carnevalemanfredonia.it
» » Conquering the American Wilderness: The Triumph of European Warfare in the Colonial Northeast (Native Americans of the Northeast)

eBook Conquering the American Wilderness: The Triumph of European Warfare in the Colonial Northeast (Native Americans of the Northeast) download

by Guy Chet

eBook Conquering the American Wilderness: The Triumph of European Warfare in the Colonial Northeast (Native Americans of the Northeast) download ISBN: 1558493824
Author: Guy Chet
Publisher: University of Massachusetts Press (April 30, 2003)
Language: English
Pages: 248
ePub: 1367 kb
Fb2: 1714 kb
Rating: 4.6
Other formats: lit lrf azw mbr
Category: History
Subcategory: Americas

Series: Native Americans of the Northeast.

Series: Native Americans of the Northeast. Chet challenges the idea of a American style of war by pointing out that while early settlers in the 1600's were able to sometimes defeat large groups of natives and "intimidate them into submission through extreme violence" this was generally not the case (pg 20). This was in part due to Colonial militaries being undermanned and poorly trained. When colonial militaries were used offensively against natives they could be easily ambushed or flanked.

in the Colonial Northeast.

As Guy Chet convincingly proves in Conquering the. American Wilderness: e Triumph of European Warfare. in the Colonial Northeast, however, there is no strong ev-. idence whatsoever to back up such a claim. in the Colonial Northeast. Prior to 1755, British-American colonial forces and American Indians (hereinafter Indians) predominantly conducted the military campaigns in the North American theatre of European conflicts. From 1755 to 1815, however, the British Army itself became heavily engaged and had to consider its use of Indians as allies or auxiliaries.

As Guy Chet convincingly proves in Conquering the American Wilderness: The Triumph of. .

As Guy Chet convincingly proves in Conquering the American Wilderness: The Triumph of European Warfare in the Colonial Northeast, however, there is no strong evidence whatsoever to back up such a claim. It does not deal with Native Americans, atrocities, or colonial forces other than the British in any detail, and therefore cannot be considered any sort of military overview of either the Atlantic World or the colonial era.

Conquering The American Wilderness book. As Guy Chet reveals, clashes between colonial and Indian forces during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries did not lead to a reevaluation and transformation of conventional military doctrine. On the contrary, the poor performance of the settlers during King Philip's War (1675-76) and King William's War (1689-1697) prompted colonial magistrates to address the shortcomings of their military forces through a greater reliance on British troops and imperial administrators.

Home Browse Books Book details, Conquering the American Wilderness: The Triumph. Conquering the American Wilderness: The Triumph of European Warfare in the Colonial Northeast. A study of military tactics and strategy before the War of Independence, this work re-examines the conquest of the North American wilderness and its native peoples by colonial settlers. It argues that the colonies' military and political leadership looked to Europe for guidance in art of combat.

Guy Chet is associate professor of history at the University of North Texas and author of The Ocean Is a Wilderness: Atlantic Piracy and the Limits of State Authority, 1688-1856 (University of Massachusetts Press, 2014). Библиографические данные. Conquering the American Wilderness: The Triumph of European Warfare in the Colonial Northeast Conquering the American Wilderness: The Triumph of European Warfare in Colonial Northeast, Guy Chet Native Americans of the Northeast.

Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2003

Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2003. Chet assails the military incompetence of English colonials between 1675 and 1755. Defensive lethargy" (p. 95) amid expansion created frontiers without adequate fortification, trained forces, or supplies. Chet measures success in European terms, as taking or holding places; he considers the Indians as recklessly offensive, and does not appreciate the place in Indian logistics of captives, or looted cattle, grain, and supplies.

indigenous peoples of Canada and United States. Warfare was not unknown in the region, but neither was it endemic The Northeast Indians began to interact regularly with Europeans in the first part of the 16th century. Warfare was not unknown in the region, but neither was it endemic. The indigenous peoples of present-day Florida treated de Soto and his men warily because the Europeans who had visited the region previously had often, but not consistently, proved violent. The Northeast Indians began to interact regularly with Europeans in the first part of the 16th century. Most of the visitors were French or English, and they were initially more interested in cartography and trade than in physical conquest.

the American Wilderness : The Triumph of European Warfare i.

Conquering the American Wilderness : The Triumph of European Warfare in Colonial New England.

Conquering the American Wilderness: The Triumph of European Warfare in the Colonial Northeast by Guy Chet. King Philip's War: Civil War in New England, 1675-1676 by James D. Drake

Conquering the American Wilderness: The Triumph of European Warfare in the Colonial Northeast by Guy Chet. Drake. Uncas: First of the Mohegans by Michael Leroy Oberg. I've come across four books that might be of interest. The following two go from Elizabethan/Stuart times and beyond the American Revolution and tend to have a global and/or Atlantic perspective, Peter Linebaugh and Marcus Rediker, The Many-headed Hydra. Sailors, Slaves, Commoners and the Hidden History of the Revolutionary Atlantic.

A study of military tactics and strategy before the War of Independence, this book reexamines the conquest of the North American wilderness and its native peoples by colonial settlers. Historians have long believed that the peculiar conditions of the New World, coupled with the success of Indians tactics, forced the colonists to abandon traditional European methods of warfare and to develop a new "American" style of combat. By combining firearms with guerrilla-like native tactics, colonial commanders were able not only to subdue their Indian adversaries but eventually to prevail against more conventionally trained British forces during the American Revolution. Yet upon closer scrutiny, this common understanding of early American warfare turns out to be more myth than reality. As Guy Chet reveals, clashes between colonial and Indian forces during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries did not lead to a reevaluation and transformation of conventional military doctrine. On the contrary, the poor performance of the settlers during King Philip's War (1675–76) and King William's War (1689–1697) prompted colonial magistrates to address the shortcomings of their military forces through a greater reliance on British troops and imperial administrators. Thus, as the eighteenth century wore on, growing military success in the New England colonies reflected an increasing degree of British planning, administration, participation, and command. The colonies' military and political leadership, Chet argues, never rejected the time-tested principles of European warfare, and even during the American War of Independence, the republic's military leadership looked to Europe for guidance in the art of combat.
Comments: (2)
Murn
All nations' identities are tied to myths, especially myths of military prowess, and the United States is no exception. In Conquering the American Wilderness: The Triumph of European Warfare in the Colonial Northeast Guy Chet argues that one of the United State's most cherished military ideals of independent colonialists adopting indigenous guerilla techniques defeated the British military ushering in a American way of war is not backed by historical events. Through a careful review of primary and secondary sources Dr. Chet shows that early colonialists used European methods of warfare while increasingly relying upon British regular forces in their conflicts with Native Americans and the French. What is important about Chet's work is his analysis of early American military history provides a clear continuity between American and European military traditions challenging ideas of American military exceptionalism.

Chet challenges the idea of a American style of war by pointing out that while early settlers in the 1600's were able to sometimes defeat large groups of natives and "intimidate them into submission through extreme violence" this was generally not the case (pg 20). This was in part due to Colonial militaries being undermanned and poorly trained. When colonial militaries were used offensively against natives they could be easily ambushed or flanked. Rather than resorting to native methods of war Chet points out early colonists made use of defensive structures and methods to resist attack (pg 43-44). When colonists moved away from conventional tactics tragedy often struck.

Chet delineates a period of military decline during the mid 1600's till the mid 1700's when colonials started to expand and stopped maintaining their defensive posture. Towns where left poorly defended by militia forces who where "remarkably inexperienced and unprepared for combat" (pg 49 - 50). This resulted in them being easily tricked into abandoning a defensive form of war with tragic results. Indeed militias during this period were so poor at defending themselves they petitioned for provincial professional garrisons to protect them (pg 96). Instead British commanders preferred offensive operations to wear down the natives by destroying their resources and shelter. This augmented by a system of regular forts across the frontier linked by roads in a classic and methodical approach to warfare (pg 98). This system of garrisons and fortifications would allow the British to steadily strengthen and expand the frontiers as well as help the British defeat the French, and their native allies, during the Seven Years War.

Chet makes an effective case for the British success in North America during the French and Indian wars was because of their very conventional approach to warfare that built upon conventional military doctrine. Chet further argues that the French adoption of aggressive raiding style tactics with indigenous allies actually allowed the British to capitalize on superior firepower and position and that it was these lessons that later revolutionary officers would remember in the conflicts with the British (pg 141). As such Dr. Chet's work provides an insightful review of early American military history, its growth from traditional European approach to war, which provides a useful challenge to American military exceptionalism.
saafari
We've become so accustomed to hearing about the "American Way of
War" that we rarely bother to reexamine it. In Conquering the American Wilderness, Chet challenges the assumption that English settlers learned from Native Americans how to fight as guerillas. He demonstrates that English fighting methods remained the same throughout the colonial period, and that the failure of colonial forces to do the job well led to greater and greater reliance on British Redcoats.
The key to the poor performance of provincials and to the overwhelming success of British regulars (culminating with the capture of Canada during the French and Indian War) was professionalism of officers, NCOs, and enlisted men.
What's interesting about this book is that it explains the wisdom and demonstrates the effectiveness of Europe's linear tactics (which are so often portrayed as senseless ritual). Chet then illustrates why large heavy formations, drawn in lines of battle, were so effective against French and Indian guerillas.
Conquering the American Wilderness also explains the origin of the myth of Americanization/Indianization of European warfare in the colonies, but because the book ends with the first battle of the American Revolution, it doesn't deal with the way the retelling of American victory magnified and enshrined the myth of the American guerilla tradition ("the American Way of War").