CHAPTER 1
1.Many of the ideas put forth in this chapter, and even some of the phrases, were gleaned from a series of conversations with Professor Theodore Ropp at the Army War College, where he was a visiting professor of military history in 1972–1973. The influence of Professor Jay Luvaas is also heavy in this chapter.
2.V. D. Sokolovsky, ed., Military Strategy (Moscow, 1968), 10. The version quoted here is the third edition, translated by Harriet Fast Scott. For a brief summary of the influence of Guibert, see Edward Mead Earle, ed., Makers of Modern Strategy (Princeton, 1943), 62–66.
3.Carl von Clausewitz, On War, ed. Anatol Rapoport (Baltimore, 1969), 179, 241, 264.
4.B. H. Liddell Hart, Strategy, 2d rev. ed. (New York, 1972), 333–336. John M. Collins, Grand Strategy (Annapolis, 1973), 15. Collins’s book fills a long ignored void.
5.Clausewitz, On War, 243.
1.Works on weaponry abound, catering mostly to the tastes of collectors or antiquarians. Bernard and Fawn Brodie, From Crossbow to H-Bomb (New York, 1962), is an excellent study of the evolution of arms. A fine book dealing more specifically with those weapons employed in North America is Harold L. Peterson, Arms and Armor in Colonial America, 1526–1783 (Harrisburg, 1956).
2.A good discussion of the accuracy and rate of fire of the musket is in Peterson, Arms and Armor, 159–163.
3.For a concise account of the role of the rifle, see ibid., 192–204. The quotation from Washington is from John C. Fitzpatrick, ed., The Writings of George Washington (Washington, D.C., 1931–1944), VIII: 236.
4.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, X: 368.
5.Winston S. Churchill, Marlborough, His Life and Times (New York, 1935), III: 112–113.
6.Quoted in Edward Earle, ed., Makers of Modern Strategy (Princeton, 1943), 55. A concise study of Frederick’s writings is Jay Luvaas, Frederick the Great on the Art of War (New York, 1966). For an excellent brief description of Frederick’s system, see Peter Paret, Yorck and the Era of Prussian Reform (Princeton, 1966), 7–21.
7.The discussion on limited warfare follows largely that of Thomas E. Griess, ed., The Art of Warfare in the 17th and 18th Centuries (West Point, 1969).
8.This incident is from Candide, chap. 2, as quoted by Theodore Ropp, War in the Modern World (New York, 1962), 54.
9.Peter Paret, Yorck and the Era of Prussian Reform (Princeton, 1966), 21.
10.A good contemporary account describing some of the experimentation with light troops in the Revolution is Colonel von Ehwald, A Treatise Upon the Duties of Light Troops, trans. A. Maimburg (London, 1803). Perhaps the best short defense of the old system is George A. Rothrock’s introduction to his translation of Vauban, Manual of Siegecraft and Fortifications (Ann Arbor, 1968). A concise discussion of the use of light troops—called “little war”—in the last half of the eighteenth century is in Paret, Yorck and the Era of Prussian Reform, 21–46.
11.Frederick the Great kept his instructions to his generals closely guarded state secrets. Consequently, few of his many writings were published until after his death. However, not all soldiers were so secretive. Americans had a wide choice of works by Turenne, de Saxe, and others of the formal school, many of whom described Prussian methods. Debates on the Articles of War are printed in Worthington C. Ford, ed., Journals of the Continental Congress (Washington, D.C., 1904–1937), V: 670–671, 788–807.
12.Quoted in William B. Willcox, Portrait of a General (New York, 1964), 48.
CHAPTER 3
1.Colonial population estimates are just that—estimates. J. Franklin Jameson in his The American Revolution Considered as a Social Movement (Princeton, 1940), calculated a figure of 2.5 million, which is generally accepted, although some historians reckon the total may have been as much as 3 million. A population chart of the United States in 1790, which would not be markedly different from one drawn in 1780, is in Francis A. Walker, comp., Statistical Atlas of the United States at the Ninth Census, 1870 (Washington, 1874), plate XVI.
2.John Alden, The American Revolution, 1775–1783 (New York, 1954), 165.
3.Public Records of the Colony of Connecticut, October 1772–April 1775 (Hartford, 1887), XIV: 495–501.
4.Ibid. See also Victor L. Johnson, The Administration of the American Commissariat During the Revolutionary War (Philadelphia, 1941). Robert A. East, Business Enterprise in the American Revolutionary Era (New York, 1938). Albert L. Olsen, “Agricultural Economy and the Population in Eighteenth-Century Connecticut,” Tercentenary Commission of the State of Connecticut 40 (1935): 3–5.
CHAPTER 4
1.Biographies of George III abound, including Stanley Ayling, George the Third (New York, 1972), and John Brooke, King George III (New York, 1972). Sir John Fortescue, ed., The Correspondence of King George the Third (London, 1928) provides indispensable material for both an insight into the personality of the king and an understanding of the American war.
2.J. W. Fortescue, A History of the British Army (London, 1911), III: 174–175.
3.William Howe, Narrative in a Committee of the House of Commons (London, 1780), 19.
4.Harvey to General Irwin, 30 June 1775, quoted by Fortescue, A History of the British Army, III: 169. Basil H. Liddell Hart, The British Way of Warfare (London, 1932), 16, 35–36.
5.Fortescue, A History of the British Army, III: 169. Piers Mackesy, The War for America, 1775–1783 (Cambridge, 1964), 143. For a book-length treatment of the line of the Hudson strategy, see Dave R. Palmer, The River and the Rock (New York, 1969).
6.An early strategic survey can be seen in collections of the New-York Historical Society, The Letters and Papers of Cadwallader Colden, 1765–1775 (“The Cadwallader Colden Papers” [New York, 1923]), VII: 197–198. See also Dartmouth to Gage, 15 April 1775, Whitehall, in Public Record Office, America and the West Indies and Military Correspondence, 1773–1783, C.O. 5/92, 103.
7.Gage to Dartmouth, 1 October 1775, in Peter Force, ed., American Archives, Fourth Series, III: 927–928.
8.Sir Henry Clinton, The American Rebellion, ed. William B. Willcox (New Haven, 1954), 11–12. Fortescue, A History of the British Army, III: 168. Sir George Otto Trevelyan, The American Revolution (London, 1928), II: 69.
9.Quoted in Fortescue, A History of the British Army, III: 338–39.
10.An admirably concise discussion of the British command and control system is in Don Higginbotham, The War of American Independence (New York, 1971), 139–143.
11.A disparaging analysis of London’s faith in a loyalist uprising is in Fortescue, A History of the British Army, III: 170–171. But Fortescue also overestimates the Tory sentiment in America. Howe is quoted by Lynn Montross in The Reluctant Rebels (New York, 1950), 177. A good summary of the role and fate of loyalists is in John Alden, A History of the American Revolution (New York, 1969), 443–456, 493–506.
12.Liddel Hart’s discussion of the naval strategy is in his The British Way of Warfare, 35–36.
CHAPTER 5
1.Don Higginbotham, The War of American Independence (New York, 1971), 91.
2.Lynn Montross, The Reluctant Rebels (New York, 1950), 136.
3.Peter Force, American Archives, Fourth Series, II: 621.
4.Worthington C. Ford, ed., Journals of the Continental Congress (Washington, D.C., 1904–1937), II: 52.
5.Ibid., 59–61, 64.
6.Ibid., 96.
7.Ibid., 100–101. John C. Fitzpatrick, ed., The Writings of George Washington (Washington, D.C., 1931–1944), III: 297.
8.Ford, ed., Journals, II: 97.
9.Charles Francis Adams, ed., Familiar Letters of John Adams and His Wife Abigail Adams (Boston, 1875), 70. The desire to help the army by direct participation persisted until at least mid-1779. On 14 July that year, John Dickinson, seconded by William Henry Drayton, moved that Congress adjourn and fight with the army. Ford, ed., Journals, XIV: 835–836.
10.Ford, ed., Journals, V: 602.
11.Ibid., 434–435.
12.Montross, The Reluctant Rebels, 190–192. Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, VI: 402.
13.Ford, ed., Journals, II: 111–112, V: 670–671, 788–807.
14.Edmund C. Burnett, ed., Letters of Members of the Continental Congress (Washington, D.C., 1921–1936), II: 263.
15.Adams, Familiar Letters, 276; Ford, ed., Journals, VII: 180; Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, VII: 285–286.
16.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, VII: 221–226. Extracts from Morris’s letter, dated 27 February 1777, are on p. 222.
17.Burnett, ed., Letters, II: 446–447; Ford, ed., Journals, VII: 649, 659; Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, VII: 433–438, VIII: 34–35.
18.Ford, ed., Journals, IX: 818–820, 976.
19.Adams, Familiar Letters, 292, 322–323.
20.Ford, ed., Journals, X: 84, 87. General Stark received eight votes, Lafayette and Conway six each, while McDougall and Glover got one each. Nevertheless, Congress designated Lafayette as commander with Conway as deputy. DeKalb later replaced Conway as deputy, but none of the officers ever served because the invasion could not be mounted.
21.A good account of the Conway Cabal is in James Flexner, George Washington in the American Revolution (Boston, 1967), 241–277.
22.Ford, ed., Journals, X: 329, 354–355, 362, 364, 368–369, 384; Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, XI: 290–291.
23.These comments and many others are printed in Morton Borden, ed., Great Lives Observed: George Washington (New Jersey, 1969), 87, 95.
24.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, XXVI: 213–216, 276–277, 291–293. Burnett, Letters, VI: 15, 83.
25.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, XXVI: 213–216, 276–277, 291–293. Several documents pertaining to the Newburgh crisis are printed in Ford, ed., Journals, XXIV: 291–311.
CHAPTER 6
1.B. H. Liddell Hart, Strategy, 2d rev. ed. (New York, 1972), 336.
2.Worthington C. Ford, ed., Journals of the Continental Congress (Washington, D.C., 1904–1937), II: 56.
3.Ibid., II: 109–110. Raymond Aron, The Imperial Republic (New Jersey, 1974), xxv.
4.Ford, ed., Journals, VI: 1055–1057.
5.East and West Florida were the lands south of the thirty-first parallel and extending from the Mississippi River to the Atlantic. West Florida encompassed much of modern Alabama and Mississippi and the western parts of Florida. The Apalachicola River was the boundary between the two; Pensacola and St. Augustine were the only sizable settlements.
6.For a succinct account of the debate triggered and later influenced by Gérard, see William C. Stinchcombe, The American Revolution and the French Alliance (Syracuse, 1969), 62–76. See also Ford, ed., Journals, XIII: 239–244, 263–265, 329–331, 339–341, 345–352, 369–373, XV: 1103–1121.
7.Albert H. Smyth, ed., The Writings of Benjamin Franklin (New York, 1905–1907), VIII: 144. An excellent work on the entire panorama of negotiations is Richard B. Morris, The Peacemakers (New York, 1965).
8.Knox is so quoted in North Callahan, George Washington’s General, Henry Knox (New York, 1958), 39. The study referenced is The Sullivan-Clinton Campaign in 1779, prepared by the Division of Archives and History of the University of the State of New York (Albany, 1929), 10.
9.The fear of encirclement never left Washington. It was one of the concerns that troubled him throughout his presidency as well as during the Revolution itself. On 27 August 1790, for example, he sent a secret letter to the vice president, the chief justice, and the three primary cabinet members asking their advice should England and Spain come to blows along the Mississippi River, as it looked like they might. English forces could march from Detroit, the president thought, and easily overrun the weakly garrisoned Spanish posts along the Mississippi, including perhaps even New Orleans. He wanted his advisors to tell him if they saw anything the United States could do to prevent such an eventuality, for he dreaded the “consequences of having so formidable and enterprising a people as the British on both our flanks and rear, with their navy in front.”
10.Ford, ed., Journals, I: 98, 114, 369; John C. Fitzpatrick, ed., The Writings of George Washington (Washington, D.C., 1931–1944), IV: 494, V: 102–162.
11.See John Alden, A History of the American Revolution (New York, 1969), 55, for a brief elaboration of prewar English thoughts on American expansion.
12.Peter Force, ed., American Archives, Fourth Series, I, 216–220. The parenthetical inclusion of two clauses purporting to preserve old boundaries and grants seems to have had little soothing effect on the colonists. See also Ford, ed., Journals, I: 9–13, 22.
CHAPTER 7
1.Worthington C. Ford, ed., Journals of the Continental Congress (Washington, D.C., 1904–1937), II: 56. John C. Fitzpatrick, ed., The Writings of George Washington (Washington, D.C., 1931–1944), III: 320n, 415–416.
2.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, III: 386–387.
3.Ibid., 302–303, 374, 386–387, 415, 347–348, 475–476, 478n, 511, IV: 112, 172. Naval History Division, Naval Documents of the American Revolution (Washington, D.C., 1964–1970), II: 1–2.
4.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, III: 436–439, 510.
5.Ibid., 394, 405, 453–454, 462, 488.
6.Peter Force, ed., American Archives, Fourth Series, III: 768. Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, III: 483–485, 488, 511.
7.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, III: 511.
8.Force, ed., American Archives, Fourth Series, III: 1153. Congress chose Knox to be “Colonel of the Regiment of Artillery” on 17 November 1775, but the regiment itself did not come into service until 1 January 1776, and it had no artillery of note until its young colonel returned from Ticonderoga with the captured pieces.
9.Ford, ed., Journals, III: 444–445. Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, IV: 208, 321. James Flexner, George Washington in the American Revolution (Boston, 1967), 65.
10.Force, ed., American Archives, Fourth Series, IV: 604. Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, IV: 217–219, 259–260.
11.Force, ed., American Archives, Fourth Series, IV: 1193. Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, IV: 335–337.
12.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, IV: 359–366.
13.Ibid., 371, 373–374.
14.Ibid., 434.
15.Ford, ed., Journals, IV: 383–384, 388, 399–401. Force, ed., American Archives, Fourth Series, VI: 472–473.
16.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, IV: 297, 321, V: 92–93.
CHAPTER 8
1.John C. Fitzpatrick, ed., The Writings of George Washington (Washington, D.C., 1931–1944), VI: 28. Pitt as quoted in Marcus Cunliffe, George Washington: Man and Monument (Boston, 1958), 124.
2.For a good description of Washington’s outlook in the spring of 1776, see Douglas Freeman, George Washington (New York, 1948–1957), IV: 76.
3.Worthington C. Ford, Journals of the Continental Congress (Washington, D.C., 1905–1937), IV: 399–401.
4.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, V: 247–250.
5.Adams to Washington, 8 January 1776, in Peter Force, ed., American Archives, Fourth Series, IV: 604.
6.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, V: 502, 506–507.
7.Greene to Washington, 5 September 1776, in Force, ed., American Archives, Fifth Series, II: 182–183.
8.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, VI: 27–33.
9.Interestingly, Washington and Mao were both concerned, after they had become victorious, that outside impurities might spoil the gains of their respective revolutions. Though Washington would never have dreamed of visiting on his countrymen anything like Mao’s brutal “Cultural Revolution,” he did see the need to fight the spread of cosmopolitan licentiousness. As he prepared his first inaugural address, his mind ranged over possible strategies for such a campaign. Not surprisingly, he drew from his Revolutionary War experiences. He had then used the size and wilderness of the thirteen colonies against the British; he now believed the same geographical realities of a frontier nation would help Americans “maintain something like a war of posts against the invasion of luxury, dissipation, and corruption.” (See Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, XXX: 307.)
10.Ibid., XXXVII: 531–533. Ford, ed., Journals, V: 749.
11.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, VI: 223–225.
12.Colonel von Ehwald, A Treatise upon the Duties of Light Troops, trans. A. Maimburg (London, 1803), 232.
13.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, VI: 321–322.
14.Howe to Germain, 29 December 1776, in ibid., VI: 341n.
15.Lee was approaching slowly and reluctantly. Occupying his thoughts was the notion that Washington should be removed, to be replaced, naturally, by Lee himself. Lee’s capture by a British cavalry patrol took him out of play for the rest of the war’s second phase, a most fortunate stroke for the cause of the Revolution.
16.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, VI: 243–247, 330, 373.
17.See Freeman, George Washington, IV: 306n, 15, for a discussion of Washington’s decision to attack. Many of Washington’s instructions are reproduced in Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, VI: 365–373.
18.Thomas Paine, whose Common Sense had moved the nation a step toward independence, had been serving as a military secretary during the retreat through New Jersey. Once again his pen came to the aid of the cause at a crucial moment, this time in the form of a pamphlet titled The American Crisis. “These are the times that try men’s souls,” he wrote. “The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it now deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.” Washington had Paine’s stirring words read to the troops before they crossed the Delaware.
19.George Trevelyan, The American Revolution (London, 1928), III: 143. Camillus was a Roman hero (c. 447–365 B.C.) who, through offensive campaigns, extended Rome’s domain by the conquest of Veii, the rout of Brennu’s Gauls, and victories in Latium.
20.Germain to William Knox, in Historical Manuscripts Commission, Various Collections (London, 1901–1904), VI: 131. A good, concise summary of the situation at the beginning of the campaign is in Don Higginbotham, The War of American Independence (New York, 1971), 181.
21.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington VII: 274.
22.Ibid., 272–276.
23.Ibid., 400–401, 436–437.
24.Ibid., IX: 273, 275–277.
25.Ibid., 277–279.
26.Ibid., 293–294, 308–309.
27.As he had done before Trenton, General Washington assembled all his men and had an inspirational message read to each regiment. Alexander Hamilton had written the words, but for all his wit, the young aide was no Thomas Paine. Whereas Paine had moved the Continentals before Trenton (was that only nine months ago?) with his penetrating call to patriotism, Hamilton challenged their spirit of competition. Reminding the men of the recent victory over Burgoyne, the message implored them to equal that feat. “This army, the main American Army, will certainly not suffer itself to be outdone by their northern brethren; they will never endure such disgrace.... Covet! My countrymen and fellow soldiers! Covet! A shadow of the glory due to their heroic deeds!”
28.Ehwald, A Treatise, 65.
CHAPTER 9
1.John C. Fitzpatrick, ed., The Writings of George Washington (Washington, D.C., 1931–1944), XIII: 11.
2.Piers Mackesy, The War for America, 1775–1783 (Cambridge, 1964), xiv. Richard B. Morris has suggested that the war might have ended sooner without French entry. His conclusion is that France’s action saved the British government from collapse after 1777, rallied the British, and undercut the peace party in London. Much of that might well be true, but, even so, Morris makes the mistake of confusing not losing with winning. An American victory meant independence and territorial expansion. That both were within reach in 1777 is most doubtful. Alone, the Americans might not have lost the war, but they almost surely would not have won it without French help. See Morris, The American Revolution Reconsidered (New York, 1967), 98–105.
3.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, XI: 363–366. Douglas Freeman, George Washington (New York, 1948–1957), IV: 630–631. The composition of that council of war amply demonstrates the reach of foreign influence in the rejuvenated Continental army. Of the council’s ten officers, four were Europeans: Lafayette, DeKalb, Steuben, and Duportail.
4.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, XI: 453.
5.Harold C. Syrett, The Papers of Alexander Hamilton (New York, 1961–1972), I: 510–513. Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, III: 115–117, 140–141.
6.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, XII: 488.
7.Ibid., XIV: 387.
8.Ibid., XII: 488, XIII: 15–16. William Shakespeare, The Tempest, act iv, scene 1.
9.Lynn Montross, The Reluctant Rebels (New York, 1950), 257–264. Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, XIII: 223–244, 254–257.
10.For an excellent account of Washington’s stay in Philadelphia, see James T. Flexner, George Washington in the American Revolution (Boston, 1967), chapter 37.
11.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, XIII: 485–502, XIV: 3–11, 382.
12.Ibid., XIV: 3–11.
13.At the same time, though, the ambassador told his superiors in Paris that since Americans thirsted so strongly for Canada, it would not hurt relations between the two countries to insist that France would not assist in operations there.
14.Worthington C. Ford, ed., Journals of the Continental Congress (Washington, D.C., 1904–1937), XV: 1103–1121; Gérard to President of Congress, 22 May 1779, in Francis Wharton, ed., The Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States (Washington, D.C., 1889), III: 177. William C. Stinchcombe, The American Revolution and the French Alliance (Syracuse, NY, 1969), chapter 5.
15.Sir John Fortescue, ed., The Correspondence of King George the Third (London, 1928), V: 57. James Thacher, Military Journal of the American Revolution (Hartford, CT, 1862), 197. Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, XVIII: 413.
16.Syrett, Hamilton Papers, II: 347–348.
17.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, XVIII: 416–419, 455–499.
18.He did not know how right he was. For printing, the proclamation went to Benedict Arnold in Philadelphia. Arnold promptly sent a copy to Henry Clinton.
19.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, XVIII: 360–363, 369–373, 386–388, 459–461, 476.
20.Ibid., 454, 482–485, 509–510, XIX: 27, 107–109.
21.Ibid., XIX: 174–176.
22.Ibid., 169–170, 180, 211–213, 236–237.
23.Ibid., 407, 419–423, 443–445, 481–483.
24.Ibid., XX: 374.
25.Ford, ed., Journals, XVII: 699. Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, XX: 15–16, 39–42, 272–273.
26.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, XX: 351, 379–396, 425–434, 459.
27.Ibid., 480–484.
28.For an interesting firsthand account of the British raids in Virginia, see Colonel von Ehwald, A Treatise upon the Duties of the Light Infantry, trans. A. Maimburg (London, 1803), 50–62.
29.Greene as cited by Don Higginbotham, The War of American Independence (New York, 1971), 375. Clinton to William Eden, 30 May 1780, Sir Henry Clinton Papers, William L. Clements Library, University of Michigan.
30.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, XXX: 26–28.
31.Ibid., XXII: 367–369, 431–434, 501–502, XXIII: 8.
32.See Lynn Montross, The Reluctant Rebels (New York, 1950), 321–322, for a description of the French parade.
33.Albert H. Smyth, ed., The Writings of Benjamin Franklin (New York, 1905–1907), VIII: 333.
34.Correspondence of General Washington and Comte de Grasse, ed. L’Institute Française de Washington (Washington, D.C., 1931), 35–41.
35.Ibid., 45–51. Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, XXIII: 136–139.
CHAPTER 10
1.John C. Fitzpatrick, ed., The Writings of George Washington (Washington, D.C., 1931–1944), XXIII: 193–195.
2.Ibid., XXIII: 250, 286, 298, 340–342. De Grasse’s mental anguish and vacillation are revealed in his letters in Correspondence of General Washington and Comte de Grasse, 128–141.
3.Ibid., 340–342.
4.Ibid., 346–347, 351–352.
5.Sir John Fortescue, ed., The Correspondence of King George the Third (London, 1928), V: 304.
6.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, XXIV: 16–17, 115–116, 139, 152–153.
7.Ibid., 164–171, 194–215.
8.See Richard Morris, The Peacemakers (New York, 1965), for a full dress account of the strange paths taken by the negotiations.
9.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, XXIV: 270–296, 405–406, XXV: 136–138.
10.Ibid., XXIV: 421–423, XXV: 17, 198–199.
11.Ibid., XXIV: 471, XXV: 21–23.
12.Ibid., XXV: 150–152, 180–181, 192–195, 272–273.
13.Ibid., XXV: 192–195, 420–421, 446–449.
14.Thomas Paine to George Washington, 18 September 1782, quoted in part in ibid., XXV: 176n.
15.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, XXV: 430–431.
16.An excellent account of “the nation’s most dangerous hour” is in James Thomas Flexner, George Washington in the American Revolution, 1775–1783 (Boston, 1967), 467–508. Some recent scholars believe the threat of military dictatorship may have been exaggerated. Perhaps. But the danger was undoubtedly there, and the weight of historical evidence clearly demonstrates that it is not unusual for dictators to ride to power through revolution.
17.Washington had always wanted to see northern New York. “The present irksome interval, while we are waiting for the definitive treaty,” he decided, was a good time to go there. He was also tired of “troublesome applications and fruitless demands, which I have neither the means nor the power of satisfying.”
18.Fitzpatrick, ed., Writings of Washington, XXVI: 76–78, 85, XXVII: 100.
19.Ibid., XXIV: 124.
20.A sketch depicting various boundary proposals between 1779 and 1783 is in Morris, The Peacemakers.
CONCLUSION
1.James Thomas Flexner, George Washington in the American Revolution, 1775–1783 (Boston, 1967), 536.
2.Marcus Cunliffe, George Washington, Man and Monument (Boston, 1958), 126.