Native Americans, which demonstrated the English brutal colonial approach. Then on the other end of the spectrum, chapter 12 described diversity in middle colonies that embraced differences among various ethnic groups and foreshadowed American’s future as a melting pot.

When the New English first immigrated to the New World, they tried to dominate the natural world, wild animals, and Native Americans through various economic means. In particular, they recreated the English style landscape and converted the Indians to establish their identity as civilized Christians. In efforts to refine the Indians, the colonists introduced modern concepts of private property and mentality of capitalism to the New World by buying Indians’ land and offering goods in return for their marks on paper documents called deeds. Furthermore, they tried to subdivide the landscape into thousands of privately held properties and regarded the deeds as Indian submission to European dominion. On a more sophisticated level, the colonists extorted wampum from southern New England Indians to exchange for furs from Maine in order to finance their continued expansion. In order to “enlighten” the Indians religiously, the English colonizers established praying towns with close surveillance to change their behavior and appearance. These various economic exploitation and religious subjugation planted seeds for imminent armed conflicts between the New English and the Indians. Since the Native Americans lack a collective identity as “Indians”, the natives operated in a fragmented way and were prone to English manipulation. For example, the English manipulated various tribal groups to provoke the King Philip’s War, the first civil war among the Indians. The conflict killed approximately a thousand English colonists and about three thousand Indians. By 1670, the 52,000 New England colonists outnumbered the Southern New England Indians by three to one. Other than the King Philip’s War, the English provoked many regional conflicts by giving fake promises and manipulating different tribes. These incidents clearly indicated that the English were experienced political entrepreneurs and colonizers, which contributed to the title of ”the empire on which the sun never sets” because they had been so effective at exterminating the local population and maximizing economic interests.

On the other hand, the mid-Atlantic colonies were more accepting and friendly toward different groups. The land was more promising than the initial colonies along the coast for cultivating grain and raising livestock. In addition, the region was not controlled by an exclusive power rather it was colonized by both the Dutch and the English. In particular, the Dutch established a republican government, naval power and had a high religious toleration. The Dutch captured huge economic interests by exporting sugar from American plantations and conducting slave trade from West Africa. Interestingly, Dutch also had the one of the greatest national wealth and the highest standard of living in Europe—they were extremely good at doing business and were least interested in mass migration to the Americas compared to English and Spanish. Unlike the English or the French, the Dutch made no missionary effort and considered mission work as unnecessary expenses. They told the Indians that they were brothers and joined together with chains as long as there was beaver trade. Thanks to the religious tolerance, middle colonies received dissident Puritans. The Dutch territories attracted a variety of peoples: Swedes, Norwegians, Finns and etc. Furthermore, the enslaved Africans were able to preserve their traditional beliefs. The overarching theme in the middle colonies is diversity and that allowed various beliefs and economic activities to thrive. It signified that the Great British colonial approach may not be the only way of life in the New World and different groups could coexist.