American Revolution: The French and Indian War

 The Catalyst That Triggered the American Revolution: The French and Indian War

How the debts and military minds that drove the colonies to independence were shaped by Britain's victory over France. While not nearly as costly in lives lost or property damaged as the world wars of the 20th century, the Seven Years’ War (1756–1763) was also a global conflict.  With only Prussia as its ally, Britain fought against France and her allies—Austria, Russia, Sweden, and Spain—in Europe, the Americas, India, and other parts of Asia.

 Americans know the North American theater of these sprawling political and military operations as the French and Indian War (1754–1763), in which France and Britain battled for possession of the North American continent, assisted by colonials and Native American tribes.  By war’s end, France had lost Canada and its claims on the American frontier to Britain.

 It is an irony of history that in winning this war, the British would lose their American colonies.  In less than 15 years, circumstances and events arising from the French and Indian War led the American settlers to issue a Declaration of Independence and to break away from the mother country that had for so long sponsored and protected them.

 War Comes With a Price Tag

 If you ask Americans who are even remotely knowledgeable about the factors that led to their Revolution, they are likely to respond, "No taxation without representation!" They are less likely to associate that cry of battle with the French and Indian War. Historians have estimated that by the time the Seven Years’ War had ended, Britain’s national debt had risen to somewhere between 122 million pounds and 133 million pounds, a vast increase and a tremendous financial burden for the government.  Because they had expended a hefty portion of that money fighting the French in defense of the American colonies, the prime ministers and parliaments of the time naturally reasoned that the colonies should pay their share of expenses. 

  The men in London believed that the Sugar Act of 1764, the Stamp Act of 1765, the Townshend Acts of 1767, and the Tea Act of 1773 were all legitimate ways to reimburse the crown for its defense of the colonies. American relatives disagreed. For one, to be taxed without representation in Parliament was anathema to them, not so much as Americans but as Englishmen.  Furthermore, they were accustomed to a policy of “benign neglect,” which had allowed them, for the most part, to govern themselves, with their own governments levying fees and budgeting funds.  Like a child raised in a permissive household, they resented the now heavy hand of interference in their affairs from the mother country.

 Resistance against these taxes and intrusions ranged from attacks on tax collectors to boycotts on English goods, from broadsides and newspapers denouncing the measures as unjust to the Boston Tea Party.  And like an erratic parent, the government they opposed swayed back and forth between instituting and then withdrawing bills like the Stamp Act or attempting to crush resistance, like closing Boston Harbor and stationing troops in that city following the Tea Party.  This imbalance was taken both as a sign of weakness and as an indicator that the colonies knew better ways to govern themselves.

The Connection to France

 English settlers had feared falling under the French kings' imperial rule for decades. They were bordered to the north by French Canada and to the west by the remainder of New France, a vast region that extended all the way down the Mississippi River to Louisiana. Trappers and settlers from this area claimed vast tracts of land as part of New France. The French had also forged strong alliances with some of the Native American tribes and could, if needed, unleash them against English settlers moving westward.

 The defeat of the French relieved these fears and seemingly opened the West to new settlements.

 However, it appeared that the king and parliament were determined to thwart these territorial ambitions. Seeking to end the ongoing warfare between the colonies and Native American tribes, King George III’s Royal Proclamation of 1763 set aside the lands west of the Appalachian Mountains as an “Indian Reserve” and sought to prohibit further expansion by law.  Though settlers like Daniel Boone and his band of Kentucky settlers ignored the proclamation, it remained in place, a burr in the side of the expansionists.

 More fallout from the war came with the Quebec Act of 1774.  To gain the loyalty of French Canadians, most of whom were Catholic, this parliamentary measure guaranteed them the right to practice their faith.  It also allowed the province to broaden its borders into the Indian Reserve, giving Quebec effective control over a vast territory that would eventually become states such as Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin.

 The lands the Quebec Act placed under Quebec's control, a tremendous favor bestowed on their former enemies, smacked of popery and offended the British subjects south of Canada as well. By this time, the enmity between Britain and her American colonies was catching fire, and the Quebec Act, a leftover consequence of the French and Indian War, only added fuel to those flames.

 Understanding the Art of War: 

A group of Native Americans and volunteers from Virginia, led by a 22-year-old, were sent to Ohio, near where Pittsburgh is today, in 1754 to build a fort and fight French incursions into English territory. When the Virginians encountered a French unit, a battle broke out, leaving 13 Frenchmen dead and 21 captured.  Many historians view this incident as the detonation that caused the French and Indian War.  A quote attributed to writer and British statesman Horace Walpole reads, “The volley fired by a young Virginian in the backwoods of America set the world on fire.”

 Lt., was that young Virginian? Col.  George Washington.


Washington spent five years in the consequent war.  He survived the disastrous defeat of British Gen.  Edward Braddock, who was killed by French and Native American forces in 1755, and he took part in the 1758 campaign that drove the French from Fort Duquesne as a colonel with his well-trained Virginia Regiment. Equipped by these lessons and experiences, he was later chosen by the Continental Congress to lead the American army against the British.

 Many other colonists received a similar education from this war, knowledge they brought to the ranks of the Continentals.  For instance, in the article titled "Braddock's Alumni," historian and journalist Robert Alberts compiles a lengthy list of Americans who were associated with Braddock and who later contributed to the establishment of the United States, both in times of war and peace. Daniel Boone, for example, was a teamster and blacksmith with the North Carolina Provincial company. 

  Horatio Gates was a professional British soldier who joined the Americans in their Revolution and, as a general, defeated the British at Saratoga in 1777.  James Craik was George Washington's personal physician and was present when Washington passed away that day. He later served as second in command of the Continental Medical Department and treated Braddock's wounds that day.

Other veterans, leaders, and common soldiers alike brought their expertise from the French war to the British war. Israel Putnam and John Stark, for instance, had served in Rogers’ Rangers and made a name for themselves in the Revolution.

 In an army as inexperienced and poorly funded as America’s Continentals, such men were vital in the pursuit of victory.

 One final note: Shortly after the defeat of the French at Duquesne, Washington left the army and returned to Virginia, unable to receive the regular commission from the British he so ardently hoped for.  This same spirit of British condescension toward the colonials and their militias was yet another cause of resentment that helped bring about the Revolution.

 Soul and Body

 In his lengthy 1818 letter to H.., President John Adams wrote to Niles, an admirer, "But what do we mean by the American Revolution? Does this refer to the American War? The Revolution was effected before the war commenced.  People's religious beliefs about their responsibilities and duties changed as a result of the Revolution. Later in the same letter, he offered this important note: “This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people was the real American Revolution.”

 As indicated by a host of historians, the religious fervor roused during the Great Awakening and Enlightenment thinkers like John Locke helped seed “this radical change.”  Certainly, too, the independent spirit engendered in Americans, the liberties born of the frontier and entrepreneurship largely free of oversight, helped create the Revolution.

 Yet it was the events of the French and Indian War and its aftermath that gave flesh and bone to these beliefs and breathed life into a republic based on “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

  Writer: Binod Kumar Simkhada 
binodkumarsimkhada315@gmail.com

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Join ME to Explore Something New.

Likendin is world's largest professional networking platform.

Rabies-infected dog bites can be fatal, if not vaccinated on time.