Showing posts with label military. Show all posts
Showing posts with label military. Show all posts

05 September 2009

Dorchester Heights (Part 1)

Where Are We?



The first thing I did when I was looking at this chapter was try to figure out where they were talking about. I was surprised at how tricky that was! Of course, then I got distracted, and when I came back I googled again and it came right up this time. Go fig. Anyway, here's this map of Boston from 1775. And here's the map of present-day Boston. You'll have to zoom in about 3 times, plus recenter the map a bit in order to get the scale to be more or less the same. The countryside that the army was camped in is now part of the city. Dorchester Heights is now just another historic neighborhood in Boston, rather than a separate entity. My the difference a few hundred years can make! But it's nice to know where we are talking about.


View Larger Map


Englishmen

There is a striking difference between the relationship between England and the colonies then, and the relationship of England and America now. On page 77 McCullough talks about the men that England sent to command the troops sent to put down the rebellion.


Clinton, Howe's second-in-command, was the least impressive in appearance, a short, fat, colorless man who could be shy and petulant. But he had a keen military mind and the advantage of knowing Americans from boyhood. He had grown up in New York, where his father, Admiral George Clinton, served as governor from 1741 to 1751.


Quite a few of them had served in the French and Indian War, some owned land in "the Americas," and relations seem to be generally cozier then than they are now. This is, of course, to be expected. England was the seat of the colonies' government, the parent state, the people's homeland. But somehow I'd grown up with the impression that you were either in England or you were in America. (Think of Ever After, with it's "You are forthwith stripped of your titles and sentenced to be shipped to the Americas..." like so much baggage. And certainly not a round trip!) The book makes it sound like there was much more moving back and forth, at least among the well-connected and well-to-do, than I had previously been aware of. More like the way the various stories (and here I'm thinking Secret Garden) talk about English officers and their families going to India, but then coming back for school and marriage and whatever. England, the place, remained an important part of an Englishman's life, even if he did happen to be living in the colonies. It makes the Loyalists' position make more sense. Not that I agree, just that it makes more sense. They were Englishmen. Really, truly. It wasn't until they felt King George betrayed them that the colonists fought for independency. And even then, not all of them agreed; some remained loyal to the crown.


Fort Ticonderoga


Fort Ticonderoga was a fort built on a narrow section of Lake Champlaign in New York. It had been strategically important in previous conflicts between Britain and France, and now was the starting point of some very heroic action in the Revolutionary War. Originally it had been a French fort, but had been captured by the British in the French and Indian War. Americans then held it from shortly after the Battle of Lexington and Concord until 1777, including the time we are considering in our book, though at this time it was in some disrepair. The cannon and other armaments were transported to Boston by Henry Knox, in a move that proved decisive in ending the seige of Boston in the Americans' favor.

I was really impressed with Knox's achievement! Knox was not what you think of when you picture a military hero:


Colonel Henry Knox was hard not to notice. Six feet tall, he bulked large, weighing perhaps 250 pounds. He had a booming voice. He was gregarious, jovial, quick of mind, highly energetic - "very fat, but very active" - and all of twenty five. ... To further complicate life, Knox had taken up the patriot cause and fallen in love with the daughter of a prominent Tory. ... In the tense days following the bloodshed at Lexington and Concord, the young couple packed up what little they could carry and slipped out of Boston in disguise.

It was Henry Knox who first suggested the idea of going after the cannon at far-off Fort Ticonderoga on Lake Champlain, an undertaking so enormous, so fraught with certain difficulties, that many thought it impossible. ... When Knox told Washington he was confident the guns could be retrieved and hauled overland to Boston, Washington agreed at once, and put the young officer in charge of the expedition. (Page58-59)



So off Henry goes, taking his younger brother William with him and sending a letter to his wife with the encouraging news that he should not be facing any fighting on this assignment. But fighting is not the only difficulty to be considered in war time!

First, there's winter. They start this little trip in mid-November. Brrrr! Then, there's distance. On present-day highways the most direct route is 223 miles and 4 hours. But they didn't have highways and they did have snow, thaws, freezes, and more snow, boats, forty-two sleds, eighty yoke of oxen, and a need for stealth and speed. The book says the distance they actually covered was nearly 300 miles. What an undertaking! Here we see one of the advantages of the American army's willingness - necessity for - doing things unorthodoxly. In the English army a junior officer, of low birth and so young, would likely not have been able to get his scheme approved. Knox, however, was in the American army which was not in a position to be choosy about where their talent came from or looked like, so long as it was loyal. So he went. And his cannon were the decisive point which broke the stalemate at Boston.

To Be Continued...

27 May 2009

His Majesty the King

I borrowed the illustrated edition of our book from the library, and this picture of King George (now in the public domain) was one of the first pictures in the book, preceded only by George Washington. I am sure that His Majesty the King would not have approved such placement, though of all the royalty that I have read about (not that the list is long), King George seems the most real. The least caught by the power of the throne, the closest to what would make, in my own mind, a good King. King George is definitely going to be making an appearance in my Book of Centuries.

I love the description of the King's procession (and the picture in the illustrated edition!), though I've had to look up a number of the different things described: Horse Grenadiers, which are a sort of mounted infantry that fights with explosives, Royal Horse Guards (pictured below, right), and the Yeomen of the Guard (below left), who, it turns out, are the Monarch's bodyguards and the oldest existing British Military unit. In honor of this, they still wear the old Tudor style uniform. Today, the Yeomen are strictly ceremonial, though the Wikipedia article makes it sound like they were much more functional in the time of King George III.


One thing that I find terribly interesting about King George is that both 1776 and the Wikipedia entry for him paint him as a good and honorable man. Faithful to his queen, conscientious in his duties both as a King and a Father. I find it interesting that a man trying so hard to live in a way pleasing to God would be the man to preside over the American Revolution. Of course, just like there is more to our government than the President, there is more to the English government than the King.

As interesting as the King is there are other folks, both familiar and unfamiliar to me, mentioned in this chapter. Here is a selection, though I find that Kate is right and there are a LOT of guys just mentioned around here!

Lord Sandwich, First Lord of the Admiralty, yes, that Lord Sandwich. Turns out that the Sandwich Islands (now Hawaii) were named after him. Lord Sandwich was confident of the defeat of the colonists, saying they were "raw, undisciplined, cowardly men.(Page 19, illus. ed.)"

James Grant, Laird of Ballindalloch (General James Grant in our book), a Scottish lord and member of the House of Commons, former Governor of Florida, and an officer during the French and Indian War. He also fought in the Caribbean in the Seven Years' War. The thing that I find interesting about him is that he had actually been to the American Colonies, and still boasted that "with 5,000 British regulars he could march from one end of the American continent to the other. (ibid)" Wikipedia expands on this claim, quoting him as saying that he could go from one end of the continent to the other and geld all the males. Nice guy, eh? He went on to create plans for Battle of Brooklyn, and Battle of White Plains, both British victories, but in both cases George Washington and enough of his army escaped to continue the war.

The colonies had their supporters in Parliament. These included John Wilkes, that is, John Wilkes, Lord Mayor of London, who appears to have been quite the character, in addition to supporting the cause of the colonies. Our book calls him "flamboyant;" he was thrice expelled from Parliament after he wrote a pornographic poem, and he had a reputation as a rake.

Edmund Burke, considered the father of modern conservatism, was another gentleman who weighed in in favor of the colonies. An interesting tidbit about him: Burke was Irish and Protestant, but his political enemies kept trying to get folks to think that he was Catholic (as some members of his family were) in order to disqualify him from public service.

After he talks about the people, he starts getting more into talking about the events. Here, I found that I needed a timeline. I added a bunch of the dates to my Book of Centuries, and brushed up on Lexington & Concord's "Shot Heard 'Round the World."


This is Battle of Bunker Hill by John Trumbull, one of his "history" paintings of the Revolutionary War. It's depicting the death of General Joseph Warren. It's included in the illustrated edition, and my first thought upon looking at was: war is a terrible thing.

McCullough mentions an "Olive Branch Petition" rejected by His Majesty, but says very little about it. I found this article at Wikipedia, in addition to the full text. It's interesting to see how people talk to the king. Such bowing and scraping! Here is a sample:


Thus called upon to address your Majesty on affairs of such moment to America, and probably to all your Dominions, we are earnestly desirous of performing this office with the utmost deference for your Majesty; and we therefore pray, that your Majesty's royal magnanimity and benevolence may make the most favourable constructions of our expressions on so uncommon an occasion. Could we represent in their full force the sentiments that agitate the minds of us your dutiful subjects, we are persuaded your Majesty would ascribe any seeming deviation from reverence in our language, and even in our conduct, not to any reprehensible intention, but to the impossibility of reconciling the usual appearance of respect with a just attention to our own preservation against those artful and cruel enemies who abuse your royal confidence and authority, for the purpose of effecting our destruction.




So many times, things could have gone another way. A confidential letter from John Adams was intercepted and arrived in London about the same time as the Olive Branch Petition, undermining it. The King actually announced that the colonists were in a state of rebellion & seeking independence, before the colonial leaders themselves had openly said anything about it. Looking at all this with the Book of Mormon in mind, and the way that Nephi talks about the "Gentiles who had gone forth out of captivity" and their conflict with their "Mother Gentiles," I have always thought of the was as being a single event with a rather foregone conclusion, in spite of having studied US History relatively closely in high school. But it becomes apparent here that the conclusion was, at this point, far from foregone. These people all had their agency. Yes, the Spirit was working with those who would listen, and the final outcome was known to the Lord beforehand, but that's not the same as the "fated to be" view that I've often taken.