Chapter 3 - Finally they get a Break!

Whew! Finally I finished this chapter! Yay for all that travel time, sitting around, that allowed me to buckled down and finish.

Such an exciting chapter! I was intrigued by the differences between the attitudes of the two armies' leadership and manner of promoting people. In the British army, if you had title, rank and money, you would be promoted. In the Americans' army, it was whoever was on hand who seemed like they could probably be counted on to step up to the plate.

Also, the British army had set regulations, set ways of attacking and defending; tried and true and that's the way it was. The American army, at a distinct disadvantage, was forced to think outside the box. Consequently, they had much more innovative methods, theories and ideas that would influenced their fighting. For example, Henry Knox convinced a crew to go with him to Ticonderoga and get those guns and, despite what could have justifiably been crippling difficulty, he successfully brought every single one home. That feat not only gave the American soldiers hope, it gave the army a fighting chance at success.

For the last couple chapters, the author has been painting a bleak, bleak picture. The Americans are significantly out-maned, the soldiers are sick and still not very orderly. The shortage of gun powder is causing General Washington to lose sleep and there isn't an expected break in sight. It's felt like, with the narrative, he's been leading up to something.. or at least something had to give, and finally it did.

The standoff outside of Boston had dragged on until spring with neither side making a move. After the heavy loss at Buncker Hill, Dorchester Heights remained empty, a "high, windblown no-mans land, neither side unmindful of its strategic importance, but neither side daring to seize and fortify it."

However, once the guns from Ticonderoga arrived, a new energy blew throughout the American camp; now they could consider making a move. Rufus Putnam, a resourceful lieutenant colonel, came up with the idea to build defensive structures off site and then assemble them in a single night on top of the Heights. Washington's council of war determined that it was the best option available and set about making it happen.

It was a complicated procedure, with many opportunities for the British to notice and take the Heights before the Americans could secure it. To prevent this, Washington cut off all correspondence to Boston so that the word would not leak out. Also, to cover the sound of the construction and assembly, the armies exchanged vollies of fire.

Records indicate a couple instances where the movements of the Americans were noticed and even reported. It seems clear that, if the news had fallen on more energetic ears, the Americans' efforts would have been discovered:

1- According to the diary of one British officer, a few of the British did find out as early as February 29, from deserters and from a spy referred to only as "Junius," that the rebels intended to "bombard the town from Dorchester (pg. 90-91)."

2- At about 10:00pm on March 4, the night the Americans took Dorchester Highets, a British lieutenant colonel, Sir John Campbell, reported to Brigadier General Fancis Smith that the "rebels were at work on Dorchester Heights (pg. 93)."

But in both cases, nothing came of it and the American army took Dorchester Heights, and the British army, by complete surprise.

It seems so evident to me that the hand of the Lord had to have played an active part in all of these happenings and it seems that many who were there felt similarly:

"The night was unseasonably mild - indeed, perfectly beautiful with a full moon - ideal conditions for the work, as if the hand of the Almighty were directing things, which the Reverend William Gordon, like many others, felt certain it was. "A finer [night] for working could not have been taken out of the whole 365," he wrote. "It was hazy below [the Heights] so that our people could not be seen, though it was a bright moonlight night above the hills (pg. 92)."

I appreciate that Mr. McCullough doesn't shy away from including descriptions of the circumstances and quotes that seem to support that very idea.

It Gets Better

I had a hard time getting into the chapter. But once I got going, I could hardly put it down. I was up till 1:30 last night finishing the chapter, and had to discipline myself to stop and write before I read the next chapter.

Looks Interesting

I don't know if we want to officially participate, as in it's part of the "assignment" we set ourselves, but this General Conference "book club" looks interesting. Maybe we could do it on a when-we-get-to-it basis? What do you think?

Oi Oi!

Sadly, I haven't got much to say about 1776 today... Back in June (due to changes with work) I switched up my general day's schedule. When this happened, I thought it was rather a bother. (I miss that extra hour of sleep!!) However, there has been some good things that have come of it. Most notably, I've had more opportunities to read over my lunch hour. It's really great!! I've had two or three days where I've been able to read a chapter over lunch, with time to take notes and think about it too. (Amazing what one can do with an entire hour of undistracted quiet time!) However, it seems that it probably would have been a better idea to have brought my 1776 book to work rather than my Eleanor Roosevelt (E.R.) biography; all that progress I've been making has been in the E.R. book and I've nothing to write here about 1776!
**sheepish grin**

However, I believe we've talked about how we can use this blog to discuss/share any good or interesting book that we're reading, so I thought I'd post a little on this biography that I've been reading.

It's a very interesting read. The author has a written it with a very easy narrative that tells a compelling story. In the introduction she gave a brief overview of what the book would contain and the chapters (so far; I just finished chapter 3 yesterday) delve into much more detail of the various periods and events of her life.

I felt that the introduction had a bit of a feminist slant ("[E.R.'s] experiences as a woman caused her to appreciate the elements of empowerment, of shared power in partnership with others." -how do we know that just 'cuz she's a woman that that increased her appreciation of these things??) Really, on the whole, I don't object to any feminist elements; it would seem that would be a fitting view to take when looking at E.R., she was a powerful and empowered woman; also, and I understand that not everybody holds the same religious views that I do and I accept that, however, having sensed that slant or tone to the author's telling, I became more wary about accepting everything the author says at face value and my 'critical reading' became all the more critical.

Nevertheless, despite my mild concerns, as I've delved into the chapters and followed the author as she has outlined E.R.'s life so far, I haven't felt that things are too biased or slanted to exaggerate the good qualities of E.R. As far as I can tell -at this early stage- the narrative seems to remember to point out shortcomings or shortsighted behaviors as well as the good and the great.

So far, in the chapters that I've read, it tells about E.R.'s childhood. Her family was notable and wealthy, but her father was a raging alcoholic and her mother was young and "unprepared for life's sharp corners." In protecting and covering for her alcoholic husband, E.R.'s mother became withdrawn and bitter. She valued pretty and pleasant things and didn't make any secret that she felt that E.R. did not embody either of those attributes.

So far, my sympathies are definitely with E.R... and to hear the details of her dysfunctional family, it's a wonder that she was able to break the cycle and make anything of herself at all. Still.. part of me wonders if this is really an unbiased account, or did the author focus on the very bad elements of E.R.'s childhood so that we would come out admiring E.R. all the more?

Either way, I'm enjoying reading this book. Still.. Before I'm finished with my study of E.R., I intend to do some other reading, seek out other biographies, just to see how similar the tone/descriptions are to this one.

Siege at Boston

I found this chapter a bit harder to get into, but I think I've finally made it.

There's a siege at Boston. George Washington was there, trying to whip the soldier into shape so they would not only be a useful fighting force, but also they'd stop getting so sick. Sounds like conditions were terrible in part because folks weren't being at all careful about where they went to the bathroom. Gross. Already folks are dieing, in large part because they are not keeping clean, as mostly they have enough food still at this point.

I think that the most interesting bit from the whole chapter was how King George, by saying the colonies were in rebellion, convinced them - the colonists - of that fact. Prior to that point, even General Washington himself was hoping for reconciliation and a quick end to the conflict. This was news to me, and I find it amazing. Take home lesson from this seems to be: watch what you say! It's still 7 years from the point that Britain recognizes America's independence, but that speech proved to be a turning point in that news of it caused the Americans to make up their minds, en masse.

George Washington

Let me just say, WOW this chapter is just jam-packed with information!! Mr. McCullough certainly can pack it in there :) But it's all good. I really like that the tone of the book isn't too text-booky (or maybe my tolerance for these educational sort of books has dramatically increased since high school), either way, I feel like the author does a good job explaining things and, for the most part, introducing the people well enough that the reader can get a basic idea and follow the story without any problems, even if they're not already a history buff.

I ended up looking up a couple words that I was unfamiliar with:

Remunerative:

1.	to pay, recompense, or reward for work, trouble, etc.

2.	to yield a recompense for (work, services, etc.).

and also,

Cipher:

2.	any of the Arabic numerals or figures.

3.	Arabic numerical notation collectively.

4.	something of no value or importance.

5.	a person of no influence; nonentity.

6.	a secret method of writing, as by transposition or substitution of letters, specially formed symbols, or the like.

7.	writing done by such a method; a coded message.

So, in this chapter, we begin to get a real feeling for how dire the circumstances are for the American troops. They are appallingly low on powder, with little expectation of more. The troops are uneducated, unclean, and disinclined to accept orders they don't like. Initially, they were well fed (though price gouging came later), but with winter fast approaching, things looked grim.

In contrast, George Washington was the picture of order. He felt that it was imperative that the leader look and act the part. And while he was troubled by the condition of the troops and lack of powder, he never stopped trying to keep his and others' spirits up by reminding them of the goodness of their cause.

Much of the beginning of Chapter 2 is spent talking about the history of Washington and how he came to be the leader of the troops. Previous to reading this chapter, I really didn't know much by way of specific details on this man: He cut down a cherry tree but was honest.. he was a great leader.. a great president and the picture I have of him in my head comes from that painting Washington Crossing the Delaware River. Imagine my surprise when, through reading these chapters, I discovered that he was actually a bit of a dandy!

Ok, probably a more correct statement would be: he was a "Virginia Gentleman". He special ordered his clothes, his boots, his furniture, and the glass for his windows from England. He pretty much as "close to being an English country gentleman as was possible for an American of the day, and intentionally." In his time off between wars, he married a wealthy widow -Martha- and enjoyed very much the life of a plantation owner.

I found myself wondering what could possibly have made this man, who was so very much in love with England, become the leader of the rebellion against that very land? I didn't feel like Mr. McCullough satisfactorily answered that question, so I turned to some outside sources. First I read this article, that said:

Married to a widow, Martha Dandridge Custis, he devoted himself to a busy and happy life. But like his fellow planters, Washington felt himself exploited by British merchants and hampered by British regulations. As the quarrel with the mother country grew acute, he moderately but firmly voiced his resistance to the restrictions.

Also, I found this one that goes into greater detail about the different actions (introducing proposals of boycotting, chairing meetings and being a delegate to the first Continental Congress), and between the two, I felt there was sufficient reason for him to have switched sides.

In the latter part of the chapter, it discusses the war and the strategic planning by Washington and his various advisers. Washington, frustrated by the sitting around, proposed a couple ideas for attack, one including an assault on Boston that would most likely lead to it's being destroyed. His advisers tell him that such a course of action would be unwise and would likely not produce good results. So, he agrees to continue waiting. All the while the looming expiration of most of the army's contracts is growing ever nearer.

Then, on January 1, 1776, the transcripts of King George's speech finally reached the American troops. It marked a turning point as "clear as the advent of the new year."

What had sounded like a patriotic speech of determination, when it fell upon the ears of the English Parliament, served to have an opposite effect on the American troops. The result was immediate. Soldiers burned copies of the letter in public. Nathanael Greene wrote, in a letter to Samuel Ward in Philadelphia, recommending that a Declaration of Independence needed to be written.

Mr. McCullough writes that "The effect of the King's speech on Washington was profound. If nothing else could 'satisfy a tyrant and diabolical ministry, we were determined to shake off all connections with a state so unjust and unnatural. This I would tell them, not under covert, but in words as clear as the sun in its meridian brightness."

Even while thousands were leaving the army lines, substantial numbers stayed on. Washington declared a "new army, which in every point of view is entirely continental." And so the army finally had a name: The Continental Army. A new flag was raised, with a 13-gun salute. "When the British in Boston saw it flying ... they first mistook if for a flag of surrender." They soon would learn otherwise.

What an exciting culmination to the chapter! I am excited to read on :)

Don't Bother...

... with the movie. I got the movie Little Women, the one that got the best reviews, with Katherine Hepburn and everything. I was sooo disappointed!! I didn't even finish it. It's not that it was a bad movie, it just lacked the depth of the book. You lost the lovely interaction of Marmee with the girls, you lost many of her best teaching moments. You lost the distinction between "Little Women" and "Good Wives." Meg was making eyes at Mr. Brooks practically from the first time that they saw each other. And Jo. Oh my, all the acting seemed overdone, but Jo especially seemed over the top and larger than life. Even more than she was in the book. I guess I should have known better... I never like movies that I've read, and the more recently I've read the worse it always is. I specifically didn't read Lord of the Rings again before I watched those because I didn't want to spoil it. I should have known better.

And so We Begin!

I must admit, I was a little jealous that your version had such fancy pictures! (heh.. see how serious i am about all this. i get all excited about reading a "heavy" book and then pout about not having as cool of pictures!) Then, I flipped a little further into my book and realized that I, too, have pretty pictures in an insert in the middle. Yay!

Alrighty.

I really don't know what I was expecting when I began this book. I admit that much of my interest in selecting this book was because I admitted to myself that the amount of information I've retained on this time period, from my bygone history classes, is embarrassingly little. So, understanding that it's WAY more complicated than this, my very vauge idea of what happened that I carry around in my head goes something like this: Big Bad Britain oppresses all its subjects; Brave Noble Settlers rise up and, against all odds, win their independence. Lots of wars... Important declarations.. Yay America... The end.

I really like that Mr. McCullough starts us of with a little peek at what's going on in England, pre-revolution; it was a new angle that, previously, I'd pretty much known nothing about. Our author's narration is definitely compelling. I agree with Ritsumei: the description of the procession was great; I really felt drawn into the story immediately.

I found, as I began to learn about King George III, I was very surprised. Perhaps it's the American slant on all the history that I've ever learned, but I'm pretty sure he's always been painted as the crazy bad-guy. With this description, he seemed very likeable; easy to relate to. He's a patriotic king. He's just trying to do his duty.. You almost feel bad for the guy since you know how the story of his trying to beat "the 'riotous rebels' of America" into submission will end.

I am very impressed by Ritsumei's dilligence in keeping up with all the name dropping that's going on. I did not keep such detailed notes :) However, I feel like Mr. McCullough does a reasonably good job throwing in a breif introduction of people whom he will talk more about further on in the chapter, so I wasn't completely lost as I read about all the action with Parliment.

The stuff with Parliement and the big speeches and lively debates between those supporting and those not supporting taking action on the (pre-labeled) insurgence in America. It was astonishing to think they'd argued until 4am!! And it didn't sound as though there were any fillibusters, it was straight arguing. That's intense.

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.

Proposed Schedule

It looks like 1776 is about 200 pages shorter than Little Women, but the chapters are a bit longer. Last time we were doing 30-35 pages a week. Most of the chapters in this book are about 40-45 pages, except chapter 2, which is 70 chapters. Looks like the text is pretty readable, so I propose the following schedule:

Chapter 1: (17 pages) read & post by May 29. (1 week)
Chapter 2: (70 pages) read & post by June 12. (2 weeks)
Chapter 3: (50 pages) read & post by June 26. (2 weeks)
Chapter 4: (40 pages) read & post by July 3. (1 week)
Chapter 5: (46 pages) read & post by July 10. (1 week)
Chapter 6: (46 pages) read & post by July 17. (1 week)
Chapter 7: (48 pages) read & post by July 24. (1 week)

We could, alternatively, make it 2 weeks & 3 weeks for each chapter. Let me know what you think.