Draft:Social history of soldiers and veterans in the United States

The Social history of soldiers and veterans in United States history covers the role of soldiers in the United States from colonial foundations to the present, with emphasis on the social, cultural, economic and political roles apart from strictly military functions.

Colonial militia

The colonial militia were primarily justified in terms of nearby threats by hostile Indians or foreign powers. In political crises, they were sometimes used for a coup d'etat, as in Boston in 1689. If they disagreed with their government's policy, they might refuse a summons as happened in Boston in 1747. The first large-scale use to deal with a natural disaster came with the devastating fire in Portsmouth, New Hampshire in 1802.

New England

The militia played a crucial role in colonial New England, especially in Massachusetts and Connecticut. They served as the primary line of defense and community organization. The Massachusetts Bay Colony established its militia system in the early 1630s, modeled after the traditional English militia system. Service in the militia was compulsory for nearly all able-bodied white men between 16 and 60 living in the town. They were required to join the local militia, and provide their own weapons and uniforms. A hierarchical command structure was established, with a Sergeant Major General overseeing the entire colony's militia, but in practice the local town officials controlled its militia. The men elected their own officers, typically choosing leading citizens with minimal military experience. Drills were infrequent, usually amounting to a few days a year. When they were needed to defend the town, a subset of paid volunteers was used for a specific mission for a specified number of months. When The entire body of militia was called out, a man could avoid duty by paying a fine or providing a substitute. For the most part, militias on active duty contained officers from the local elite, and privates from the poorest sector who needed the pay. Few or none had prior military experience or advanced training.^[1]^[2]

Wars and raids were frequent in the colonial era, involving the nearby outposts of the French or Spanish empires, or hostile Indian tribes. The French often used Indian allies to raid outlying towns in New England. The militia was responsible for defending against attacks by the French and their Native Americans allies, as well as by independent Indian tribes. The militia often used their own Indian allies. The militia and their allies played the central role in the destruction of the Pequot Indians in the Pequot War of 1636-1638, as well as victory in the hard fought King Philip's War of 1675-1676.^[3]

In the 18th century the British Army fought the French Army in a series of major European wars, especially the French and Indian War of 1754-1763. Important battles took place in North America that ended in expelling the French from North America. American militia played ancillary roles, but were often ridiculed by British officers as hopelessly undisciplined amateurs who lacked respect for authority.^[4]^[5]

1689 Boston revolt

In the late 1680s Governor Edmund Andros, representing King James II and the Catholic faction in power in London, consolidated the northern colonies into the Dominion of New England. He thus stripped away much of the power of colonial governments in New England, New York, and the two Jersey colonies. The elites were angry at their loss of control. When rumor arrived in April 1689 of the king's overthrow, local forces in Boston used the militia to overthrow Andros and his regular army troops. No shots were fired; no one was killed or injured. Bostonians long celebrated their use of the militia to overthrow unlawful attempts to challenge their historic right of self-government. ^[6]

1747 Boston's militia refuses

In November, 1747, Admiral Charles Knowles of the Royal Navy made port in Boston on the way to action against France in the Caribbean during the War of the Austrian Succession. His crews were shorthanded and he sent in a press gang to seize likely sailors regardless of their status. A mob of 300 sailors assembled to block the press gang; it escalated into a three day riot. Governor William Shirley called for calm, but he represented British authority and he was chased by the mob to the safety of Castle William. The governor called out the militia, but only 20 men responded: Boston's militiamen were refusing to obey the order of the king's governor to help impress sailors for the king's fleet in wartime. Admiral Knowles prepared to bombard the city. Shirley managed to convince him to release some of the impressed men and the mob dispersed. Knowles finally sailed off, ending the most serious challenge against imperial authority in the American colonies to take place before the Stamp Act crisis.^[7]^[8]^[9]

1775: Lexington and Concord

As threats evolved, so did the militia system. In the 1770s, some towns created elite "minutemen" companies that trained more intensely and could respond rapidly to British threats.^[10] The minutemen played a crucial role in the early stages of the American Revolution, particularly at Lexington and Concord on April 19, 1775. British spies had reported that two top Patriots were in Lexington and that large stores of munitions were in Concord. The British decided to send a midnight march by 900 elite troops to neutralize the threat. The Massachusetts Provincial Congress had ordered all towns to activate and train their militias, and prepare for action. Around Boston the Minutemen had built a large network of informants focused on quick reaction. Patriot spies somehow learned of the plan and before midnight on April 18 Paul Revere and 40 others were spreading the alarm. At least 80 militia companies were involved with about 4000 soldiers. Dozens of towns rang church bells and mobilized for battle. The British did not find leaders at Lexington or munition at Concord. At noon they started back encountering time and again ambushes from about a thousand militia riflemen firing from about 100 yards. At last a relief column rescued them but not before a third became casualties, including nearly half the officers.^[11]

Middle colonies

Leisler's Rebellion in New York City 1689-1691

In Britain, religious tensions flared between King James II, a Catholic, and the anti-Catholics who led the Glorious Revolution and installed William and Mary. When rumors reached New York in 1689, the anti-Catholic Yankees on Long Island were energized, and at one point sent their militia units on a march to the city to oust the pro-Catholic element. They turned back, however, and there were no episodes of rival militias fighting for political power. Soon a prominent businessman Jacob Leisler used the militia unit he controlled to seize power, and proclaim himself lieutenant governor awaiting the new governor to be appointed by the new monarchs. He ruled for two years. London finally sent in a new governor whom Leisler refused to recognize. Tensions mounted, with Leisler's militia confronting the king's forces. There was no fighting. Leisler finally gave in. He was arrested, found guilty of treason, and punished by the most gruesome method known: he was Hanged, drawn and quartered.^[12]

American Revolution

Life and death

Historian John Shy estimates that 150,000 to 200,000 Americans served in the Revolution, about one in ten white non-Loyalist. About 25,000 died and perhaps 25,000 came home crippled. After the first wave of enthusiasm, enlisted men were drawn largely from the poorer classes.^[13] John Ruddiman argues that universal service in the peacetime militia meant that all young white men could expect to be seen by everyone in adult company with men of all levels of local society. It validated their manliness and their maturity. Volunteering for the Continental Army, however, was a different experience because it recruited from lower ranks of society. The recruits were surrounded by strangers of about the same age, who on the whole were younger, poorer, and more marginal than most adults. Drilling was far more intense and frequent, and it was not for show but for survival. As veterans their post-war status tended to reflect how they started with less and never caught up, despite their aspirations to "Becoming Men of Some Consequence."^[14]

Black soldiers

African Americans, both as slaves and freemen, served on both sides. About 9,000 black soldiers served on the American side, counting the Continental Army and Navy, state militia units, as well as privateers, wagoneers in the Army, servants, officers and spies.^[15] Ray Raphael notes that while thousands did join the Loyalist cause, "A far larger number, free as well as slave, tried to further their interests by siding with the patriots."^[16]

Black soldiers served in Northern militias from the outset, but this was forbidden in the South, where slave-owners feared arming slaves. Lord Dunmore, the Royal Governor of Virginia, issued a proclamation in November 1775, promising freedom to runaway slaves who fought for the British. From 800 to 2,000 slaves took up the invitation. The only notable battle in which Dunmore's regiment participated was the Battle of Great Bridge in Virginia in December 1775, which was a decisive British loss.^[17] Dunmore's strategy was ultimately unsuccessful as the Black troops were decimated by smallpox.^[18]

Many of the Black Loyalists performed military service in the British Army, particularly as part of the only Black regiment of the war, the Black Pioneers, and others served non-military roles.^[19] After the war many Black Loyalist migrated to Nova Scotia and later to Sierra Leone; others went to Britain.^[20]

In response to Dunmore's proclamation, Washington lifted the ban on black enlistment in the Continental Army in January 1776. All-black units were formed in Rhode Island and Massachusetts. They included slaves promised freedom for serving as replacements when their masters were drafted. ^[21]^[22]

Prisoners of war

Prisoners of war were seldom exchanged, except for a few top officers. Both sides released their captives in 1782.^[23]

Patriot vs Loyalist militias

During the Revolutionary War, militia units supporting independence (Patriots or Whigs) sometimes fought against militia units loyal to the Crown (Loyalists or Tories). Conflict was particularly intense in North Carolina after 1781, when the main British and Continental armies left the state. The resulting "Tory War" was a vicious struggle between local militia factions.^[24]

In New York City and western Long Island, with 50,000 Loyalist refugees, the British set up new militia units with 16,000 men. They did not fight the Patriot forces.^[25]

Unpaid soldiers and veteran complaints

The combat phase of the Revolution ended in 1781 with an American victory. The peacemaking process took two years. Meanwhile Congress and the states were practically insolvent and were r behind in paying the troops of the Continental Army, most of whom were still in service. The growing anger resulted in two attempted mutinies. Washington himself quelled the one threatened by senior officers in the Newburgh Conspiracy in March 1783. Some 300 Contitental Army enlisted mem without their officers, marched on Congress in Philadelphia in June 1783 demanding back pay. Promises were made and there was no violence. However Congress quickly left Philadelphia and reopened in the small college town of Princeton, New Jersey. Robert Morris, in charge of finances, faced a complex of issues, according to Kenneth R. Bowling:

The settlement involved the different laws and procedures of the states, Congress, and various departments within the Army. In addition to back pay and cash bounties, the government of the United States and the several states had to consider tax free land titles, clothing allowances, and other rations in the computations. Each soldier needed to be treated individually because the accounts varied enormously. Morris knew they would take years to settle, and he held to his position adamantly, pointing out that the longer the Army was retained, the less likely it would be to go home peacefully.^[26]

Veterans revolt: Shays's Rebellion 1786-1787

A massive regional insurrection took place in Western Massachusetts as embittered farmers and small town businessmen were badly indebted by statewide taxation, banking, and economic policies imposed from Boston.^[27] Their repeated demands for relief were ignored by the state legislature. Local leaders called themselves "Regulators," mobilized the militias, and systematically shut down the entire court system in the western half of the state. The Boston elite counter-mobilized. The national government was too weak to help in any way, so the governor his allies called out the militia units from eastern Massachusetts, and Boston bankers funded a new private militia. They marched west to a showdown. On both sides, nearly all the of the officers and most of the men were veterans of the Revolutionary War. The Regulators had typically been in the militia rather than the Continental army. The Regulator leadership by Daniel Shays and Luke Day proved very poor, with a lack of planning and confused decisions in combat. By contrast, leadership challenges were well handled by the government troops. In the decisive confrontation in January, 1787, three separate insurgent militia groups of about 1200 men each were badly coordinated in an attack on the state arsenal in Springfield. At the first counterattack, the men broke and ran. State forces quickly forced the insurgents to surrender or go into exile. Most were pardoned and some economic reforms were made. The episode was used by national leaders to call for a new constitution for a national government that could be capable of handling future large scale insurgency.^[28]^[29]^[30]

Military service and veterans' response to new Constitution in 1788

In the New York and Pennsylvania conventions that ratified the proposed new Constitution in 1788, delegates who had served in the militia tended to be Anti-Federalists and opposed ratification, while delegates who served in the Continental Army favored the new constitution. Historian Edwin G Burrows argues this represents a cleavage between the “localist” elites and the “cosmopolitan” elites in the same community. Anti-Federalists were hostile to having their local defense forces shifted elsewhere even temporarily. Federalists on the other hand saw the way to unite the new nation was to have men from every state mingling together in the national army. ^[31]

References

^ Jack S. Radabaugh, "The Militia of Colonial Massachusetts" Military Affairs 18#1 (1954), pp. 1–18.
^ Harold E. Selesky, War and Society in Colonial Connecticut (Yale UP 1990) pp.16–32.
^ Douglas Edward Leach, Flintlock and Tomahawk: New England in King Philip's War (1958) pp.11–13.
^ Michael D. Doubler, Civilian in Peace, Soldier in War: The Army National Guard, 1636-2000 (U of Kansas Press, 2003), pp.3–46.
^ John W. Shy, "A New Look at Colonial Militia" William and Mary Quarterly 20#2 (1963) pp. 176–85.
^ G. B. Warden, Boston: 1689-1776 (Little Brown, 1970), pp. 8-15;online
^ Denver Brunsman, "The Knowles Atlantic impressment riots of the 1740s." Early American Studies (2007): 324-366. online
^ John Lax and William Pencak, "The Knowles Riot and the Crisis of the 1740’s in Massachusetts," Perspectives in American History 10 (1976): 163–216.
^ Richard Hofstadter and Michael Wallace, eds. American Violence (1970) pp. 59-63.
^ Ronald L. Boucher, "The Colonial Militia as a Social Institution: Salem, Massachusetts 1764-1775," Military Affairs 37#4 (1973), pp. 125–30. online
^ David Hackett Fischer, Paul Revere's Ride (Oxford University Press, 1994), "Epilogue."
^ Edwin G. Burrows, and Mike Wallace, Gotham: A History of New York City to 1898 (1999) pp. 91-102.
^ John W. Shy, A people numerous and armed: Reflections on the military struggle for American independence (U of Michigan Press, 1990) pp.248–252.
^ John A. Ruddiman, Becoming Men of Some Consequence: Youth and Military Service in the Revolutionary War. (U of Virginia Press, 2014) p. 93. online.
^ Gary B. Nash, "The African Americans Revolution", in Oxford Handbook of the American Revolution (2012) edited by Edward G Gray and Jane Kamensky, pp. 250–70, at p. 254.
^ Ray Raphael, A People's History of the American Revolution (2001), p. 281.
^ Benjamin Quarles, "Lord Dunmore as Liberator." William and Mary Quarterly (1958) 15#4: 494-507. online
^ Gary Sellick," 'Undistinguished Destruction': The Effects of Smallpox on British Emancipation Policy in the Revolutionary War." Journal of American Studies 51.3 (2017): 865-885. online
^ James W. St. G. Walker, "Blacks as American Loyalists: The Slaves’ War for Independence" Historical Reflections / Réflexions Historiques 2#1 (1975), pp. 51–67. online
^ Mary Beth Norton, "The fate of some black loyalists of the American revolution." Journal of Negro History 58.4 (1973): 402-426.
^ Noel B. Poirier, "A Legacy of Integration: The African American Citizen–Soldier and the Continental Army." Army History 56 (2002): 16-25 online.
^ David O. White, Connecticut's black soldiers, 1775-1783 (Rowman & Littlefield, 2017) online
^
Armbruster, Eugene L. The Wallabout Prison-ships, 1776-1783 (1920) online.
- Becker, Laura L. "Prisoners of War in the American Revolution: A Community Perspective." Military Affairs (1982) 46#4: 169-173. online
- Burrows, Edwin G. Forgotten patriots: the untold story of American prisoners during the revolutionary war (Basic Books, 2008).
- Dzurec, David. "Prisoners of War and American Self-Image during the American Revolution." War in History 20.4 (2013): 430-451. online
- Jones, T. Cole. Captives of Liberty: Prisoners of War and the Politics of Vengeance in the American Revolution (U of Pennsylvania Press, 2019) online.
- Krebs, Daniel. A Generous and Merciful Enemy: life for German prisoners of war during the American Revolution (U of Oklahoma Press, 2013) on Hessians. online
- Prelinger, Catherine M. "Benjamin Franklin and the American prisoners of war in England during the American Revolution." William and Mary Quarterly (1975) 32#2: 261-294. online
^ See "Militias in the Revolution Part-Time Soldiers with a Vital Role"
^ Burrows & Wallace, Gotham pp.245–246.
^ Kenneth R. Bowling, "New light on the Philadelphia Mutiny of 1783: Federal-state confrontation at the close of the war for independence." Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography 101.4 (1977): 419-450 at p. 423 online
^ Robert A. Gross, "A Yankee Rebellion? The Regulators, New England, and the New Nation" New England Quarterly 82#1 (2009), pp. 112–35. online
^ Leonard L. Richards, Shays Rebellion: The American Revolutions, Final Battle (2002).
^ David P. Szatmary, Shays Rebellion: The Making of an Agrarian Insurrection (1980)
^ Rosemarie Zagarri, "The Revolution Against the Revolution" Reviews in American History 22#1 (1994), pp. 45-50 online
^ For New York see Edwin G Burrows, “Military Experience and the origins of Federalism and Antifederalism,” in Jacob Judd and Irwin H. Polishook, eds., ‘’Aspects of Early New York Society and Politics’’ (Sleepy Hollow Restorations, 1974) pp. 83 to 91. For Pennsylvania see William A. Benton, "Pennsylvania Revolutionary Officers and the Federal Constitution." Pennsylvania History (1964) 31#4 pp.419-435, esp. p. 425. online