tv The American Revolutions Global Impact CSPAN September 24, 2022 9:01am-12:02pm EDT
next. american history tv is live from the lyceum in alexandria, virginia, where scholars and authors will discuss how the american revolution transformed governments and impacted countries around the world. this event is hosted by the group emerging revolutionary war. hopefully the bad guys can realize what they're doing. welcome, everyone. my name is liz williams and i'm the director of gatsby's tavern museum with the office of historic alexandria. it is an honor to partner with emerging revolutionary war today at this important time in our nation's history. a time to consider america's founding in preparation for the coming 250th anniversary of our nation. historic alexandria strives to use history to spark curiosity and reflection as we approach
this upcoming 250th anniversary. examining our american experiment as key. this revolution of ours created waves across the world. with its lasting impacts, felt even today. this symposium the world turned upside down the american revolution. its impact on a global scale. we'll study the effects of this revolution that trans formed governments and the governed across the globe. appropriate as we consider the birth of our nation, is to acknowledge the ancestral lands of our indigenous peoples on which we gather. we recognize the many tribes who moved through this region trading and drawing resources from the land and waterways. we honor their descendants today. our community is shaped by the diversity of its people. past, present and future. and we affirm that this is central to the values of the place we now call alexandria. i have a few important housekeeping notes before we
begin. we will have 15 minutes of question and answer after each presentation. so please line up behind the microphone to ask your questions for those here in person and for those on zoom. please type your questions in the chat and we will ask them in real life. we do have author books for sale downstairs, so if you would like any of our books, our authors to sign your book, please visit with them over the course of the day. and then lunch is on your own and there are a ton of options here in oldtown. so if you need some recommendation, please look for our historic alexandria staff who will be happy to point you in the right direction. so with that, please welcome phil greenawalt with emerging revolutionary war to introduce our first speaker. good morning. how? we are so grateful to have norm the mayors with us here today. norm is a professor emeritus
providence college and providence, rhode island. he's the author of the guide of the american revolutionary war series, 13 volumes about the war on land, sea and overseas, as well as america's first ally, france and the american revolutionary war. and washington's engineer. louis, the port title and the creation of an army corps enormous translated annotated a number of french works, including louis, francois, baton du pont all day view camp de la deer, which takes up a whole slide in the biography. his journals, published as the road to yorktown, the french campaigns in the american revolution, 1780 through 83. he also translated the gazette. francois, the french newspaper that was actually published in newport, rhode island, by the french fleet that brought the company rochambeau, and his 5800 french troops to america in july of 1780. norm was a pioneer in the cd-rom industry, setting up the first network of rhode island.
for those watching on zoom, there's a little disks that used to come on your computer. he's an active re-enactor. serves on the board of directors of the bovine center at the university of massachusetts, dartmouth. please welcome enormous presents, reevaluating our french allies. a new look at popular assumptions of the french army through the diary of count de lauberdiere. thank you very much, phil. i'm sure you're all here expecting us to talk about what's what's in our books. i'm going to take a different path. i'm going to talk about what's not in the book. what i mean by that is that 18th century diaries are more like scrapbooks. they contain a lot of stuff that is not pertinent to the to the diary. for example, this particular diary includes maps. it includes illustrations, hand-drawn illustration scenes.
one of them being that of carlton's bridge, which is a an engineering feat of of the 18th century. several diaries talk about it, but he's the only one who has an illustration of it. and it's not in the book. you have to look at the manuscript for that. there there are also several issues of newspapers, and that's going to be one of the topics i'm going to cover. there are laudatory poems, congressional citations and all kinds of other stuff that gets included in there. but even though i translated all of it and intended that it be published as an appendix, it didn't get included. so the first thing i want to talk about is the gazette. francoise. this is the when the french fleet came here, they brought a printing press and this became the first the first of what became expeditionary public nations. much as those of you who've served in the military, you're
familiar with stars and stripes. this is the ancestor of stars, not of stars. and stripes were of that genre of publication. this is the first publication for soldiers in a foreign land. and what's important about this is that there are six issues and two supplements in existence. and the the the press was set up in newport and it was it was set up at a time when the soldiers are getting bored. they needed something to do. so they they started publishing this newspaper. the up here you see where you can get a facsimile version of i've done a. there's a facsimile version such as this. the entire newspaper. and there's an english translation of it right here. this is the last page of the test of the second supplement. and there are there are no issues after that that that that
exist. the original of this is in the rhode island historical society. i've seen several iterations of this. there are a couple of iterations in print. there are a couple of it went from print. it was microfilm and more recently, it's available electronically through the american newspapers database. all of the the iterations that i've seen have a tear in this corner. always the likelihood of having the exact same tear. you know, every iteration is or in several publications is extremely astronomically rare. so we know that the the issues that are in the historical historical society are the only ones in existence. at the end of the the article at
the end of the issue, you have a french paragraph, if translated with an english paragraph requesting rags. the reason for requesting rags is that paper in those days was published with rag fiber. we didn't have cotton fiber at the time, so a wood pulp. so the the rags fiber is the the medium for publication. and he's he's looking for a good supply of rags. people assume that because the paper is looking for rags, that they don't have enough of material to to print to print subsequent editions. so since there are no issues of this journal of this magazine that exist after this date, the assumption was that the press may have gone out of business. another thing is that people thought that maybe because after a period of a couple of months,
the french soldiers had learned enough english that they didn't need a translation of english newspaper articles, that they were pertinent to them. the next paragraph, both in french and english, indicates that the newspaper is planning to publish an almanac. the following year. so this is at the end of actually this is published on january second, 1780. 1780 now. 1781. so they're planning on publishing an an almanac for the year 1781. this this line down here is what's called the california. and i'm going to talk a bit more about that in a moment. the lumberjack journal has a supplement to the diary. this is the origin the the the the top of the issue that was published in 1780.
the one that we just looked at this is the supplement that's included with lumberjack diary. and it reads number 93, which means that there were 87. my assumption has given the the title to what the layout of the title, the design of the page, the font and everything that there were published by the same press. and i was really excited to find that this was number 93, which meant that the public that the press did not go out of business in 1780 and the beginning of 1781. but when i looked at the color fun to this issue, i found that the it was published by the of the the french fleet. but it had the place of publication in paris. and i'm wondering, how did the press get from rhode island to paris in 1781, while the troops were on the march to yorktown? so i did i started doing more research into that, and i found out that the this issue is a supplement to the gazette. france was, which i had
translated about 20 years ago. this is the supplement to the gazette. the france very similar title, but the two different publications. and i found a copy of this online and to verify that it does follow in that sequence. so this publication did not go to buy two twice a week public portion in 1781, but these are two different publications. however, the public, the press, the the navy press did not go out of business because it did publish the the the almanac that i mentioned. this is the the title page of the almanac. and in addition to that, it published a an account this is a four page account. this is a four page account of the admiral that touches the battle in the chesapeake. in 17, in march of 1781. this is the articles of
capitulation, which happened to be after yorktown, of course. so the the press was still operating. was it was it still in newport? i don't know, because the you know, all the troops had moved down to yorktown and the the the french troops wintered in williamsburg that whenever i think maybe the the the navy had gone back to rhode island. but in any case, they published that. in addition to that, they published this voyage of newport to philadelphia. this is the first edition of france was marketed to shot to lose voyages to new of travels in america. the second edition is is a two volume set published as it does under the title travels in america in french and then english translations have been published in a number of other languages. so the press did not go out of business that year. in fact, this this issue of the press published 27 copies and
the count de lauberdiere had had a copy because he makes mention of it in his in his diary. the next item that i want to talk about is a map. this is a map by which shows the the landing sites. you have a landing site here. and two landing sites down here. newport is and rhode islanders think that russia bore and the navy landed right here around the long wharf around here where kings park is. this map is you can see the name there to show up here. they took succeeded admiral, to tell admiral germany died on december 15, 1780. they took immediately took command of the navy at that time and remained in command until march 13th, 1781, when he was replaced by admiral deborah. so this this map had to be done
in the first quarter of 1781, judging by the appearance of it, it looks to be. very, very similar to the maps done by louis alexandria-caen. louis alexander berthier was one of russia most quartermaster stores, and he was his his main job was was make it cartographer. you're making maps. the problem with the touche and berthier is that neither one of them were at the landing when when the troops arrived here in 17 eight in 1780. neither one of them were with the navy at the time. berthier missed the boat in britain, brest and had to take another another ship over. and he didn't arrive until october. so his his information is what what what he says in his diary is that where he indicates the
landing sites is he's marking landing sites that he expects the british to land if they're going to attack newport. so this is the map that that appears in, in nobody's diary. you notice up here, there's no indication of of a landing site. the two landing sites are down here. this is a detail of that of that map. so this this right here says landing site. landing site. and he indicates this woods castle. and the importance for this is that he is the only diarist to mention where the landing site occurred. all the diaries tell you that the troops landed. they arrived in newport and they landed first. one day this regiment lands. the next day the another regiment lands. and so on. he is the only one who says that they they landed and they landed
at woods castle and but he doesn't say that on the landing day. he says this in october, on october 7th and october 10th. in the diary, he indicates that the troops aboard russian bow has something, has to do something to do, revive their spirits, keep them occupied. so what he does is he has them play war games. and he says the war games are held at the landing site at woods castle, which is five miles from the campsite. now, this is a 1780 map. this is this is a better map overlaid with a google map. and the reason i wanted i overlaid this map is i wanted to find out this line of defenses is the british line of defense around newport. and i wanted to find out where does this line actually go in zigzag in the city. but i'm finding that i'm getting
more use out of it for for planning and plotting where the french were. this set of camps here, this is the french camp. this is the schwarzenegger camp over here, the bubonic camp is down here. royal depot, st george and schwarzenegger. and if you measure from woods castle, which is now what's called such was point, it's a wildlife preserve today from there, coming over this causeway to here, it's exactly five miles. and that's what little badger says in his diary. this is a blessed school. which map of newport. this is touro synagogue right here. and this is the baptist church. they were the currently the the baptist churches over is about right here. no, it's right right about here. this this is the second baptist church in newport. there were six baptist churches over the period of years. the current one, the third
baptist church, is about over here right up around here. but this is the second baptist church. and the importance of that will be i'll point that out in a moment. well, when the when the french arrived a little bit here notes that they arrived at 11:00 in the morning. but there's such a heavy fog that they dropped anchor and they waited until late afternoon. the fog lifted around 3:00 while i lifted around noon and they started to prepare, landing around 3:00. now rush on boat and his son donostia, the vermeer are on different ships and different. they decided that the only the last ship in the fleet to arrive in it at the newport would be the one to to to land. so rush on boat and his son both have to transfer ships to go to the amazon which is the last
ship in the to arrive in newport. they then take the captain's -- and go ashore from there. so they arrive sometime around late, about 5:00 in the afternoon. and here you see this is a quote from. dynasty and the russian boys diary indicating that he and his father came ashore. now, the they were coming ashore along with jack deville. jack abbeville is the quartermaster general. and the purpose that they were going to go ashore is to scout out where they're going to to lay out the camp, which is where i showed you earlier this option. this vessel is a --. this is a cutter. so that gives you an idea of what the what what what the captains -- would look like. and so that's the kind of boat that we take ashore.
this. this is long wharf right here, which is which is where people think that rochambeau landed. this building is the colony house, and the baptist church would have been right about here. so the. looking up from the from the wharf straight up to the colony house is a very imposing view. it's a beautiful building. the british use this building as a hospital during the during their occupation of newport. the french did not a lot of people assume that the french use that building as a hospital, but no diary. none of the french diaries actually talk about the the the colony house other than saying it's a village. it's a grand state building. it's a beautiful public building. so that's about the extent of it. they don't talk about it as a
hospital. when russia arrived, one of everybody thinks that they were welcomed with a big brass band and lots of, you know, lots of troops massed on the on the shore and everything. russia always severely disappointed, he said nobody was there. if you read general heath's diary, general heath, as the continental army commander of the new england area, he's in providence, which is about 45 miles away. and he's talking about how, you know, he gave a proper reception to russian bull. well, he's covering his tail because he wasn't there. nobody heard, was there? and this is this is from his diary. and he talks about how russia but went ashore with deville. they they ran into mr. wharton, who was a quaker. mr. wharton lived three houses up from where the colony house was, and what offered him some some horses invites him to t
that evening russian bull asked who is in charge of the militia in the area and christopher greene is in charge. but he's not at that particular site. he's elsewhere in the newport area. so they send out an express to go get him to bring him to russia on board, let him know that that russian boy and his troops have arrived once. bear in the view of many bear in the view of many is russia boys second in command when he realizes that russian boys ashore with no bodyguard, he decides that he's going to send the grenadier company of the boat when they're regiment board bonnybridge element is the senior regiment of russian boys army. so he sends the the to the grenadier company are the so the crackerjack troops of the regiment. they are the people who are in time of riot. they would be the what you your when they call out the riot act. they're the ones who show up. they're the sort of elite troops look more like the someone like
the rangers today. they you had to be five feet eight inches tall to be to be even considered to be a grenadier and. look in addition to being five feet eight inches tall, you had these bearskin caps which added another 8 to 12 inches to your height. the german grenadiers had they had tight coats which shorter sleeves. so the reason for that is that these guys look like they're giants who are busting out of their clothes, much like the incredible hulk, the french. the french did the same very, very similar look at the the cuffs on the on these sleeves, these guys are from the schwarzenegger regiment. you can tell they're schwarzenegger because of the are the salmon colored facings and the the cuffs. this is the uniform of 1776. in 1778, 70, 79, the uniform
changed so that the grenadiers are now wearing. the grenadiers are now wearing caps like the the the infantry soldiers. you see a member of the schwarzenegger regiment back here who's still wearing his his bearskin cap. not everybody changed uniform all at the same time. so they change uniforms gradually. so this guy is still wearing the uniform of 1776, the way you can tell the function of the soldiers is on the turn backs of their coats. this guy is wearing a sort of bomb or grenade, which indicates that he's a grenadier. also on his his sir is belt here is a you well you can't see it hidden by his hand. he's got a slow match. there's a brass a brass container, a four slow match to
light the grenades at this point in at this time, grenades are primarily used. what they did not use, they're more this is all more decorative. but one of the things about the grenadiers is the grenadiers and the the the chaser, which are light infantry, are the only ones to allow to wear facial hair. all the other soldiers had to be clean shaven. so this guy is indicate indicates he's clean shaven. this guy is a regular infantry, which you can tell by the the flow to leave on his on his turn backs the the the the the color of the the decoration lines here match the sleeves and the the the facings. so the this regiment is the st thomas regiment. the musicians wear off as it colors of the regiment. in this case, he's wearing blue. but he's got a lot of these these stripes here. the reason the lot of lace that
the reason for that is music is very important music in the army governs your entire day from from morning to night. the musician wakes you up, puts you to bed, and he calls out all the other calls during the day. if you if you're on duty they do would call with feet of food what they call a roast beef, which is the lunch call. so they they govern the lives of the soldiers. plus they give all the commands on the field. the officers can't project their voice loud enough, so that everybody can hear the commands. and so they are conveyed by drum and fife. well, the troops land on july 13, 14, 14, 15 and 16. the artillery is unloaded on the 16th. also. by the night of the 16th, all the troops are in in the in in camp. it is the courtney who is the sort of the commissary general
of the army had set up hospital. he set up a hospital in providence, one in papa squash point in bristol, rhode island, and another one in newport on the russian bull writes a letter to the called the mobile mulberry, who is the minister of war at that time, on july 5th, 25th, 1780, he tells him that he's got 800 sick and there are some 1500 soldiers who are also sick of scurvy and various other types of illnesses down at the bottom here, hope. there were 153 soldiers who died in newport between 1780 and 81. that's over a period of 11 months, 11 months of peacetime. and mind you and well, not peacetime, but the army, the french army isn't doing anything. they're just in camp and sort of relaxing and trying to recover
and recuperate. in providence, there were 27 soldiers who died. 35% of the soldiers who died in in newport, and 44% of those who died in in in providence were died in august and september of that year. most of them from malaria and scurvy, dysentery and cholera with the most common forms of illness in the american army and the british army. smallpox was a was a factor leading cause of death in the french army. it was less so all the soldiers were inoculated before coming here. and there is a case in 1781 where somebody shows up in a french camp and introduces smallpox. at that time. so that's the only instance we have of it, of or indication of
of of illness. and here we've got a passage from lopetegui's diary indicating the importance or the how severe this this illness was, particularly seasickness. the last the last sentence is particularly important. what the what's underlying the sentence is that on the way over duchovny they had an opportunity to meet with a cut to occasions where he ran into british ships and he he could easily have captured the vessels. he's got five over 6000 men on board a military soldiers, plus the sailors. he's got another. 6 to 8000 sailors. so he's got enough troops to to engage a fight and the men have been at sea for three months. they're they're rearing for a fight. and he passed them by.
he had orders to to bring russian boys troops to america as quickly and as safely as possible. so he ignored those occasions, and the soldiers were very angry with him. and that that that will show up in a couple of moments. i talked about the hospital, the the the newport hospital was set up in the baptist church. remember, the baptist church? i pointed out a couple of slides ago. well, here it indicates that this is from russia. hbo's order book. the order book has never been translated or published, but this is this is the manuscript. and it says that the the the the hospital was set up at the at the the baptist church. it also indicates that the red it in the daily orders indicate who's who, who's doing duties on different days. so in this case, it's indicating
that the bonar regiment is is doing the guard duty and he is indicating that they're doing guard duty at at the camp. so he's got 90 men guarding the camp. the then there's a corporal's guard at the hospital. the corporal's guard is about 12 people, 12 men under under a corporal here. the. all the time that the french were in newport, every single day he's he's changing the guard. and the guards are always placed at the same place. the camp, the hospital and the woods castle, which is the landing site. so this is further indication of the importance of woods, castle and it's just lopetegui's diary and russia boys order book that specify which castle russia but never never specifies why he's placing a guard at woods castle. but it's it's assumed because
all the soldiers know that that's where they landed. and they understand the the importance of that. it's in lopez diaz diary that you realize that that that's important. okay. also in blanshard claudius shot is a commissary of war and he indicates on july 23rd that rochambeau all attended, he went to visit the sick at the hospital and attended mass there. so this is one of the concerns about rhode islanders. where was the first catholic mass celebrated in rhode island? and in this in this instance, we know that it's celebrated at at the baptist church, which is at the corner of barnes street and spring street. at this time, while the troops are landing, vehicle. don't know why we continue. why is lafayette's brother in law, he was living in the richardson house, which is two
houses over from hunter house, which is where the turner had his headquarters and the first week of end of the landing, july 20th, the 23rd, he is sent to connecticut island, which is now called jamestown island. rhode island has 20 or 36 islands, 37 islands. newport aquidneck island, which is where newport is, is the largest. the second largest is jamestown or connecticut island. so he's sent over to connecticut island to guard the bay. he's protecting the the the camp from the the the british had when the british were in newport, they occupied part of connecticut island and nobody is going over there to the same area of the camp to to manage, to maintain that and to protect the the the the port. so in case of an attack and lopetegui mentions that this is
the only time that the british could have attacked and successfully conquered the french because there was they were still not organized they were still setting up their camp. they were making their fortifications building to digging the trenches. and so on. so he mentions that as the and then after they after that week, they lost that opportunity because then the french were so well entrenched that it was impossible for them to attack when they landed. one of the the ships, the is the france got lost in the fog and people thought that it had probably got captured or sank. orders were that when the french if the french were not able to landed in new york or newport or if they got separated in the storm, they were to go to to to boston. and that's what happened with this ship. they got lost in the fog and got separated from the fleet. so they went to the boston and
they landed there with half of the one regiment, 350 men in this case. and they marched to newport. they arrived in newport on the 28th, which is like a couple of weeks later. one of the things that little bit. yeah. mentions in the in the in his book, in his diary is that on august 25th, august 25th is st louis day, which is king louis of them. day two for the french, the name day is more important than your birthday. you. and so this is a grand birthday when the defenders boat was born, they have a big celebration. they have a big celebration on the anniversary of the the the the name day. does anybody know what a food is? why is it? oh, i've got a few people. okay. he mentions that on on on august 25th, russian bull reviews the
troops and they have a further july. this is some 6000 soldiers who are participating in this. so this is one grand parade. i don't know how big macy's parade is, but i would say this would probably the bigger, if not equivalent. so they they fire further july what a further july is, is when when they're all in camp. you it's a running fire. so you you you fire your muskets from left to right, the right to left. and then everybody fires together. so when you have a small company or small army, you might fire individually one person, fire one after another, and when you've got an army of this size, you would probably fire by company. there are ten companies to a regiment, so you would fire you know, like one company after another until you get down to the end of the line. then you reload and you start the fire down the other the
other way. and then at the end you fire one massive volley. well, you've got to i'm counting 5000 soldiers here because there's a 10% misfire rate on average. so assuming a misfire rate of 10%, you've got 5000 soldiers firing three rounds apiece. so you've got. 1800 or 1500 shots or you've got this these are the various types of cannons in the fort, in the forts and on the vessels. so this is an indication of how many you know, what the caliber is. and you figure like a 12 pounder might fire, might you might put in maybe a pound, half a pound of at least half a pound of powder, if not a pound, or maybe more, then you've got all the vessels fire. if they fire a 21 gun salute from the vessels, the three
cannon shots from each fourth. so this gives you an indication you've got 699 guns, you've got 2008 shots. this is about a ton and a half to two tons of gunpowder. that's being fought and being fired on this anniversary. re that is one massive celebration, one massive fireworks display. this is an of the 1st of july at fort adams. it's a this is the massive of the total company firing firing. this is actually a small the small group does this is a small reenactment. i want to. i want to skip over the the visit of the the native americans if we've got time after which we can come back to that another thing that okay one of the things that.
people think is that when washington came to newport in march of 1781, that he was planning the the march to yorktown. the march on yorktown was not planned either. in newport or in hartford or at wethersfield. there were conferences between washington and russia on both. whoops, what happened. oh, okay. there were conferences between washington and russia on board both in wethersfield and in hartford. but what con wallace was not in virginia at the time. well, he was actually in he was in petersburg and he didn't arrive in yorktown until august 1st. so the the allies did not know that that they were going to march to yorktown. they marched from newport to new york and they set up a siege
around new york for about a month. they had a lot of expeditions and and skirmishes around new york city and the whole new york area and then they they when when they realized that admiral deborah was coming up and he wasn't going any further than chesapeake bay, then they decided going down south. so that's what they decided to do. march and even at that point, they they hadn't really decided on yorktown. it did just occurred that they're going south, they're going to meet the the french fleet there. and don't engage the con wallace wherever they happen, wherever he happens to be. and he happened to go to yorktown, the. when they left new york, they they wanted to up to a washington was a master of counter counterintelligence.
so what he did is he had the french build bread ovens. who doesn't like french bread. so they made a big deal out of this. they going all over the place along the river banks and all over all over the new york area. and they're sending out massive numbers of men to look for bricks to build the ovens. and they're building quite a few ovens. so the british know that if you're building a bread oven, it takes about several days to build an oven. if you're building an oven, you're going to be there for a while. so they was convinced that they're going to stay at in yorktown. well, i mean, in new york. so the army is moving south. he leaves a group behind to keep campfire is burning, make it look like there's a whole army there. there probably maybe 100 guys left behind. and they they've got all these ovens. and everybody knows that the french are building bread ovens. so the army is already almost in trenton by the time that the british realized that the army
is on the move, it's too late for them to get ready. they can't they get out there. so that that left all of the troops in new york out of the picture for for the work, for the for the the battle oc. whoops. dutton they died on december 15th. russia happen to be in boston on that day. he was visiting the area nobody had was sent to get him and bring him back russia boy decides to stop on the route and sleep because he was exhausted. so he stayed there the night of the 16th. detonate was buried that morning from the hour of his death to the time of buried there he was there was a his flagship with the depot going was firing cannon every half hour and the men on shore, the troops were firing three musket volleys.
remember the the passage i mentioned, i mentioned about detonating not being appreciated by his troops because he passed up these opportunities. well, nobody had has this passage in the hopes he has this passage in his diary that his troops were is his sailors were very much miffed at him. and he lost their respect. so he also mentions that the cortege going from the hunter house, which is down here all the way up to trinity church, which where his funeral was held. trinity church is an anglican church and there's no catholic church in newport at this time. so the funeral is celebrated here and he is buried in the graveyard right next next to the church. and that's where so the whole route was lined by soldiers, two men deep on each side of the street, shoulder to shoulder. now, normally, the men would be
24 inches apart. the entire army stretched out would get would would allow 30 inches apart for it for the men. so if the entire army is turned out along this parade, this mark route of march. that that that takes up the entire army. and so that would leave the navy to be in the cortege behind them. and if there is nobody in the cortege that indicates that he's got they may be 8000 sailors on board who would have been in the cortege and they had a very rather small cortege. well, the things that that nobody i talks about in his diary drawing that that period where there's really not much to that there in newport during a winter is he talks about life in newport he talks about religion.
the five major religions that were dominating in newport and rhode island. for that matter. he talks about a quaker be and a quaker marriage ceremony, which he said resembles of a funeral than a marriage. but he also talks about the champlain family, the beautiful the beautiful champlain daughters were very they made a hit with all the souls, all the sailors, because virtually every diary of any of any soldier will talk about the champlain daughters. then he goes on to talk about the the march to yorktown and to new york and then to yorktown. he also talks about from pond oops, from pond is one of the stops on the way on the way back to to the new to the newport in 1782. they stop it from pond for a month and that's an interesting story because there are several diaries who talk about this
particular event the night before or they're due to leave. crompton which is now the wood crump pond is what's called pines of richardson, yorktown heights, new york. and the interesting thing about this, this incident is that nobody had has a passage where he's laid down on the floor of the mill during the night. and this man comes in late at night. he shows it, gives him a place to sleep along with the soldiers who are in the in the mill. so he sleeps on the floor. the next morning, he finds out that this is the local sheriff who's come to arrest rush on board because of the property damage that the troops have done on the mill. so he has russia boys ready to mount his horse. he puts his hand on his shoulder and tells them he's under arrest. and russia will ask him what the charges are and he tells them it's for destruction of property russia established that they, a committee of five people to go and inspect the damage and give him their assessment they tell
him is the damage is one third of the price that he's asking for. and so russia agrees to pay him half the price. and he says the difference is in goodwill. and he said, look, the way the different diarists interpret this is interesting because some say he's a log. they they portray russia was a law abiding citizen. some indicate that the soldiers drew their swords and they were ready to run the sheriff through. and that that could have been the start of a war. and one diary says that russia both responded to the sheriff saying that. do you realize how bold this is for you to arrest the commander of the french army amidst his troops? this is the whole army could have risen up and will slaughter this guy right there on the spot. and so it's interesting to read the different diaries, get their different interpretations. so i'm going to stop there and open it up for questions and.
no questions. you. yes. oh, they want you to go to like in the back. you you have to watch. almost all the rolling. orders from the king exist. yes, they do. well, i have not seen them, but i expect they do. one of the one of the soldiers who came over earlier, there were four four soldiers who came over in 1777 to join the army. and. when you assign soldiers to to the military duty, that becomes
a an act of war. this is before the french joined the army. so this is you had to disguise the orders to look like something else. so these guys were ordered to take they were given a leave of absence. take care of personal business, personal was to go to america and help the american army. and so that order exists. so i imagine russia, those orders exist somewhere in the french archives. i have not seen them myself. because you go to my place. that russian boat sailed to yorktown. apparently not. he marched. excuse me. i was under the mistaken assumption that russian bow sailed to yorktown. but he. he marched and he marched and then who? what was the fleet that they show the maps in yorktown, in the french fleet. he did. i haven't research that that
particular aspect, but some of the fleet some of the fleet left from elkton, head of elk, the others left from annapolis. so there were two, two different groups that left a good part of the army, marched down marched south, rochambeau went with the army. that was a way of showing, you know, the also being in command. it was also showing that he was he was part of them. he wasn't he was an acting special. he one of the things that russia boy did in all of his camp, all of his camps, is he had his headquarters closest to as close as possible to the soldiers. most officers would be separated from the soldiers, for example, designed in a way was the colonel of the artillery. he his headquarters in newport were about a mile away from the from the troops or from his from the artillery, actually, probably a mile and a quarter.
the artillery camp or the artillery park? yes. could you tell us a little about the money, the specie? you know, there's lots of accounts from the american side, civilians, that they were being paid in specie, and that was tremendous. yes. were the french aware of what of the fact they were having been able to pay in specie and etc.? just any comments you had that they might have made about it over? i wish i would have. i had anticipated this question. i would have brought up examples. i've got some some reproductions of french french coins. you're not you're not asking about the the value of the money. you're asking about. yeah. how is it? see, how is how how is it seen. yeah. how do they perceive that. really aware of what they were doing because it was a term. oh yes, yes. they were tremendously aware of what they were doing and in some cases, rochambeau ordered his men or purchases to be to be made in continental currency pay in content currency before you
pay in in in coin because when they got to newport as soon as people realize that they were paying in coin they started jacking up prices. and every french diary talks about how they were being taken advantage of by the the local people. now, they came over with with the shipments were to two and a half million leave it at a time to give you an idea of what that entails. you don't just take out your wallet and carry this amount of money. this is all in hard cash. so it's all silver and gold. there was one ship, the la, which was coming in 1781. it was going up the delaware river and it ran aground in the in the bay or in the at the mouth of the delaware. and they couldn't get it couldn't get it off the bar. so they threw the money overboard. and two and a half million leave the crew overboard and they market with buoys because they
were being attacked by a band of loyalists in the in the bay. well, one of the soldiers was sent to find some some wagons to bring the cart, the money by the time he arrived, he returned, they had retrieved the money and they had already put it in wagons that they'd required 14 wagons drawn by. 648 oxen. so we're talking, you know, quite a few tons of silver. and that was one shipment there were it. i know of at least three shipments of that size that came over over the course of of a period of time or during that, that that year. so we're talking a massive amount of money. does that answer your question. thank you.
thank you for that wonderful talk. appreciate it. welcome, everybody. my name's mark malloy. i'm one of the contributors with emerging revolutionary war. i'm also the author of the book victory death the battles of trenton and princeton and encourage everybody here and who's watching online to check out our web page, emerging revolutionary war. org. and be sure to follow us on social media. we are your home for the 250th anniversary of the revolutionary war, so i hope you can follow all the great things we're doing and. we're very proud to be here this weekend to be doing this symposium with the city of alexandria, the city of alexandria. and there's no or appropriate place to to talk about the history of the revolutionary. then george washington's hometown here in alexandria. but i'm here to introduce our
next speaker and one of our fellow emerging revolutionary war historians. his name is eric sterner. eric is a writer focusing on american history, particularly the revolutionary war and the civil war. he writes frequently for the journal of the american revolution as well as blogs regularly, regularly, emerging revolutionary war. in 2020, he published anatomy of a massacre the destruction of net in hutton, 1782, and he's currently working on a micro history of the 1782 crawford campaign and survey of george rodgers clarke's illinois campaign that occurred in 1778 1779. in his former life, eric worked in the fields of national security and aerospace, both in the public and private sectors. he also taught graduate courses in cyber power at missouri state university, georgetown. john and george washington
university. he holds a bachelor's degree in soviet and international studies and separate master's degrees in security policy studies and political science. so let us journey with eric as he presents britain, russia and the american war. anybody a historian of russia also. okay. so the reason i pick this topic is britain. russia and the american war is, is, is the title. but i really wanted to dig into the army neutrality of 1780. a lot of people aren't familiar with it. i remembered it from way back when and thought, well, i don't know enough about it. let's go start exploring it. in a nutshell. in 1780, a change in russia's naval posture threatened to upend the entire city of british
naval strategy would have thrown their their strategy for winning the war, not only against the americans, but against the french, the spanish back on its heels. it's one of these great what if questions of the american revolution in a nutshell, in 1780 march, catherine the great yet the great just the second issue but i'm going to call the declaration of principles principles of armed neutrality much longer title but then take my our these were basically rules at sea for neutral states when other countries were at war. then she went about in april and started to create a league of like minded nations. these were all neutral states. the idea was to enforce these principles. she's got a specif fic target in mind and that's british naval strategy. she to also wants to establish new rules governing trade at sea among neutral states when there's a war on. she failed. one of the questions that i had was, well, why.
the reason to pick this question, pick this topic was. i think it illustrates the american revolution had a much broader impact on the world than just france and spain in the united kingdom. it's having an impact throughout europe at a minimum. at a minimum, the war caused a rift between britain and russia. it highlights the fact that the british strategy was more tenuous and uncertain than we perhaps we realize. we tend to look back and say, here's how the war went. but at any one given point, it had several what if questions or several moments at which things could have gone radically different. we're not just talking about battles in the hemisphere. we have to talk about europe. so this helps us put the american war in context. before the war, anglo-russian relations generally friendly, kind of indifferent. they're not paying a whole lot
of attention to each other. they're primarily governed by trade. okay, so we got a positive relationship there. russia's is a source of naval goods for britain, which is a source of its military powers, naval power. it's hemp rope, pitch tar really tall masts and british merchants carry most of russia's exports. russia did not have a merchant fleet speak of. so let's look at really quickly here. russia in, the run up to the revolution to sort of get an understanding of where catherine's coming from as the revolution occurs, she's on the throne in 1762 after a coup against her husband, period. the third, whether she participated in the coup or not is, still debated among historians. she probably knew it was common. it was a really an attempt by one faction in the court to get rid of the peer to the third and put someone who they might have thought was more cooperative on
the throne. at the same time they didn't they underestimated her. she actually sort of dressed in military garb, got on a horse and rode down to the palace. she's a little uneasy on the throne and partly because she's german and partly because she came to power through a coup. she's not actually a romanoff. so there are frequent rebellions against her reign and there's always rumors of plots against her. not a surprise if you've taken power in a coup. the biggest one was called the was the picture of of rebellion. but of causing scot together decided they didn't like catherine leader came to the fore his name was emil puga cervi claimed to be peter the third who was dead. at this point they caught him in 1774. he was executed in 1775, but if it was a big thing, he actually threatened moscow. and it's the point where if
you're if you're the empress, you're a german, you're living in saint petersburg at the edge of your empire. and the guy can get that much support and actually represent a serious threat to your power. you're a little nervous. see, she's educated, she's well read. she's extraordinarily independent. and she corresponds regularly with enlightenment, enlightenment thinkers. the need to row actually comes and visits her for a little while. the founder father of one of the encyclopedias and she's a regular correspondent with voltaire. she is a reformer, determined to improve the internal management of russia. important for us, she wants to involve a wider cross-section of society in governance, government decision making was primarily with the aristocracy. these guys all have these largest gates full of peasants. they make their money off their estates. she wanted to promote this merchant. merchant class and give them a role in promoting society and promoting the economy.
to that end, she and she has a treaty signed between russia and britain. in great britain, the commercial treaty of 1766. now, there's a whole lot of things, but two things are going to be important here. it allows neutral states to trade with to trade non-current or banned items with the enemies of one of the signatories. so i can trade everything except more material with sweden or with france. if i'm russia, even when britain is fighting sweden or france and vice versa, the british can trade to sweden. when the russians are fighting with sweden. so long as this doesn't include war material. the treaty does not include prohibitions on the trade in naval stores. okay, so in theory, russia could continue to trade naval stores with france when britain's at war with france rope pitch tar masks. now, here's the tricky it's an
international treaty language which is actually rather vague. the british have the position that this language is so vague, you think it might include naval stores. the russians are very explicit. it doesn't include naval stores. the british have signed similar treaties with sweden and denmark with similarly vague language. and it was vague enough that the british felt they could, you know, lawyer up and get their way out of it and take what they wanted. but in 1747, a british judge in admiralty court actually ruled against britain on the basis of vague language in a treaty and allowed a cargo of naval stores to go forward. and so even britain's quite settled on the exclusion of naval stores from the treaty. but as i said, russia clearly did not think they were included. so three trends during the american revolution caused this russian change in policy. they create this crisis for britain in 17/81, the strategy
of the trade embargo to francis spain joined the war. so it is largely a colonial war becomes a european war. the european the impact of the embargo grows on russia and then you get an end of european distractions on russia's part. so they're ignoring a lot of what's going on in the war for the most part, because they've got other matters, other fish to fry in europe. so we'll go over british naval strategy very quickly. it's a pretty short step from the boston port act in the intolerable acts to say that we're going to embargo all trade with the colonies. europeans are fine with this neutral states. they look, we all have a right to govern. trade with our colonies, and we're going to do just that. and you have a right to do just that. and we're not going to contest it. besides, the embargo creates wonderful smuggling opportunities. prices rise, and you can make some money. now, the navy cannot conduct the royal navy cannot conduct a
close blockade of every port. it's not big enough. the difficulties and challenges of conducting close blockade of ports in the ages of sail near impossible. basically you've got to sit outside the port, be able to intercept ships coming in. you can't do that against the east coast of the united states. it's difficult to do in major countries of major coast. so what the british do is pretty typical. they have a fleet in the intercept ships or convoys, sea usually in trade routes, stops them, goes aboard, inspects the cargo and the manifest, and decides whether or not there's anything here you're carrying that's suspect. that might be more material for our enemies. then they send that ship, if they find anything. remember, they're kind of vague about what anything is. they send it to a british port for adjudication by an admiralty court. this is basically a british court set up to adjudicate, to decide these kinds of things.
and when you get to court, it turns out that the british, the merchant ship owner and cargo owner, the burdens on them to prove that their cargo is not bound for a blockade in port, basically, it's a it's a it's a scam not supposed to say that, but it's a scam. so what you get is these tensions with france involving the war with france and then spain in 1779, the british embargo escalates. in july 78, the british orders and councils direct the royal navy to seize or destroy all french vessels encountered august 1778. and this is important. the council explains the blockade to direct the navy to bring it to british port. all vessels, including neutrals bound for french carrying naval or warlike stores. we've got to stop all vessels bound for france. or that you think might be bound
for france. remember, we're in the high seas in a trade route and take it into british port to have the cargo adjudicated by an admiralty court in a loaded process. this clearly affects the neutrals and notices notices catherine didn't her dependance on british hauls to carry russia's exports that have been going on since the early. since the mid 1700s early 1700s will say that. in 1776 the british council in st petersburg notices an increased presence of spanish and french ships. st petersburg an odd one. the truth is they're buying up naval stores. they know what's coming or might come. in 1778, he counts british ship visits to st petersburg 314. all others combined are only 285 things.
philip 1779 british ship visits fall to 314. all the others combined rise to 379. so catherine's diversification policy is working significant share of these hulls. these merchant visits are or dutch or some of the most notorious smugglers taking cargoes into the united states and. it's pretty easy shot for them to go to france if they prefer. at the same time that her depends or her her or her attempt to shed british into british dependance dependance on britain sorry and increase the visits of other ships. her cargoes start getting seized on the high seas by mostly the british, but ironically things really get bad. in august 1778, when an american the general mifflin sinks, one british merchant seizes up in the white sea and they're all a russian cargo.
so she orders this to order a squadron to the white sea to convoy basically merchant ships in the white sea. white sea is north of russia. it's navigable, good portions of the year. it's where really talking arctic circle here, those kinds of conditions. october 1778 british british vessels seize the russian merchant army. going to try to pronounce this properly, because i don't know if it's in french, german or what it's the young prince couldn't find it in russian. couldn't. and i don't speak french. it's bound for france with a cargo of hemp and flax. now from russia standpoint, hemp is excluded from seizure by the british under the 1766 commercial treaty. flax is excluded from seizure by all treaties. it's it's is fair game. so she's angry. and in december 78, she announces catherine announces that the white sea is close to
all merchant vessels or all right, merchant raiders. my apologies. her her foreign minister account nikita panin does not want a confrontation with britain he doesn't see it as in russia's interests. and at this point he's arguing against taking any drastic steps to deal with the british seizure of russian cargoes. she's not happy about that. but this is an opportunity because that first vessel seized was seized by an american so she can say she's still being neutral and he can argue his case that this is fair and even handed. and we're still we're still walking a tightrope between these two here. she formally protests to britain their policy and their practice of seizing merchant at sea. the british ignored which is always a bad idea when it comes europe's strongest land power in the winter of 78 and 79, britain continues to seize.
still, more russian vessels, russian cargo aboard foreign hols. in april 1779, britain announces that convoys will be stopped as well. now their practice had been seize individual ships, so the neutral said, well, we'll stop that, we'll convoy makes sense and that's generally considered something to show that okay guys are not running any blockades or not carrying anything because they wouldn't be running out in broad daylight carrying all this stuff as a big convoy. so this british decision to say that carrying or carrying trade in a convoy makes you exempt from solvency easier isn't going to that's kind of an offense to, catherine and all the other neutral traders at sea denmark. it takes the lead and appeals to the russian court help the russian court kind of ignores denmark just the way britain had russia. the second thing is going on in 1779 is the russian cargo and
former giant vessels is taking an interminable of time to get adjudicated in british courts. this is taking months and if you've got perishable goods, which it was a fair amount of russia's were green this is a problem and then rulings when they come down are really not helpful. the british try to help out what they do is they announce a policy of to you know, lessen the impact on neutrals often we will buy all condemned cargoes at market rates. well, here's a shock. the market's depressed in england because there are so many condemned cargoes in port. so basically it's like i said, i'm going to walk up to you. i'm going to take your car and i'm going to pay you a used car price in 2018 instead of the inflated prices paid during the pandemic. you probably don't like that. november 79, she instructs her ambassador in london to protest strongly and describes british acts as acts of insolence, insubordination. cupidity you know, this is a
relatively strong language for diplomacy, especially aimed at another george. the third. again, main complaint is directed at the slow speed of the admiralty courts. the british ignore the russian protests yet again, even though these are originating with catherine, they're more concerned with the french and spanish naval threats. 1779 there was a very real threat of combined fleet sustaining invasion. the united kingdom itself and internal. disagreements within the government of lord north, largely over the the saratoga campaign. now they get to know what the british are getting with this, in part because russia's in europe and to the south and it's its front against the ottoman empire. so just go through some of those distractions real quick and see why the british could do this so long and why it took so long for catherine to decide she'd had
enough probably heard about it before the first partition of poland takes place in 1772. russia and austria get together and slice off about a third to half of the countries poland drinks. they're still maneuvering for influence in what's left in the rump state of poland 1772. and as the war goes on, russia's had a historic enemy. is the ottoman empire to the south. 1768 1774. russia fights a war with the ottoman empire. they they do very well get access to the black sea. and by the time of the american revolution, the ottoman and russia still dueling and trying to stall competing puppet regimes in the crimea and conflict, which is that little peninsula that juts down into the black sea. so they're pretty much focused there. we've got the rebellion by fugitive and most importantly, we've got the war bavarian succession taking place in central europe. this is in germany.
runs from july 78 to may 79. basically, what's going on is the elector of bavaria dies without an heir. so prussia and austria start to figure out what we want. our guy in his place that improve our odds of becoming holy roman emperor and having greater in central europe, in the holy roman empire. it's a typical 18th century court war in which they're basically armies maneuvering at a distance, not necessarily wanting to have a big fight, because that involves cost losses and money. so this is going on for a while, russia has been allied with prussia for some time now prior to the threat for third was a great admirer of frederick the great who's still around. so there's a historic alliance here for the last few decades, russia's to intervene on prussia's behalf pretty much sort of says, okay, we're going to end now and forces everybody to come to the table and cut a
deal. that's the treaty of tension in 1779, for the first time, russia becomes, the guarantor of the holy roman empire. empire, emperor, pick one. and this is the privilege. this privileged position that only france, sweden have had before. so russian influence here is moving into central europe a big way when that war ends, russia suddenly goes, okay we've had all these crises in the last ten years. we've done quite well them. there's one thing that has not broken our way, and that's the stupid naval war that britain is waging on neutral trade. for the british part, they're completely misreading where russia's head is, where katherine's head is, and where russian priorities are. in the fall of 79, lord stormont, the secretary of state for the northern department, he's kind germain's equivalent
here has the ambassador to russia sir james harris exploring the possibility of a military alliance between russia and great. he keeps offering them islands in the mediterranean. well, appealing but you know it's the mediterranean and i'm up here and down in the ottoman empire just doesn't generate any interest in the russian court. they're not real eager to get in the middle of a war. they also float talk diplomatically in diplomatic circles. the idea of an armed mediation with the americans or the french or the spanish, anybody they can get help with. this has a little bit more appeal for the russians because it's similar to the role they had just played in bavaria in succession. it expands their influence into western europe, but nothing comes of that. they really don't want to go to war. and you've got to have that threat if you're going to basically become an armed mediator. so 1780, the beginning of the year, catherine finally acts on her frustration.
in february without consulting her counsel, she mobilizes a portion of the russian fleet. it's just 15 ships of the line and five frigates. she orders count panin to invite neutral states to issue a joint declaration on the rights of neutrals and to craft the treaty. this is her initiative initiative, march 1780. the declaration principles of armed neutrality with you really long title that i don't read gets released. it's primarily directed at france, britain and spain. the real the real target here is britain. and it's a revolution. in international law that she's proposing, she wants neutral ships to be free to navigate from port to port and along belligerent coasts. she wants the end of the stop and seizure policy cargoes in neutral vessels, including that carried by subjects of belligerent states. okay will be immune to seizure. the only exception is being is
contraband and war materiel. the did not include naval stores meaning i'm a french businessman, i can buy naval stores in russia, have them shipped on a dutch ship and delivered in france as be intolerable for britain. of course, contraband for russia for catherine's purposes will be defined by the 1766 treaty of commerce between the united kingdom and russia as. it is important to blockaded ports will only be considered literally or legally blockaded if there's a sufficient number of ships outside the port so as to render entry these distant high seas blockades that the british are conducting are no longer going to be acceptable. the principles that govern the decisions of admiralty courts, or at least four principles that she's laid out, five things there. at the end of the day, she's
basically to tell british courts how to rule and the rules under which they have to use to rule. and she wants this this of principles to be adopted by. all neutral states in europe. she goes on in the in the in the declaration of principles to stress that russia's been neutral that it's victimized by all parties. and that she prefer to stay neutral. but she hints at the possibility of using force to back up her principles. and i'm just going to read a little quote here. this measure, observe, so long as she in russia is not provoked, forced to pass the bounds of moderation, perfect impartiality, it is only in this extremity that her fleet will have orders to go wherever honor, interest and need may require. okay. then she announces. she, by the way, mobilized a portion of her fleet in april. she she proposes the league of armed neutrality.
so this is a two step here. she invites the netherlands. denmark, prussia and portugal to create a league to enforce those principles that she just laid out. she's convinced and that the she just laid out have their origins in natural law. remember, she's she's an enlightenment type thinker. okay. so these are not principles based on concepts of self-interest. so these are concepts based on natural law. she thinks the neutrals should join her, join russia on the basis of their understanding and self-evident truth of natural law. i'm going to come back to that. important to remember now is a massive risk for britain. okay. one she's accustom accustomed to fighting european wars with the continental ally 1780. britain does not have one. catherine is threatening to lead an alliance of neutral states in a conflict confrontation with
britain counter to british interests and british strategy. worse, it could radically change the balance of naval power. britain has roughly 117 ships of the line. these are the capital ships of the time. they're spread among several theaters, north america, the english channel, mediterranean, caribbean and north privateers, and the and the frigates are running around doing the merchant stops. combi and francis spain have 129 ships of the line, but given russian or british superiority and professionalism, training, experience, they tend to be evenly matched despite the french, spanish numerical superiority. in. there's a debate going on between lord sandwich, the basically the navy, the admiralty and lord germaine over proper use of the navy. germaine wants it in the caribbean and on the coast of north america.
sandwich wants it close to home because remember he just faced a threat of invasion from a combined french and spanish fleet. so the aren't quite sure what to do with this either of those strategies is at risk if they ever resolve their differences. here's the big kicker denmark and sweden combined have nearly 60 ships of the line. russia has another 30. the netherlands have 26. they're all at a qualitative. disadvantage in a one on one fight with britain. but combined it's 116 ships. the line if for some reason they had a confrontation with britain. in addition to the french and spanish having their confrontation with britain. britains just cannot make up for such a quantitative disparity. and here's the little tiny footnote that gets missed a lot at that time. britain is still dependent on russia for naval stores 90% of its hemp used in cordage, and
90% of its large masts come from russia. so now they're going to start to pay the price for having ignored catherine's complaints for so long. the french and spanish do what the french and spanish do. they think it's the greatest idea since sliced bread for neutrals to get together and stop the british naval strategy. and they tell. so the french go so far as to write and publicly announce that he thinks this idea from natural law is fantastic and he's at war to defend it. the spanish sort of do the same thing, actually beat the french out of the gate. they say, you know, they could some russian ships in the cargo. sorry about that. the british us do it didn't mean to and it won't happen again unless you're going to gibraltar now, the british don't know what this all means. there's a lot of things going on here and there's a lot of balls in the air and they're not sure how to react. is catherine's preparing to intervene in the american war in french war, in the spanish war
or all of the above? is she looking for a move? more indirect support in france and spain? has she decided that it's in russia's interests for france and spain to prevail or she simply trying to redefine customary international in a law which would be horrible for the british because? their interpretation of international law is not based on her concept of neutral rights or natural law, but on self-interest and the right to national security. that's how they fight their wars. it's how they plan to fight the wars. it's they will fight their wars and. if catherine changes the nature of international law, the understanding of international law, then britain's entire naval strategy from then and into the future will be a violation of international law. so they can't that either the diplomatic channels are humming britain's got great spies all over the world. so they know they know what's going on. the conversations between ambassadors in-country and their own ambassadors and the courts in denmark, sweden, norway and so on.
but not norway. it's part of denmark, right? or sweden. it keeps changing as late as july, lord stormont sends a note to his ambassador in russia and he said the more. i reflect on all that has passed of the more i am inclined to believe that we have got to the bottom of this strange business. they're still confused. in the summer of 1780. here's with the strategy the britain or russia's policy change principles announcement starts to fall apart. the neutrals are as confused as the british. they don't quite know what to make of this. they all request clarification. and i'm only going to go over swedes because it's the most straightforward swedish. the swedish want to know would the league provide reciprocal protection and mutual assistance? what are the mechanics of this league? how is it going to work? what each member be obligated to protect every party's? are the swedes going to have to protect the russian commerce, or would they be able to set aside
portion of their military forces and navy to protect other interests? okay. who would command the joint or a combined joint force or a combined operation? who's in charge fairly? question would states be on their own to protest seizures of their cargoes, or were the league collectively? well, those individuals states have to wait. who would decide how to respond to a violation? any single member's trade. so who's more the who's in charge? but just as important, who's going to decide how to respond when one of us gets caught out? because the british are not going to start doing it to everybody. they'll pick them. they'll pick one at a time and and this is where things really south russia's response is unsatisfactory unsatisfactory they announce that it's a narrow security agreement limited to
freedom of the seas. basically what they seem to have in mind is an armed convoy escort escort which functions by nation kind of a relay race. so a convoy would be by the navy of one state. the convoy will get past the navy of another state, get past the navy of another state. it's easy for the russians to say being at the eastern of the baltic where there aren't as many private british or british vessels. but there you go to make matters worse, catherine, orders that the russian baltic fleet will only protect russian merchant vessels. she's not going to protect other neutrals carrying russian cargo. the reason she has to do this is do this is pretty straightforward. a significant portion of the baltic fleet is by british citizens, and they basically tell her, we're not to fight the british decisions.
the league are to be unanimous, which we know washington is a formula for an action and the league is limited to defending the march principles. states are on their own outside of the principles of arm neutrality, meaning that if i'm netherlands and i join and we get into a scuffle, the british and the british decide to see seas seine status, which is one of my best colonies in the caribbean on my own. i'm not going to look to other neutrals for help because catherine just said we're not going to get any. and we'll work out the specifics in the treaty as we've negotiated. so the greatest burden as started to say, gets placed on those states, closest britain, the netherlands, denmark and sweden. the baltic and white sea cluster. russia at this point are not regularly patrolled by the british any more. it's sufficient to wait on the edge of the sea. you know that choke point in the baltic.
and. the russian fleet is not going to protect member vessels even if they carry russian cargo. the greatest risk is run by others, those closest to britain, who will be responsible for protecting convoys when they're closest to britain and most likely bound for france, spain. they're in there all these colonies are going to be vulnerable no matter where they are. so this is where we have the real problem for catherine that her principles and her proposed league don't recognize national security interests. that kills the credibility of the threat of force that had worried the british. it also means that the other neutrals can't look to the league for much in the way of protection. as it becomes clear to sweden and denmark that the league is going to have no teeth. they have to figure out what they're going to do and how they're going to respond. if the danes are internally split, they've been taking a bit
of abuse from the british, so one faction says, well, let's go negotiate with the russians and see if we can't put some teeth in this thing. the other faction has taken the view that now she's never going to put russian interests at risk for us. and, well, let's cut a deal with the british so the first minister can't burn staff does both. he secretly pursues britain negotiations with britain while he's negotiating with the russians. and i seem to have lost a page. which is awkward. in may, denmark proposed revisions to the anglo danish treaty 1670 to address the british concerns. basically the danish throw in the towel and tell the british we will include naval we'll we'll take your language even though our interpretation and understanding of our existing treaty is vague we'll take your language and announces the closure of the baltic to all hostile naval vessels, not a
big, big step as it sounds, because, again, the british can intercept convoys leaving the baltic just as they exit it on july 4th. it signs a secret deal with the british. basically, we won't export naval goods. and then in publicly to sign the treaty with the russians on july ninth saying, oh, we love the league, it's it's wonderful. let's go do that. sweden pursues the same practice they negotiate with britain and russia. they decide to accept that vague language again from an old treaty from 1661 and will basically that we will not export naval stores and then they sign the treaty with russia on august the first to create the league and there's a proviso that sweden says, you know, we've already understood our limits with british include naval stores. we be exporting those.
the netherlands moves to join in 1780 because only neutral states can join britain promptly declares war on the dutch. so they're no longer neutral. and that leads to the fourth anglo-dutch war, the seizure of st eustatius. not surprisingly, prussia austria and portugal join in 1781. ironically, the ottoman empire joins in 1782, and then the kingdom of to sicily is which is really just the bottom third of the boot joins in 1783. so we've got great league that it's toothless and most of it is joined by in the end by countries with no navies interests and nothing at stake. so where does this all leave. britain's naval strategy for waging war against the colonies made it more dependent on the baltic states for naval stores.
shore probably should have said that at the beginning of which means that the british had taken a risk in their policy with neutrals, in a lot of ways, the principle, the declaration of principles and the league of our neutrality neutrality are a response to that british policy. this led to the neutral state reaction declaration in the league, which would have upset british of all three of all wars then in the future. and the british naval strategy persisted. so why did the british keep doing this? it created such risks for. them. why historians don't tackle the subject. if you start following histories, including naval histories, the american revolution, you get this weird situation where the arm, the arm neutrality rates a sentence or two, and that's at the time diplomats attributed the whole thing, which proved to be a farce as a results of russian court politics, they saw an internal political between count
panin used to be a favorite of the emperors and he's on his way out and grigory potemkin he's on his way up. and these two are sending different signals about the whole thing means and. so that's how the diplomats read it which partly explains the confusion in the british court. and for that matter, among neutral courts. john granger, who has studied the royal navy in the baltic, decides it's an attempt by russia to dominate denmark and sweden. probably some credence to it, but i don't think that's where catherine's head is saying sam willis, who in his great one volume history of the the naval the naval war, says just a cover for imperial, russian imperial or mercantile ambitions. he's kind of on the same page as granger. i'm going to mispronounce his name, but david sear it, i think, is still the naval war college because the whole thing a vanity project for catherine the second it's it's kind of harsh but might be this might be the case and then isobel the
material guy who got hold of sir james harrison's diaries and looked at all his correspondence she essentially says that it's an attempt to force britain to clarify international law. it comes to neutral rights at sea during times of war. so he gives her the or she she gives catherine the most credit and she highlights, i think, to her credit that the russian complaints about russian about british naval policy continue and escalate well into 1783. so i think that's a more serious interpretation. it's also 60 years old and she wrote a great book in the sixties and unfortunately the language, frankly, of diplomacy was in french. and i don't read french. and her book has great passages in it, and they're all in french. i did what i could wish they'd been in russian. all these explanations haven't. after fact aspect to them. they can look back over time and
say, well, this is how it turned out. so they kind of have the feeling that because it turned out this way. it must have been this way or this, but this is how was going to turn out from the get go. the thing that they missed is at the time this all happened, the british didn't know that. they didn't know it was going to turn out the way that turned out. all those explanations downplay this urgency and success of british diplomacy with sweden and denmark these negotiations with denmark, sweden over a naval trade neutral rights going on for a long time. as denmark and sweden complained to the british about what was being done to them. they go into high gear after after catherine makes. her announcement. so i don't think these guys give the british credit for having the deal very quickly turn on a dime solve their danish and swedish problems. it also underplays the seriousness of the threat that britain perceived. otherwise you wouldn't have the fourth anglo-dutch war soon as the dutch, which were probably
the weakest of the neutrals here with a fleet threatened to join. there's a war. this occurs even after the british knew the league was toothless because they had good spies in sweden and denmark. so where this us is, i think it's a rather short episode. the league armed neutrality is very short lived. the meaning of life, but it does highlight the challenges that the british faced as they fought the war and the tenuous ness that at any point could have gone the other way. why? i think it's one of those good. what if questions if catherine had had teeth in her league, the war might have ended differently? it certainly would have ended sooner, might have spread much wider, much more widely, particularly into europe and the mediterranean and.
the fact that russia's proposal seemed to take the british by surprise essentially it came out left field for them also. as i mentioned a couple of times i alluded to a couple of times created a threat the way of the way that russia that britain fights its wars at sea or fought its wars at sea. there are great volumes published during world war one about the rights of neutrals. and they're looking back at these two things. a lot of the original documents are in two volumes, and this debate over neutral rights the rights of versus rights of national security upon which britain its its blockades. you can see it goes on for 130 years, 140 years after the american revolution. she used the opportunity to try catherine, use the opportunity to try and change entire legal system when it came to neutral
rights and and ices so i'll leave you with this this think the story of the arm neutrality. i wrote this down because i'm going to use it in an reminds us of the gossamer strands that held britain's war effort together for so long after waterloo. the duke of wellington remarked it was the nearest one thing you ever saw in your life. and i think that applies to british naval strategy and the crisis that they faced in 1780. as a result of their seven years, five years of war at that point. quest questions i've got 20. yes, sir. yeah. think that much. it. did the americans actively try to take advantage of the tensions like and send a delegation catherine like they did france for troops and arms they to join the league and that
wasn't that was a nonstarter. obviously the russians didn't recognize independence at that point. and they were at war. so that was a nonstarter here, which means that even the americans were confused and didn't understand exactly what was going as prize. very if you cover the war on land at all. no. on the russian part, no. because after the battle of brooklyn, there was and the arrival of the hessians the there were rumors around about the britain negotiating with catherine about hiring russian troops to join the hessians could create a lot of a lot of turmoil there in this country. the british did approach, the russians at the beginning of the war as actually before they started rounding up willing germans. remember in 1775, the british had or the russians had just won a seven year war against the ottoman empire. their troops, their committee, their officers, their
experienced, they know what they're do and they're veterans it's a natural place to go. so would started there to the british have got this weird love hate relationship with the russians throughout this period but like i said, for the most it's kind of indifferent. it's like, well, you know, we want to get involved, maybe we can find some some use for them or mutual projects with the russians. the russians like, yeah, great. maybe we can find some, some mutual, mutually beneficial relationship with the british, but it just didn't go anywhere. the russians are focused on the east. the british are focused on the west. do the historians understand britain was truly motivated to simply enforce their law by, hey, you can't have naval stores? or were they at a point financially where they needed to confiscate these things to support their own war effort in the americas? like was there a under under leaning political pressure saying, hey, just start up all these boats, make excuses, we need free resources where they
at that point yet was that. i think the main driver here was preventing those resources from getting to the french, the spanish or the americans before 1778. as as the council noted, the french and the spanish were showing up in st petersburg in increasing numbers and, you know, yeah, they were carrying some grain, but they were looking for naval goods, particularly the french virgins knew what he was doing because he saw what he thought he saw, where things might. he knew he'd need a bigger and stronger navy. and the baltic was the best place to get it. so i think that was the main driver of the british of the british strategy. they did take some steps as the war progressed to sort of, quote, lighten the load more. i'm making the words up. it's not a quote on the neutrals of policy at various points, they said, okay, you know, amnesty for all we've done dutch ships in port because they were
seizing dutch left and right. they had a larger merchant. so they kind of let them all go as long as they weren't carrying, you know, banned cargo as far as the british were concerned, whether that made much of a difference or not is is another question. the british dutch tensions are really interesting. leading up to the fourth anglo-dutch war and there exacerbate it by the american revolution. that's a little bit outside so i didn't, i didn't tackle it. so excellent presentation. eric, my question for you is, is how much do the individual colonial governments in the continental how much of this information are they interpreting or are they receiving between all the different treaties that are going on, talks between britain and russia, what kind of information is being received in the colonies in regards to these incidents? not a lot.
it's a high priority for them. i don't mean it should be, but they did have other things that were sort of at the top of the list and and what happened in far off russia after it became clear the russians going to send troops was of a you know. well, that's but we've got other things on our plate that's why i think they trying join the league if i mean they clearly didn't understand what it was intended to be from the get go. i think who they maybe somebody remind can remind me who they sent to try to get into the court petersburg who had not a lot of success so they didn't have good intelligence on the russians frankly could tell them what he knew from the french and the french knew quite a bit. but again, it wasn't a high priority for them in a lot of ways. the revolution was the pretty good size stone in the pond that
had spread these rebels over in eastern europe and then france to spain were polders following that. so that's kind of how came to it. sure. anything else, you know, just a random comment like i'm a -- and you should pick a different subject. definitely not a random comment. and no, i don't think you should pick a different subject question about the relationship more of a on a personal level, if one existed between the two monarchs, catherine and george both with their with their german heritage, did that factor in at all to the relationship or the decision making? i didn't find any evidence of it, to tell you the truth. i mean, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. she she was more she and to the third her her husband both had more. so peter interests in lands germany to the south in denmark and so a lot of their diplomacy
was focused on trying resolve that issue and hand over you know being being these principalities in the holy roman empire. that was kind of in play. but i think george the third was pretty proud of the fact that he was a britain at this point and not a german. i mean, he played that up so you don't you don't really see much of a of a relationship there. they may exist. i didn't do a deep dive some of her letters and memoirs are published. they're all sort of sort of end a seven years war. you don't find a lot of correspondence with george third, they tend to be lower level german princes and and a few dukes. and then a lot of the french themselves. i think i don't quite know, but i don't think much. there's a quote, just a curious so did the league of armed neutrality include the hapsburg
empire? did they get involved? i think eventually in 1781. yes. 1781. they did join. i haven't read it. there's a new book out about the hapsburg empire, the austrian empire and the relationship with the the result of the american that just came out. but it's a little bit outside my price range and moment and would go to the bottom of reading list. so yeah, they did. thanks. it was great talk and you know, very relevant with russia being in the news a lot and our relationship with them was very interesting i guess from catherine the great and the russian people at that time, what did they think of? our revolution, you know, you talk about natural law was so important to catherine in her in the league that she was trying to create.
you know, did they view it as as we view, you know, places like france and ireland and other places kind of the people get really imbued with a lot of the ideals. any idea, you know, what russians thought of our revolution? catherine's a weird character, you know, as far as opinion in russia, you know, even then and didn't have one savior or not to she is a truly enlightened person and is is is fascinated by the enlightenment growing up she was very well-educated a lot of private study and like i said of course my role people so she felt something akin to she saw the appeal i think of natural law she actually when she was refusing troops she was saying you know like she broke a friend. i you know obviously weren't going to go that route.
but. the revolution itself doesn't matter much to me. but she predicted american independence in lifetime. so saw this think as being sort of the outcome or the outcrop or the result of an enlightenment movement. she actually located the unique from for for monarch monarchy or rulers. she located the of russia among its people. okay. you know a lot of you hear you know george third is the sovereign now she said it's people now of course the czar represents and symbolized and sits at the top of the people. so for a long time, the russians was known as the little father. so he was the he. in her case, she whether she used mother, father, i don't know, wouldn't surprise me if she used father to that that,
you know, our autocracy is enlightened, but it's still an autocracy was going to be one. and here's a reason the level below her these folks they've made a lot of progress since the 1500s in terms of their thinking but it's still really these airstrip autocrats and nobles who don't concern themselves with such issues. so she's unique in russian history. i think at that point, you know, her her big predecessor, that everybody talks about, not her immediate predecessor. her big predecessor was peter the great, who famously turned russia from the east to focus on the west. she was truly person of the west and her attitude changed and her attitude changed radically with the execution of. louis the 16th.
so she saw that all these great ideas that i'd been so fond of for so long, you know, this is where they can lead and that's bad. and therefore they're bad ideas. and so she became one of the toughest autocrats in europe up until her death. you know as all these plots are happening throughout much of her reign, you're, you know, her solution. we're more civilized and enlightened because we find these people we beat a confession out of them. we use that word and then we send them to siberia. whereas in the western europe, less enlightened, they execute them, you know, siberia was a death sentence in the 1700s for a lot of people. so she sincere about it, she shares a of those values that i think our founders had she doesn't understand or certainly doesn't agree with the connection between representative government and the individual rights and where that when it comes to governance to her credit she did try to
reform a constitution she did reorganize country administratively. and like i said, she tried to involve the merchant class in governance and decision making, which is something aristocrats had no interest in. so she's she's you know, i'd say 40% of the way where the founders were, which is which is for a monarch, particularly one with that much power, but intellectually and philosophy philosophically, that's where she is. but i think she didn't specifically look at the american revolution itself. and in terms how those ideas related to governance, that was more of a thing for france. her. and the other resources. i think.
it's a oh, good morning. we're off to such a great start with these two lectures that we've had. so far today. my name is dan welch and i am the emerging war book series editor. if you've not had opportunity to check out any of the books that emerging revolutionary war has put over the last several years, i highly encourage you to do so. if you find, you know, the topic of this time period engaging, the goal of this book series is to not only give you an introductory level and in some cases a unique perspective of some of these topics, these military history topics from the time period. but also to take you to these all of these books include, handy battlefield guides in the books to take you to where history as my colleague at air w mark malloy likes to say where history actually happened. so we have another number of different books over the last
years. we a single blow battles for lexington and concord written by rw founders, rob awesome and phil greenwald victory or death written by malloy on the battles of trenton and princeton. a handsome flogging written by billy griffith on the battle of, monmouth and phil greenwald on the winner in camden at valley forge. and coming up in the next few months, we have two new books coming out in the series, one on the revolution in central new jersey titled unhappy catastrophes by historian bert dunkel, as well as to the last extremity, the battles for charles in south carolina, 1776 to 1782, written by mark malloy. so if you hadn't had a chance yet to check out all the books in the emerging revolutionary war series where you encourage you to do so, you can get updates on the releases of those upcoming books on emerging revolutionary war your blog as well as savage's bd publishing. the other thing that i wanted to mention that rw is gearing up
for this november is our second annual bus tour. like i said, one of the goals of emerging revolutionary war is to get you to places these events occurred, put you in the of those that lived those moments. this november is the second annual tour will be heading to the battlefields of monmouth as well as spending some time at valley forge and further exploring encampment that would take place there between 1777 and 1778. if you're interested in that bus tour, we have a few still available. please see any one of us from emerging revolutionary war for today or again, check us out our blog emerging revolutionary war. your dawg. and with that i would like to turn it over. liz, who will be introducing our next speaker. thank you so much. dan, it is my privilege, bj, to introduce our last speaker of the morning back for her second
round with the revolutionary war symposium is catherine gruber. you might remember her excellent presentation on our alexandria taylor william karlin. in 2019. kate is the acting director of curatorial services for the jamestown yorktown, where she works with a team to grow the collection and broaden the interpretation early. american history at jamestown settlement and american revolutionary museum at yorktown. kate is a graduate of the university of mary washington's historic preservation program, the best program in the united states. because i am also a graduate where she on archeology and material culture and she also a master's degree in early american history from the college of william and mary. so at that i'd like to welcome
kate and her presentation to a retrospective. england's long 17th century and the coming of revolution in virginia. good morning. well, first off. thank you, liz for organizing such an incredible symposium morning and everyone at emerging revolutionary war or thank you for having me back. definite thoughts. well, i must not have overstayed my welcome too much last time, so thank you for having me back. jim, thank you so much. from holloway, whose work in our rv and everything today. thank you for your service, sir. and you, everyone, for spending your saturday morning talking about american history. i've really enjoyed our presentations this morning so far, but i got to say now for something different. we've established that there is one historian of of russian
history in the room and he's 79th century historians in the room. more importantly, historians of british history, 17th century british history. thank you. this is not my area of expertise either. so it's been really fun to do a deep dive. how retrospectively? 18th century patriots viewed the revolution looking at their 17th century forebears. but we're going to get started. here in 1828, when alexander garden published the second edition of his anecdotes of the american revolution. nearly 50 years had passed since cornwallis surrendered to washington at yorktown, and many, if most of those participants and witnesses of the siege at yorktown were long gone. save of course, major william jackson, who spoke with garden a few years before and supplied
some of the material for gardens book, jackson relayed to him an anecdote he claims to have heard from john lawrence that during the surrender, as the british lay down their arms, the despondent field band played a well-known tune the world turned upside down a fitting. if not passive aggressive commentary on their belief that until less than a organized body of poorly trained, ragtag group rebels had bested the most fearsome and professional fighting force the modern world had ever seen. certainly for the british, if not for everyone involved, washing tins decisive victory at yorktown in king george, the thirds inevitable recognition of american independence must have indeed felt like the world was upside down. it's fitting, right? maybe even a little poetic. but it's probably not true that
what. there's no corroborating evidence that. the british played this tune yorktown for from any eyewitnesses of the surrender, which there are many. this tune or excuse me, perhaps lawrence actually made it up. maybe as some historians, including barbara tuchman, have suggested, jackson may have missed. understood. lawrence comments of the event. supposing that instead of referencing a song, maybe lawrence kind of caught up in that ideology. maybe he simply was stating himself that it was as if the world had turned upside down. but we're not here to make a judgment on john lawrence memory or william jackson's hearing. we're here to talk about the coming of the revolution as, seen retrospectively from the lens of the long 17th century in
britain's old virginia. so what does the world turned upside down? have do with it? probably no one was thinking this at yorktown in 1781, but plenty people were. well aware of this phrase in not necessarily in the 18th century, but in the when new lyrics of a ballad to the tune of the king enjoys his own again started popping up in the 1640s during the english civil wars. i will sing it for you now. now, i'm totally. how did not get invited. to not get invited. a recording reverse symposium. listen to me. and you shall hear. news has not been this thousand year since herod. and many more. you never heard the like before.
your holy days are despised. new fashions are devised. old christmases kicked out of town. yet be content. and the times you see. the world turned upside down. well, lots of people, and i'm sorry to say, include king lin-manuel miranda there. i said it. think that what we know as the world turned upside down was a simple english drinking song. well, far from it. actually, these words are scathing. social and political on the new regime of the puritan parliament. and course, oliver cromwell, who led england's new model army against, the stewart king charles, the first cromwell's victory over charles's loyalists at the battle of naseby in 1645 ended the first civil war, but the second civil war soon began and ended more or less with the execution of charles the first
on january 30th, 1649. began england's commonwealth period which saw not a king but oliver cromwell as lord protector. he and his parliament instituted unpopular changes such as banning christmas traditions which just heard in reference in that stanza that i just read for you. and it was in context that the appeared a social and politically active group of londoners who were discontent with current events and concerns about infringements on the rights of english subjects. garnering support through broadside and pamphlet campaigns illustrating life in a literal world turned upside down. this was all published by this group, and this was a full with the now famous stanza, the world turned upside down. so even though it's probably apocryphal, the fact this 17th
century ballad about the eventual regicide of a king becoming so inherently entwined with our own national mythology surrounding patriots own version of regicide at their victory at yorktown. it makes perfect sense, right? considering theme of exploring the american revolution turned the world upside down, i cannot think a better way to start than by exploring this very deep, 17th century global origin of that very phrase. thank you so much. came up with with that topic for this symposium because this just landed right in my lap. and, you know this is such a poetic way in which citizens of the new republic co-opted these words to further the parallel of a new world in which rebellious patriots successfully overthrew the yoke of an oppressive monarch and ineffective
parliament. well, historians such as barbara tuchman again have have rightfully argued for multiple reasons outside the scope, this talk that it's unlikely that anyone was playing this song. the world turned upside down during the british surrender at yorktown. music historian arthur schrader's 1998 article in the journal american music, published by the university of illinois press, takes tuchman's assertion a little bit further. in his article, the turned upside down a march or music to surrender by. i love that title. schrader argues that actually let me let me suggest that as a topic the next symposium music to surrender by that would be fun. schrader that even though these words existed on a broadside published on to the tune of when the king and joyce's own again, that quote excuse me, he is
saying that quote, there is no reason whatsoever ever to think that anyone at yorktown would have remembered a very obscure year, 135 year old word upside down. text title association with. that tune, he says, quote, the men at yorktown were soldiers, not antiquarians. come on now. i submit this. there are plenty of why the masses assembled. yorktown in october of 1781 may have been thinking about events in british history hundred and 35 years earlier. because what history doesn't happen in a vacuum, you write. and this morning we'll be exploring virginia's relationship with british history and primarily that of the stuart monarchs who reigned from 1603 1714 and how this relationship laid the foundation for virginia's rebellion against
great britain nearly a century later or even before for yorktown virginians saw key similarities between their own protestations with george the third and those experienced by their forefathers against king parliament a century before. but don't take my word for it. listen to patrick, who uttered these words along with virginia resolves on the stamp act in 1765. tarquin and had each his brutus charles the first his cromwell and george the third may prophet by their example. if this be treason make the most of it. many colonists or i should probably say many, many educated founding fathers had the knowledge of the english civil wars and subsequent regicide of charles, who as i mentioned, was
executed in 1649. charles his rule teetered on absolutism. remember the stuarts all believed in the divine right of kings, and charles was a pretty big proponent of that. he levied taxes, parliamentary consent, and did all of these things that two patriots made it. george the third look a whole lot like charles the first george, of course, refused to hear patriots grievances. he acted with outside of colonial best. he raised armies them and he levied taxes without their consent. colonists reasoned then that they had to perform their own version of regicide, declaring independence and resolution as everyone who's seen the musical 1776 knows was proposed by a virginian. richard henry lee lee.
oh, okay. now for everyone watching on zoom and all of the gen zers in the this is the original hamilton. okay. this wonderful film, 1776, is a wonderful and completely accurate portrayal. all of the coming of revolution and virginia's importance to it. and importantly, a virginian importance to to the resolution of independence, the lives of old virginia, the fbi. anyone don't want to sing it? the first family in the sovereign colony, virginia. there we go. i got it. well, richard henry lee, again very accurately portrayed here, has a really interesting connection. back to 17th century england. let me go now. well, yeah, i was going to make
you look at 1776 for longer, but. well, we'll move so rarely we get to engage with that. richard the immigrant you see here on the left was the patriarch of the lee family. he was born in england in 1679. guess what? he was a pretty loyal supporter of charles the first. but he immigrated to virginia during the english civil wars along a whole throng of english royalists and others who saw no economic, political or social future for themselves in a king, england or in an england that was turning their backs on the monarchy. and specifically charles the first. but i am getting a little ahead of myself so we're going to take it all the way back to the beginning when 104 men and boys arrived in, sent a kombucha to establish the first permanent english colony in place that they named.
thank you, jamestown. very good name. after, of course, james, the first of bible fame. much virginia's a joke. nobody got it much of virginia's foundational history is because of or in spite out of james the first stuart monarch who granted that first charter for the virginia company of london. it was then course king james, whom the paramount chief power hands daughter, pocahontas met during her time in london. the same king who promoted trade in africa, which eventually led his heirs to establish the royal african company, which later supplied thousands of enslaved africans to the colonies. and of course. well, in london, james's reign began and almost ended with a bang. on november 5th, 1605, a small group, englishmen frustrated by
the intolerance and persecution under the new protestant monarchs reign, planned to the gunpowder that had stashed in a cellar beneath parliament during its opening session with king james. the whole of the royal family and most of english government inside, they hoped to spark a catholic revolt. well, spoiler. the plot failed. a member of parliament had received letter warning him to stay away from the proceedings that day. so authorities able to capture conspirator guy fox underneath parliament with kegs of gunpowder. and most of the conspirators ended up meeting a pretty gruesome demise, while others who were implicated were imprisoned for life, including one henry percy, older brother of original jamestown colonist george percy. so it's understandable that george age might have been eager
to put himself between and to put an ocean between himself and his conspiratorial family. and even less surprising that king james might have really wanted that, especially when you consider that the percy family either kind of some rabble rousers. it wasn't just george's brother who was involved, the gunpowder plot that was kind of a problem. george's father had actually been previously implicated, aided in a plot to oust queen elizabeth, the first in favor of catholic mary, queen of scots. and he died. so this is his father. he died while imprisoned in the tower of london. found to death. true crime fans unite because it was a suicide. again. come on, now, king james had much to gain by granting the
virginia company's charter to settle an ocean away, fixing english subjects upon the soil reinforced james's claim to land in north america. he hoped that raw materials from virginia, including timbers, furs and sassafras and new industries. of course, introduced in the colony, could reduce england's dependance on foreign nations. virginia event could function as a core league in james's slowly turning wheel toward global imperialism. james also wanted to plant the protestant church as a foil against roman catholicism, which had spread throughout central and south america under the spanish. and he wanted to force virginians to convert to protestant christianity. once john ralph's grand experiment in tobacco cultivation proved an overwhelming success.
james put his own distaste for the vile tobacco aside to, reap its benefits. in his coffers, which, of course, only became even more abundant throughout 17th century and after first enslaved africans arrived in the colony in 1619 as the majority labor force for tobacco cultivate. and there thus began the planting of english colonization in virginia, the themes of trade, race and religion, or perhaps more protestant religion establishing like tobacco in a fertile soil, growing deep roots underneath the surface. on the eve of the american patriots were questioning their collective identity and their role in the empire and. you know, were they full english subjects? were they guaranteed the same
rights and protections by king and parliament as their counterparts in great britain? on the british mainland, or on the other hand, were they something very different either by necessity? neglect or design and therefore in need of their own sovereignty. we tend to think of this collective questioning as one that's firmly rooted in that revolution. and every moment the 18th century, but english subjects in the 17th century grappled with this question to sometimes coming to polar opposite conclusions, largely depending upon their with monarchs and parliaments, an ocean away and whether or not colony your needs were taking a back seat to more pressing imperial. james, the first's first charter for the virginia company explicitly granted the colonists
and all of their future generations. that's important to note. the right to quote have and enjoy all liberties. franchise passes and immunities as if they had been abiding and within this our realm of england or any of our said dominions unquote. the coat of arms of the virginia company of london. you can see here on this window in, england and on this frontispiece to an early 18th century book, the coat of arms of the virginia company of london made that guarantee manifest with the motto of virginia in quantum which if you know your latin. roughly translates to virginia gives the fifth the fifth of the of the dominions alongside scotland ireland and france. of course is in there too. so virginia gives the fifth.
it's firmly rooted as a. a jewel, if you will, in england's crown after the act of 1707, though when queen in the last of the house of stuart if you know your. monarch monarchical history she actually achieved the unification of england and scotland something that her predecessors had failed to accomplish so. i kind of like the idea that if you really want something done, send a woman to do it. she did it. she. she unified those two parliaments. so then virginia had to adopt a slightly different motto. virginia in court them so there now being four, not five. dominions, because, of course, of that unification virginia continued to display you can just barely make it out here. virginia in that courtroom here, virginia continued to display this motto right up until the revolutionary war. we were talking a little about currency in specie earlier.
you see this motto printed on some of the paper currency throughout the seven or excuse me, throughout the 18th century. all right. but all of this really should sound to you. the this talk of of dominions because virginia still takes her moniker as the old dominion, it's everywhere. old dominion brewing. very brewing, very, very good. i should point out. rumor has it that was actually stuart king charles the second who who fondly bestowed this title on virginia in recognition the loyalty shown to by virginians after the death of charles the first which of course sent charles the second into exile. and throughout that exile, all the way up to his own, resting nation to the throne in 1660. but before all of that, the
first half of the 17th century, the colonial in virginia was met with, i'm going to be really nice and succinct and say mixed results for for most english settlers in jamestown and beyond. colonists, of course, had an unforgiving climate starvation changing relationships with indigenous virginians. and after the dissolution of the virginia company in 1624, which placed operation of the colony under a more direct royal control, colonial governors started to arrive to represent and ensure more intentionally the crown's interests in and virginia not. all of these governors were met favorably, but in sir william berkeley colonies, it's really found an advocate. berkeley arrived in virginia. in 1642. he was a close and ally of
charles, the first. and berkeley calculated that his royalist sentiments serve him a little bit better than they would england. and of course his calculations. correct? right. it paid off for him. well, yeah. i'm going to stand by that. while in office, berkeley advocated for colonists rights and advanced many of their freedoms. you know, as english subjects. right. he supported the repeal of a tax that funded some of his own income, the crown's representative. there was a poll tax and he repealed it. he believed that neither governor nor the governor's council all could impose taxes without the consent of representatives in the virginia assembly. wow. look at that. he assured colonists that if the colonial government imposed on any region in the colony, that that location would have to have representation and. the assembly remember, this is a time where virginia was expand
and colonists were expanding, getting further, further out of that centralized control and and representation was was starting to be important. during his tenure as colonial governor berkeley effectively established no taxation without representation and he solidified colonists rights as english citizens abroad. this is 1642, right? again this should all sound very familiar now at this part of our story. sorry to say, we really have to dive back into the english civil wars which pitted parliaments supporting roundheads against charles the first and his cavaliers from about the end of 1630s to 1648 at perhaps most basic level. the wars were fought because of charles the first's increasing
absolute test rule. again, right of kings. he dissolves parliament. parliament is supposed to. they're supposed to work in tandem. they're supposed to work together, right? he said, i'm working alone. he levied taxes then without parliamentary permission, and like i just said, he he dissolve parliament altogether. the joint power of monarchy and parliament had been the of the land since you know what document established that joint structure the magna carta. that's right. 1215. it's been it's been the law of the land since 1215. and now here's charles. the first like no, that was great. 500 years. but we're done now. so charles's singular and untouchable status you know suffice it to say ruffled many a feather ruffled many a rough if you will, the english civil wars caused clashes both and on the battlefield and virginians were really caught up in in both
extremes. i don't have this in my notes, but i should point that there actually was a technically battle of the english civil war fought here in virginia, the james river, where two ships from opposing ideologies met on the james and fired shots at each. so so there really is the english civil war on our landscape but most including governor sir william barclay again were loyal to king charles the first some colonists but particularly small farmers as might imagine, were really sympathetic with parliament's efforts to rein the king back, limit his his ultimate of taxation. these small in virginia. again it makes sense they didn't like the idea of courting quote big government run by an absolutist king and his loyal governors. an ocean away though the king's
forces finally surrendered to oliver cromwell's model army. the high court of justice at westminster hall tried charles for treason against the people of england, of which he was found guilty and sentenced to be executed on january 30th. 649. charles was led to a public scaffold in whitehall where he lost head in front of a throng of spectators. one witness later wrote that upon the fall of the executioner's ax quote, there was such and groan by the thousands then present as i had never before, and desire that i may never hear again the word of charles the first execution reached a virgin u and berkeley ever the royalist and supporter of the english monarchy refused accept the legitimacy of cromwell's commonwealth rule that took effect, and instead he
that virginia as royal colony would recognize the new lawful monarch charles the second who was then in exile, can't blame them, berkeley declared in 1651, quote we are resolved to continue our allegiance to the most gracious king. again, speaking of charles, the second year, as long as gracious favor permits us and we will peacefully trade with the and all other nations in with our sovereign berkeley really aside from that assertion try to maintain neutrality during the english civil wars. but he had reason to publicly proclaim virginia as a royalist colony because he himself had sought social and political security. the colony when charles the first was losing his approval initially. but it turns out a lot of other people had the same idea or more
royalist and more importantly younger sons of the english aristocracy arrived in virginia throughout the 1640s and fifties, and berkeley was an active for for that. for that immigration, including one immigrant you might know john washington who immigrated in 1657 you've probably heard of his great grandson, george, this is a participatory lecture. that's right. george washington heard of him back in england and in virginia to cram well wasn't everyone's cup of tea, nor was his ineffective parliament. so by may of 1660, i'm skipping over a vast majority of british history in 1660, we have the restoration of the monarchy. and charles the second was invited back to the throne. this restoration of the monarchy
had incredible consequences. virginia and i. i chose the word consequences intentionally, not meaning negative or positive, but both. it had it had reverberations in virginia, which had demonstrated, of course, loyalty to charles, even during his exile. this special relationship between charles the second and his faithful old was further illustrated. robert beverley, who wrote in his 1705 history of the present state of virginia that, quote, the king compliment to that colony. virginia was at his coronation, a robe made of the silk that was sent from sense. can you believe that? i really don't know if this is true. i really need to dig into this. but this really got thinking about coronations, which you know, we're going to see one soon, right? you know, when the monarch sits on the the coronation chair, let's he sit to represent his his dominion. what is it someone said it was
the stone of scone. right. is his symbolic. you know he's he's being coordinated over, you know, as the monarch, the sovereign of scotland, as well, so this really gave me stone of stone vibes, you know, thinking, oh, my gosh, like, you know, he's he's even being coronated wearing virginia. i mean, how incredible of a moment must must that be? and just thinking about those implications again. consequences for forward ginia. well again in recognition of the special that virginians bestowed upon charles. charles the second bestowed land grants to his many supporters, george washington himself actually spent some of childhood on one of these land grants at little hunting on the northern neck. guess what? that was a land grant by charles the second virginia became
populated with supporters of the monarchy and, many were able to gain political control of the colony and with their own amassed holdings and fortunes, they were able start passing that influence to their sons. many, many, many generations down the line. but the era wasn't for everyone. lingering uncertainty in tis sorry. is charles the second his coronation. but no this is charles the second. and charles is in both sets. his coronation, their imagine that that's virginia silk. there we go. sorry about that. the era wasn't prosperous for everyone. lingering uncertainties in the wake of the english civil war caused colonists to take their anxieties on virginians enslaved and indigenous population. in the 1660s, the assembly numerous laws defining enslaved people as property. they also sought to control
indigenous virginians by requiring them to carry passes. this, when they hunted or fished and to wear silver or copper badges inscribed with the names of their tribes when visiting or passing through english settlements. we see this a lot throughout, right? when you have an anxiety, there's something that you can't control. you tend to take anxieties out on other and try to control what you can. this is exactly what happened in. mid-17th century, virginia, 1660s and so forth. further, though, colonists were feeling the strain of, the navigation acts. but wait, isn't that from the 18th century? no beginning in 1651, parliament had passed a number of navigation acts to increase profits from the colonies. these acts required, of course, that all virginia tobacco be shipped to england only in english ships forbidding the colonies from trading freely again. sounds familiar. it should. there is nothing new. the sun, right?
these acts angered colonists because they could get good prices trading with other colonies and dutch competitors. we've already heard about about the dutch being, you know, some of the like the rogues, the ocean, right. trying to get around these these trade acts. but england's profits upon forcing virginia to buy expensive english made goods and shipping their tobacco to merchants in england and paying all of those customs duties which went to royal coffers, governor berkley was still protesting against these 1651 acts in 1671, writing, quote mighty and destructive by that severe of parliament, which in excludes us from having any commerce with any nation in europe our own. so he was pretty upset about this and these are, of course, as i've already mentioned, the exact same navigation acts from which colonists get a reprieve
around the 1720s, when prime minister walpole instituted that officially unofficial policy of loosening the enforcement of them in the colonies, their prompt reinforcement after the french and indian war renewed a decades old outcry of hey, no taxation without representation. we've been through this william berkeley and others were really the first ones to try to safeguard that. well, when berkeley and others petitioned charles the second for a new charter to formalize virginians rights as english subjects, including, of course, no taxation without representation. so the king was too distracted with his growing empire to really much care. and this is where all of those anglo-dutch wars start, start coming in. charles the second is trying to trying to negotiate global warfare. and virginia is becoming insignificant by the minute. colonists really wanted a charter to forbid taxes from
being imposed on them without representation in general assembly. and instead. charles the second issued a pretty weak patent in place decision making for the colonies under his counsel and advisors in england. charles lack of attention and his counsel and advisors of understanding of virginians unique situation caused tension which played out often pretty violently as increased taxation and poor economic. really brought about a feeling of a lack of support which prompted some colonists to exorcize their own discontent with open rebellion. in 1663, indentured servants in gloucester planned an insurrection and threatened to kill governor berkeley. so their plans were betrayed again. in 1676, nathaniel bacon led his own faction against governor berkeley and virginians indigenous allies in retaliation for attacks on the frontier
perpetuated by other indigenous groups. the culminating event, of course, was bacon's burning of jamestown to the ground. the colony was in turmoil a committee arrived from london to dispose berkeley as governor, opposed to unofficially filled by herbert because the actual appointed governor culpeper never bothered to show up when he did, only stayed three months. so how good is that the subsequent parade of royal governors believe the assembly into raising taxes on tobacco before diminishing their authority pretty much entirely. it's pretty much the exact opposite of what the colonists to happen. but soon england was again in turmoil and they themselves were starting to see a world upside down. in 1685. charles, a second was succeeded by his brother james. the second, a known roman, his rocky relationship with parliament and, as much as his religion, ensured that james's
reign was short lived in mid 1688 protestant leaders william of orange and his wife mary, who's james's eldest protestant daughter to come to england, an army and assume the throne on november 5th, 1688, 83 years to the day after guy fawkes to overthrow james, the first william landed in england to restore balance of power between king and parliament in england and its colonies. this so-called glorious revolution john promoted dialog and debate about the characteristics of democracy, the balance of power and rights of the governed. the glorious revolution inspired. the english declaration of right in 1689, and john locke's two treatises of government 1689, which together of course inspired the founding fathers, the declaration of independence say it when you know the
declaration of right, the separation of powers between and their parliaments, they established amount of religious toleration as well locke's works were really the first to outline a government's responsibility to protect life, liberty and property, not the pursuit of happiness. its property, thomas jefferson and other founders were familiar with these works from which of course they drew their own ideas about how to govern without the glorious revolution, would there have ever been an american revolution? maybe that's for another conference. but suffice it to say, after years of turmoils and anxiety, virginia became much more with william and mary firmly affixed on the throne as joint sovereigns, virginians, new lieutenant frances nicholson was making a start at building the colony up in the image of england. ground zero for this project was moving the colonial capital from
jamestown, which of course had been years earlier. further to a settlement middle, renamed appropriately what williamsburg? that's right for king william the third. that's right. nicholson. nicholson out to develop that colony with an english model. williamsburg took the shape of england's protestant image with a physical that visually prioritized the role of royal government in the church england decades generations faded away. but by the end of the french indian war, those specters of the 17th century, the absolutist home of charles, the first taxation without representation and eventually a standing army policing british subjects. they just a thing of the past anymore. they were very much in the present parliament restricted. excuse me when parliament imposed duties on american colonies to help pay for that
french and indian war, they not only levied new taxes but reinforced duties and laws have been in place since the 17th century. they restricted colonists trade with other european. the restrictions also dated to the 17th century when parliament and sometimes the stuart monarchs themselves were really dictating tobacco which prohibited the colonists free trade even more egregious was the presence of a standing british army in the colonies charged enforcing acts and their punishments not since the english civil wars had a standing policed british subdue and people noticed on december 29th, 1765, john adams things go on here exactly as they did in reign of king charles. the first it's telling that, as i noted previously, patrick henry was uttering much same sentiment here in on the eve of
revolution, colonists began looking at their circumstances through the lens of the earlier stuart era history repeating itself. virginia colonists shared memory, especially among white of stuart era distractions and parliaments, dismissive ness of colonial requests fueled the now growing suspicion that there was a conspiracy to drive them and to to deprive them of their rights and fed burning flame that sparked a desire for independence. on october 25th, 1770, for the first continental congress sent a petition directly to the king, asking him to address an outlined list of grievances against parliament and their actions. the king failed to respond, and by 1775, many colonists had begun to reject the legitimacy of the king altogether and the
monarchy itself off. because remember this the problem was with parliament to begin with. it wasn't it wasn't with the but patriots in buckingham, virginia addressed change of heart on may 13th, 1776, writing, quote, when dissensions for you. when dissensions first arose, we felt our hearts warmly attached to the king of great britain. but now the case is much altered. by july, the declaration of independence held king george the third direct actually responsible for the colonists necessary rebellion. too many, george the third mirrored charles the first. he refused to hear their grievances. he acted outside colonial best interests. he raised armies them and he loving taxes without their consent. colonists reasoned that they had to perform that regicide they had to declare their independence.
five years later, not far from the old colonial capital williamsburg, the british army surrendered to washington at yorktown. well, probably ever know whether or not the band was indeed playing that old anti cromwellian ballad the world turned upside down. but one thing is for certain a new world was about to start and no one on that surrender field had to be an antiquarian to know. thank you so much. happy to answer. any questions you may have specifically about the tony award winning musical 1776. you are going to watch point well a text player when you are moving on paper now you colonists keep going over the
mountains and getting into scraps. the locals and. then you send a telephone call back and come on el paso. we sent a task force over so your problem and then task force goes on. of course we want you to pay for it. and then you get into another scrap. you traders keep going on the mountain. it's not good enough. seven in 63, we an act saying keep this side of the bloody mountains no, no, no, sir that line changes quite a bit. that proclamation line in 1763. but i really have to thank you for giving me. i really wonder for a way to invite you all to the american revolution museum at yorktown, where we explore for a much wider of the the comings of the revolution and its implications. obviously in britain and that so
please come in and visit our museum yorktown and learn more about the revolution. i would like to mention that we have to opening on november 5th, 2020 to remember remember the of november. our two new exhibitions called rain and rebellion will topics just like this virginia's relationship with 17th century england and britain and the coming of the revolution so guys are letting me off pretty easy. it was a really wonderful musical really bothers me that so many people are into hamilton and nobody wanted to watch 1776 with me for some reason. hamilton 1776 would you like do an interpretive dance? i came courteous. i'm oh, yes courteously. i am being told to drag it out so if you'd like a recitation. virginia is my home. all right, mark. agree preservation during the cromwell area. yeah. oh, do this to me.
was there any attempt to for him to regain his sounds? like there is a lot of royalists. there are people going there and the governors are pledging fealty to the king. he ever knowledge this? absolutely. parliamentary forces cromwell's forces do come to virginia and berkeley have to surrender the colony to to the parliamentary. so yeah that is a thing that that yes. lou. hey, if we may do a little what if scenario with the previous revolutions let's just say they didn't happen how do you think that would have affected the american? no idea. because they did happen. sorry theoretical. there's so many interesting to think about in terms of again implications of what did happen and. unpacking the relationships that exist. so yeah mean i know i kind of pose that question if there was
no glorious revolution was the american revolution have occurred i don't know the answer to that yeah oh i'm a little confused at the beginning of your talk as i recall and i might have misunderstood it you talked about governor berkeley granting these rights, cutting all these taxes. but i thought that bacon's rebellion was complaining about tech forces and all that. so how there was disconnect between what berkeley did and what he was at least perceived by bacon in his followers. 38 and 30 years. you know, berkeley comes in the seventh in the 1640s. bacon's rebellion is in 1676. it's a different world. by then, there a lot of grievances that that bacon, you
know, lobbies against against the royal governor and taxes is just one of them. so yeah. one of the implications of the 16th hundreds is as an irish-american cromwell massacred whole cities in ireland. absolutely and the idea was that if you these people are playing for keeps and and if you have any any with cromwell and by by extension the the the eventual british government after oh seven you could end up really a world of hurt. right. so i think that the the importance the 1600s on on our our story not to be underestimated. and i thank for making that clear today. oh, thank. and, you know, to your point, there are this begets an incredible, you know, wave of migration of scots, irish presbyterian boys into virginia. as virginia starts to lax.
it's its laws on religion have a lot of religious freedom sent. well, i don't to say a lot. we have some religious freedom in virginia, specifically because we have a lot of a lot of scots irish coming and. you know, of course, the virginia develops way that it does today because of a lot of our of that immigration, specifically because of what you're speaking of, sir so thank you, mr. greenwald. thank great presentation. thank you. you had mentioned that there was two ships of different political persuasions that had met in the james river, were there you speak on any of mason? i mean was. there had to be a reaction from the town or the. were there casualties or did you just go people are firing again in the james and but ago if memory serves there was one casualty but that is all my mental rolodex able to give me right now. but this would be a fun research project to dig into. does anyone know the answer to
that? yeah, i don't either. and there was a thought there was another battle loosely associated with the english civil war fought in maryland on the river severn. does anybody know? yeah. but again, i don't know the details that but but yeah, it wasn't just a world away. it was right here. thank you. that so it's clear a legacy in what's going on historically and what ultimately is occurs here you guys don't want me to sing. sorry revolution by the way i my first movie was radio city music hall, 1776 with my mom. but why? what's happening in canada? why is there a completely different. scenario? yeah, north in the way, outside my scope of knowledge speak on what's happening in canada. but of course, you know, there are you know moving into the the even before the french and indian war right a lot going on in canada colonial support you
know from, north american colonies going up to support what's happening canada. but that's again outside the scope of my knowledge right now and you know, relating to this. but that's a really great research project too to dig into it. so thank you for for inviting me along. new rabbit hole. so all right i think i'm standing between you and lunch or have one more. i have to go sit down now. thank you. i appreciate. hello, everybody. my name is scott stroh. i'm to serve as executive director of george gunston hall and you'll be hearing a little bit from me after we return from lunch. but i've been asked just to provide a comment about the american revolution 2/50 commission here in virginia, which certainly is very much related to this fabulous
symposium and all that we're talking about today. many of. you are likely aware that two years ago, virginia adopted legislation to the american revolution 2/50 commission. i am proud to serve that commission along with our lead from the jamestown-yorktown foundation and from the virginia museum of history and culture as well as many others. what i would just encourage you to do is to go va 250 dot org. there is a new website that has just recently live the commission has hired staff a number of really exciting plans in the works to really put virginia at center of this important to 50th commemoration coming up in 2026 and for all of you who are also interested in what is possible here in alexandria or at the local level there, i would encourage you also to be thinking about some grant funding. there are several grant funding opportunities that will be available through the virginia 2/50 commission in partnership
with the virginia tourism corporation for marketing and virginia humanities for programing. and that website will have ample information about. all of that and all of the other activities that the commission will be familiar and leading. and lastly you should be proud about being in alexandria and about being in northern virginia because, both fairfax county and alexandria also have established their own local planning bodies to again put not just virginia but northern virginia at the center of this important. so please visit the website. stay connected there's be a lot on over the next few years and we look forward to an absolutely fabulous commemoration in 2026. thank you. thank you so much, scott. i appreciate everyone being here and i just want to say that history is cool and think we've
learned a lot this morning and i really appreciate that. if questions that we've already proposed this morning. but have a lot more coming this afternoon on george mason and john adams and maybe have some singing of john adams songs from 1776 later this afternoon. or maybe that'll be for our happy hour later at gatsby's tavern museum, where we talk about america and the complex of after all of this revolution and what do we do next? what happens next? how do we be a nation? so please come visit our tavern and you can learn all about those things a few housekeeping notes before we close our morning session for. those who would like to buy books for, our authors, they are downstairs in our gift shop and. we are going to have an hour and a half break. so for those in person, we have
a lot of great restaurants here in old town you to enjoy and and cruise our town for those on zoom and on tv. i'm sure you have fabulous things your kitchen so we'll starting our afternoon at 130 so we will see you back here in in an hour and a half so again thank you so much for your morning and your questions, your inquisitiveness. we look forward to having you back this afternoon to continue this conversation and start thinking of panel questions because we're going to have all of these amazing speakers back up between 330 and four. i kind of talking about all the things we've learned today. so as you're as you're listening and you're thinking about that over lunch, think about some questions on how we can tie all of these pieces together when we have all of our speakers back here at 330. so again, thank you and we will see you back here at 130.
have. to. decide this. on your own. american history tv will return live coverage from the lyceum and alexandria, virginia at 1:30 p.m. eastern until. then here's some other recent revolutionary war programing. weekends on c-span. two are an intellectual. every saturday, american tv documents america's and on sundays book tv v brings you the latest in nonfiction and authors funding for c-span and to come from these television companies
more including charter communications broadband, a force for empowerment that's charter has invested billions building infrastructure upgrading empowering opportunity in communities big and small charter is connecting us charter along with these television companies, supports c-span two as a public service service. welcome everyone. my name is philip mead. i'm the chief historian and curator of this museum of the american revolution. i'm so pleased to see you all tonight for fredricka bears presents session on the hessians scott's stevenson sends his regrets had intended to be here tonight hosting but was unavailable. he though he may be watching from zoom so if you're out there scott hello i wanted to call your attention tonight an important object that we have here in this room.
this is a fragment of a hessian miter cap from the fusileers napoleon of hezekiah's cell. it was discovered, among other fragments, these caps in the delaware river in the early 20th century. and historical research by craig nanos and others has pretty well established that it was lost when a troop transport fort went under in may of human march of 1778 in the delaware river, and no one drowned. all of the soldiers on board, but obviously a bunch of their stayed in the river. they were dredged and are on display. other pieces of that same material are on in the corps galleries. so tonight we have the privilege of welcoming fredricka bear, who is associate professor of
history and division, head for arts and humanities at pennsylvania state university abington college. her research focuses on the experience of german speaking in north america from the period to the late 19th century. her public actions prior to tonight include the monograph the trial of frederick avril language patriotism and citizenship in philadelphia's german community 1792 1830, which was winner of the st paul's biglerville prize for the best in lutheran church history. and tonight she is launching her book hessians german soldiers in the american revolutionary, which is, i think, destined to be a indispensable book for and general students of the american revolution. it plans an extraordinary