Liberty, prisoners of war and the politics of vengeance in the American Revolution which has just come out from the university of pennsylvania press. We have known professor jones, cole, since 2010 when he received a society of the cincinnati scholars grant to conduct research in our library in support of his doctoral dissertation on enemy prisoners of war in revolutionary america. We have since followed his career and accomplishments with great interest and admiration. He received his ph. D. From Johns Hopkins in 2014, went on to hold post doctoral fellowships at the American Society and the New York Historical society and since 2015 he has been assistant professor of history at purdue university. Captives of liberty is an important and thought provoking book that examines how the founding generation of americans grappled with the problems of prisoner treatment during the eightyear conflict. American forces captured more than 17,000 british and allied germanic soldiers as well as thousands more loyalists, civilians and british mariners. In fact, the number of enemy prisoners in american custody often exceeded that of the american soldiers in the Continental Army. These prisoners proved increasingly burdensome for the new nation as the war progressed. What was to become of these men . How would they be confined . Who would pay to house and feed them . When and how should they be released . A series of thorny political issues compounded these logistical difficulties. In his talk this evening, professor jones will take us from the meeting rooms of the Continental Congress to the prison camps of virginia and maryland and pennsylvania, revealing the factors that could coalesced, escalating violence precipitously. Please join me. Im very much looking forward to his talk. Cole jones. [ applause ] excellent. Everyone, thank you so much for coming out. Ellen, thank you so very, very much for that kind and generous introduction. Im going to grab my little pointer here. It feels like a homecoming to be back here at Anderson House. The project that ellen just described and what im about to talk about, the book that came from that project was really in many ways born here. This was my first archival trip as a historian for this project. When i was working on a dissertation at Johns Hopkins on this issue. I didnt know what i was looking for. I had a question. I wanted an answer. I started to find those answers here at the society. It is really a great privilege to be back. Although, i did note its been ten years. It took me ten years from that initial question to come up with this book that we will talk about today. So with that, lets talk about it. Shall we . What is this book all about . In short, as ellen told us, this book examines how revolutionary americans dealt with enemy prisoners, british, american loyalists. To figure that out, i had to begin with a premise. The premise was that prisoners of war are problematic. They pose a whole host of logistical as well as political problems. Prisoners of war have been a perennial problem in the history of warfare. What do you do when your opponent throws down list arhis and stopping fighting, begging for his life . Do you accept that proposition . Do you take prisoners . Has that person forfieited his life . You can kill them out of hand . If you agree to accept somebodys surrender, then what . How do you feed them, clothe them, shelter them, guard them . Where are you going to hold hem . How long will you keep them . What will you do with them . Are you going to release them . Its a logistical nightmare in the best of circumstances. Its even worse, even more problematic when the two sides engaged in conflict do not view each other as equals. If you view your opponent as unlawful, uncivilized, maybe even subhuman, then what are you going to do with these prisoners . You are going to see them as criminals, terrorists. We dont have to go very far back in our own history to remember how this issue played out in the opening stages of the war on terror. When last i checked, not long ago, the gitmo prison is still very much in operation. What are you going to do with these people . Are they lawful combatants . No. This is a war or terror. Right . They are criminals. Okay. Why dont we send them to trial . Charge them with a crime. Cant really do that either. So what do they do . People will be held in limbo. Thats where my book comes in. It looks as an earlier conflict. In short, it asks, how did these guys figure out this problem . How did they address . What would the founders do . That was my question. How are they going to deal with the problems posed by the 17,000 plus prisoners captured over an eightyear war which before the conflict in vietnam was the longest war in American History . In order to tell this story, the story of the revolution, we actually have to go back to europe. We have to go back across the atlantic to the middle decades of the 18th century to try and understand how war was practiced in in europe and what we call the age of the enlightenment. This is a 19th century painting. I think it captures in many ways the culture of war practiced by europeans in the 18th century. Linear tactics. You see the french in the f foreground. They are inviting the english if they would like the honor of firing first. It gives you some sense of the culture of this conflict in europe, which is going to shape and color war in the American Revolution. This age of enlightenment are when men of reason believed that violence could be controlled. Violence was not an inherent thing that anybody can have to deal with. It can be restrained. That humanity has value and pain is bad and can be ameliorated. Europeans had accepted pain and violence as a way of life. So therefore, thats going to play out in the actual practice of war. They are still going to fight a lot. In fact, for most of the 18th century europe is at war. They are going to fight over limited goals. Historians call this the age of limited war. They will fight with regular standing armies. Not bands of mercenaries or civilians in arms. Its these trained regular troops. Violence, while these battles can be very violent, as the poor french guardsmen in the front realized here, its controlled to the its limited to the battlefield. Maybe the siege of a city or town. But violence is limited and its controlled. Additionally, when the shooting stops, the violence stops. That is the idea is that violence will be limited to the battlefield and that prisoners, if taken, will be treated humanely. They use that phrase, humane treatment. They will be treated with humanity. The key to this whole system is the social order of 18th century europe, which is a social order based on an aristocracy. Theres an aristocratic culture, at the top of the social order. That these two men, a british officer and a spanish officer spanish on the left, who would have happily hacked each other to death in the early 17th century over the differing the confessional politics, religions. One is a catholic. One is a protestant. Here are engaging in gentlemanly c conviv conviviality. They share this culture of war. And their understanding how war should be fought. War should be fought. And that pertains, especially to prisoners. Officers like spanish officer here, hes captured, he can offer his parole from the french meaning word. Parole of honor and order to avoid imprisonment, right . He might go back home, he might stay in the nearest city until he can be exchanged. Thats the real point of this of taking prisoners, is you want to take your enemy prisoners and then exchange them for your own troops in enemy hands. You want to do this as quickly as possible. Because regular trained troops are hard to come by and it takes a long time to form a standing army, and you want your troops back. Especially you want your officers back. And so what nations would do in the 18th century is they would sign a treaty, known as a cartel, and the outset of hostilities. The war starts, france and britain going at it, theyre going to sign this treaty and it is going to agree to how prisoners will be treated and most specifically how quickly they will be exchanged. And the cartel that was in place during the seven years war, we call it over here the french and indian war, stipulated 14 days. So you were only captive 14 days before being released. Now, did it always work that way . No. Right. The things broke down and there were breaches, et cetera. What happened when there was sort of breach of etiquette. What if your side abused a prisoner . How are you going to rectify that . What is going to happen . Well, for one thing, they will invoke what they knew as the called the law of retaliation. And the law of retaliation is part of an expanding purpose of International Law that comes out of the enlightenment, stipulating how different nations should engage one another, right. So if you violate the accepted norms of war, you abuse your prisoner, were going to take another prisoner and were going to abuse that prisoner to the exact same level. And the key here is proportio l proportionali proportionality. So retaliation is an act of proportional violence. In order to convince the other side that they need to play by the rules, right . In fact, in the age it happened very rarely in europe. In part because of the gentlemanly code of honor shared by the officers on both sides of the conflicts, and another part because the mere threat of a retaliation was often enough to prevent abuse of prisoners. Plus, both sides had a vested interest in getting their prisoners back. So there was no u. N. Or International Court to adjudicate these things, they were done between two men, just like that, on their word of honor. What about in america . We all know that warfare in america didnt look like that, right . What about in america . Well, in part, because for most of the 18th century, european powers are not sending regular troops, certainly not in large numbers, to north america. So most of the conflict in north america is fought by militia, colonial militias on both sides, france and new england. English colonies. So there is a difference right there, right . You wont have the same sort of standing armies. There is no aristocracy in the british colonies in north america, that shares the same values. Additionally and most importantly, right, north america is also home to indigenous population, right . Different native nations who have their own culture of war, their own understanding of what of what is acceptable violence in war. So to take a scalp and the native culture of war is an accepted practice of warfare. Right . But in europe, this would be seen as barbarism. Savagery. So europeans tended to view their native antagonists as uncivilized, beyond the pale of civilization is what theyll say. And therefore not entitled to the same protections. So in European Forces going to fight against native nations, they often do so with extreme violence in the 18th century. Additionally the officers of these colonial American Forces are going to model themselves on their european counterparts. They want to be seen not as mere provincials, the official title, they want to be seen of gentleman officers of this same cast. Here is an example of a new yorker, sir William Johnson here, commanding new york provincial troops at the battle of lake george. You see hes showing himself restraining his native ally, right . Mohawk warrior wants to scalp the poor wounded french officer. Hes protecting his fellow gentleman officer from violence. The french officer will have given his parole, and will be allowed to return to france until hes either exchanged or a cessation of hostilities ensues. So in 1775, when the Anglo American elite decides to prosecute their grievances against parliament by force of arms, in april 1775, right, it is with this idea of warfare that they enter the conflict. They believe that they understand how their enemy is going to fight, and theyre going to fight by these rules. Prisoners, of course, will be treated humanely. Anglo americans see themselves as british and civilized. The british on the other hand, 3,000 miles across the atlantic, had a very different idea. Right. These were not just some recalcitrant colonial subjects. These are rebels, right. These are rebels and traders against the king. They oppose a direct challenge to the supremacy of parliament, and that cannot be tolerated. The British State in the 18th century had suppressed no shorter than three major domestic insurrections in britain and had done so extremely violently. So rebels are to be punished. Theyre not to be conciliated and not to be negotiated with. That is very, very clear. The british army comes over here, they are forbidden by the Colonial Ministry from negotiating with the americans. Theyre not allowed to negotiate over terms of prisoners of war, right, or anything like that. These are rebels in arms, criminals, and therefore subject to civil justice. Okay. Well, here is a problem. As you can capture 300 guys, maybe you can bring them back to london and put them on trial for treason and hang some of them, right . What do you do when you capture 3,000 . Thats exactly what the british will do in the fall of 1776 in new york. What are they going to do with these prisoners . They cant negotiate for their release. Because that would be legitimizing the americans. Cant do that. Nor can we send them all back to london. That would just bog down our courts forever. So what are we going to do . Guantanamo bay 1776, right. Were going to hold them indefinitely. Problem is the british occupied new york city, new york city has burned, it is a ruin of a city, where is general howell going to put these prisoners but on troop transport ships. Probably the most famous of these is the jersey jersey is used as a prison ship later in the war, not at first. Nonetheless, the conditions on these prison ships or american soldiers are going to be held and jersey primarily holds sailors, are going to be atrocious, right . You can imagine the filth and the disease that is going to run rampant when you put thousands of people on a ship like that. Moored in the brooklyn harbor. And so consequently fatalities are going to mount. Really quickly. That first winter of 76 77 is really, really deadly for the americans. Historians estimate that somewhere between 12 and 18,000 American Service personnel died in british custody during their eight years of the revolutionary war. 12 to 18. There are perhaps between 20 and 30,000 americans captured. Dont have great numbers for this. But thats over 50 though. That means if you fall into british hands, you have an over 50 chance of dying. And stories of this these hell holes, right . These prison ships are going to spread. American newspapers, propagandaists theyre going to latch on to this as evidence that the british are the barbarians, right . Were playing by the rules. Were doing things the right way, theyre the ones who are savages, right. They are not civilized people. As one american officer says, general washington intends to show the british that americans are humane as well as brave. That were not going to sink to their level, there is an ideological and political commitment to the way americans are going to treat prisoners of war. Great example of this is the capture of the heshen brigade, 900 soldiers, german auxiliary troops are captured. Washington specifically forbids his officers and soldiers from abusing these heshans who had behaved horribly during the campaign in york. Very oftentimes not taking american prisoners. He specifically forbids this. When they march these prisoners through philadelphia, crowds flock to the prisoners and begin throwing dung at them and he allows the prisoners to move to what is now central pennsylvania, reading, york, lancaster area to work, instead of being confined in jails. Theyre going to work on farms and return for meager wages and room and board. Theyre given a lot of freedom. Theyre not guarded. Theyre not put on prison ships at all. Yet the british are still doing this, right. This is there is no headway here on this issue, right. Americans are still dying and when some are released, William Howell released many of the men he captured, theyre going to come back to their communities and theyre going to be diseased, and theyre going to be traumatized by the experience of these prison ships. And theyre going to tell their families and anyone who will listen about how barbaric the british had been. And this is going to surge support for the revolution. For many people who were on the fence, are now going to say no, no, no, this is wrong. Additionally, people are going to start saying, it is time, right . We played nice too long. It is time to as one citizen writes to congress, he says it is time to revenge the innocent blood of your murdered children. The british are going to put our men on ships, we should put their men on ships, right. Retaliation, proportional, right, thats tolerated by the laws of war. But this call for retaliation is going to spiral into demands for vengeance, right . Vengeance is not proportional. It is an act of revenge. I call this process the politics of vengeance. As it turns out George Washington does not have a monopoly on violence. He does not control he has limited control over the Northern Army that he commands, but thats it, right . Does not control the states. He does not control the state militias. He has very little control outside of his individual area. And the states themselves who are now responsible to their constituents are going to enact retaliatory measures that will spiral to vengeance against first loyalists, americans who dont who are unwilling to sign the oath of allegiance to the new state. Are going to be punished and then eventually britons as well. Loyalists have a particularly hard time after the declaration of independence because paradoxically once independence is declared, loyalists will become, if youre loyal to the government under which you were born, suddenly independence happens and now youre a traitor to your state. And all 13 states are going to make treason laws to punish loyalists. It becomes a capital crime in all 13 states. Now, not every state will use capital punishment, but most will engage in persecution of some kind. In particular, confiscation of land. But also, of course, executions as well. And most of these executions are actually going to be extra legal. Theyre not going to use the apparatus of the courts to do it. It is going to be more like mob or vigilante justice. A group will come to your house, drag you out and string you up. One american officer from virginia, a guy by the name of charles lynch, became so famous for hanging loyalists that they called it lynchs law. He would hang them according to lynchs law. The act of hanging a loyalist then just became lynching or to lynch a loyalist. Loyalists themselves are going to respond with violence and increasing violence against their patriot oppressors. Whenever they can, whenever the british support them, theyre going to rise up in rebellion and do so and retaliate on a similar scale. But it is not enough just to target loyalists, right . You also have to target the british and thats really where they see the british are the epicenter of patriot animosity. Barbarians beyond the pale of civilization. And revolutionary americans will get their opportunity for revenge on a grand scale in october of 1777 when British American general Horatio Gates captures general john burgoins army at saratoga. What we dont think about too often is that burgoin and gates were british officers, both served together in the same regiment, 13 years old, and they were old friends and gates is going to sign what is known as a convention. So burgoyne will not surrender. He will sign a treaty of convention, which is a cessation of hostilities. Going to allow him to go back to england, on parole, as long as his men dont fight in america, his whole army can go back. This is part of that gentlemanly culture of war that we talked about in a european context. You can imagine if youre an american, and milford, connecticut, and your brother died on a british prison ship, you have 6,000 british and brunswick and german prisoners, in your custody, now is the time to put them on a prison ship, right . Now is the time to obtain vengeance, justice for your murdered loved ones. Ordinary americans are infuriated by gates treaty. They petition congress, demanding congress do something about this. That is exactly what will happen. In january of 1778, congress will repudiate the convention of saratoga. And well say, no, were not going to agree to this, everybody is going to stay until the parliament of Great Britain does two things. Agrees that the United States is a sovereign nation, theyre not going to do that, thats the whole point of the war, right. Okay. So theyre not going to do that. Then the british crowd will reimburse the American Congress for all of the expenses of the prisoners up to that point. And it was a vastly exaggerated amount of money that they demanded. So, of course, parliament will say, no, but parliament is going to stop sending supplies to these prisoners. If theyre not going to be released, let the americans pay for them. Problem, problem, congress does not have the power of the purse. Cannot tax, has to ask states for requisitions. Massachusetts had enough of these guys. They cant stay here anymore. So Congress Orders them to march, wintertime, going to march from boston, massachusetts, to albemarle, virginia, thats an unpleasant walk. You can imagine, especially if you walked from canada. And so along this way, prisoners suffer every little town they go through, pelted with stones, called names, harassed, some murdered, et cetera. Theyre furious because of the way burgoyne had fought the campaign. He had auxiliaries, particularly the nation and these native american auxiliaries had not played by the european gentlemanly rules. They even murdered a loyalist, a young loyalist woman, jane mccrea. So people are furious and demanding revenge. Turns out, people of virginia none too fond of the prisoners either. Wore out their welcome there. The governor of virginia will stop paying. Your congress is a problem, we dont have any money for you anymore, no money means no food. Theyre kept in these pens, camps, where there is no food, if youre starving, you are much more likely to contract a disease. You can imagine in this age of coronavirus how easily disease spreads, imagine if youre 6,000 people held in a in an open air pen, some huts to shelter you. One british surgeon at a camp in pennsylvania, he says the prisoners are falling sick so fast, they are not men enough to attend them or bury the dead. He said the army is at the very jaws of death. Theyre dying at an extreme rate. There they are entering captivity. After the war, were not so cheerful when they left. There is a return of some of the prisoners of war showing prisoners who have died who have disease, et cetera. The commissioned army will never be officially released until the end of the war. Theyre held for five and a half years. Congress will never agree to the terms of the convention. And the british will never agree to the american demands. Theyll be held until a treaty of paris ends the war in 1783. By that point, there is about 20 of them are left. Many have run away. Many have escaped. Some have enlisted in the American Army to avoid the horrible conditions in the prison camps. And others have died. Washington, of course, is totally horrified by this. This is not the war he wanted to fight. Washington is an exemplar of the virginia gentleman. He wants to play by european rules. Hes thinking of his mentor, general braddock, wants to live up to those standards. But each of these states is not only fighting against a foreign foe. Theyre also fighting civil wars, internal civil wars, their own subjects are rising up in rebellion, in the name of the king to try to challenge their authority. Their own citizens are demanding they do something. They have to answer their constituents. Many, even in washingtons army, by 1779, 1780, are demanding that we fight british fire with fire. The gloves are off. This is this has gone too far. Washington, however, throughout the war, fights that impulse. Constantly fighting this impulse for revenge. Trying to talk people off a ledge, trying to reason with congress, congress will want to have throw some officers in a dungeon, he says, please, lets not do that, lets not be rash, et cetera. Washington gets its opportunity to show hes in fact a european style officer deserving of that title in october of 1781. Another british general, this time charles corn wallace, will surrender his army at york town. Another roughly 6,000 men. These are the two big captures of the war, york town and saratoga. In here, in the presence of the french, who are very punctilious about protocol, washington is able to demonstrate his magnanimity, hes a gentleman and will offer corn wallace generous terms. Not as generous as gates had offered burgoyne. They will be prisoners of war. Corn wallace will return to england on parole. Almost all of the officers of the army will go back to new york on the parole of honor, not to fight until exchange. And the rank and file will be marched into virginia, the interior virginia where they will be provided with the same rations and clothing as the Continental Army. They are protected against retaliation. So it is in the surrender documents that these prisoners cannot be retaliated upon. Thats really very, very magnanimous of him. You can imagine how the angry farmer in milford, connecticut, whose brother is sitting on the prison ship feels about this. Not great. And even more so, the delegate the population of the southern states, corn wallaces army marched through the carolinas spreading terror, violence, et cetera, provoebing loyalist insurrections, freeing enslaved people, et cetera. So there is great demand for revenge. The delegates from South Carolina to the Continental Congress want to recall corn wallace, they petition to have corn wallace recalled to philadelphia so he can be hanged in front of congress. Thats what we need. If we want him hanged. You can imagine, right, how that would play out. Congress for their part cant afford to beat these guys any better than they can the Convention Army. Theyre going to bring them to the same camps, bring these prisoners to the same camps for the Convention Army as in virginia, maryland and pennsylvania, eventually. There, according to one of the prisoners, a guy by the name of roger lamb, he wrote this after the war. This is a depiction of the camp, the american guards, and i just love this what he wrote in here, lord corn wallaces army was shut up here like a toad in a hole, theyre not pleased by this situation whatsoever. No surprise, yellow fever is going through philadelphia, in the summer of 1781. So before their capture. It will spread to these camps in pennsylvania. And begin taking the lives of these prisoners that are very rapid rate. To the point that we actually do have fairly good records for the prisoners of the york town prisoners who, again, are never exchanged, theyre held until the treaty ends the war in 1783 in the spring of 1783. For the numbers, the mortality rate on the british prisoners, corn wallaces army, american custody, is over 30 , which is higher than the mortality rate of Union Prisoners at the confederate prison in andersonville during the civil war. We dont have photographs, right, from the American Revolution. But thats what starvation and disease does to the human body and that paints some picture, i think, of the suffering that these prisoners endured. Eventually they just dont have enough food to keep even the emaciated ones alive, so they agree to sell the heshens into servitude. Anyone who resists is sent to philadelphia to the new jail in philadelphia where yellow fever is rampant. A group of 128 men from the 9,000 regiment confined there in philadelphia for one year of the 128, 20 of them perished in philadelphia. Give you some sense. So washington was deeply, deeply upset by this. And he could not control it. He could command his army, but he could not command congress. He was a subject of congress. And congress was answerable to the states. Right. So he had no power over that. He continually tries to arrange informal exchanges with the british, and to no avail, right . It is just they continue trying and trying and trying. They can never agree on terms. Largely because the states are oftentimes guarding the prisoners and not giving them back to washington. There are prisoners now, were going to hold them to exchange for our guys. Washington has to confess he feels deeply embarrassed on the issue of prisoners. Both prisoners on both sides, british and american custody and americans in british custody will languish in captivity again until the treaty of paris. This is an image done of american prisoners on the jersey the famous Jersey Prison ship, showing the sunken faces of these men. Dont have any images for the british prisoners, but british pension applications, the survivors made it through their captivity and made it home to apply for a chelsea pension, these things read like a laundry list of misery, suffering and woe. A few quotes from members, enlisted prisoners in these camps, talking about how their confinement left them suffering, burying the scars of their captivity for life. Many of them dont live long after they return home. One british survivor, wrote in his diary, he said the treatment of prisoners in general during the american war was harsh, severe, and in many instances inhuman. A pretty sad story, right . Pretty upsetting story. What do we make of that, what is the story tell us about the American Revolution . How does this make us rethink the American Revolution . For one, i think it forces us to confront an uncomfortable reality, which is that the American Revolution was tragic for many people. We have this triumphant nationalist narrative of this revolution that the lies, the tragedy at the core of an eightyear civil war that divided this these people. Many other scholars recently observed this was a bloody contradictory divisive civil war. And too often we forget those horrors. The tale of these prisoners confirms that. But perhaps most importantly the war time experiences of these prisoners demonstrates that americas commitment to the restraint of violence, of war time violence, was fragile. It was complicated and then eroded by the experience of the war itself. The act of waging this war degraded that prewar commitment to restraining violence. And treating prisoners. I think it is about time, and you all can help me with this, i think it is time to stop talking about the war for american independence, i hate this term, and we need to Start Talking about the American Revolutionary war. This was a revolutionary war. It was fundamentally different the practice of war before. It was every bit as revolutionary in character as the french revolutionary wars of the late 18th century. While the American Revolution itself did not evolve into the terror of the french revolution, i have lots of ideas about why it did not, it could have. And in places where the loyalists and the british posed a Severe Threat to the revolution it did. It did devolve into cycles of vengeance and terror. Much like the case for the french revolution, revolutionary political change, getting rid of monarchy and creating a republic based on popular sovereignty had the unintended consequence of democratizing the practice of war, removing war from the hands of these elite gentlemen and escalating its violence along the way. Prisoners on both sides suffered. From the Vantage Point of the prisoners, the American Revolution looks like a cautionary tale, not an inspirational one. I plead with you to emulate the aspirations of the founders, not their actions. We can do better. We must do better. Thank you very much. [ applause ] im happy to entertain some questions if we have time. Yes, please. I was wondering, i wondered for quite some time, you mentioned that the heshens from trenton went to the reading area in pennsylvania. In maryland, in frederick, we have a building, which is commonly referred to as the heshen barracks. In your study, did you find out which heshens, where they came from, that were imprisoned there. Trenton excuse me, frederick as well as ft. Frederick, a little further away, were these were sites of these internment camps throughout the war. There were many different regiments that would have cycled out through there. Maryland will refuse to pay after a while. Theyre not going to continue to feed these guys. They have to go over the border to virginia or over the border to pennsylvania. I believe brunswick troops from Burgoynes Army was there for a while. They came from many different principal ties within what is now militia. But then, as many of these parole militia men will go off and join francis mare yet and other partisan forces, break their parole, he becomes enraged. So when corn wallace takes over from him, corn wallace is going to retaliate on the prisoners violently. The Continental Army troops are initially kept in their barracks in charleston. But then once these violations of the paroles happen, the british commander i believe his name is Nesbitt Balfour orders them on to the prison ships. And to punish them for those violations of rules. Yes. Thank you for your work. Certainly very novel and interesting. Thank you. How do you tell intentional harm, when youre a prisoner, versus gross negligence . At least gross negligence. You can make an argument with the british, a lot of it arguably was gross negligence. Just didnt understand how diseases worked or the money they were putting in. Clearly at least gross negligence. But you cited some angry words by americans, but how did they really translate into intentional harm or was it mostly just the lack of funds, they were not well organized when it came to money and raising money and appreciation of money or what is your view on that . Thats a great question. Also a sliding scale, you know . Yes. Where does gross negligence begin and cruelty begin . I would argue from the position of a prisoner, starving in a camp, doesnt matter what the intentions were. But there were actually violent intentions. In fact, for much of the war, the british are willing to swap american sailors, privateers captured on their prison ships informally with the americans. Washington wants to do it. He wants to maybe the exchanges that would release the prisoners. Congress cannot do that because theyre under demands from the states to hold the prisoners for the purposes of retaliation. So they use that language, were holding these men, not going to exchange them, going to keep them locked up to punish the british for what they have done and to show them they cant push us around anymore. From the perspective of individual states as well as many of the delegates in congress, it is intentional. It is not they could have released british prisoners and got american prisoners in exchange. They dont. Individual states will do it. Washington is able to get people exchanged through his contacts, through informally negotiating with howell. There is no large scale major exchanges. In the in your research, have you come across any examples of how the british treated the irish rebels prior to the revolution. One time when i was in ireland, prior to the rousing of 1916 there was some 18 or 19 previous rebellions big and small, and the unifying characteristic of those irish was that the officers all got hanged. Did you find anything like that in your research. The context i was discussing in my book, british attitudes, how do you suppress a rebellion and what do you do with a capti captive, in fact, the british army will do that effectively, will capture many of the officer core will be tried for treason and executed as a symbolic gesture, but they also drive the ordinary common highland scotts out of their homes, many of them sent sold into indentured servitude, so using extreme violence to crush that rebellion. It is my understanding the british are doing the same thing in ireland, particularly in 1798 with major rising in ireland then. Rebellions pose an existential threat to the state. They call into legitimacy, they call the legitimacy of the state into question. You cannot negotiate with rebels without undermining your your the very foundation of government, and in britain, the foundation of government is not the god to the king. It is a parliamentary monarchy, so any challenge to parliament is an existential challenge that has to be punished. In both highland, scotland and in ireland, the fact that these are gaelic speaking primarily, many catholics are going to make them seem uncivilized or alien to the british army, who is going to exacerbate this trend of violence. We see that that is less so than the american case, which is a mitigating factor for many of these british officers. Yes. [ inaudible ] right, i cant quite recall the reference in the book to that. But the issue here at play, i think, is that the americans are shocked. Hadnt seen war like this. It is worth keeping in mind that most of the American Revolutionary war is fought right along the coast. The most settled places in north america. Right. War used to be peripheral, distant. Having the frontier, western pennsylvania, western new york, canada, the west indies. Didnt have in borden town, new jersey. Hadnt been major fighting like that since 1675. So war comes to these communities, they have never seen war. Maybe one or two of the men in town had fought during the french and indian war, but many times not. So it is they have this idealized vision of what war should be, it is like a picture like a painting. Thats what war looks like in europe. It is pretty. There are flags and drums. And thats not what happens during the American Revolution. Back there . Yes. Ironically the revolution brought up the emancipation of many slaves. Yes. Lord dunnsmore who commanded the british, governor of virginia, many of the loyalists i guess had allowed the emancipation, chaos, upwards of 20,000 enslaved americans had joined forces with the british. I was wondering whether this much documentation on what happened to them. It is a very sad story, predictably. Dunnmore issues this emancipation proclamation, saying if youre a slave, belonging to the revolutionary, rebels, if youre enslaved by the rebels, you may free yourself by joining the british, by rallying to my standard. Initially just men to raise for his regiment, but then eventually after 1779, becomes a general emancipation for the property of rebel masters. What happens when these guys join the british army and they get captured by americans . What happens in december of 1775, place called great bridge, virginia, and immediately, right, immediately the revolutionaries are confronted. What do we do with we know what we need to do to the british, like, soldiers, right, were less sure about the loyalists, while loyalists what do we do about the slaves . There is an initial desire to murder them on the field of battle and one of the commanders there has to intercede and prevent them from being murdered. He does this not out of humanity or the goodness of his heart, he wants to sell them. And get the profit from it. Many of the masters will petition, demand the property back, say, this is my property, give it back and it will be returned to slavery. Even washington has to sign some of these. He doesnt seem to think this is a big problem, sending property back. Throughout the war, africanamericans in arms captured could be summarily executed on the spot. More often than not, theyre sold into slavery somewhere else, sold in the west indies, put on ships, privateer vessels. There is salt in a lead mine in pennsylvania where they send black loyalists, virginia does, to work there. It is it is even more horrific than for the White British soldiers. [ inaudible ] yeah. It is a real problem. Reason washington doesnt want to touch it because if you were born in a state, youre considered a subject of a citizen of that state after july 4th, 1776, if you were in arms, caught in arms against that state, that is insurrection and treason, punishable by death. Washington cannot override the treason laws of the individual states. Doesnt want to touch that whatsoever. He doesnt have the power to do that. Hes constrained. In reality, most of those most of the loyalist prisoners, many of them return to the states, some are tried, but, again, the same thing within britain, you cant try 500 people for treason, right . This is a an incohet government. Well take your property, confiscate your prosecute and you have to leave, go back to new york, british occupied new york, and things like that. It is a mix of exemplary terror, not unlike in the irish and scottish cases and in some form of pardon and disenfranchisement. Last question right here. I know that in the case of a lot of the german soldiers, soldiers like roger lamb, they ended up settling in america after their experience as prisoners. Do we know any rough estimate of how many p. O. W. S stayed even after the the short answer is no. We dont. What we do know is that there has persistently been this long story, which is these poor heshens, mercenaries, sent over here, they were captured, and then shown the bounty of this american land, all of this, freedom and liberty and land to farm, and they settled and prospered and became active members of the community, especially in central pennsylvania. A large german speaking population, right . Thats the story. That one makes us feel good at night. It is actually much, much more complicated than that. Congress and washington will actively try to make that happen. They will try to encourage these heshens to desert, to join the American Army, to settle down, dont go back to the british and what my colleague daniel krebs has found, hes gone over to germany and through the muster roles, a lot of the guys come back, they enlist the American Army and once the American Army gets somewhere close to new york city, theyll run away. Theyll go back and rejoin the regiments. So i think we had this idea that the germans were forced here, and miserable and mal treated and had no loyalty to their princes that sent them for money, right . It is not really true. These are regular basically professional soldiers, they have they have sworn an oath, they feel a duty, and they want to get home at the end of the war. So we dont really know, but it is much more complicated than we would like it to be. Thank you to dr. Jones for his talk this evening. Thank you. [ applause ] every saturday night, American History tv takes you to College Classrooms around the country for lectures in history. Why do you all know who Lizzie Borden is and raise your hand if you had ever heard of this murder, the gene harris murder trial before this class . The deepest cause where well find the true meaning of the revolution was in this transformation that took place in the minds of the american people. Were going to talk about both of these sides of this story here, right, the tools, the techniques of slave owner power, and well also talk about the tools and techniques of power that were practiced by enslaved people. Watch history professors lead discussions can their students on topics ranging from the American Revolution to september 11th. Lectures in history on cspan3 every saturday at 8 00 p. M. Eastern, on American History tv, and lectures in history is available as a podcast. Find it where you listen to podcasts. Youre watching a special edition of American History tv. Airing now during the week while members of congress are working in their districts because of the coronavirus pandemic. Tonight at 8 00 eastern, we talk with White House Historical Association Historians about their jobs, and the Organizations Mission to protect and preserve the executive mansion. Please enjoy American History tv now, and also watch over the weekend on cspan3. Television has changed since cspan began 41 years ago. But our mission continues. To provide an unfiltered view of government. Already this year we brought you primary election coverage, the president ial impeachment process, and now the federal response to the coronavirus. You can watch all of cspans Public Affairs programming on television, online, or listen on our free radio app. And be part of the National Conversation through cspans daily washington journal program. Or through our social media feeds. Cspan, created by private industry, americas Cable Television companies, as a public service, and brought to you today by your television provider. Next, author Christy Pichichero talks about french officers in the American Revolution. She argues their experiences influenced french politics and perspectives. The American Revolution institute hosted this event. Greetings, everyone. I am ellen clark. And im the Library Director for the American Revolution institute of the society of cincinnati. It is my special pleasure to welcome you to Anderson House this evening and to introduce our speaker, dr. Christy pichichero. Dr. Pichichero, our good
vimarsana.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.