Page 154 - American Stories, A History of the United States

Fighting for independence
5.1

5.4 Why did it take eight years of warfare for the Americans to gain independence?
5.2
O nly fools and visionaries expressed optimism about America’s prospects of 5.3

winning independence in 1776. The Americans had taken on a formidable
military power. Britain’s population was perhaps four times that of its for-
mer colonies. Britain also possessed a strong manufacturing base, a well-
trained regular army supplemented by thousands of German mercenaries (Hessians),
and a navy that dominated the seas. Many British officers were battlefield veterans. 5.4
They already knew what the Americans would slowly learn: Waging war requires dis-
cipline, money, and sacrifice.
The British government was confident that it could beat the Americans. In 1776,
Lord North and his colleagues regarded the war as a police action. A mere show
of force would intimidate the upstart colonists. As soon as the rebels in Boston
had been humbled, the British argued, other colonies would desert the cause for
independence. General Gage, for example, told the king that the colonists “will be
Lions, whilst we are Lambs . . . if we take a resolute part they will undoubtedly prove
very weak.” Since this advice confirmed George’s views, he called Gage “an honest
determined man.”
As later events demonstrated, of course, Britain had become involved in an impos-
sible military situation. Three separate elements neutralized the larger power’s advan-
tages over its adversary. First, the British had to transport men and supplies across the
Atlantic, a logistic challenge of unprecedented complexity. Unreliable lines of com-
munication broke down under the strain of war.
Second, America was too vast to be conquered by conventional military methods.
Redcoats might gain control over the major ports, but as long as the Continental Army
remained intact, the rebellion continued. As Washington explained, “the possession of
our Towns, while we have an Army in the field, will avail them little. . . . It is our Arms,
not defenceless Towns, they have to subdue.” Even if Britain had recruited enough
soldiers to occupy the entire country, it would still have lost the war. As one Loyalist
instructed the king, “if all America becomes a garrison, she is not worth your atten-
tion.” Britain could only win by crushing the American will to resist.
And third, British strategists never appreciated the depth of the Americans’ com-
mitment to a political ideology. In the wars of eighteenth-century Europe, such beliefs
had seldom mattered. European troops before the French Revolution broke out in 1789
served because they were paid or because the military was a vocation, not because
they hoped to advance a set of constitutional principles. Americans were different. To
be sure, some young men were drawn to the military by bounty money or the desire
to escape unhappy families. A few were drafted. But the American troops still had a
remarkable commitment to republican ideals. One French officer reported from the
United States, “It is incredible that soldiers composed of men of every age, even of
children of fifteen, of whites and blacks, almost naked, unpaid, and rather poorly fed,
can march so well and withstand fire so steadfastly.”

building a Professional Army
Washington insisted on organizing a regular well-trained field army. Some advisers
urged the commander-in-chief to wage a guerrilla war in which small partisan bands
would sap Britain’s will to fight. But Washington recognized that the Continental
Army was not just a fighting force but a symbol of the republican cause. Its very exis-
tence would sustain American hopes, and so long as the army survived, American

121