In an age where the names of Franklin, Jefferson, and Washington are household, the names of Wilkinson, Kemper, and Bowles seem to be consigned to the fringes of histories of the early American republic. With the formation of the fledgling United States of America, both the honorable and not-so-honorable helped shape the direction of expansion, and diplomacy, and reinforce societal values of the 18th and early 19th centuries. This collection of essays is akin to watching a true crime television documentary.
With a collection of essays, editors David Head and Timothy C. Hemmis, historians, and biographers provide snippets into the lives of these scoundrels of the early Republic. A few of the names are well known, including Benedict Arnold and Aaron Burr, a few will conjure up memories from the fringes of other histories, such as James Wilkinson, whereas others have escaped the main avenues of historical exploration. Throughout the various essays, “this collection seeks to reexamine the Founding generation” to “replace the hagiography of the Founding Fathers with something more realistic” (pg. xx).
First, an examination of the word “scoundrel” is needed. According to usage at the time and the 1755 dictionary of Samuel Johnson’s authoring, that word meant “a mean rascal; a low petty villain” (pg. xiii). Through 12 individuals, the various authors explain how each earned the moniker “scoundrel” and how that affected the development of the United States. Especially interesting was the role of various individuals in Western expansion and the domino effect on international diplomacy. Individuals such as Aaron Burr and James Wilkinson are better known but Philip Nolan and Thomas Green are not so much.
Others, such as Benedict Arnold and Charles Lee get a fresh look from two great Revolutionary-era historians, James Kirby Martin and Mark Edward Lender. Included in those discussed, William Augustus Bowles and Diego de Gardeoqui show how international actors played prominent roles in providing heartburn to the national government. One theme, the west and south of the original thirteen states provided the arena for scheming, opportunity, and risk.
In conclusion, the editors examine three main reasons a study like this is important, that the “unintended result of the American Revolution” was “many men decided they had their own ideas about what was important” (pg. 266). Secondly, the “vital importance of the American West as a zone of territorial expansion, economic opportunity, and foreign intrigue” and lastly simply “early America was…a time and place for scoundrels…” (pgs. 267-268).
Overall this essay-comprised book is a fun, fresh read that looks at those scoundrels that sought an opportunity to change the landscape of the early American republic and potentially change the course of United States history. Who does not like to read about plots, scheming, and resultant escapades?
Welcome to the first “Rev War Revelry” of 2024! To kick off the new year, Emerging Revolutionary War is joined by Tom Hand, author, historian, and founder of Americana Corner. However, in the later stages of 20234, Tom added published book author to his lengthy list of accomplishments. His book, American Triumph is now available via his website.
The book, “masterly blends the personal experiences and historic milestones” of three luminaries of the early Republic, Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, and John Adams. The book, with a plethora of graphics, sidebars, and informational tidbits aims to provide a “captivating collection of stories” for the “everyday American.”
We look forward to a lively and friendly discussion with Tom. Hope you can tune in, to Emerging Revolutionary War’s Facebook page at 7 p.m. EDT this Sunday, January 7th.
As we move towards to the 250th anniversary of the Boston Tea Party, we at ERW have gotten a lot of questions with a central theme…” why was it tea that led to revolution?” Was tea so central to colonial life that it was worth risking war or was it something else? The answer is somewhere in the middle and as with most history, there is nuance to the story (and yes, tea WAS a big part of everyday live in British America).
On May 10, 1773, Parliament passed the Tea Act, this act was a way for the British government to help bail out a major corporation, the British East India Company. The British East India Company was one of the largest global companies and faced immense debt and financial trouble. Furthering their troubles, they held a large amount of tea stored in warehouses in London. The British East India Company sought a way to offload this tea, which was considered some of the best tea in the world. The company’s success was directly tied to Great Britain’s international strategy, as the company spread British influence across the globe especially in India where they basically managed the British colony. The Tea Act reduced the cost on the tea (cutting out the “middleman” in Great Britain), and now the colonists could buy the tea directly from the British East India Company.
The British colonies in North America consumed on average of 1.2 million pounds of black tea annually. In 1773, about 1/3 of the population drank tea at least twice a day. It was a common luxury among most middle- and upper-class colonists. They preferred black tea but also drank green tea. Black tea varieties included Bohea, Congou and Souchong and common green tea varieties included Singlo and Hyson. All the tea that the British East India Company sold was grown and imported from China. Tea from China was preferred by most for better flavor, but it tended to be more expensive. The North American colonies consumed a lot of smuggled tea from the Dutch, the quality of the tea was not the same but much cheaper. A large market grew for smuggled tea with most British port officials looking the other way. All of this changed when the Tea Act was passed.
Nineteenthcentury lithograph depicting a tea plantation in Qing China
Many in Parliament believed the colonists would have little opposition to this new act. They could now purchase their preferred tea for a cheaper price than the smuggled tea from the Netherlands. Unfortunately for Royal leaders, this was not the case. As word reached the colonies Whig leaders such as Samuel Adams called it nothing more than a British authorized monopoly of the tea market, cutting into the pockets of colonial merchants (though their tea smuggling business was illegal to begin with). The Tea Act also highlighted a British policy that the colonists opposed for many years, the Townshend Acts. The Townshend Acts imposed duties on imported lead, glass, paper, paint, and tea. This “tax” was payable at ports and funded the salaries of colonial judges, governors, and other government officials. This angered many colonial leaders for two reasons. First, it levied another tax on the colonists without having their own representation in Parliament. Secondly, it made the government officials more beholden to the British government (and the tax) than the colonial governments.
Whig groups like the Sons of Liberty used local taverns as places for their meetings. The most famous being the Green Dragon Tavern in Boston. It no longer stands today.
As the news of the Tea Act reached the colonies, the reaction was mixed. Whig leaders in major cities such as Charleston, New York, Philadelphia and Boston saw it as a way to reinvigorate their cause of opposing British rule. Recently things were mostly quiet with little interest by the public for protest. But now the Whig spin machine went into full affect. The Tea Act was a direct affront to colonial self-rule and economic interest. The taxes paid for the tea went to British officials in the colonies and the cheaper priced (and better quality) tea would put many American merchants out of business. Whigs were able to control the message that the Tea Act was just another way for Parliament to make money off the colonists, who did not have representation in Parliament.
As part of the Tea Act, consignees were appointed to oversee the sale of tea and the collection of the taxes on behalf of the British East India Company. As the tea began to arrive in colonial ports, public pressure was put on consignees to resign. This pressure was successful in New York, Philadelphia and in Charleston. Each of these cities were able to either stop the tea from being offloaded or, as in the case of Charleston, they confiscated the tea and didn’t allow any duties to be paid on it. All of these were direct affronts to the law but the events in Boston proved to be the most dramatic.
Ca, 1780 view of Charleston Harbor, and the Exchange Building where the confiscated tea was locked away by Whig leaders.
Unlike in other port cities, the consignees in Boston refused to resign. Richard Clarke, leading merchant in Boston and one of consignees faced a mob at his warehouse trying to pressure him and the other consignees to resign. Encouraged by the Massachusetts Governor Thomas Hutchinson (who had two sons serving as tea consignees) to stand their ground, the consignees refused to resign. Soon news arrived that the first ship carrying the tea, the Dartmouth, was arriving in Boston soon.
Hosting several town meetings, some hosting thousands of people, Whig leaders such as Samuel Adams, Dr. Joseph Warren and John Hancock were able to organize a strong opposition to the tea. Of course, Boston was already a tinderbox due to the “Boston Massacre” in 1770 and the large contingent of British regular troops stationed in Boston. Bostonians were reminded daily of Royal influence. The Whigs protested to the Governor to order the ships to return to England, but Hutchinson refused to do so and claimed he didn’t have that authority. Many historians believed Hutchinson, who recently had resigned as Governor and was awaiting his replacement, had grown tired and frustrated with the likes of the Whigs and Sons of Liberty in Boston and was trying to press the issue.
On November 28, the Dartmouth arrived in Boston Harbor. Captain James Hall was turned away at the first wharf he sailed too and was redirected to Griffins Wharf. Everyone knew that once a ship entered the harbor, the captain had twenty days to unload the cargo and pay the custom duties. Soon two more ships arrived at Griffins Wharf with more tea. With the Governor refusing to allow the ships to leave the harbor and local patrols watching the ships to make sure the tea was not offloaded, the stage was set for December 16th, the last day the ship’s captains had to unload their cargo.
Joseph Galloway is best known as one of the preeminent and prominent Loyalists who remained in the American colonies through the majority of the American Revolution. Prior to the colonies declaring independence, especially during the First Continental Congress, Galloway was active in the debates that decided the path forward. Besides attending and being active in the discussions in Philadelphia he penned a pamphlet entitled A Candid Examination of the Mutual Claims of Great Britain and the Colonies.
Within the pages, he called African American slavery “the dangerous enemy within” and the “natural weakness” of the soon-to-be Southern states. If a division ensued, Galloway predicted that,
“If the colonies happen to vie and try their reciprocal strength with each other, the political force of the Northern Colonies will soon destroy the opulent force of the Southern.”
Furthermore, Galloway pointed to the colonies/states of Georgia, Maryland, North and South Carolina, and Virginia as vulnerable because of the institution of slavery. In a conflict without the overarching guidance by Great Britain, the division between Northern and Southern colonies/states would lead to a domestic civil war and the possibility that African American slaves would join the Northern effort in vanquishing their former owners.
Although Galloway was writing to prop support for remaining loyal to the British crown he foreshadowed accurately the rift that plagued the independent United States. In laying out his views, Galloway quite succinctly predicted what would happen in 78 years after independence was won by the United States.
Galloway left Philadelphia when the British evacuated the city in 1778 and left for England where he would position himself in a leading role for loyalists in exiles. He never returned to the United States. His succinct prediction of the future though proved eerily accurate.
Sources:
Disunion Among Ourselves, The Perilous Politics of the American Revolution by Eli Merritt
University of Michigan, Evans Early American Imprint Collection, click here for the link.
We are excited to announce our 2024 (fourth annual!) bus tour location will be Lexington and Concord on October 11-13, 2024. Join historians Phillip Greenwalt, Rob Orrison and Alex Cain as we tour the sites associated with the beginning of the American Revolution on April 19, 1775. The tour will cover events in Lexington, Concord and sites along the “Battle Road.” Tickets are $250 per person and includes a Friday night lecture, all day tour on Saturday and half day tour on Sunday (bus tour transportation and Saturday lunch included in cost).
Join us for our FOURTH annual tour as we take on the beginning of the American Revolution just a few months before the 250th anniversary. Learn about the dramatic events that led to the first shots for the Revolution and the bloody aftermath. We will visit Lexington Green, Buckman’s Tavern, North Bridge in Concord, Battle Road including Merriam’s Corner, Parker’s Revenge and the Jason Russell House. There is no better way to experience history than to stand in the footsteps of where it happened!
Join us this Sunday night at 7pm as we welcome Glenn F. Williams, PhD to our popular Sunday night Rev War Revelry! Glenn will examine the political and economic causes of the American Revolution beginning at the end of the Seven Years War / French and Indian War through the resistance movements. He will dispel or clarify some of the popular beliefs about the grievances that eventually led the thirteen colonies to break with the Mother Country. This will be a timely discussion as we approach the 250th anniversary of the Boston Tea Party. Glenn Williams is a retired U.S. Army officer that until recently also enjoyed a “second career” as a military historian. He retired as a senior Historian after 18 years at the U.S. Army Center of Military History and 3 1/2 years as the historian of the American Battlefield Protection Program of the U.S. National Park Service.
Grab your favorite drink and tune in, we will be live so feel free to drop your questions in the live chat. If you are not able to tune in on Sunday, the video will be placed on our You Tube and podcast channels.
Join us this Sunday, October 15th at 7pm as we welcome Matthew Wilding, Director of Education and Interpretation at Revolutionary Spaces. Revolutionary Spaces manages the Old South Meeting House and the Old State House in historic Boston. We will discuss the history of the Old South Meeting House and its important role in the revolutionary movement in Boston (especially during the Boston Tea Party). We will also cover their plans for the 250th anniversary of the Boston Tea Party, including their new exhibit on the destruction of property in public protests.
Grab a drink and follow along as we start to gear up for the 250th anniversary of the Boston Tea Party with Emerging Revolutionary War!
Join us as we discuss the excavation and successful recovery of the remains of 14 veterans of the August 16, 1780, Battle of Camden with James Legg and Steven Smith, Ph.D., the lead archeologists of the Camden Re-Burial Project which began in September 2022. We will discuss the indepth research conducted and the precise archaeological work that was done on the battlefield. Also learn about the reburial ceremony and where the soldiers were finally laid to rest.
This is a great opportunity to learn about a rare discovery on a American Revolutionary War battlefield. The Camden battlefield is a great archaeological site that is revealing multiple stories and helping historians piece together a better understanding of the battle. Grab a drink and join us on our Facebook page for a great evening of archaeology and history!
For those that write and research it can be a personal albeit lonely endeavor. Hours spent in libraries or archives, humped over your computer or pad and pencil taking copious notes. Eyes going bleary or cross-eyed trying to decipher 18th century handwriting or microfilmed pieces of primary data. But, at the same time, it is such a rewarding experience, is it not? Uncovering the past, shedding light on the personalities that comprise the fabric of American history. Maybe even finding overlooked accounts or information that changes the narrative or promotes a fuller picture?
For me, I enjoy finding quotes or descriptions that creates a better understanding of the world in which the soldiers and civilians of the American Revolutionary or American Civil War periods lived. Anything that humanizes them more I feel makes them relatable. Breathes life into who they were, instead of just what comes through in official dispatches, reports, or polished accounts they left behind. One way is to read the accounts of fellow officers or compatriots as they discuss or describe their fellow comrades-in-arms.
Or there is just Israel Putnam. The patriot general who on April 19, 1775 when hearing of the British march to Lexington and Concord famously left his plow in a half plowed farm field to rush from Connecticut to Massachusetts. In the process he rallied his militia and stuck around for the siege that followed the first shots of what would become the American Revolution.
Israel Putnam
That is where I picked up his tale. Researching an upcoming volume of the Emerging Revolutionary War Series. (Stay tuned for what that will be in the upcoming months. Yes, “vague booking” and self-promotion happening!) During the siege of Boston he was asked in a meeting of general officers about the “expediency of intrenching” as a few of the gathered were doubtful of its efficacy on the psyche of the volunteer militia.
Putnam’s response fit the mold mentioned above, of providing a human touch to the notes of that meeting and a bit of 18th century humor for added measure.
The general responded, “earnest in his advocacy of the measure” that,
“The Americans are not at all afraid of their heads, though very much afraid of their legs: if you cover these, they will fight for ever.”
Time and defensive tactics would uncover the truth of that statement.
In closing, what is a favorite line, anecdote that is not well known from the American Revolutionary period that resonates with you?
There are arguably many moments along the road towards war with England that greatly shaped that road’s trajectory. Perhaps among the top contenders on that list would be the Boston Tea Party. Join historian Benjamin Carp and ERW’s Dan Welch as we dig in with the author of one of the best books on that pivotal moment. Dr. Benjamin L. Carp is the author of The Great New York Fire of 1776: A Lost Story of the American Revolution, and Defiance of the Patriots: The Boston Tea Party and the Making of America (2010), which won the triennial Society of the Cincinnati Cox Book Prize in 2013; and Rebels Rising: Cities and the American Revolution (2007). His book, Defiance of the Patriots, will be the focus of Sunday’s book chat.
With Richard D. Brown, he co-edited Major Problems in the Era of the American Revolution, 1760-1791: Documents and Essays, 3rd ed. (2014). He has written about nationalism, firefighters, Benjamin Franklin, and Quaker merchants in Charleston. He has also written for Colonial Williamsburg, the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post. He previously taught at the University of Edinburgh and Tufts University. He was born and raised in New York State and each of his parents earned two CUNY degrees. See you Sunday at 7 p.m. EDT on Emerging Revolutionary War’s Facebook page!
Emerging Revolutionary War Era 