Hes author of jacksons sword and peacekeepers and conquerors about the u. S. Armys Officers Corps on the borders and frontiers between the war of 1812 and the war with mexico. Which together won the distinguished book award from the society for military history. Incidentally cited military history of which we are a part. Professor watson is coeddy tore of the history of warfare which won the society for military history george c. Marshall Foundation Prize for the use of Digital Technology teaching military history. He is coeditor of the west point history of the civil war which won the distinguished writing award. And he is also a coauthor of the west point history of the american revolution. Forthcoming from simon shuster, this autumn. Professor watson teaches courses at westpoint on 19th century warfare and 19th Century America and about the american frontier. Ladies and gentlemen, tonight, sam watson. [ applause ] thank you. Bob. Thanks to all of you. Bob noted ive been teaching west point for 18 years and gave my first talk at my maps about 18 years ago in the fall of 1999 on Army Medical Officers in the war and do they see themselves as medical officers or military officers and turned out they saw themselves as a bit of both. Im going to be talking to you about the army before and after jackson, focusing primarily on before jacksons presidency during his presidency and then after his presidency. He was only in the army for a short period of time. Before i do so, i have to give the standard disclaimer. I speak for myself. Not from the department of the army. Not or the department of defense and not for any other agency of the United States government. With that out of the way, i will try to say a few controversial things or few things that you might want to question and debate, and give you some information in the synthesis, really, about the army and jacksons a factor, lack of of a factor on it. Ill talk about four big topics here. The first is Civil Military relations. The armys view of politics or view of Army Officers of politics. And the armys role in politics. Second structure between the army or the army if you prefer, its not clear, people havent called it the regular army in capitals, capital a back then. Youll see it referred to the army in lower case or regulars, but in any case, but talking about that Standing Army, moreorless Permanent Army rather than the mass of intermittent militia and volunteers. So four structures the balance between theme. To what extent did the u. S. Employ the National Standing army to what extent volunteers. To what extent did it employ militia and volunteers. The third question is that of command. When they deployed troops to florida in the second seminole war or to georgia, to force the cherokee indians to move west or along the Canadian Border or border with texas, who commanded the u. S. Troops . Was it regular officers or were the commanders say volunteer citizen soldiers. Which we often tend to think they were. We think of jackson himself began as a militia general. And then was commissioned into the United States army during the war of 1812. The fourth question is the effect and outcomes question, what about the armys capability performing the missions assigned to it. Did that increase, decrease. Improve or degrade. During and after jacksons presidency . Within those four topic, Civil Military relations, forced structure, command of u. S. Forces, and the forces cape within those, we have questions of perception versus reality. Both for contemporaries and historians. People looking back thinks the United States in the 19th century its all citizen soldiers, all volunteers or all militia or all Andrew Jackson. And then on the other hand, we have my tie, Winfield Scott leading the charge for the regular army. Then, theres also question of change versus continuity. To what extent there was change to what extent there was changes had already been made before jackson became president. The army that Andrew Jackson was commissioned as a general had been a small frontier force, between 1874 and 1812. It was not very active developing profession capability. It was not very accountable financially or in supplying its soldiers. Neither the soldiers nor their officers displayed the sort of discipline and responsibility to authority we would expect or desire. Jackson himself repeatedly challenged, ignored and subverted authority some dysfunctional dynamics that i explore in my book. Jacksons sword. And this book is really a story primarily of dysfunctions, of jackson invading florida on his own initiative and on his own authority. Of problems supplying the troops, problems paying the troops, other officers wanting to attack cuba, all kinds of insubordination to the authority to the elected command authority. Or other forms of indiscipline. So jacksons victory in new orleans didnt really make a big difference to that army. It made a difference in how americans perceived military force. The hunters of kentucky to whom they contributed. Scholars would say certainly a lot of accurate rifle men but also a lot of powerful artillery in jacksons line in new orleans. Some of that artillery was manned by pirates. You may have heard the story of general lafitte. Much of that was manned by artillery men and some u. S. Navy gunners as well. So theres sort of a myth of the battle of new orleans. But meanwhile the regular army, the National Standing army is kind of doing its own thing. And during the 1820s the army changed quite a bit. There were a variety of favorite variety of forums initiated by the senior leaders. People liked scott. It is supported by james monroe and secretary john c. Calhoun. In effect, that National Standing army, that permanent and hopefully professional army became during the 1820s, both a frontier constabulary, meaning a sort of police force to guard the borders and to intimidate and deter opponents and thus to keep the peace along the borders, but also a cadre of technical experts and educators for developing and maintaining professional expertise and capability. For example, at west point, but also say the Artillery School at fortress monroe near norfolk or Infantry School at Jefferson Barracks in st. Louis. Now that ladder to mention to the army was drawn largely from those from Westpoint Academy at westpoint to whom the president secretary of war gave monopolies on commissions for more than a decade during the 1820s. During the 1820s Army Officers were politically attuned. They privately supported president ial candidates like jackson, John Quincy Adams or john c. Calhoun, whom they knew through close personal association within the small government. So this is sort of an elite politics of general men and government officials who already know each other and as such they would write a lot of letters to one another privately. What do you think of calhoun . What do you think of jackson . Who do you think will be better for the army. Remember how calhoun supported us on this . Remember what jackson said about that . It is a lot of behind the scenes politicking. Not really anything public but in 1828 and 1829, many of the Senior Officers, albeit within a small senior officer corps, many of that small number of Senior Officers welcomed jacksons president ial victory seeing him as a former comrade that would support more funding for the army. That is usually the main thing that army leaders wanted at that time. We dont think we have enough troops for the Canadian Border. If things break out with the british again for the border with mexico, for the coastal fortifications. For the indians on the plains. When the army when army Staff Officers made plans they would say we need three or four regiments for each of those. We need 20 or 25 regiments to perform our missions. The army at that point in time had 11 regiments. They perceived they are always under strength. Fortunately usually the crises that break out break out one place at a time and they can redeploy their forces one place at a time to meet the different crises. It is fair to say that in 1828 and 29, a lot saw him like that. Now during jacksons administration, funding remained tight. Jacksonians talked about keeping spending down. Not raising taxes or other avenues. So the army didnt get a lot more funding. But it did grow by two regiments under jacksons administration. A nearly 20 increase, from 11 to 13 regiments to an army that was about 5,000 soldiers. 5,000. When jackson entered office. Both those regiments were mounted regiments. The first and second which you can of who can you can see an camera principle here on the cover of my second book. This was an important step in making the army more capable of performing its missions. For two decades, the army had not had any cavalry. The u. S. Army had dragoons. Cavalry that can dismount to fight on foot. Although the american officers often like to think of charging you know, on their horses with sabers. But u. S. Had them in revolution. They had them on a very small scale with Anthony Waynes legion of the United States in 1790s. And then those were disbanded alexander hamilton, george washington, wanted to have some at the end of the decade. Never really built that force and then during war of 1812, there were a couple of regiments of dragoons and there were a lot of volunteers. Like the kentuckians, fighting to come to the british in 1813. But at the end of the war of 1812, dragoons, forces cost money you have to feed the horses. Cost money. Congress not willing pay for that, cutting back. Between 1815 and 1833, the u. S. Army didnt have any cavalry. Sometimes, they would mount infantry soldiers. To conduct patrols and you can imagine the soldiers werent very good horsemen. They werent about to mount the horses and go catch them. So the army had not much ability to pursue indians west of the mississippi. If the army just wanted to catch them or intimidate them or sign a treaty or something. So these dragoons, the first in 1833 and second would prove crucial to effective power to mexico and california during the war of mexico. The first dragoons in particular would spend time mostly dismounted. Because its often forested and swampy there. But clearly, there were needed troops in florida. Other changes in the army during the Jackson Administration included more nutritious rations. Which significantly improved soldiers health and mortality. Adding more vegetables, beans, legumes, different element to a diet that had been like classic salt park, salt beef, you know, a lot of tried food. Dried food. And abolishing liquor ration. During the Jackson Administration, the Navy Officers and civilians with an interest, civilian publishers also created professional journals. I dont have a picture of the ration. Probably i should have pulled one off the web. They probably have one in some of the Different Army museums of what a ration would look like. But during the early 1830s, officers began to write in sufficient amount that publishers, benjamin homens, a baltimore publisher, created in this case, a monthly magazine or journal if you like and in this case, a weekly for the army. And these became centers for debate about military professionalism, Civil Military relations, military capability. Reform. Tactics. In 1834, 1835, then when the second seminole war began in 1835 and early 1836, by that point the military naval magazine was saturdaying to fade and the chronicle was becoming the standard and it is just chockfull. If you want to study the second seminole war, like the american periodical series that that database has the army and Navy Chronicle and you can write a book on the seminole war. Largely from that. Now, in terms of our question now the terms of our question today, Andrew Jackson didnt really have anything to do with this. These are changes that occur under Andrew Jacksons administration but these are really initiatives within the army or you know, civilian publisher responding to a demand by you know, Army Officers wanting to write and being willing to buy and in fact, the army Navy Chronicle disappears after the second seminole war. They change it to the army Navy Chronicle and the scientific repository for a couple of years. 184244, but theres just not enough interest once the war is over so it goes out of business in 1844. So the changes that occurred to the army that i mentioned so far were during jacksons administration largely changes initiated by Army Officers. The same as the changes in the 1810s and 1820s. You had political leaders, whether it had been president monroe or now president jackson or secretary calhoun in particular, among the secretaries of war. Who had supported the army doipg so. But by and large, Army Officers would you know, be talking among themselves, writing letters back and forth saying you know, we really need an Infantry School. And calhoun would say yeah, sounds like a good idea and you know, then monroe or John Quincy Adams would say yes, good, go. Well try to fund that. But most of this reform was coming from the inside. The actual ideas for the reform. With a supportive political climate. But the 1830s were also difficult years for the army. So jacksons administration from 1829 to the beginning of 1837, these were difficult years for the army brought on by resurgence in u. S. Territorial expansion. Largely in the form of jacksons policy of forcing indians to leave their land east of the mississippi. What we know from the title of the legislation as indian reform. Nowadays, that you know, that sounds a little harsh, but and it was harsh, so we might say the expropriation of the announced. Of the indians. We might say ethnic cleansing. So in europe, we would, if this happened in europe, you would say it was ethnic cleansing and everybody was like, yeah, those europeans, theyre like that. While officers had professionals journeys to debate reforms in the Artillery Schools, this is an image of a later painting, a 20th century painting, but an image of drill at the Artillery School in the 1820s. In 1827. Those schools had to close, reducing officers opportunities to practice drill and tactics and to train larger units of soldiers. This was because army, artillery units were deployed from the Artillery School at fortress monroe to deter slave rebellions between 1829 and 1831. Now this is actually from the outside of the second seminole war, but its sort of this standard iconography. You can see here the image of slaves. You know, rising up and attacking slave holders. And between 1829 and 1831, there was, a wave of slave unrest of rumors of slave unrest and you know, culminating for example in nat turners rebellion, in 1831. But for several years there, governors, mayors, state legislators, congressmen from throughout the south, virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, mostly the eastern seaboard database mostly the eastern sea board states, but also louisiana, they were constantly sending letters to army commanders. There are rumors of they wouldnt say slave. They usually conceal that. Savage unrest in our neighborhood. It was pretty clear they meant slaves and so the army forces were constantly small detachments were being dispatched from usually from the coastal fortifications. Manned by the artillery. To try to deter any slave unrest. Now when they actually get to nat turners rebellion, the army is not involved in repressing that. The army did conduct a lot of patrols and kind of showing force in the weeks and months after nat turners rebellion. But not only that, weve also got the blackhawk war in 1832. And blackhawk had almost gone to war or the United States had almost gone to war against blackhawk the Previous Year in 1832, situation exploded. With a lot of miscommunication, but certainly exploded. And you add infantry units in the region, but they ultimately brought the artillery units from the Artillery School near norfolk. Actually as far as i can tell, the First Movement of soldiers by train in the United States. They took them by train part of the way to chicago. Part of the way by steam boat. Part of the way by train. And then they all caught cholera in the course of doing that. But these kind of pressures then the artillery had to go back to the eastern seaboard back to South Carolina to try to intimidate the nullification advocates in South Carolina. And so by the time he got to the end of 1832, it was pretty clear that they werent going to be able to sustain an A