77. Small Battles Loomed Large in the Revolution

Reminder: If you’re reading this in your email, you have to go to dpauthor.com and click on the Speaking of Which tab in order to view the actual blog post with the featured image.


In the Series Editors’ Introduction to each book in Westholme Publishing’s Small Battles Series, coeditors Mark Edward Lender and the late James Kirby Martin contend that the too-often ignored, smaller military actions impacted the course of the war for independence as much as, if not more than, the celebrated engagements that retain their indelible grip on our collective historical consciousness—Trenton, Saratoga, and Yorktown, being foremost among the latter. These more obscure encounters were typically fought at what Lender and Martin term the “grassroots level,” usually without the direct involvement of regular troops on either side, and without the presence of famed commanders such as George Washington, Nathanael Greene, William Howe, Charles Cornwallis, etc., but rather with Patriot militia opposing Loyalist units, and sometimes involving Native warriors who more-often-than-not sided with the British.[1]

Although smaller battles accounted for the predominant share of fighting, they have generally received little attention in popular narratives about the Revolutionary struggle, perhaps due to the fact that the “big names” were not present. Private Joseph Plumb Martin, in his classic memoir that represents one of the best-known primary accounts of army life then, lamented the lack of public regard for these events owing, in his opinion, to the absence of famous men. As a result, the combatants who faced off on these occasions linger in obscurity to this day. “Such circumstances and such troops,” he wrote, “generally get but little notice taken of them, do what they will. Great men get great praise, little men nothing. But it always was so and always will be.”[2]

In his majestic chronicle of the Revolution, Page Smith argues that because many of the minor engagements—to cite two examples, the Paoli massacre in September 1777 and the Battle of Waxhaws (also known as Buford’s Massacre) in May 1780—ended in disaster for the forces of rebellion, there ensued less incentive to recount them in great detail than would have been the case if the American side prevailed. But as he reminds us, the smaller actions were often as agonizingly contested as the larger ones, and those who fell in them were just as dead as the soldiers who perished in more famous battles.[3] According to Smith, there were thousands of smaller clashes—many of them between bands of Loyalists and Patriots—that involved no more than fifty men, and the records of those encounters, if preserved at all, lie buried in some local archive, comprise half-legendary tales passed on from one generation to another, or are briefly mentioned in a seldom-read newspaper. Nonetheless, these affairs embodied the grim circumstances of war endured by the great majority of Americans, for relatively few participated in the famous battles that occupy the center stage of historiography. As Smith puts it, most in the Revolutionary generation “labored in the wings and experienced in very acute form the hunger, the fear, the continual and corrosive anxiety, the bitter divisions between friends and neighbors, the scattered incidents of violence, the demoralizing effect of rumor that were part of the daily lives of Americans, patriot or Tory, during the years of the war.”[4]

The frightful aspect of America’s first civil war that was characterized by the ferocity of combat between opposing factions among the civilian population—a feature that has been attendant to other such contests here and abroad—is embodied in the bloody record of these little-known episodes, to the extent it is available to us. Friends, neighbors, family members, and relatives all became caught up in the brutality that often manifested itself in the smaller actions. This savagery may be at variance with the idyllic image of our path to independence embraced by traditional accounts and conveyed by popular memory across the generations, for as Holger Hoock points out, the perpetuation of a too-sentimental narrative of the conflict obscures the truth that it caused proportionately more suffering than any other in American history, except the Civil War.[5}

Margaret MacMillan notes that civil wars often assume the character and cruelty of a crusade because they are about the nature of society itself.[6] Thomas Brown, a Loyalist who led troops in the Southern theater from 1777 to 1781, echoed these sentiments from personal experience: “A civil war being one of the greatest evils incident to human society, the history of every contest presents us with instances of wanton cruelty and barbarity. Men whose passions are inflamed by mutual injuries, exasperated with personal animosity against each other, and eager to gratify revenge, often violate the laws of war and principles of humanity.”[7] Indeed, the violence perpetrated on both sides in the Revolution is the stuff of historical reality—the kind Henry Knox presumably had in mind when he wrote his wife in the aftermath of the first Battle of Trenton: “War, my Lucy, is not a humane trade, and the man who follows (it) as such will meet with his proper demerits in another world.”[8]

Notes:

[1] Series Editors’ Introduction, in David Price, The Battle of Harlem Heights, 1776 (Westholme Publishing: Yardley, PA, 2022), ix-x.

[2] Joseph Plumb Martin, Memoir of a Revolutionary Soldier: The Narrative of Joseph Plumb Martin (Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, 2006), 54.

[3] Page Smith, A New Age Now Begins: A People’s History of the American Revolution (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1976), 2:1124-1125.

[4] Ibid., 2:1125.

[5] Holger Hoock, Scars of Independence: America’s Violent Birth (New York: Crown, 2017), 11-17.

[6] Margaret Macmillan, War: How Conflict Shaped Us (New York: Random House, 2020), 42.

[7] Thomas Brown to David Ramsey, December 25, 1786, in The American Revolution: Writings from the War of Independence, 1775-1783, ed. John Rhodehamel (New York: The Library of America, 2001), 681-682.

[8] Henry Knox to Lucy Knox, January 2, 1777, in William S. Stryker, The Battles of Trenton and Princeton (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin and Company, 1898), 436.


And speaking of small things (as in books), Rescuing has been rescued:

For anyone who has, or knows anyone who has, tried without success to acquire a copy of my first book, Rescuing the Revolution, during its recent exile to the publishing wilderness (having been out of print for the last couple of years), please be advised that it has returned from Elba (for any Napoleonic-minded readers out there). My thanks to the Friends of Washington Crossing Park—the nonprofit that runs the gift shop at Washington Crossing Historic Park (WCHP) and oversees the historical/educational programming there—for publishing a new edition as a successor to the Knox Press release from 2016. This marks the Friends’ first-ever foray into this sort of activity, and credit is due to Roger Williams, Jennifer Martin, Larry Kidder, Guy Sava, and Michelle Flanagan for their contributions to this effort. I anticipate (hopefully) that signed copies of the new edition will soon be available at WCHP for purchase in person or online. It can also be ordered from Amazon or Barnes & Noble.

71. From the Revolution to D-Day

Reminder: If you’re reading this in your email, you have to go to dpauthor.com and click on the Speaking of Which tab in order to view the actual blog post with the featured image.


On this much-touted (and deservedly so) 80th anniversary of the Normandy beach landings that profoundly shaped the outcome of World War II, I recall a passage from my second book, The Road to Assunpink Creek, that alludes to the exploits of the Continental Army during its legendary winter campaign of 1776-77—specifically the resistance led by Colonel Edward Hand against a much larger enemy force on January 2, 1777—and that I think speaks to the emotions attendant to this occasion:

The democratic impulse behind the efforts of Edward Hand and his men reflected a desire to be free of arbitrary governmental authority and to enjoy the prerogatives of political and economic self-determination that have since the Republic’s founding been gradually extended to more and more Americans. That motivation has been frequently and notably expressed in many ways and by many individuals since the Revolution but was perhaps never more succinctly articulated than it was by a more recent military hero who rose from the nation’s heartland, Dwight Eisenhower, when he was asked to comment on the events of D-Day—the invasion of German-occupied France on June 6, 1944 that he commanded under the code name, Operation Overlord.
During an interview on Omaha Beach for a special CBS television program marking the 20th anniversary of that engagement, the old soldier spoke against the backdrop of the English Channel, which the American, British, and Canadian troops of the Allied Expeditionary Force had traversed on that June day—the most celebrated nautical undertaking by American infantry since Christmas night 1776. From there they stormed the French beaches during the most decisive battle of the Second World War and went on to liberate western Europe from the tyranny of Nazi rule. Looking out at the history-laden waterway, America’s 34th president reflected with a compelling simplicity on the force of an aroused democracy: “It just shows what free men will do rather than be slaves.”

Obviously, no moral equivalence exists between Britain’s colonial policy towards its North American colonies in the 1770s and the atrocities that characterized Nazi governance, but we are reminded once again how the impulse to attain human freedom—however perceived by those striving for it and however relative the challenge it may face at any given time and place—spans generation after generation, and presumably always will.

38. New Books

I thought I’d take a brief respite from working on my next opus to suggest a few new Revolution-related books for your consideration. These are based on my own reading, listening to author talks, or in one case an author interview.

In no particular order  .  .  .

Surviving the Winters: Housing Washington’s Army during the American Revolution, Steven Elliott (University of Oklahoma Press, 2021) — The author has crafted a detailed narrative and penetrating analysis of how the Continental Army housed its units and camp followers, which explains how the construction and operation of these camps was important to the success of the Patriot cause. When you consider that the army spent a great deal more time in these settings than it did on the battlefield, this is a significant contribution to the literature of the Revolution.

Liberty Is Sweet: The Hidden History of the American Revolution, Woody Holton (Simon & Schuster, 2021) — The author offers a new and refreshing look at our struggle for independence that incorporates the story of marginalized  Americans—black people, women, Indians, and religious dissenters—into the mainstream of Revolution-related historiography in a way that general histories of the period have not done until now, while considering other overlooked aspects of the war that factored into its outcome.

The Revolutionary World of a Free Black Man: Jacob Francis, 1754-1836, William L. “Larry” Kidder (S.P., 2021) — This story of a free black man’s struggles with the systemic racism that accompanied enslavement in early America chronicles his youth as an indentured servant, his service in the Continental Army and Hunterdon County militia, and his post-war life as a husband, father, and farmer, as well as his youngest son’s efforts in the abolitionist cause. (BTW see my blog post no. 27, “Jacob’s Ladder,” to read the author’s comments about his work.)

These Distinguished Corps: British Grenadier and Light Infantry Battalions in the American Revolution, Don Hagist (Helion & Company, 2021) — For the authentic military history buff, this should be a real treat to read, being the product of a noted authority on the eighteenth-century British army who is also managing editor of the Journal of the American Revolution. The reader is provided with a thorough and well-written analysis of the role played by British light infantry and grenadier battalions during the Revolutionary War that relies predominantly on a vast array of primary source material.

Happy Reading.

26. Talking about the Revolution & Stuff

For today’s post, I wanted to share with you—through the link at the bottom—my recent appearance on “Back Story with Joan Goldstein” on Princeton Community Television, hosted and produced by Joan Goldstein, Ph.D., a sociologist and retired college professor.

The program, which runs about 28 minutes and was first aired on June 9, focuses on the meaning of the Revolution and how it relates to current circumstances. And any fans of the most famous and least accurate depiction of Washington crossing the Delaware—see above—will get loyts of Lotsa, I mean lots of Leutze. Best of all, there’s no commercial interruption. (For example, you won’t hear me say, “I’m not a historian but I play one on TV.”)

Apologies are due in advance for at least one verbal gaffe—inexplicably substituting “decades” for “centuries” at one point when it’s obvious I meant the latter (no, really)—and excessive use of the convenient but less-than-silver-tongued expression, “um.” My only other regret was not managing to squeeze into our exchange the gustatory aphorism about how democracy resembles pizza. (When it’s good it’s very, very good and when it’s bad it’s still pretty good.)

Hope you enjoy the show.