More handpicked essays just for you.
American revolution social and political
American revolution social and political
The role of leadership in military
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The article “Why Men Fought in the American Revolution” delves into the reasons why men chose to stay and fight in the American Revolution. The author, Robert Middlekauff, gives his rationale on why he believes men risked their lives in the battles against the British. While Middlekauf explains reasons men had for risking their lives fighting, he is swift to dismiss motivations these American men did not have to fight. Not only does Middlekauff discuss motivations of men, he also draws contrast between the American and British armies; more specifically, differences between the armies’ officers and soldiers. Middlekauff began the article by dismissing some reasons American men were ready to risk their lives in the revolutionary battles. A …show more content…
The mannerisms, attitudes, and background of the American and British soldiers contrasted greatly. The values held by the individual soldiers of the two armies differed. American soldiers had a tendency to think on their own accord and often with liberty in mind (143). In contrast, the British soldiers held the values that their army held (144). American soldiers often fought with the same men from their town or village (142). The British soldiers, however, were pulled from society and isolated from it (144). During the time of the British soldiers’ isolation, they were tightly disciplined and rigorously trained (144). This too shows a contrast between the British and American soldiers. British soldiers underwent a stricter regimen of training while the training Americans had was more informal. The commanding men of the armies, the officers, were different as well. The British officers held themselves aloof from war and quite distant from their men (145). British officers were also much harsher on their men and trained them more effectively (136). The American officer sought to achieve the refinement of the British officers but often failed in achieving it. (145). The training American officers gave to their men was also not as cohesive like the
For training, the author shares the difficult task involved in the training and that went into preparing the American solider for battle in World War I from multiple levels including from Brownies’ perspective. The author gave clear and concise examples to strengthen his claim concerning the overwhelming task of training an inexperienced army. As the Snead explains, “Historians, journalists, and others have written numerous books
The book “For Cause and Comrades: Why Men Fought In The Civil War” by James M. McPherson examines the motivations of the soldiers who fought in the Civil War. McPherson wanted to understand why the men fought in the Civil War and why they fought so ferociously for such a large amount of time even though there was a huge possibility of death, disease and injurys.To answer the question regarding the reasons why men fought in the Civil War so viciously, and for such a long period of time, James McPherson studied countless amounts of letters, diaries and other mails that were written or sent by the soldiers who fought in the Civil War.
In 1776, David McCullough gives a vivid portrayal of the Continental Army from October 1775 through January 1777, with sharp focus on the leadership of America’s greatest hero, George Washington. McCullough’s thesis is that had not the right man (George Washington) been leading the Continental Army in 1776, the American Revolution would have resulted in a vastly different outcome. He supports his argument with a critical analysis of Washington’s leadership during the period from the Siege of Boston, through the disastrous defense of New York City, the desperate yet, well ordered retreat through New Jersey against overwhelming odds, and concludes with the inspiring victories of Trenton and Princeton. By keeping his army intact and persevering through 1776, Washington demonstrated to the British Army that the Continental Army was not simply a gang of rabble, but a viable fighting force. Additionally, Mr. McCullough supports his premise that the key to the survival of the American Revolution was not in the defense of Boston, New York City, or any other vital terrain, but rather the survival of the Continental Army itself. A masterful piece of history, 1776 is not a dry retelling of the Revolutionary War, but a compelling character study of George Washington, as well as his key lieutenants, and his British adversaries, the most powerful Army in the 18th Century world. When I read this book, I went from a casual understanding of the hero George Washington to a more specific understanding of why Washington was quite literally the exact right man at the exact right place and time to enable the birth of the United States.
...e gun, it seemed, the greater the owner‘s pride in it.” (McCullough 33) The Continental army certainly did not look like an army yet these people were brought together in this fight for freedom and prevailed even winning the support of Americans who had no hope the British would be defeated.” Merchant Erving had sided with the Loyalists primarily because he thought the rebellion would fail. But the success of Washington‘s army at Boston had changed his mind as it had for many” (McCullough 108). The reader must comprehend the power of this accomplishment for the rag-tag army. “Especially for those who had been with Washington and who knew what a close call it was at the beginning-how often circumstance, storms, contrary winds, the oddities or strengths of individual character had made the difference- the outcome seemed little short of a miracle.” (McCullough 294).
“Join, or Die.” “Don’t Tread on Me.” These are two mottos often used by Revolutionary supporters and fighters from about 1754 to 1783, and even sometimes today it is still used. These were battle cries that patriotic men would scream with all their might before charging onto the battlefield, where they might take their last breath. Nearly five thousand men gave their lives, for freedom’s sake. Their sacrifices were not done in vain, as the war was ended on September 3rd, 1783. This sense of victory and accomplishment is what lead these new Americans to further establishing their country, making their mark on history, and creating a new identity for themselves, as free men and woman.
When one explains his or her ingenious yet, enterprising interpretation, one views the nature of history from a single standpoint: motivation. In The American Revolution: A History, Gordon Wood, the author, explains the complexities and motivations of the people who partook in the American Revolution, and he shows the significance of numerous themes, that emerge during the American Revolution, such as democracy, discontent, tyranny, and independence. Wood’s interpretation, throughout his literary work, shows that the true nature of the American Revolution leads to the development of United State’s current government: a federal republic. Wood, the author, views the treatment of the American Revolution in the early twentieth century as scholastic yet, innovative and views the American Revolution’s true nature as
The book ‘For Cause and Comrades’ is a journey to comprehend why the soldiers in the Civil War fought, why they fought so passionately, and why they fought for the long period of time. Men were pulling guns against other men who they had known their whole lives. McPherson’s main source of evidence was the many letters from the soldiers writing to home. One of the many significant influences was how the men fought to prove their masculinity and courage. To fight would prove they were a man to their community and country. Fighting also had to do with a duty to their family. Ideology was also a major motivating factor; each side thought they were fighting for their liberty. The soldier’s reputations were created and demolished on the battlefield, where men who showed the most courage were the most honored. Religion also played an important role because the second Great Awakening had just occurred. Their religion caused the men who thought of themselves as saved to be fearless of death, “Religion was the only thing that kept this soldier going; even in the trenches…” (McPherson, p. 76) R...
If you live in the United States, you probably are aware of the American Revolution. Most educated adults in America can name at least on hero of pre-Revolutionary America such as Samuel Adams, John Hancock, Paul Revere and Thomas Jefferson . But to what extent did these few men, credited with our freedom, actually participate in events that lead up to the revolution? How many countless men remained unnamed and unnoticed despite the work they put into the Revolution? These men have often been overlooked in textbooks, despite the fact most of the freedoms we have now are derived from their brave actions. But why did these men get the wheels of a revolution turning? What was the reason they had for their actions, the very ones that led America and Great Britain to begin a fight not only for freedom, but for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?
In a time full of chaos, desperation, and dissenting opinions, two definitive authors, Thomas Paine and Patrick Henry, led the way toward the American Revolution. Both men demanded action of their separate audiences. Paine wrote to inspire the commoners to fight while Henry spoke extemporaneously to compel the states’ delegates to create an army. Despite the differences between the two, both had very similar arguments which relied heavily upon God, abstract language, and ethos. In the end, both men were able to inspire their audiences and capture the approval and support of the masses. If not for these two highly influential and demanding men, the America that we know today might not exist.
The Revolutionary War was one of America’s earliest battles and one of many. Although, many came to America to gain independence from Great Britain many still had loyalty for the King and their laws. Others believed that America needs to be separated from Great Britain and control their own fate and government. I will analyze the arguments of Thomas Paine and James Chalmers. Should America be sustained by Great Britain or find their own passage?
In the world’s lens during the 1760s, the British empire had a clear and prominent control over the colonies. However, by the mid-1770s the Americans became enraged enough to declare war against the British for independence. Due to Britain’s massive imperial presence around the globe, the British civilians had a strong inclination for a successful outcome. Instead, the colonists pulled a surprising victory from what should have been a swift defeat. While the British had an abundance of advantages, they lost the Revolutionary War because the British army underestimated the colonists’ perseverance for freedom.
“Is there a single trait of resemblance between those few towns and a great and growing people spread over a vast quarter of the globe, separated by a mighty ocean?” This question posed by Edmund Burke was in the hearts of nearly every colonist before the colonies gained their independence from Britain. The colonists’ heritage was largely British, as was their outlook on a great array of subjects; however, the position and prejudices they held concerning their independence were comprised entirely from American ingenuity. This identity crisis of these “British Americans” played an enormous role in the colonists’ battle for independence, and paved the road to revolution.
In conclusion, it is evident that the freedom of America was not free. It was bought with a price. This freedom was gained through years of sacrifice and the American victory in the Revolutionary War. It’s military assets, the aid from foreign countries, and the unwavering, inspiring spirit of independence were significant factors in the colonial victory. Without these three components, the Revolutionary War would have been lost and America would not be as we know it today.
At the beginning of the War, men felt that being part of the troops that were on the frontline was an honorable thing to do. Men who joined the army were seen as patriotic and loyal to their countries. In this perspective, any man who had the strength to go out to fight would voluntarily join the force without any resistance. The feeling was that of enthusiasm as many men wanted to serve their countries. In Britain for example, joining the army was seen as a noble cause and many men would volunteer to leave their families and join the frontline. In addition to this, it was seen as betrayal for fellow countrymen to be on the frontline while one was left at home. Such a person would not earn the respect of the society as he was seen as a traitor who did not love nor respect their country. In this perspective, the thoughts and experiences of men ...
In Joseph Plumb Martin’s account of his experiences in the Revolutionary War he offers unique insight into the perspective of a regular soldier, which differs from the views of generals and leaders such as popular characters like George Washington. Martin’s narrative is an asset to historical scholarship as a primary source that gives an in-depth look at how life in the army was for many young men during the War for Independence. He described the tremendous suffering he experienced like starvation and privation. He did not shy away from describing his criticism of the government who he believes did not adequately care for the soldiers during and after the war. While he may be biased because of his personal involvement as a soldier, he seems to relate accounts that are plausible without embellishment or self-aggrandizement. Overall, “A Narrative of A Revolutionary Soldier” is a rich source of information providing an overview of military experience during the war.