Wednesday, March 4, 2015
The History Files - episode 003: the Ukraine
Wednesday, February 25, 2015
The History Files - episode 002: the Spanish American War
Episode 002 of The History Files podcast is live! In this edition Gordon and Dylan talk about the Spanish American War, U.S. imperialism in the 1890s (and beyond), and blame it all on Gordon's ancestors.
Sunday, February 8, 2015
Steel Ships and Iron Men
I ran across a very interesting post on “Weapons Man” blog
today, that I though worth citing for my own comments on it. It concerns the
adoption by the US Army and US Navy of steel breech-loading artillery in the
1880’s. After having led the world in artillery
design and production during the American Civil War, a general doldrums set in
on both services in regards to any serious innovation. Part was due to the wish on the part of most
of the populace to just not think about war anymore, part was due to a serious
lack of interest by Congress, and part due to the result of said lack of
interest, being a lack of money to do any innovating.
While there were a few innovations in
small-arms (such as the general adoption of breech-loading rifles and revolvers
firing self-contained metallic cartridges, as well as Gatling guns) there wasn’t
any change in the sorts of artillery fielded by either the Army or the
Navy. They still used the same basic
cast-iron (or sometimes bronze) muzzle-loading smooth-bores that had been made
by the thousands during the Civil War, and economics dictated that they remain
in service until something forced the issue. President Chester Arthur authorized a board of
officers to tour various European armouries to see just how far behind we were
in such things. The essay discusses the book on the board’s tour, and some of
their comments and conclusions. A good
read, BTW:
Interestingly, the production of steel in the US in large
quantities came right at this time (1884 or so) due to the Navy modernization
program known as the "ABCD Ships". The USS Atlanta (under sail, right), USS Boston, USS
Chicago and USS Dolphin formed the first real expansion to the US Navy since 1865, and the demand by the board authorized them to build
them in steel, rather than in the iron that US foundries could produce in
quantity. Although Carnegie's Homestead
Steel Mill could produce steel, it wasn't enough to construct armoured ships, so
it would have forced the Navy to import sufficient steel from Britain or
Germany. However, the board also
recommended that various subsidies be provided to US iron mills which would
convert to the production of steel in order to ensure a sufficient supply: a
case of "build it and they will come" (or rather "demand it and
they will provide".)
The entire story is nicely told by Robley D. Evans, who retired out as an
Admiral, in his book "A Sailor's
Log: Recollections of Forty Years of Naval Life", as he was on the board
described. At least claims he was instrumental in the adoption of steel for
ship building in the Navy and with it, a greater availability of steel for other uses by American industry. For those
interested, here is a link to his book, at Googlebooks:
Thus it was
done, and you will note that such manufactures as Colt, Remington and Winchester went from
producing iron-frame firearms to steel-frame firearms circa 1885 as well, due to
the now-abundant production of steel.
At any rate, it is interesting that the needs of the services for steel
artillery came at a time when the need for steel ships had already become
apparent, and that the need was actually being attended to due to some
far-sighted officers in the Navy. Handy serendipity and a strong confirmation of the wisdom of Captain Robley Evans.
Gordon
Friday, January 9, 2015
The War of 1812 and the Battle of New Orleans
Yesterday was January 8, 2015, which marked the 200th
anniversary of the culminating fight of the Battle of New Orleans, where in
General Andrew Jackson and his rather motley group of volunteers, militia and
regulars fought off a major British attempt to capture the fairly new (since the
1803 Louisiana Purchase; it was founded by the French in 1718) American city. In a war filled with mistakes, errors and
bumbling (by both sides) it was a fair marvel to most Americans that such a
battle, against such odds, could be won.
It certainly had the benefit of propelling Andrew Jackson into the
American consciousness, and eventually led him to the White House.
The war was officially declared over various infringements
of our national sovereignty by the belligerents of the Napoleonic Wars, the
primary agent of such being the United Kingdom, and in particular the Royal
Navy. Unreasonable searches and seizures
of neutral ships and goods, the pressing of American sailors from
American-flagged (i.e. neutral) ships to serve on British warships and a host
of other provocations by His Most Britannic Majesty’s Government led to the
slogan of “Free Trade, and Sailor’s Rights!”
Amazingly though, the most ardent supporters of this slogan were not the
politicians and citizens of New England, which was the one to suffer most from
these provocations, but rather from the Western “War Hawks” who, like
politicians of all stripes everywhere, had other things on their agenda’s which
could be conveniently benefitted by a nice little victory over Britain. Never no mind that Britain at the time had
the largest navy in the world (over 600 ships in commission, compared to our 24
or so), but also had a fairly strong interest in maintaining its colony of
British North America (AKA “Canada” to you folks today).
This is not to suggest that the Westerners had no grievances
with the British, for there were certainly reasons to believe that the Western
Indians (still Eastern Indians as far as we moderns are concerned, but certainly
Western by the standards of someone in Kentucky or Michigan) were being armed
and supplied by British agents to keep things “interesting” on the Western
frontier. There were definitely some
good reasons to believe this, though the truth is probably more to the fact
that the British were trading arms and ammunition to the Indians, where as the
Americans were wont to believe that the supplies were made as gifts. Whichever, the Americans were angry with this
state of affairs, as a fairly constant low-level condition of border warfare
existed along the frontier, which consequently led to the demand of, and then
by, politicians to “do something” about it. Furthermore, said Western politicians had their eyes firmly focused on what was then called "Upper Canada", or Ontario. Close at hand to Ohio, Indiana and Michigan, it was richly endowed with fertile land and best of all, lightly populated by Anglo-Saxons. Even Jefferson had thought that merely showing the American flag there would lead to immediate annexation, despite all local feelings to the contrary.
I’m not planning on writing a 30-page essay on the War of
1812, so I’ll instead simply make note of some of the results of the war. To
begin with, it did in fact lead the British to have a somewhat higher opinion
of the “Colonials”, mostly due to the outrageous effectiveness of our infant US
Navy in what was referred to as “The War of the Frigates”. When you go to war with 24 ships vs. your
enemy’s 600, you have to innovate! Thus
the strong predilection of our naval officers to prefer “Guerre de Course”, i.e.
a war on the enemy’s individual ships and commerce, as opposed to “Guerre de
Main”, a war of big ships in big fleets against and enemy’s big ships in big
fleets. The last time anyone had tried
that was in 1804, which resulted in the Battle of Trafalgar, in which the
combined Spanish-French fleet was destroyed by the British under Admiral
Horatio Nelson (who was himself also destroyed, by the way, setting a nice example.) Thus the American Navy, spreading itself thin
managed some astounding victories in single-ship actions against their Royal Navy
foes, to the point that the Admiralty forbade their frigate captains from
attacking American ships singly, requiring at least a two-to-one margin to
ensure victory. I call that a victory in
and of itself! Of course, when the Brits
DID send two-to-one, usually they were successful, especially when attacking in
a neutral port, such as when USS Essex
was attacked in Valparaiso by HMS Phoebe and HMS Cherub. However, in the
last fight of USS Constitution, she
rather neatly defeated both HMS Cyanne
and HMS Levant, so it wasn’t exactly
a slam-dunk strategy, as it were. In any
event, the US Navy came out of the otherwise rather ugly little war with a much
burnished reputation, and a well-deserved one.
Another reputation which was somewhat burnished by the war
was one then-Brigadier General Winfield Scott.
Accepting a commission in the Regular Army in 1807, he, through dint of exceptional
abilities in both administration and leadership in the field, rose to the
General Officer’s ranks by 1814. During
one of our ill-fated invasions of British North America/Canada, a large British
force advanced on Scott’s brigade on the 5th of July. Due to the Army Quartermaster’s lack of blue
cloth for uniforms in their theatre, Scott’s men were uniformed in “militia
grey” cloth. (Scott wasn’t one to stand
on ceremony when it came to logistics.
When informed that the Quartermaster only had grey cloth, he accepted
it, as it was better to have his troops in the wrong colour than be naked or in
rags.) This colour difference led the
British commander, who had assumed that the grey clad Americans were mere
militia, to supposedly exclaim, “Those are Regulars, by God!” as Scott’s
soldiers both maneuvered well and held firm under punishing British volleys. Scott,
a stickler for drill and efficiency, and drilled his men 10 hours a day for
months to ensure that level of discipline, and it showed when it counted. Scott
not only continued to be a general in the US Army for a LONG time, leading
American forces to conquer Mexico City in 1847, but was also still in uniform,
and in fact commanding general of the US Army in 1861 at the beginning of the
Civil War! Over fifty years in uniform must be some sort of record by anyone’s reckoning.
Back to New Orleans though, the man who no doubt made the
most of his fame and glory won in the War of 1812 would have to be Andrew
Jackson. Slapped in the face with a riding crop by Major Patrick Ferguson of
the British Army (on his way to die at the Battle of King’s Mountain in 1780)
for refusing to shine Ferguson’s boots, and demanding to be treated as a
Prisoner of War (at the ripe old age of 13…).
He was shortly there-after orphaned, when his mother died of “gaol fever”
while tending to his sick father and older brother (both of whom also died from
it) who had been languishing in a prison-hulk as POW’s in Charleston
Harbour. Raised by another older brother,
Jackson may safely be assumed to have harbored a bit of a grudge against the
British.
Somehow Jackson managed to acquire a rather good education,
and passed the Bar exam in the new State of Tennessee, with its rip-roaring
capital of Nashville being the center of politics, business and society as a
major frontier metropolis. Jackson was
the sort of man who made connections and encouraged strong emotions in his
associates. They either loved him dearly
and were devoted to him, or hated him with a passion. His record of a meteoric rise in politics on
one hand, and duels on the other speaks volumes. Suffice it to say that he managed to wrangle
the political plum of “Major General of the Tennessee Militia” as one of his
fruits of political victory, and through that all of his other fame came to be.
Lots of things were coming to a head in 1814, two years into
the struggle with Great Britain. In the
North, a mounted cavalry charge by Kentucky Volunteer Mounted Riflemen under
Richard Mentor Johnson managed to break the 41st Regiment of Foot at
the Battle of the Thames, and according to some, Johnson was responsible for
shooting the great Indian leader Tecumseh during the battle. (Johnson later rose to political fame and
became the 9th Vice President of the United States). To the South, the frontier broke out in
warfare with the Creek War, where Jackson first made his name as a military
commander.
The Creek War started out as a civil war within the Creek
Nation, but one faction of the so-called “Red Sticks” made the error of
massacring some White militia-men and settlers at Fort Mims in Alabama (along
with far greater numbers of opposing factions of Creeks). The Red Sticks were firmly against any sort
of accommodation with the Whites, and thus were happy to accept arms and
supplies from the British-allied Spaniards in Pensacola. Attempts at halting
this trade not only were unsuccessful, but also met with disaster. Peter McQueen and William Weatherford (I love
this, leaders of the “anti-White” faction had Scottish grandfathers…) led their
followers into battle against the now-aroused foe in the form of Jackson’s
Tennessee and Alabama militia (along Cherokee and Creek allies, and the 39th
US Infantry Regiment).
In brief, Jackson followed the Red Sticks to a fortified “ox
bow” or loop in the Tallapoosa River. In
a direct, full-on frontal assault, the militiamen swarmed over the defenses and
proceeded to slaughter the Red Sticks.
William Weatherford got away, and Jackson put a “dead or alive” price on
his head. In response, Weatherford, full
armed, walked right into Jackson’s command tent, placed his rifle, pistols,
tomahawk and knives on Jackson’s desk and surrendered. Jackson was so impressed with this act of
bravery that he pardoned Weatherford, and gave him parole. On the other hand, in the subsequent treaty
with the Creeks, he not only took land from both the insurgent Creeks and the
Allied (to Jackson) Creeks, but from the allied Cherokees as well! A very, very complex man indeed. (One may suppose that he could be generous
with an individual, but when it came to paying off his political backers, he
couldn’t be so kind and thus annexed much of Georgia and most of the State of
Alabama from the Indians, both those fighting against and those fighting for
him. To be fair, he DID give some of the land annexed from the Creeks to the
newly-dispossessed Cherokee, but only on a “temporary” basis, as he then
expelled them from THAT land a generation later, to Oklahoma, aka “Indian
Territory”).
As a side-note, a couple of interesting
political/mythological characters came out of this campaign. Davy Crockett was a scout for Jackson, and
Samuel Houston, another up-and-coming politician, was a junior officer who was
wounded in action at Horseshoe Bend. Both
became stout allies of Jackson in both Tennessee and later in Washington,
though Crockett had a falling-out with Jackson over the expulsion of the
Cherokee. Houston, who actually had
LIVED with the Cherokee, had no such challenges of conscience. Both were, of course, later to become famous
in the Texas Revolution of 1836.
When word came to Washington City (“District of Columbia”, but
generally known at the time as simply “Washington City”) of a major expedition
from Britain with the express intention of taking New Orleans, Jackson was the
only real candidate available to take the job.
He was experienced (to some degree), very popular both locally and
nationally, and most important, fairly close to the scene of the operations.
Arriving in New Orleans in the waning days of 1814, Jackson
began to set up defenses and organize troops to hold them. He utilized the Navy to defend Lake Borgne
under the command of a young officer later to gain fame in California (by
capturing it four years too early) Lieutenant Thomas ap Catesby-Jones. Likewise he was, eventually, moved to accept
the volunteer efforts of the pirate Jean Lafitte (the pirates came complete
with their own cannons and crews, so that probably swayed Jackson’s views as to
the morality of accepting their offer of help), as well as the local militia’s
of the French-speaking population as well as of free Blacks. In a battle best
known for the efforts of the “Kentucky Riflemen” (who thus gave a name to a
rifle which had always before simply been known as the “American Rifle”), as it
turns out Jackson himself gave most of the credit to his artillery, both
Regular Army and pirate. In a frontal
assault against a prepared, entrenched position, artillery tended to do most of
the slaughter, what with the use of solid shot at range, and then canister and “grape”
at closer range. 1” iron balls hurtling
downrange at somewhat over the speed of sound tend to do a lot of damage to
mere flesh and bone.
The British commander, General Edward Packenham, a favorite
officer of the Duke of Wellington (who had refused command of the expedition
himself) was killed during the assault, leaving him to be stuffed into a keg of
brandy (much as Nelson had been) to preserve his body for interment in England.
Jackson on the other hand, was lionized
throughout the United States as a Great War Hero for his victory, seeing as
most of the other aspects of the war had been less than successful for the most
part. Canada was definitely not taken, and most of the other rational for
entering the war had been dealt with prior to the actual declaration of war
anyway. The treaty ending the war was
signed on December 14 of 1814, citing “status quo anti bellum”, in other words,
nothing had changed from prior to the war’s beginning. The one codicil to it that mattered, however,
was that anything that either party got prior to the ratification of the
treaty/end of actual hostilities, they got to keep. Thus the Battle of New Orleans was important,
for the British were hardly going to hand it back over had we lost it. Having a foreign (and hostile) government in
charge of the only egress for almost all of our Western commerce would have
been a major catastrophe for the US, to say the least. For these reasons the 8th of
January was celebrated far more heavily with “rocket’s red glare” and
firecrackers, gunfire and other festivities than the 4th of July up
to the Civil War. In many ways, it was
just as important, and one of the reasons that the War of 1812 was often
referred to as “The Second War of Independence”, since it certainly secured
that which the first had attempted to secure, but kind of left in the air.
Jackson of course rode the wave of popularity to first the
Governor’s Mansion in Nashville, and then (eventually) to the White House. His
administration, like himself, could be seen to contain both marvelous acts of
bravery (vetoing the charter of the 2nd Bank of the United States,
and early attempt at a private, i.e. British-owned central bank for the US that was put off until the FED was created in
1913 with all of its disastrous consequences) to incredible acts of knavery
(the expulsion of Native Americans from east of the Mississippi. The Supreme
Court found it unconstitutional to do so, but Jackson is purported to have said
“when the Supreme Court has an army at its beck and call, they can do as they
please”).
For all that however, Jackson also ushered in “Jacksonian Democracy”,
a celebration of what would be referred to as the Common Man. No longer was democracy a thing for only the ruling class to
toy with, but became a thing of power for the masses (of free White men, at
least)… and for demagogues as well, who could learn to sway them.
Monday, October 20, 2014
Emerald City Writers' Conference
This past weekend I was privileged to have the opportunity
to give a presentation on historical firearms to the Emerald City Writers' Conference, in Seattle. The conference was primarily attended by participants
of the female persuasion (I think I counted eight or nine other fellows there,
and one of them was a cover model for books), so there were several eye-openers
for me. Even though I was there as a speaker, I learned a lot of “interesting
things” from other speakers in the process. I guess I’ve led a sheltered life!
One of the things I wanted to make note of however was the
professionalism and efficiency of the people putting on the conference. I at all times was kept apprised of what was
going on. From the moment I was green-lighted as a speaker until I left the
event, the organizers were on the ball, letting me know what was expected of me,
where I was to be speaking and where I could store my “props”. I was even met at the loading dock of the
hotel to help me get my show-and-tell items to the right room. I am impressed, and I hereby award kudos to
the ladies who were always available to help ensure that everything was taken
care of every step of the way. I
definitely hope to be invited back next year!
Monday, October 13, 2014
Catching up, or What I did this Summer
It’s been a while since I’ve posted here last… two
years! Gack. I’ve decided that I need to do a bit more in
this arena, so here goes with some updates as to what I’ve been up to.
I had the wonderful opportunity to do some jousting this
past summer, the first in June at the Castellode Amarosa winery in Calistoga, CA. My friend Will
Hamersky and his wonderful horse Rohan were kind enough to invite me down to
take part in it, and it was a serious hoot.
 |
| Breaking lances with Will Hamersky & Rohan |
Patti Friend was likewise kind enough to offer to me the use
of her great little mare (well, little compared to Rohan, but otherwise not
exactly tiny) to ride in the festivities.
She’s a fine little girl, and well on her way to becoming a very
well-rounded warhorse.
In July, I got to go down to California again, this time to
San Luis Obispo for their Central CoastRenaissance Festival, where again I jousted against Will
Hamersky. Patti also jousted against
Will, but we didn’t get the opportunity to joust against one another, unfortunately. This time I was riding
another wonderful little (again, comparatively speaking) mare, Sophie. Sophie is owned by Dora Grund, and trained by
Katrina Sanders. What a wonderful mare!
Again Will and I broke a lot of lances against one another’s armour, and I had
a great time in general. I hope that I
have a chance to do it again next year, one way or another!
Finally, insofar as jousting is concerned, I was able to be
a judge at the “Emprise of the Black Lion” (SCA) in September. I forget how hard it is to sit on the
sidelines when people are doing something that you love to do, but you don’t
get to be involved! Still, it was fun,
and I’m glad that I was invited to take part.
This week I’m gearing up for an engagement at the Emerald City Writer’s Conference, where I’ll give a presentation on Saturday
afternoon. The subject this time is
“Firearms for Romance Writers”, though I’ll doubtless talk a bit about things
that a mystery novelist might find interesting…but that’s really for another
presentation! I’ll be going over some of the arms used in the late-16th
Century, the Georgian period, and delve
a bit into the Victorian era as well. My
last foray into giving a presentation to a writer’s group was at the Romance
Writer’s Guild conference in San Francisco a few years ago, and it was a lot of
fun. I expect that this will be to, so
I’m looking forward to it!
I’ll try to post a bit more often than I have to date, as I
have a number of ideas and analyses of current events to be looked at through
an historical lens, so check back in.
Hopefully it shall prove to be of interest!
Gordon
Wednesday, September 26, 2012
Here's Gordon's complete speaking schedule:
Surviving the Steampunk Zombie Apocalypse - Friday, 5-6PM
Weapons for Vampire Hunting: Historical & Modern Literary Views - Friday, 7-8PM
Machine Guns of the Victorian Era - Saturday, 11AM-12PM
Firearms of the Victorian Era - Sunday, 12-1PM
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)