American Independence From the British Perspective - Armchair Historian Reaction
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 ธ.ค. 2023
- See the original here - • American Independence ...
Support VTH on patreon: / vth
Follow me on instagram here - / vloggingthroughhistory
Follow VTH on Facebook here - profile.php?...
Check out the VTH Podcast
Spotify - open.spotify.com/show/2lMCaIT...
Apple - podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
VTH Gaming - / thehistoryguy
VTH Extra - / @vthextra
VTH Originals - / @vthoriginals259
#history #reaction
Dear VTH,
I have wanted to write this to you for some time, but between starting my first semester at William & Mary and the pain of composing something like this, I stalled. But, with my first semester now over and it being the holiday season, I have worked up to this.
I wanted to thank you for providing my late father a source of entertainment and discussion between him and myself.
He was a veteran of the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars whose life was in many ways defined by his experiences in Fallujah. But he was also a reenactor, a historian,
and a profound fan of your content.
I introduced him to your channel with the Civil War General tier list, and we found ourselves discussing your perspective and offering our own all night long! From there, we frequently watched your videos together. Your gaming channel also helped to inspire us to play Ultimate General Civil War together. We made it all the way to Chickamauga on the Union campaign this past summer before he left us.
I think he found himself particularly appreciating your content because he related to you. You two were of similar age with kids of similar ages, and shared many of the same passions. Even politically, I think he liked that your more conservative views matched his or provided a healthy medium between his own staunchly right -wing beliefs and my more centrist ones for us to meet in the middle when taking your points into account.
We even hoped to go up to Gettysburg for the 160th and 30th anniversary events as we had five years prior, and meet you! Unfortunately we did not make it then, though we did go in August, just two weeks before his passing. In fact, that trip was the last time I ever saw him in person.
I just came home from visiting him at Arlington National Cemetery. We had a very good conversation, I think. I even mentioned to him that I was going to write to you!
You gave my father a lot of joy watching your videos! And for me, even as my relationship with my father was rocky in the final year or two, you offered an opportunity for me to set any conflict aside with him and have a discourse on some things we both loved: your channel, and history itself. Even as I continue to watch your videos alone, I will never stop appreciating you for that. Thank you again for what you do, it has some tremendous impacts. Merry Christmas to you and your family!
Blessings,
Jackson Pretus
Wow i was incredibly blessed to read this thank you for opening it up for everyone im sure he’ll be happily surprised to see this ☺️
this is such an intimate and personal thing to say out in the open and i admire it. It sounds like your father and yourself had a strong connection and bonded over this channel which is amazing. If i had a channel, this is the type of comment that would warm my heart.
I'm not crying, you are 😢
Amazing !!!! Sorry for your loss and God Bless you!
Bloody hell lad. Sorry about such a horrible loss.🫡
I had an ancestor on the Mayflower, John Turner. Though he himself didn't survive the first winter, his daughter Elizabeth went to Salem in the early 1630s and is the matriarch of 18 generations that have lived here ever since.
Nice, have you ever visited Plymouth?
Elizabeth Turner? Has your ancestor been on an adventure with a Captain Jack Sparrow?
@@GrayGamer There's basically no information on her other than she married and had two sons.
A historian and genealogist in our family has traced the family tree as far back as early 16th century England. There was nothing to go on but birth and baptism records from before the American Revolution, and there's just no surviving information left from before 1500 to investigate further.
I’ll take things that didn’t happen for 500, Alex
@@BoatsNhoes824 that’s such a weird thing to say. You don’t believe this guy has a 12th great grandmother in Plymouth? There’s got to be hundreds of thousands, maybe millions, of people who descend from those same ancestors. Such a weird take.
General Knox was really the victor of the battle of Boston, as he managed to transport heavy guns cross country in a then mostly roadless area. A victory of logistics.
Here in Britain, we were never taught anything at all about the American Revolution, i think it was mainly because we had over two thousand years of history to get through and it's ranked pretty low in British history.
That and it didn't really have that much of an impact in any way on British society or culture. Barely half a decade later the French Revolution broke out, triggering decades of war on the continent, and Britain was yet to reach its zenith of power.
@thecynicaloptimist1884 Crazy to think about, isn't it? Mostly insignificant at the time, but the loss of the American colonies would go on to create a major superpower that would eventually inherit Britain's western dominance of the world, so to speak.
Especially fascinating, given just how *young* the US is compared to its mother country and other powers of the time.
I liked how Churchill acknowledges this in 1940. The New World, armed with all their power and might, coming to liberate the Old should it fall to the tyranny of Nazism.
The American Revolution resulted in the end of the First British Empire and put in motion the British economy's transition from mercantilism to liberalized trade by the mid-1800s. You may consider this of little importance over the last 2,000 years of British history, but over the last 200 years, it's of somewhat more significance.
@@toddkorbutiak3261 I'm not just saying this because we lost, but losing the Colonies actually helped the British, they became a much stronger power and the British empire grew post war.
@@cpj93070 I believe it was through the Industrial Revolution and liberalization of global trade that Britain became such a world power. After the loss of the New England colonies, Britain didn't abandon its colonial ambitions; rather, it cobbled together the Second British Empire (Australia, Sri Lanka, Singapore, Hong Kong, Egypt, Kenya, etc.). Yes, Britain started losing these colonies post war; but that war was WW2, not the American Revolution.
Kind of an interesting note: One of my Dad's ancestors was a Hessian, who likely fought for the British in the War. Meanwhile, my Grandpa's ancestor was a chaplain that rode with Washington at Trenton and was killed by Hessians.
Family is complicated.
Must be a sweet settlement deal!
As someone who’s studied the Revolution in the UK, we definitely had a more British perspective on it, especially from our teacher who never failed to remind us that Britain was constantly thinking about their far-reaching empire outside of the America
He was correct. This is why Britain let go of the colonies.
@johnnotrealname8168 it was more than a "let go" its not like they didnt try to keep them. British people often say well we didnt even really care about them or they weren't even a priority. That's just not true. George sent 20k troops to America after Boston fell which was a gargantuan Army for the time period. If the British truly didnt care about keeping the colonies they would've packed up after Burgoynes surrender at Saratoga but the war kept going in the South for several more years.
@firingallcylinders2949 It was more buying time for Britain's interests to be met. They were. They were rather happily let go. 20,000 troops is not a lot actually. Do not get me wrong it is a lot of men but European Warfare faced larger numbers frequently in those days. The British realised they could do without the colonies, much less trouble certainly, so left. I view the Irish War of Independence Edit2: "Edit: "(1919-1921)"" in a similar light. The British arguably won that War in the negotiating halls of Londain (They were strictly speaking winning in Ireland too though.).
Or some unhinged dictator just got beat and make up excuses after the fact. That's basically most of British history, isn't it? Just wild royals doing wild things, and some revisionist historians coming along later, to class it all up?
@@johnnotrealname8168 30k troops (can't forget the hessians) is a lot, maybe not compared to armies fielded in europe at the time, but as an expiditionary force projecting power across an ocean its a gargantuan effort. Every soldier has a logistics tail streaching back to england, several supporting personal, along with a sizable number of ships being sent its a massive investment of force for the day. dozens of ships of the line, and all the supply and transport ships, it was a massive undertaking. Part of the reason they werent willng to continue is the massive amount invested meant it would take decades to make their money back through taxes. The problem is distance means money. One of the reasons the us today spends so much is that they are the only millitary with significant expaditionary capabilities. compare that to the guys who grab their hunting rifle and go out to shoot the brits from their portch so to speak, one for one a a british soldier costs dozensof times more to feild than an american and many times more to support.
As a Canadian, I remember we weren't taught much about the American Revolution, but the Seven Years War was a really big deal, because Wolff's defeat of Montcalm on the Plains of Abraham is how Québec became a British holding, and ultimately why Canada contains a large French-speaking territory.
They didnt cover Benedict Arnold's march on Quebec and the starvation and death that they endured?
@@firingallcylinders2949 Nope. Didn't come up.
The reason it doesn't come up is because Britain actually lost😂😂 hell I don't know how they even got anything done with them big bright ass red coats lmfao looking like a target in the middle of the woods man they sticking out like sore thumb😂😂
this is not mentioned once in us history books on that war😂😂
16:48 Benjamin Franklin when he was in Britain as an unofficial spokesmen for several of the colonies, was instructed that under no circumstances was he to make a deal for representation in British Parliament because they would be totally outvoted. They didn't really want representation in parliament, what they wanted was what would later come to be referred to as Dominion Status, which Britain freely gave to Australia, Canada and New Zealand, but did so only after the experience of the American Revolution. This would have empowered the colonial legislatures to control issues like taxation, thus supplying the "representation" element. It would also save the British from having to spend money on defense costs, and had cooler heads prevailed at key points, this might have been what came about. By the time Britain was willing to entertain this notion, the Declaration of Independence had already been signed.
This is far too often overlooked and misunderstood. There was also brinksmanship on both sides, as soon as the British made concessions by stopping external taxes that were the original issue the colonists then decided internal and external taxation was the problem, so the British would have struggled to win as any concessions they gave were never good enough despite them being the issue being raised at the time - if they'd been a bit quicker maybe they would have been, but it just kept escalating. Give an inch take a mile and all that.
@@vaudevillian7 In any revolutionary situation, you will have radicals and agitators and this was true of America's as well. The major point of no return was the reaction to the Boston Tea Party. Britain's response to that united the opposition and brought large numbers of supporters on board in the Southern colonies and the Mid Atlantic, who otherwise would have been neutral or pro-British. Its kind of like in the lead up to the Civil War:
Fugitive Slave Act - Nukes the credibility of the Northern Whigs
Kansas-Nebraska Act (specifically the repeal of the Missouri Compromise line) - Creates the Republican Party
Dred Scott Decision - Nukes the Northern Democrats and unites the more populous North politically for the first time.
It wasn't that simple. A lot of it was the British limiting expansion to the Appalachians. It also has to do with the pride of leading citizens in the US and the way the British made clear that the colonials 'were not Gentleman' Colonial officers who served in the 7 years war were denied the privileges of being treated like a British officer.
It added up over the years and the tax issues were the final spark. They told the British tell us how much we need to raise, we will do it ourselves. In the end the British saw them as an inferior colony, the people in the colonies were seeing themselves as Americans. Obviously not all, about a third were loyalist, a third wanted out but feared the consequences of the war, a third were totally pro independence.
@@njlauren And yet, support for independence among the Patriot/Whig side in the colonies didn't materialize until early 1776. All of those grievances were certainly a factor, but support for complete independence took a while even among the delegates to the Constitutional convention. Thomas Paine's Common Sense was also a factor in pushing people towards independence. As for the "tell how much you need and we will raise it", that is exactly what I described above with colonial legislatures handling issues like taxation, while Britain controlled foreign policy (basically the situation Canada and Australia were in prior to WWI. That is the arrangement many hoped to push towards before coming around to complete independence. The Olive Branch petition is a good example of this wishful thinking as late as 1775. By the time Britain was even willing to discuss something approaching that kind of relationship, it was after Saratoga and the Americans had zero interest.
@@njlauren "....a third wanted out but feared the consequences of the war." I'd rather have one tyrant three thousand miles away than three thousand tyrants a mile away.
I was lucky as a history major in college one of the first courses we took focused entirely on historiagraphy and understanding and finding bias in writings from the time period. Really helped me understand a lot about historical context and to look at more than just what I was reading.
It's always important to look at both sides for stuff like this. It's so easy to get narrowed eyed.
I hadn't realized how drastic those budget cuts were! That definitely explains the rise of piracy!
In the navy?
@@johnnotrealname8168 Aye, alot of pirates were ex-military. Over 4 million pounds less money, can you imagine the amount of people laid off? How many tens or hundreds of thousands the government left out to dry? Their livelihoods were being sailors and the government took that from them, so of course many would go pirate to try and continue that livelihood, not to mention trying to get back at the government for firing them.
@trathanstargazer6421 Well they were working for the government. The government hardly took their job. In any case piracy was actually rare, it was smuggling that was the issue. The same phenomena happened during the War of the Spanish Succesion (1701-1713) where piracy exploded because of out-of-work veteran sailors and piracy was suppressed by the veteran in-work sailors.
I absolutely love your channel, I have learned far more about history from you than I did in high school. Thanks for the hard work and amazing information!! God bless you
Excellent video. I know your passion is getting out and vlogging, showing us tremendous historical sites and adding your own little signature to the sites. But, i appreciate you doing analysis (reaction) videos floating around.
There was definitely support for the colonists in England. As an indication of this, Sir Thomas Gascoigne, in 1783, had a triumphal arch erected on his estate in Aberford, Yorkshire. It was built to celebrate the victory of the colonists against a 'German king'. The arch was said to be modelled on the Arch of Titus in Rome.
Many thanks to you for all your interesting videos.
The Minuteman Trail in Lexington and Lincoln, MA, is such an incredible place to explore. There are markers where battles took place, as well as old buildings and foundations that are centuries old.
I studied the Revolutionary War at University in the UK, my lecturer was British but had also been a professor at Princeton; the American students commented on how it was taught in a much more unbiased way here as a historical event as it’s free from the baggage of being a founding a myth
I just want to say that your videos are my favorites because it’s like receiving a double checked and more refined lecture, having the information run through two different historians.
Merry Christmas from the rolling green hills of Antrim, Ireland.
Hey Chris I love your videos. I'm currently studying both History and Education to be a high school History Teacher.
So am I
Watching History videos on TH-cam remind me of that show I used to watch as a little kid.. “Wishbone” that show wit that little dog who would be dressed up into the main characters and would go into these great stories.. not just historical stories but a lot of great Books and some History stuff .. such a great show❤
Yeah!
Hope your family had a wonderful Christmas and a happy New Years.
I live in NC, about 20 miles from the Guilford Courthouse military park. My elementary school was named after General Greene, as many things in this area are. We took a field trip to the memorial site when I was young and I still enjoy visiting it now and then.
"They see it {their independence} as a win,
We see it as a lucky fKN escape."
Al murray 😂
That whole bit is hilarious.
That whole bit is not always accurate strictly speaking (I would argue it is more than it is not.) however that line was 100% accurate.
well they would have lower Tax and free health care now, but hey ho
@@matspurs1629 That is debatable.
We're coming up on the 250th anniversary of many Revolutionary War events. The Boston Tea Party was a couple weeks ago.
Love your content! Hope you had a great Christmas!🎄🎄🎄🎄
I studied Early American history in Grad school and we spent quite a bit of time going over the British perspective of the Revolution as well as just general British history mostly starting with the Stuarts. I found it very interesting because it was not covered in HS or undergrad courses. A great book to get you started is the The Men Who Lost America by Andrew Jackson O’Shaughnessy. It talks a lot about the disconnect there was between how British Leadership viewed the Colonies and how the colonists viewed themselves. A lot of Americans are under the misconception that the Revolution was about how the colonist started to form an identity of their own and resented their “Imperial Overlords”, but in fact it’s more about the opposite. The colonist viewed themselves as proud British citizens and believed they were being treated as second class citizens. The colonies over time went through a process of identifying themselves as British more and more, certainly it was not the case that they wanted to be identified as English or British in the beginning, but various upheavals across the colonies changed that perspective. This is a concept called Anglicization that was coined by historian John Murrin whose collected essays I recommend reading. I am biased by the fact that the editor of his collected essays was a mentor and former professor of mine 😅 and I was very much taught along Murrin’s line of thinking.
True. The misconception of which you speak of comes about largely in fact because during the Revolution and in the decades after the revolution Americans DID then make a concerted effort to redefine themselves as having a distinct aspect from the British. But yes leading up the revolution and during the revolution their were large communities of colonists that thought of themselves very much as British.
@@benjaminroe311ify Yea you are basically correct, when you look at the period from 1763 through the end of the war. It’s important to understand that the process im talking about of Anglicization is something that takes place up until 1763. The revolutionary period from 1763 on will push the colonies rhetoric further as the conflict develops. So yes an American like identity has its basis in the revolution, but it’s not the reason we came to believe we needed a revolution in the first place. In the beginning we still respected and cared enough about the monarchy that it wasn’t part of most of the polemics in the early revolutionary period, but it doesn’t take long before that changes too. And in turn you get something that goes well beyond the Glorious Revolution in terms of liberal democracy and individual rights.
All I was taught about the US in school is some people went over there, made a country, bought a load of slaves and then helped us in WW2, don’t know if it’s typical for other people who grew up in the UK but everything I know about American history I’ve learned online. Didn’t even know there was an American Civil War until I was an adult
To be fair. Here the U.S. most don't know much about the Civil Wars in English History. I mean I'm a historian and have studies European History in general so I do. But it's not a requirement for regular students to know much about Britain. Which is CRAZY!
We learned loads about Native Americans and their plight. But I didn't know anything about independence until I was an adult. I figured it was just like most of the rest of the Empire getting its independence.
Hey Chris! Excellent video as always. I thought I would let you know I recently purchased my second history guy sweater, this one in green.
The Turn series is probably one of the best of American historical series.
Yes! Excited for this one
The video we didn't ask for but the video we needed. I had never seen that meme before lol. Badass. I had always thought it was cowardly thing to do but my pragmatic mind says "well of course we attack them on Christmas".
Hey Chris love all your content!! You doing a video on the battle of kings mountain would be sweet!!! Not alot out there. My family comes from a small town Tipton hill, North Carolina lots of ancestors on many branches that faught in that battle. Most of them were Scot-Irish - my direct ancestor Darling Everett Jones was a pvt in carters company shelby's NC regt. Just want to say thanks for sharing all your knowledge! God Bless All! Merry Christmas
My family is from Cherryville, nc and kings mountain haha so yes we definitely need a video on the battle of kings mountain
A friend of mine in Wales🏴 actually said it best that, in regards to military might and overall mentality, it could be said that the U.S.🇺🇸 is the son closest to the father🇬🇧. Canada🇨🇦 is the well-behaved first born but Uncle Sam is the rebellious son more like the father in his prime (which the father hates to admit😂).
1:44 Too true VTH Too true! Merry Christmas BTW!
Brady Crytzer’s Wartime podcast series is one of the best overviews of the Revolutionary War out there (season 3 specifically), and that’s essentially from a British perspective
*Highly* recommend it even if familiar with the history.
In regards to the question posed by Mr Beat, I think you can always find an economic component to historical events because our lives as people rely on various macro and micro economies. But plenty of historical events have their primary motivations in religious beliefs, ideologies, and some things like disease and natural disasters have no human agency at all.
All of them together. Humans interact not think isolatedly.
Also all wars are wars of attrition which at the end of the day is economics
@firingallcylinders2949 Not really. European Warfare of the time is described as Kabinettskriege with some justification. American attritional warfare doctrine began in the Overland Campaign (1864) but ended sort of in the late '70s as soviet manpower was much larger.
@@johnnotrealname8168 doesn't quite matter what the doctrine was, almost all wars are going to come down to resources and who has more resolve.
@firingallcylinders2949 I mean yeah. I agree. Richard Milhous Nixon had a similar turn of phrase.
Great video man
It's the Boston Tea Party and Boston Massacre syndrome. Perspective changes everything. Thank you for this video!
Speaking of the battle of Trenton and perspective, the famous painting by Emanuel Leutze of Washington triumphantly crossing the Delaware, has always appeared to me that he is going the wrong way. I live in south Jersey so from my perspective I’d be looking north towards the crossing and Washington is facing left. Which would be back towards PA. I guess it’s all about perspective but I always thought it was odd.
Chris, I know you like to wait for a week, and that's very reasonable, but I am here to simply notify you that the long awaited Napoleon in Egypt series by Epic History TV is finally here.
It was released this Friday, so I hope you react to it by next Friday or Saturday 😊.
This was fun, thanks
8:02 "Raid has reached out to me, but I haven't taken them up on it, yet."
You heard him, Raid! Give away a TR Champion, and a Woodrow Wilson Raid Boss. You'll get another sponsor. No shot VTH would pass up the opputunity to have Teddy beat Wilson with a Big Stick.
Accurate.
I never knew Chris couldn’t grow a full beard, I thought the foo man choo he was rocking was a style choice 😂 love the videos man keep it up!
Fun fact: Each year in Boston, there are large parties with much drinking and feasting and general revelry on the anniversary of the evacuation of Boston by Howe's garrison. Suffolk County (which comprises mostly Boston, plus a few other cities) established the annual holiday, Evacuation Day, to formally commemorate the end of the seige of Boston; also, it coincides with Saint Patrick's Day.
I think Spain's role in helping the US gain independence is quite underrated. They declared their support and provided large amounts of financial and material assistance before the French, tied up massive amounts of British resources and manpower with the Great Siege of Gibraltar and defeated British armies on the US mainland at Mobile and Pensacola, drawing British efforts away from the northern theatre.
It wasn’t before the French aid as that started in 1775, but it’s absolutely under appreciated
Also the Spanish assault on Gibraltar forced the British to keep Naval concern higher in the Mediterranean. Also fun fact the French and Spanish were actually working on a land assault of the UK herself but disease and pestilence hit the ships and they called it off.
@@vaudevillian7 The Spanish unofficially helped the revolutionaries from the beginning.
The Spanish Governor of Louisiana, Bernardo de Gálvez blocked the port of New Orleans from the English, allowing the Americans to use it.
He also helped, through Oliver Pollock, the revolutionaries with money and supplies.
For example, the record in the Spanish National Archive of the supplies delivered by Spain in 1776, before the key battle of Saratoga (1777): 216 cannons, 209 carriages, 27 mortars, 29 saddles, 12,826 bombs, 51,134 bullets, 300 thousand gunpowder, 30,000 rifles with their bayonets, 4,000 stores and 30,000 complete dresses (uniforms).
After the declaration of war in 1779, Gálvez invaded and occupied Florida and the Bahamas, signing peace while preparing the invasion of Jamaica.
On the other hand, the Spanish navy, under the command of Luis de Córdova y Córdova, captured 52 English ships in the action of August 9, 1780.
This logistical blow has remained the largest suffered in history by the Royal Navy, with 1350 sailors captured, 1,357 officers and infantrymen captured and 286 civilians captured. Total: 2943 prisoners, plus the seizure of 80,000 muskets, 294 cannons, 3000 barrels of gunpowder, clothing and equipment for 12 infantry regiments and large quantity of provisions for the Indian and American fleets, 1 million pounds in gold.
In 1781 he captured another convoy of 24 ships.
George Washington's famous phrase: "Not without Spain."
Americans: We won this war all by ourselves.
The Rest Of The World: What are we, chopped liver?
British: Wait, which war are they talking about?
Ha! This!
Hey Chris,
If you come to Cowpens I would love to show you around. My brother lives close to the battle ground and go to Chesnee and eat at the Bantam Chef.
Much of Spartanburg is named after the Spartan regiment that fought in Cowpens (hence the name Spartanburg) as well as Daniel Morgan Ave and Technology Center. You can even see the statue of Daniel Morgan in downtown Spartanburg about 1/4 of a mile down from Delaney’s Irish Pub.
Can never go wrong with the Armchair Historian
Evacuation day, is a holiday here in the Boston area, celebrating the British evacuation of the city.
I actually really enjoyed this video, its not really explored how the British saw the American Revolution in some of the history classes I've taken, even in college.
I didn’t even learn it in my British school 😂 so I wonder if we even care about it at this point 😂😂
@@Gingerchalky Guess it was a entire lifetime ago that no one really cares since we are now stalwart allies now.
@@GingerchalkyBritain does not except some hatred over American Empire so called.
When are we going to get more of that awesome content like that video you did on how the American revolution almost died in its infancy. Where you just talk into the camera and give us information. I really loved that video
It's interesting that America was so disconnected from the crown as said in the video. So many countries continue to be connected politically and emotionally to the crown and our British ancestors. Eg. Australia, NZ etc. 200 years and were still a commonwealth and a realm
Merry Christmas Chris. How was it? Finally got my family to watch Home Alone.
We had a great Christmas! Hope you did as well.
@@VloggingThroughHistory I'm really glad, man:):):)
Watched this video and was waiting to see your perspective on it haha 😅
Hey Chris, I just wanted to make a suggestion for a future video. I know for a period you covered a lot of Napoleonic content. But most of this content talked about Napoleon himself. I think it would be cool if you checked out videos about Wellington or Nelson. I say you should watch biographics videos about them
Hey VTH, did you see there's a new one of those Campaign Trail scenarios where you try to get the Declaration of Independence passed?
35:55 I believe the 2000 movie The Patriot featured that region of the campaign.
As a Brit, I really appreciate you reacting to this and seeing the revolution from the British perspective. Also (as someone who lives near Gibraltar) I love that the Great Siege of Gibraltar was mentioned in the video
One of the great chuckles for me as someone who enjoys American and Europeans history is only how recently the British were the "good" guys in wars.
Before the early 19th century, that certainly wasn't the case.
@@mattm7798 Every country has been the "bad guys" at some point in their history. No nation is completely innocent
I mean their dominance wasn't a terribly long time outside of the British isles either. They were a minor power as late as the late 1600s
@@feartheamish9183 true
World wide dominance was short(which looking thru history is common), but European major power has been for about 1000 years now. @@feartheamish9183
It's funny, my brother lives in Lexington and I've been to the battlegreen during the reenactments of the battle of Lexington.
32:53 I hope a certain french general can come with the rest of his army!
(The backround music. To get this, listen to the music)
11:56 Also I find it is little surprising that the first major trouble spot was in New England and while the puritanical nature of the region is certainly declining by this point, many of its vestiges remain and also the cultural and political influence as well, which would naturally tend to make it skeptical of the centralized authority in London.
There is a scene in the movie, Amazing Grace (detailing the life of William Wilberforce), where Parliament is debating the issue of Tory support in the South. Supporters of the War estimated the Tory population to be one in two of every Southerner. Wilberforce counters that the number in one in three at best and closer to one in four. Wilberforce, a young and affluent trader at the time, also wondered how many young British men would die before enough was enough. Edmund Burke was also an opposing voice in Parliament.
the south was very weird georgia was by far the most pro british colony and if it hadnt been for several blunders likely wouldnt have supported the 2nd continental congress yet virginia which made a lot of money selling to britain was heavily anti british georgia really could have remained a british territory as could have florida if it hadnt been for some really stupid situations and bad luck like the unarmed loyalist militia getting ambushed by patriots as they attempted to gather and head to draw out muskets
Although i disagree with VTHs view that representation in parliament wouldnt have had a long term effect and with his point that they didnt really see themselves as british Mason for instance most definitely did
Used an inflation calculator and the debt was roughly 32.5 billion pounds in todays money....but in an era before income tax and VAT that was probably not representstive.
Another way of doing the sums is that britains nave now costs around 15 billion, using this as a benchmark comoared to the 7 million it cost in 1762, that would put the debt at nearly 300 billion! You can wmsee why they wanted to claw somenof that back.
Regarding 'no taxation without representation': In the "Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania", a very popular series of essays by John Dickinson (whom one can't consider a radical), the author says that Parliament has the authority to regulate trade between the various parts of the British Colonial Empire, but has no lawmaking authority over the colonies themselves because Parliament does not represent them. But he also says that representation in Parliament isn't really feasible on account of the long distance of communication. So "no taxation without representation" really meant "no taxation".
Many colonists would by that point never have accepted Parliament's authority, and Parliament would never have allowed the Colonies to elude its authority. I too think that conflict was inevitable, however the conflict only became a war of independance when the King chose Parliament's side.
3:48 Napoleon traded a small principality in Italy to Spain in return for getting the Louisiana Territory back in French hands. Its weird to think that a tiny principality would be more valuable to the Spanish crown than an entire chunk of North America. At about the same time though, Guadalupe was more valuable than the whole of Canada because of the sugar trade. Even as it was, when the Spanish took possession they were seriously disappointed as the principality was a complete mess. I recall an anecdote that it was "the first time the daughter of the King of Spain had to be served on porcelain". Napoleon's plan was use Louisiana to farm wheat and other food products, so that all of the available land on Haiti could be used for sugar plantations. Of course to make this work, he needed to reclaim Haiti and when that did not succeed and Britain threatened War again, he needed cash upfront so he sold Louisiana to the United States.
Any tips on doing family research
American independence was immensely beneficial for the UK. We received a huge trading partner and were no longer obliged to spend a pound in administering half a continent.
I feel you on the facial hair issues I have the exact same problem as you
For somebody who hasn't given into raid shadow yet you certainly were happy to let that logo linger on the pause screen lol.
21:06 In my view, the Coercive (Intolerable) Acts, serves as the point of no return and also the primary unifying force that brought the thirteen colonies together. It essentially demonstrated that England did not treat the colonies with the same rights that Englishmen in England enjoyed and also served as a warning that if they could do that to Boston, they could do that anywhere in the colonies. I would basically term it the equivalent of Dred Scott in terms of the march towards Revolution, in that it sparks both unity in opposition and also undermines the standing of the side bringing it about, not to mention validating many of the critics points.
good stuff
No, I would argue that Great Britain was a fully-fledged empire by this point. Their primary participation in the imperial wars of the 18th Century and the territorial/economic rewards they reaped as a result, in addition to their original North American colonies, even if the Raj hadn't yet fully formed. This is really important in understanding the political dynamics emanating from the home island. Parliament sets official policy of course for the entirety of the empire and the monarchy influences everything, but as a subsection of that structure was the colonial office. This was headed by the Secretary of State for War and controlled everything that did not happen within the Union of Kingdoms (excluding Ireland). This bureaucracy was obviously mandated to follow the acts passed by parliament but was essentially autonomous, especially concerning the military and trade. This helps explain the appearance of the king and parliament saying one thing and then doing something else.
The two main participants of the Seven Years War, Great Britain and France... Frederick the Great's and Maria Theresa's ghosts jump up and simultaneously exclaim, "what!?"
I highly recommend Schwerpunkt's videos on early US warfare on this
His video on American independence is good.
The best example of perspective in history, is how those outside of Romania view Vlad Tepes vs how Romanians view him :)
I have the same exact beard problems man. It's so frustrating!!
I know it's history all of us Americans grow up knowing, but how crazy is it to picture for real? British ships pulling up on our coasts for war, the British as our ememy, foreign soldiers dying on our soil, us fighting to BE a seperate nation. It's something we will never be able to truly understand unless it happens again, and even then, only that generation will ever really get it. The civil war is the same. We've been blessed to go through these things long ago, and only see other countries go through it from our phones and living rooms. Whether you say we're the best country or not, we've certainly been one of the most blessed. And man, that would have been a crazy time to be alive. I mean the country was still wild. They couldn't just go anywhere. The natives were still a threat, the west was still a mystery. Just a crazy period.
Hi I always think the same about the blitz in the u.k imagining those hundreds of lufftwaffe flying above us then dropping there bombs seems unreal and not really that long ago .fascinating to think about
@@claregale9011 Absolutely. I love watching footage of battlefields and imagining what you'd see if you stood right there and rewound time back to those day. History is fascinating.
@@claregale9011 My grandmother lived in london during the blitz. She was initially sent away to a relative in the country but came home as she was home sick. She is 97, 98 very soon, some of her stories are amazing.
A big thing to remember is that it would have felt a lot more like a civil war. Americans and British weren’t as distinct as they were today. They would have probably sounded fairly similar to one another
I used to celebrate July 4th with my British buddy
Appalachian is pronounced differently depending on geography. Â sound up north usually, Ā sound if it’s south or west.
Hey how about extra credits history of Brazil?
"I don't know why they insist on keeping it all, soon enough they will have no choice but to turn upon each other." That was in substance what Choiseul said after ceding Canada to the British after the Seven Years War.
As essentially the most important event in world history the American revolution should be required history in every country. God bless America.
The main TH-cam channels i watch either are sponsored by Raids Shadow Legends or that air pin that helps you get off smoking or vaping
The issue that is commonly not mentioned, during the independent war and France helping the US. Britain was also fighting in india/africa and Europe which took the majority of the British forces away from a fight in America which made it easier for them.
If the full might of the British came down on the Americans then it would of been finished within weeks
At 17:40 George III was not the villain history has painted as, but the colonists certainly vilified him in print, cartoons, and sermons. In The Sacred Cause of Liberty, written by Nathan Hatch, notable American Christianity scholar, examines millennial images in sermons both during the French Indian War and the rising anti-crown sentiment in the colonies after 1763. During the previous conflict, preachers painted the King of France as the antichrist and other negative images. By the 1770s, those same preachers now portrayed George III in the same roles, demonstrating not only the effect of the First Great Awakening throughout the colonies, but the emerging identity of colonial citizens as Americans.
Thanks for giving credit to Benedict Arnold, he changed history more than anyone else I can think of. The way he got treated by his peers was completely unacceptable when they took credit for his ideas and triumphs while also going back on their agreement to refund him all of the money that came out of his own back pocket to support the troops that he had to get them to where their victories were happening. The newspapers made him look like a greedy asshole when all he wanted was his money back cuz he spent his whole life savings on supplying this army that he was victorious with and a damn good soldier. It was too much for him to take he was so disrespected it's not even funny it's one of the worst stories I've ever heard. I think he's our first Patriot I think he's our first example of what we think America is he was a badass. The fact that we don't have the statue somewhere for Benedict Donald praising him for his victories and we don't have John Brown on anything at all not a coin not a bill not a chapter in history book. It's shameful
Patriots don't betray their nations, guy. Words have meanings.
@@Tijuanabill Patriots do not get betrayed by nations they are fighting for.
@@johnnotrealname8168 He betrayed us. He changed sides. He is the literal source of being called a Benedict Arnold, aka a traitor. Also, on person's patriotism isn't dependent upon how others act towards them. That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard a person say, in quite some time.
@Tijuanabill You were @#£%ing traitors who treated him dishonourably and you want to argue he is the traitor? That is indeed the stupidest thing I have ever read. It is, he chose the correct side.
@@Tijuanabill yes it is.
With the facial hair thing, do you happen to come from welsh descent? Most of my family can grow a helluva mustache but nothing for beards. There were a few large welsh familys that immigrated to ohio around Post, Radnor, and delware. My male line ancestors are from those families. I know there were other welsh communities that came over later for mining in NE ohio, and there was interaction between those communities.
The guy in the video sounds exactly like the guy who does Historia Civilis. 😮
Hearing two of my favorite channels support each other. It’ll just warm your heart.
There is a small detail about George Iii that needs to be remembered. He was between 7 and 8 years old during the ',45 Jacobite Rebellion. He was too young to understand the politics but would have sensed the panic in and around his family as his grandfather prepared to flee England for the continent. He would understand that his uncle had to bring soldiers back to England to end the terror. As he grew up, we can easily believe that this "more British than the British" monarch did not like "rebellion" for the bad memories it stirred. Once Massachusetts entered that state, it is easy to see why he showed little empathy or interest in olive branch petitions.
The Americans were going to attack Canada.
id argue that the credit for the american victory at saratoga shouldnt go to bates or arnold but to General Clinton the british commander in new york he had promised to attempt to link up with Burgoyne and basically went galivanting off in the other direction whereas if he had attempted to support burgoyne with the troops in the new york area its likely saratoga could have been a british victory
Also. Both ways to say that mountain are accepted and correct. It is just regional.
One thing that people don't really realize when thinking of "all that land" is the population density (or lack of it) of native Americans compared to Britain. By most estimates, Britain (well, England, Scotland and Wales) had roughly double the population of all natives in the US and Canada (at least from stats I can find). On dramatically less land. Not to say what those settlers were doing was right (and definitely it got much worse later), but it does help to understand WHY they wanted to go west and settle, and why they felt there was enough room.
At the time of Canadian Confederation in 1867, there were between 100,000 and 125,000 indigenous people within the current boundaries of Canada. The population of London was over 4 million at the time.
I like how the americans complained about no taxation without representation yet less than 5% of british citizens could vote at the time while being levied much higher taxes at the time, im sure british citizens would declare independence from parliment if they could 😂
Well I mean you could lol we weren’t technically allowed to at the time either but we did lol
What brought British citizens to the New World--opportunity. All of England and Scotland had long been settled and carved up among a variety of nobles and freeholders. The colonies offered a chance to make something of yourself regardless of class. The western frontier held all of that in spades. The Proclamation of 1763 was the first step in denying that chance.
George Otto Trevalyan, the British historian , said that the American revolutiob was also a British one. He said that George III was in a power grab, that he hated that he had to deal with Parliament unlike other Kings and his strong arm tactics were aimed at Parliament as much as the US.
6:01 As bad as it is for Britain, it must be remembered that no other country in Europe could have sustained this level of debt. By the end of the Napoleonic Wars, Britain's Debt to GDP ratio would exceed 200%. Because of the Bank of England and because of the system established by Parliament as part of the settlements following the Glorious Revolution, Britain had the financial infrastructure to withstand massive levels of debt and essentially out finance their opponents. This is much different then how it was under Elizabeth I and the early Stuarts when campaigns and even in some cases entire wars had to be called off because they ran out of funds. The US meanwhile tried to print its way through the war because of its lack of taxing power at the national level and this along with the British printing up lots of counterfeit essentially made the continental currency worthless. Its no accident that after having served in the war through this disaster of a system, under Washington's leadership, that both Washington and Hamilton embrace implementing a system similar to the British.
The District of Columbia was not intended to be a residential district for welfare recipients and lobbyists. The purpose of the District is to be a business district for the federal government. If the residents of the District of Columbia would like federal representation, then they should move to a state.
17:53: There was something of a Tory or "neo-Tory" revival in the 1760s in Britain. The official Tory party was basically dead as a result of most of them having supported the Jacobite Uprising, the proscription against them holding office and the association of their brand with reactionary politics, Divine Right, and of course Catholicism (though most Tory supporters had historically been Anglicans). The Whig Oligarchy is reaching its height during this time period and they were the champions of natural rights, contract theory of government and the reformation. They were also passionate defenders of the Hanoverian succession both because of religious reasons, and also because the Hanoverians meant a lot of power was ceded to Parliament. Under Anne, emphasizing that the Glorious Revolution was bipartisan, power went back and forth between the two parties. Care was taken to ensure that the wording was finessed so that both Whigs and Tories could come out of 1689 supportive of the new settlements. Mary and Anne were still the children of James II, William was the grandson of Charles I, the contrivance that James had "technically abdicated by throwing away the Great Seal" and other such delicate handling was aimed at not appearing too radical to the Tory members. Even with this restraint, the power of the purse was placed firmly in the hands of parliament and structured in such a way to force the Monarch to have a parliament in session to renew the appropriations of funds. The days of going decades without a parliament sitting were over.
However, even beyond the concessions under William III towards Parliamentary rule, more power had slipped away under the early Hanoverians owing to the fact that George I was very much German, spoke very little English and was really uninterested in British politics. This continued to a lesser extent under George II, leading to the dominance of figures like Walpole and then later William Pitt, the Elder. When George III comes to the throne, he is the first monarch born in Britain since Queen Anne, English is his first language and he is far more engaged in British affairs then either of his predecessors and he wanted to pull back some of the power lost over the previous fifty years. At one point he tries to restrict freedom of the press, when the press is criticizing him and this led to an early scandal in his reign.
This would lead to a split in the Whig Party between those who favored George's increased influence and those who opposed it. Of course the former faction were derided as "rotten Tories", though most were in fact Whigs. At the same time in America, this is coming off of the period of salutary neglect and so when you confront a dynamic of Britain reasserting itself, to the more radically Whig minded, it looks like an attempt to turn back the clock. This is why loyalists are derided as Tories, despite Britain having a nominally Whig government throughout most of this entire period.
There are some Tories like Samuel Johnson who embrace the Hanoverian succession, and then become passionate critics of the American Revolution. One of his contentions essentially claimed that Americans ceded their rights as Englishman by moving to the colonies and thus couldn't protest things like no taxation without representative. To the advocates of natural rights, this mindset must have been horrifyingly reactionary to their Whig sensibilities.
Britain was in India before 1750 and extended rule via the East India company, as a mere conduit of power, in 1757, One major reason the American colonists didn't like the taxes was because they were using American issued paper currency for internal trade due to not being able to get British coins (since it was restricted). Therefore they didn't have enough British currency to pay any taxes in that currency. Also Britain's economising had nothing to do with the country becoming 'bankrupt' (that would have been impossible) it was due to not being able to purchase enough real resources (raw material, goods, labour) to maintain armed forces.