Charles Royster and the Rage Militaire

The historian Charles Royster died in early February. He was the author of Light-Horse Harry Lee and the Legacy of the American Revolution (1981), The Fabulous History of the Dismal Swamp Company: A Story of George Washington’s Time (1999), and studies of the Civil War.

But the book historians will most remember Royster for is A Revolutionary People at War: The Continental Army and American Character, 1775–1783 (1979). Eighteen years after its publication, Joseph R. Fischer wrote on the H-War listserv that it “continues to rank as the definitive work on the Continental Army’s relationship with the American people.”

This month, twenty-two years after that encomium, Michael Lynch wrote in an appreciation on his Past in the Present blog:

I first encountered Royster’s work when I was fresh out of college. At that time I was a newly-minted aspiring historian who had decided to study the American Revolution. On a family trip to Williamsburg I found a copy of A Revolutionary People at War in a bookstore. It probably had a bigger impact on me than any academic book I’ve read, whether at that time or since. It was one of my first experiences with a work of history that asked such probing questions and constructed such meaningful answers.

Sometimes, when you’re just beginning to engage with a field, a book will smash its way into your intellect like an asteroid, but then you revisit it later when you’re more seasoned and find the magic’s worn off. You decide it must have made a big impression only because you read it when you were green and had a narrow frame of reference. That’s never been the case with me and A Revolutionary People. Every time I take it off the shelf, it’s as powerful and insightful as it seemed before I started graduate school. To this day, I think it’s an unparalleled analysis of the Continental Army and its role in defining what the Revolution meant.

Focusing as I do on the start of the war, I find the most helpful concept from Royster’s book his emphasis on the rage militaire that energized Patriots in 1775. That phrase was the title of his first chapter. It’s cited widely by other authors. Royster studied how that feeling fell apart over the next year and a half, and what thoughts and feelings replaced it.

That’s not just a story of the army—it’s also a story of the society that produced, sustained, grumbled about, and reabsorbed that army. As Gaines Foster wrote in his obituary for the American Historical Association, “Charlie always bristled at being termed a ‘military historian,’ although he would admit that he studied ‘war and society.’”

“First in the hearts of his fellow-citizens” first?

Yesterday I quoted the famous praise for George Washington that appears in the House of Representatives’ record for 19 Dec 1799: “first in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen.”

Those words were entered into the record by Rep. John Marshall. However, Marshall always insisted that the credit belonged to his fellow Virginian, Rep. Henry Lee (often called “Light-Horse Harry” Lee and shown here).

In 1832 Marshall set down this recollection in a letter:

As the stage passed through Philadelphia, some passenger mentioned to a friend he saw in the street the death of General Washington. The report flew to the hall of Congress, and I was asked to move an adjournment. I did so.

General Lee was not at the time in the House. On receiving the intelligence which he did on the first arrival of the stage, he retired to his room and prepared the resolutions which were adopted with the intention of offering them himself.

But the House of Representatives had voted on my motion [to adjourn], and it was expected by all that I on the next day announce the lamentable event and propose resolutions adapted to the occasion.

General Lee immediately called on me and showed me his resolutions. He said it had now become improper for him to offer them, and wished me to take them. As I had not written anything myself and was pleased with his resolutions which I entirely approved, I told him I would offer them the next day when I should state to the House of Representatives the confirmation of the melancholy intelligence received the preceding day. I did so.

Marshall also wrote about that moment in his overly long biography of Washington, published in 1804-07. Circumspectly not naming himself, he wrote that the following “resolutions were prepared by general Lee, who happening not to be in his place when the melancholy intelligence was received and first mentioned in the house, placed them in the hands of the member who moved them”:

Resolved, that this house will wait on the president in condolence of this mournful event.

Resolved, that the speaker’s chair be shrouded with black, and that the members and officers of the house wear black during the session.

Resolved, that a committee, in conjunction with one from the Senate be appointed to consider on the most suitable manner of paying honour to the memory of the MAN, first in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his fellow-citizens.

Sharp-eyed readers will note that these clauses differ from what appears in the House record, quoted yesterday. The official resolutions spelled out “President of the United States” and called the event a “national calamity” instead of a “mournful event.” The third resolution is worded differently, and there’s a fourth about adjournment.

And when it comes to the most famous phrase, “first in the hearts of his countrymen” appeared in Marshall’s biography as “first in the hearts of his fellow-citizens.”

The authors I’ve read don’t seem to know what to make of this. Some suggest that Marshall was simply wrong in his Washington biography, even though he wrote about an event that had happened only eight years before and the official House records were available to him (he was by then Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, after all).

Another possibility is that in the biography Marshall quoted the actual draft that Lee had handed him. In that case, “fellow-citizens” was the first version of “countrymen,” and Marshall or the House revised Lee’s language.

Within a couple of days the “countrymen” phrase had become official in both House and Senate resolutions, and Lee incorporated that into the public eulogy he delivered on 26 December.

Celebrating Washington in Cambridge and South Boston, 22 Feb.

George Washington’s Birthday is on Monday, February 22. I was going to spotlight the special tours of the general’s headquarters in Cambridge that day, led by Garrett Cloer of the Longfellow House–Washington’s Headquarters National Historic Site.

However, this afternoon I heard that those tours are all booked up. If you want to take a chance on cancellations, call 617-876-4491 to hear if spaces have opened up.

Meanwhile, over at the South Boston Library, the South Boston Historical Society will host Prof. William M. Fowler of Northeastern speaking on “First in War, First in Peace, First in the Hearts of his Countrymen!” That salute to Washington will run from 6:30 to 7:45 P.M. The library branch is at 646 East Broadway, and the event is free to the public.

The title of Bill Fowler’s talk comes from the resolutions that the U.S. House passed on 19 Dec 1799 after receiving news of President Washington’s death. The official record of the House offers this text of the resolutions:

1. That this House will wait on the President of the United States, in condolence of this national calamity.

2. That the Speaker’s chair be shrouded with black, and that the members and officers of the House wear mourning, during the session.

3. That a joint committee of both Houses be appointed to report measures suitable to the occasion, and expressive of the profound sorrow with which Congress is penetrated on the loss of a citizen, first in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen.

4. That when this House adjourns, it will adjourn until Monday next.

When the Senate responded to the House, it too used the phrase “first in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen.” And when John Marshall read a eulogy written by Gen. Henry Lee in front of Congress a few days later, he said of Washington: “First in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen, he was second to none in the humble and endearing scenes of private life.”

TOMORROW: But what was the first form of that phrase?

4th Conference on the American Revolution, 20-22 Mar.

On 20-22 March, America’s History, L.L.C., will host its fourth annual Conference on the American Revolution in Williamsburg, Virginia.

Scheduled speakers include:

• Edward G. Lengel, Head of Faculty: “Enigmatic Warrior: Light-Horse Harry Lee [shown here] at the Battle of Eutaw Springs”
• Rick Atkinson: “Bringing Back the Dead: History, Memory, and Writing About War”
• John “Jack” Buchanan: “‘A Great and Good Man’: Nathanael Greene and the Road to Charleston”
• Don N. Hagist: “The Revolution’s Last Men: The Soldiers Behind the Photographs”
• James Kirby Martin: “The Man Who Wouldn’t Be King: George Washington and the Newburgh Conspiracy”
• Holly Mayer: “Command and Control of Congress’s Own: Hazen’s 2nd Canadian Regiment”
• Andrew Jackson O’Shaughnessy: “Hot Weather and Heavy Casualties: The Revolutionary War in the Caribbean”
• Julia Anne Osman: “From Greatest Enemies to Greatest Allies: France and America in the War for Independence”

There are two panel discussions planned:

• What are the most overrated and underrated battles or campaigns of the Revolutionary War?
• Who is the most underrated or overlooked individual (on either side) who had an impact on the American Revolution?

The conference package, including lunch and refreshments, costs $225. The conference has arranged for a block of rooms at the Colonial Williamsburg Woodlands Hotel and discounted tickets to the Colonial Williamsburg Historic Area. For more information, call America’s History at 703-785-4373 or check its website. Featured sponsors include Westholme Publishing Company and Tim Sampson’s Battlemaps.us.

American Revolution Conference in Williamsburg, 22-24 Mar.

America’s History, L.L.C., is sponsoring its second annual Conference on the American Revolution in Williamsburg, Virginia, on 22-24 March. Although there are academics on the list of speakers, this conference is not designed for academic scholars and job-seekers but for independent researchers and history buffs.

The scheduled program is:

• Edward G. Lengel: “Revolutionary Rivals: Horatio Gates and George Washington”
• Douglas Cubbison: “Man on a Mission: John Burgoyne and the Campaign of 1777”
• Joshua Howard: “The Swamp Fox: Francis Marion, Revolutionary War Hero of South Carolina”
• James Kirby Martin: “Benedict Arnold: Revolutionary America’s Heroic General”
• Andrew O’Shaughnessy: “Fighting with Friends and Enemies Simultaneously: Sir Henry Clinton”
• Jim Piecuch: “Frustrated Ambitions: “Light Horse Harry Lee’s Conflicts On and Off the Battlefield”
• John V. Quarstein: “Closing the Door on Cornwallis: The Battle of the Capes September 1781”
• Glenn F. Williams: “Lord Dunmore’s War: Training Ground for Continental Officers”

As you see, there’s an emphasis on military commanders this year rather than, say, politics, battles or other events, ordinary soldiers, social movements, technology, &c.

There will also be two panel discussions: “The Best and Worst Military Commanders of the Revolutionary War” and “A Revolutionary War Bookshelf: What You Should Own and What Books Will Be Published Soon.”

The conference package costs $225 and includes lunch, two breakfasts, and refreshment breaks. There are rooms available at the Williamsburg Hospitality House, which I think is also the site of the sessions. On the Friday afternoon before the conference begins, there’s an optional bus tour of Petersburg and other sites led by William Welsch of the local American Revolution Round Table; that costs $95 extra. I hadn’t thought seriously about going to Virginia next month, but two feet of snow has a way of making me reconsider.

America’s History offers a range of other tours and events this year, including sessions on “Religion, Rebellion, and the Founding Fathers” in Pennsylvania with John Fea; "Defending the Highlands” in Newburgh, New York, with Bill Welsch and Bruce Venter; “Braddock's Campaign to Fort Duquesne” in Pennsylvania with Doug Cubbison; and “Burgoyne’s Campaign of 1777” in conjunction with the 10th annual American Revolution Seminar at Fort Ticonderoga.

What Really Happened in Wadsworth House

Boston 1775 reader Robert C. Mitchell alerted me to this webpage from Harvard University. It says of Wadsworth House, once home of the college president and now office of the university marshal:

General George Washington, with the assistance of Henry Lee (then an officer in the Patriot Forces, and later father to General Robert E. Lee), set up his first headquarters in the house. From there, on July 3, 1775, Washington rode out to the Cambridge Common to take command of the Revolutionary troops. It is also said that the plans to oust King George from Boston took form in Wadsworth Parlor.

This description mixes up Charles Lee with Henry “Light-horse Harry” Lee. Charles was a former British army officer appointed major general of the Continental Army. He rode with Washington from Philadelphia to Cambridge, and spent some days sharing this house with the commander-in-chief.

Henry was a young man, still in his teens, whom Washington knew back in Virginia. By coincidence, both these Lees had visited Mount Vernon in late April, as Washington prepared for the Second Continental Congress. But in 1775 young Harry remained in Virginia, joining the Continental Army only in June 1776. He rose to the rank of lieutenant colonel by the end of the war.

The paragraph above also perpetuates the myth that Washington took command of the New England troops on the Cambridge common on 3 July 1775, a story usually set beneath the Washington Elm. Most scholars now agree that Gen. Artemas Ward handed over authority to Washington on the evening of 2 July in the college steward’s house around the corner (which is no longer standing).

Finally, it’s a stretch to say that the plans laid in Wadsworth House drove “King George” or his metonymic troops out of Boston. When Washington and Lee arrived in Cambridge, their immediate priorities were to strengthen American defenses and figure out just how many soldiers they had. Those tasks took weeks. Washington had no chance to plan an offensive until after he had moved out of this house into the abandoned Vassall mansion.