Myths of the American Revolution

Myths of the American Revolution
A noted historian debunks the conventional wisdom about America's War of Independence

by John Ferling


We think we know the Revolutionary War. After all, the American Revolution and the war that accompanied it not only determined the nation we would become but also continue to define who we are. The Declaration of Independence, the Midnight Ride, Valley Forge—the whole glorious chronicle of the colonists’ rebellion against tyranny is in the American DNA. Often it is the Revolution that is a child’s first encounter with history.

Yet much of what we know is not entirely true. Perhaps more than any defining moment in American history, the War of Independence is swathed in beliefs not borne out by the facts. Here, in order to form a more perfect understanding, the most significant myths of the Revolutionary War are reassessed.

more...

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/Myths-of-the-American-Revolution.html

What? Gen. Washington wasn't such a brilliant tactician and strategist? Saved by Rochambeau in the South? Heaven forfend!

Saratogo wasn't exactly the turning point of the war? What will our magical ideas about revolutionary war battles come to?

Britain really coulda won? O my god.


Happy New Year!

Sue

The situation with Washington wasn't that he wasn't a good tactician and strategist, but that at the outset, he didn't know how to properly fight the kind of war that needed to be waged. Very few people did. Washington, like most officers, was trained in the European style of open-field warfare, with his only other experience being frontier warfare during the French & Indian War. Consequently Washington made some blunders, mostly at the outset, by returning to his instincts to fight a face-to-face European style war. Consequently, part of what made Washington a success was being able to recognize his own limits, and rely on the skills of others. That included his general staff, and also others like Nathanael Greene and Daniel Morgan, who were directly responsible for some of the major battles and campaigns. He never completely overcame the impulse, but in the later part of the war he did mostly avoid any costly mistakes, sometimes by virtue of listening to the ideas of people around him instead of going with his own instincts. For instance, at Yorktown Washington had originally intended a frontal assault, but changed to a siege on the advice of his subordinates and the French.

without pay and was only reimbursed for expenses. These expenses were so high (and wasteful) that when he offered the same terms as President the congress turned him down and gave him a salary and budget.
True, anyone?

and whoever comes out on top gets to write the history their way

that it considered more important that the young colonies in the America's, it would have squashed the Americans States like bugs. As it was they send the dregs of their superb fighting machine over here, didn't equip them well and put incompetants in charge.

Face it, we got lucky.

Remember it was Franklin who pressed the French into going empire-against-empire with the British, which was what put them on the defensive all over their territory.

In the end, it's one of the reasons they fall.

Get rid of some of your own myths!

You may not call the Brigade of Guards, The Royal Welch Fusiliers, or the 33rd Regiment of Foot dregs. They were superbly trained troops, equipped with state-of-the art weapons, and a quick grasp of adaptive tactics. Their officers were experienced and capable, and their courage was unmatched.

Viva la France! :) and a big thank you across the years to those soldiers that helped us..including the French Pirate John LaFeet who helped us as well. :)

John LaFeet a.k.a. Jean Laffite/Lafitte, the (probably) French-born pirate who joined Andrew Jackson to defend New Orleans in 1815, or to the Marquis de Lafayette, the French general who defied the orders of his own king to fight with the American colonists? Laffite wasn't born until (probably) 1776.



Tansy Gold

I mean Lafayette who helped us during the revolution. Still John LaFeet also helped us.
So again I say...thank you to the French. :)

Don't you know it's forbidden on DU to ever admit you've made a mistake?



:sarcasm:


:hi:



Tansy Gold, who never makes mistakes

I may not be right but I'm never wrong.

Happy new year :)

In 1776, in what is now the United States, there were 15 British colonies -- the 13 you always hear of plus the crown colonies of East Florida and West Florida, with capitals at St Augustine and Pensacola. These two colonies elected to remain loyal to Britain, and hence were later written completely out of the history books. And East Florida was very important as a refuge for fleeing loyalists from the rebel Southern colonies, so important that Continental troops from Georgia launched three invasions to try to capture St Augustine, all of which failed. And the main British unit defending East Florida was ironically the 60th Regiment of Foot, the "Royal Americans," an elite loyalist American regiment.

want to consider why Arnold defected. He took his troops up the Kennebec to Quebec and had he succeeded Canada would be part of the US. His capability as a general has been often overlooked.

- Benedict Arnold was one of the best field commanders the Continental Army had, basically single-handedly winning the Saratoga campaign.

- There were some 200 American loyalist regular and militia units fighting alongside the British at one point or other during the war, and at one point there were more loyalist Americans in uniform than rebels.

- Canadians formed several pro-American regiments and one of them, the 2nd Canadian, earned the honorific title "Congress' Own Regiment" for its valor in the New York theater; it was the only regiment so honored by an act of Congress during the war.

- So many loyalist American refugees fled to Canada that their descendants make up over 70% of the modern population there today. The city of York (Toronto) was founded by a regiment of loyalist American veterans who left after the war.

- France's entry into the war brought their ally Spain in as well, and the Spanish fleet was instrumental is seizing control of the Gulf of Mexico and the Mississippi River, pinning the Royal Navy's Caribbean Squadron in-place and preventing a British attack on the rebel colonies from the west via the Mississippi, which was being planned.

- Vermont wasn't one of the thirteen colonies, but still existed as a separate entity during the war. As the "Republic of Vermont" it broke away from New York and declared itself a separate country, and while not represented in the Continental Congress, considered itself an ally of the United States. Vermont remained a separate country until nearly 1800.

Lots more interesting things like this that most history books ignore and most people are never taught in school, which in my opinion is sad and is far more interesting than the black-and-white cartoon version of the Revolutionary War that we learn as children.

This was as much a civil war as a war for Independence. This was a war between the farmers and laborers against the rich who sided with the Tories and wanted no part of freedom and liberty. They are referred to in the article as loyalists, but this was a war between liberals like Jefferson and Franklin against the conservative tea merchants and their ilk. That is why it especially galls me when our current teabaggers try to claim revolutionary heritage when in fact they would be more like Benedict Arnold who sold out his country when he fell in love with a rich Tory's daughter.

Its more a filling in the gaps of history piece than a "debunking" thing, which is more interesting anyway.

One thing about Washington I hadn't heard - that his renown as a "military genius" was somewhat based on the success of plans originating from French strategists, while at the same time he avoided responsibility for set-backs due to his own indecision and inexperience.

Legends and lies grow up around the truth, but it's not even close to all being a lie, especially as we move closer to the more closely examined events like the Declaration of Independence. There's poor writing and bad scholarship, to be sure, but the facts are out there for serious inquirers and known to them.