Washington's Crossing

[canadarocks]

I was recently at Washington's Crossing, PA for a dress rehearsal for the Christmas Day re-enactment of George Washington's crossing of the Delaware River to attack Trenton, NJ. During the rehearsal, I heard the speech made by the faux Washington to his troops and he involked the name of Thomas Paine in stirring them. I was glad to hear Thomas Paine's name being prominently credited (and rightly so), especially since Paine's words in Common Sense and other writing were widely read by the common folk to support the war, and since he was shunned by most after he published the Age of Reason. I wonder how many other Revolutionary war re-enactments around the nation mention Thomas Paine (Like Williamsburg?).

 

[Garrette]

Paine seems to be very little mentioned nowadays, at least in my own children's schooling. And when he is, it is only in passing as the writer of patriotic pamphlets. Substantive review of his works is left completely out.

My own unscientific guess is that while re-enactors may be the exception, the rule is that most Americans know next to nothing about Paine.

Pity, really.

 

[cj.23]

There is a memorial to him in Thetford, England. I was always curious as to whether the old story about his coffin being washed overboard while crossing the Atlantic was true? Wikipedia does not mention it I note.

 

[Brown]

I love Thomas Paine, although I suspect that in real life he was something of an a**hole. His "Common Sense" is arguably the most influential political pamphlet ever composed and its effects upon the United States of America can be felt to this day. Yet there is no statue to him in the US capital.

The Age of Reason surely affected any desire to honor Paine, but it is possible that Paine trashed his own reputation with some of his other writings.

It is a bit odd, in a way, that "George Washington" would quote Thomas Paine, as the two men ended their relationship on rather unpleasant terms. Paine felt strongly toward Washington, and dedicated Part One of "The Rights of Man" to him. In 1793, however, Paine was put in a French prison for a year, and Paine believed that Washington (who was at that time the President) should have intervened on Paine's behalf, but did not.

In 1795, Paine took up his poison pen and wrote an angry letter to Washington, which was published (against the advice of cooler heads). The letter concludes with these words:

And as to you, Sir, treacherous in private friendship (for so you have been to me, and that in the day of danger) and a hypocrite in public life, the world will be puzzled to decide whether you are an apostate or an impostor; whether you have abandoned good principles, or whether you ever had any.

 

[Mike B.]

I was recently at Washington's Crossing, PA for a dress rehearsal for the Christmas Day re-enactment of George Washington's crossing of the Delaware River to attack Trenton, NJ. During the rehearsal, I heard the speech made by the faux Washington to his troops and he involked the name of Thomas Paine in stirring them. I was glad to hear Thomas Paine's name being prominently credited (and rightly so), especially since Paine's words in Common Sense and other writing were widely read by the common folk to support the war, and since he was shunned by most after he published the Age of Reason. I wonder how many other Revolutionary war re-enactments around the nation mention Thomas Paine (Like Williamsburg?).

Having seen the re-enactment a number of times, I can tell you they are reading, "The Crisis" by Thomas Paine.

Famous line -
"These are the times that try men's souls...the sunshine patriot...etc."

Paine was with the army in 1776 while the British army was beating it quite badly all over New York. He wrote the pamphlet in response to this.

Washington was so impressed that he had it read before the crossing.

 

[canadarocks]

It struck me as funny that Washington's plan was to attack on Dec 25th at Trenton where the opposing faction may have been "celebrating" a bit for Christmas. I think this is what people call strategery. I thought of Pearl Harbor when the Japanese attacked on a Sunday morning (IIRC), after the troops would be slowly recovering from R&R on Sat. night in Hawaii.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

It struck me as funny that Washington's plan was to attack on Dec 25th at Trenton where the opposing faction may have been "celebrating" a bit for Christmas. I think this is what people call strategery. I thought of Pearl Harbor when the Japanese attacked on a Sunday morning (IIRC), after the troops would be slowly recovering from R&R on Sat. night in Hawaii.

Shh, America = good. America's foes = bad. When Americans breach the rules of war of their day and attack hungover Hessians in thier winter quarters on Christmas, it's good.

 

[Spindrift]

It struck me as funny that Washington's plan was to attack on Dec 25th at Trenton where the opposing faction may have been "celebrating" a bit for Christmas. I think this is what people call strategery. I thought of Pearl Harbor when the Japanese attacked on a Sunday morning (IIRC), after the troops would be slowly recovering from R&R on Sat. night in Hawaii.

Not a very good analogy.

The Colonies and the British were already at war. Japan and the US were not at war yet. Sneak attacks in the middle of a war are pretty much standard and usually a good way to win. Sneak attacks to start a war is an entirely different thing.

If you are in a war you should be prepared to attack or be attacked at any time.

 

[Mike B.]

Shh, America = good. America's foes = bad. When Americans breach the rules of war of their day and attack hungover Hessians in thier winter quarters on Christmas, it's good.

How was the attack on Trenton a "breach" of the rules of war?
The fighting took place outside of their "quarters."

BTW,
The drunk Hessian myth is exposed pretty well by David Hackett Fischer's "Washington's Crossing."
It really was the snowstorm that allowed the surprise more than booze.

Also, the battle took place on the 26th...not Xmas.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

How was the attack on Trenton a "breach" of the rules of war?
The fighting took place outside of their "quarters."

BTW,
The drunk Hessian myth is exposed pretty well by David Hackett Fischer's "Washington's Crossing."
It really was the snowstorm that allowed the surprise more than booze.

Also, the battle took place on the 26th...not Xmas.

If David Hackett Fischer's book has relevant passages, could you maybe quote or summarize them? I'm not about to go buy and read a book because you said it explodes the myth that Washington snuck up on the hessians while they were hung over from drunking and singing "O Tanenbaum" all night.

 

[Mike B.]

If David Hackett Fischer's book has relevant passages, could you maybe quote or summarize them? I'm not about to go buy and read a book because you said it explodes the myth that Washington snuck up on the hessians while they were hung over from drunking and singing "O Tanenbaum" all night.

Well,
Col. Rall was on full alert at the time. He had his outposts fully manned. There were enough loyalists in the area that warned him. What happened was the snowstorm allowed Washington's army to take out the outposts on the two main roads into Trenton without the main garrison being warned. By the time the main force knew what hit them they were basically surrounded. Rall tried to organize a counter-attack but took a fatal bullet for doing so.
The garrison was also worn out from constantly being on a state of alert and fending off raids. They were too far from any real support and paid for the bad and overconfident troop deployments of General Howe.

So instead of the picture of drunk Hessians, the truth is they were exhausted Hessians.

However, you should explain why attacking on Boxing Day is against the rules of war? Even if the enemy was hung over?

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Well,
Col. Rall was on full alert at the time. He had his outposts fully manned. There were enough loyalists in the area that warned him. What happened was the snowstorm allowed Washington's army to take out the outposts on the two main roads into Trenton without the main garrison being warned. By the time the main force knew what hit them they were basically surrounded. Rall tried to organize a counter-attack but took a fatal bullet for doing so.
The garrison was also worn out from constantly being on a state of alert and fending off raids. They were too far from any real support and paid for the bad and overconfident troop deployments of General Howe.

So instead of the picture of drunk Hessians, the truth is they were exhausted Hessians.

However, you should explain why attacking on Boxing Day is against the rules of war? Even if the enemy was hung over?

That's a much different account. as for boxing day, it was a sneak attack at dawn. In general, battles were not sneaky affairs during that time period. English officers in the colonies often decried the lack of fair play in the Revolutionary forces. Sneak attacks, ambushes over many grueling years wasn't the sort of war they were expecting. It wasn't "against the rules of war" per se, but it was a dirty trick. I suppose when an army is engaged in that desperate a fight, dirty tricks are to be expected.

 

[Spindrift]

That's a much different account. as for boxing day, it was a sneak attack at dawn. In general, battles were not sneaky affairs during that time period. English officers in the colonies often decried the lack of fair play in the Revolutionary forces. Sneak attacks, ambushes over many grueling years wasn't the sort of war they were expecting. It wasn't "against the rules of war" per se, but it was a dirty trick. I suppose when an army is engaged in that desperate a fight, dirty tricks are to be expected.

Fair play? What does war have to do with fair play?

And the British were complaining about sneak attacks? Look up the British taking of Quebec in the French and Indian War.

It's war and the object is to win and whoever wins determines what's fair.

 

[Mike B.]

Fair play? What does war have to do with fair play?

And the British were complaining about sneak attacks? Look up the British taking of Quebec in the French and Indian War.

It's war and the object is to win and whoever wins determines what's fair.

Indeed.

You might as well look at the British attack on Paoli the following year when General Gray ordered his men to remove the flints from their muskets and fix bayonets. He didn't want any guns going off to warn an American camp that he was attacking. In the early morning the British surprised the camp and massacred the Americans.

Or the flank attack that Howe used to defeat Washington on Long Island in August 1776. He used an old forrest road to get behind the American position. etc. etc. etc.

They were not "fair," but they were within the rules of war (the surprise part, not the massacre of the wounded at Paoli.)

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Fair play? What does war have to do with fair play?

Nothing, of course. But, the Battle of Trenton was decried as unfair by some Brits as unfair, just as sneak attacks and abmushes against our own military forces are sometimes called unfair or devious.

And the British were complaining about sneak attacks? Look up the British taking of Quebec in the French and Indian War.

It's war and the object is to win and whoever wins determines what's fair.

I'd disagree with the last part. "Fair" isn't even a relevant term in bloody armed conflicts. Fairness has no place.

 

[Spindrift]

Nothing, of course. But, the Battle of Trenton was decried as unfair by some Brits as unfair, just as sneak attacks and abmushes against our own military forces are sometimes called unfair or devious.



I'd disagree with the last part. "Fair" isn't even a relevant term in bloody armed conflicts. Fairness has no place.

You lost me.

You stated that the British decried the lack of fair play. I was just saying that the British used "sneak attacks" themselves so for them to complain about a sneak attack is hypocritical. Now you say that fairness has no place in bloody armed conflicts.

I had thought you were trying to make the point that Washington was unfair by attacking Trenton when he did.

So I think I totally missed whatever point you were trying to make.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

You lost me.

You stated that the British decried the lack of fair play. I was just saying that the British used "sneak attacks" themselves so for them to complain about a sneak attack is hypocritical. Now you say that fairness has no place in bloody armed conflicts.

I had thought you were trying to make the point that Washington was unfair by attacking Trenton when he did.

So I think I totally missed whatever point you were trying to make.

Well, I was trying to be somewhat sarcastic to start with. It's hard to suggest that A) we tend to decry dirty pool commited by our enemies more than our own, and B) there is no point "B." Clearly, I did a really bad job.

ETA: Oh, there was a point B. Our enemies is the Revolutionary War didn't like it when we played dirty. But of course, they did too.

 

[Garrette]

Dirty tricks are standard in war. Nor do I really see a legitimate complaint about sneak attacks to start a war.

Should a nation say to itself We must fight them and we must win but we must first let them get ready by warning them. ?

Things like Pearl Harbor strike an emotional chord with the recipient, and if not successful enough have their military value outweighed by the enemy's increased morale, but to state out of hand that they are wrong is, imo, wrong.

As an aside, most people do not realize that the battle at Trenton was only the beginning of what became Washington's most successful (even brilliant) campaing, and that the maneuvering after the battle was not intentional. Frederick the Great called the Princeton Campaign one of history's greatest.

 

[NobbyNobbs]

I was recently at Washington's Crossing, PA for a dress rehearsal for the Christmas Day re-enactment of George Washington's crossing of the Delaware River to attack Trenton, NJ. During the rehearsal, I heard the speech made by the faux Washington to his troops and he involked the name of Thomas Paine in stirring them. I was glad to hear Thomas Paine's name being prominently credited (and rightly so), especially since Paine's words in Common Sense and other writing were widely read by the common folk to support the war, and since he was shunned by most after he published the Age of Reason. I wonder how many other Revolutionary war re-enactments around the nation mention Thomas Paine (Like Williamsburg?).

Funny you should mention this. I'm involved with Rev War re-enacting, and we do an event each year at the Mercer Museum in Doylestown on Mother's Day weekend. This past year I gave a public reading from "Common Sense".

Indeed.

You might as well look at the British attack on Paoli the following year when General Gray ordered his men to remove the flints from their muskets and fix bayonets. He didn't want any guns going off to warn an American camp that he was attacking. In the early morning the British surprised the camp and massacred the Americans.

And the first event I took part in was the 225th anniversary of the Paoli massacre. Even in the re-enactment, the Brits actually snuck up on us. We had our muskets stacked and out regimental coats off and were sitting around rolling dice. They got to within 20 yards of us before we saw them. It was suprising, and exciting, and over in a flash. Kinda scary, really.