Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
About Me
- Paul Aleckson
- I’m Paul Aleckson. I am the District Social Studies Coordinator. I also teach an Advanced Placement U.S. History and a pre AP Seminar Class. I am the Project Coordinator for our Oral History Project (www.dceoralhistory.com) which received the Beveridge Family Teaching Award. I have coached both boys and girls basketball for many years. I am fortunate to work with an amazing social studies staff. They are dedicated to teaching social studies in a fun, exciting manner and to truly helping students become historians and active citizens. I really like to push students to do their very best!
-Leutrime Jusufi-
ReplyDeleteIn David McCullough historical and descriptive novel, 1776, he takes you through the events leading up to the American Revolution, or in more heroic words, the "glorious cause". The Siege, the first segment in the book shares the rough and crude times generals such as George Washington, Nathanael Greene, William Howe, and many more had when traveling and preparing to fight for their independence and the 13 stripes they waved so proudly.
Throughout the book, I had previewed through the pictures and connections in regards to the information McCullough had to share in the Siege. Before reading, I paged through the book and a picture previous to page 52 caught my eye in 1776. Washington was featured in a portrait on a white horse fighting in New York. This made me believe that Washington was a heroic man because of his power holding a sword in the photo, and the caption below that explained how the battle had not even one causualty throughout the whole time. By previewing, I was able to predict that the book would be filled with information on how the 6 foot general had been a great leader, and of course, no one else would be fit for the job. I also made connections with Washington's love for architecture. I, myself, plan on pursuing a career in the architectural field and wondered about the styles and rich culture Washington appreciated in the late 1700's. It was explained in the book how he had designed some features of the White House, resembling some European architecture. Overall, I found it interesting how we shared that passion.
After reading the first part of 1776, I had begun to see how times had been through their eyes and how things have changed from then to now and how they have stayed the same. Reading about the cold winters soldiers faced, how only few passed for a formal uniform, and how short of money they were at the time from recovering from the French and Indian War, made me realized how much loyalty and patriotism soldiers had for their country. They were willing to face starving, and freezing to death just for the hope of freedom from the ruthless, King George the third. It suprised me how things had changed from then to present day 2010. How young boys, starting at age 16 to 50 were sent to fight for their country, were now, you have a choice weather you want to enlist or not. I also found it sexist how woman were treated like a second class citizen in their own home and couldn't pursue an education or fight in the war or do anything. I am greatful for all the freedom the female race has reached today.
Overall, the first part of 1776 has kept me interested but I am quant to read the second, and third part. I plan on keeping using reading thoughts and thinking like a historian to get back and share more of my opinions.
Amelia Stranz
ReplyDeleteReading the first section in David McCullough's 1776 made me remember how times were very hard for people back then. In this first section, I read about Washington's struggle to keep the troops together and King George III declaring the people in the new world rebellious. Through all the struggle that the commanders all faced(Washington, Howe, and Greene), they were still able to fly the flag at the end of the section.
As I was reading through this section, I made a connection between the lives of the soldiers and the lives of people today. The soldiers had to live with minimal pay just as people od today, but the soldiers had only $13 a month. With the recession today, people have had to "tighten their belts" because its been so hard for people to keep a steady job. Also, the soldiers had to survive through harsh weather, much like people from Wisconsin have to put up with during the winter. Although we live in the 21st century, our lives consist of much of the same problems as people back then had to deal with.
Previewing the chapter, I found a picture of the British Armada sailing into New York Harbor. As I read the caption I learned how large it actually was. "It was the largest naval force ever seen in American waters, the largest sent out from the Britsih Isles to defeat a distant foe. With no fighting ships of their own, the Americans faced an almost impossible task of defending against such might." I could just picture myself as a soldier stading there looking out at all these vessels and seeing all of my fellow soldiers standing there looking with me. Fear would be the only feeling that I would have at that moment. As soon as I saw that picture, I predicted that this chapter would talk about the fear and struggle of all of the soldiers that served under Washington.
During this section, I started making some generalizations about not just how the soldiers felt, but how the families must of been feeling and even the whole country. Mainly this section talked about what the soldiers had to go through and how the commanders where debating on what to do next. I know that if I were a family member of a soldier and all I could do was wait at home for news, I would be afraid and hopeful. As a whole, I believe the country must have been in a state of panic and desperation because there was a possiblity that the British would eventually take over and I could lose my whole way of life.
Many aspects of our society have changed since this war. One obvious reason is we are not ruled by the Britsh anymore because of the Declaration of Independce. We still have a leader, however, the President of the United States just like the people back then had a president. I believe that the whole country has benefited from this change because we are no longer ruled by another country.
Many people believe that using past events can help us avoid situations like them in the future. By using the American Revolution or the events leading up to it, our leaders can avoid the rebellious actions that people back then were forced to do. Instead of having the government do everything for the people, the people now have a say in the government's actions.
Comment about Trimia's blog: I like how she incorperated how she shared a love for architecture like George Washington. Connections like that can really help understand how people lived back then. I also liked how she talked about how the woman were treated back then. Now woman are finally moving up in socitey.
As I keep reading 1776, I believe there will be more connections between our world today and the world of the people during the American Revolution. This book has been very engaging and intriguing, so I have high hopes for the last two sections.
Leutrime, I am very pleased with the way you utilized the reading thought- previewing- to analyze what might be coming in the first section of the book. Even better, you were able to look through the eyes of soldiers and women during this time period to make comparisons to the present. Excellent work using the Thinking Like a Historian inquiry categories. Keep up the good work. Glad to read about your connection to architecture. You will find that several founding fathers were into that! Especially Thomas Jefferson. Check out Monticello and the University of Virginia to see Jefferson's really cool inventions and ideas related to Architecture. Mr.A
ReplyDeleteAmelia, I like the way you applied the inquiry category Using the Past to understand the present. Interesting comparison of economic hardships. YOur interpretation of the visual of the harbor is also quite perceptive. Clearly Washington was a smart man when he figured out that the Americans were going to have to fight a defensive war and keep from being captured. I found it interesting though that the first couple of battles up in the Boston area were actually victories for the Americans, but then it got really tough for them. Nice reflection on Leutrime's comments and nice job with your comparisons to today. Keep up the good work. Mr A.
ReplyDeleteJUST A REMINDER TO ALL STUDENTS THAT YOU NEED TO DO TWO THINGS FOR EACH SECTION OF THE BOOK. FIRST CREATE YOUR OWN POST USING THINKING LIKE A HISTORIAN OR READING THOUGHTS. SECONDLY YOU NEED TO RESPOND TO THE PREVIOUS PERSONS COMMENTS. THANK YOU AND ENJOY THE EXPERIENCE!
ReplyDeleteKatelyn Koepke
ReplyDeleteIn section 1 of David McCullough’s 1776, I was able to make a connection between women in the army during the time of the American Revolution and women in the army today. The author explained that many mothers and wives came to army camps to care for soldiers who had become ill with “camp fever” or “putrid fever”- both terms for highly infectious diseases that overcame many army camps due to uncontrollable filth. Those women that so willingly helped the cause of the American Army by traveling with the troops to nurse the sick and injured were very brave, considering women were unable to fight in the army at that time. That representation of bravery remains true today as there are many female soldiers currently serving our country, though now with more opportunities than simply caring for the sick.
I thought it was extremely important that the author kept mentioning General Washington’s personality throughout much of this section of the book. As it turns out, there is a definite possibility that without Washington’s love of precision in everything, some of the events that are considered American successes may have had quite different outcomes. Washington’s meticulousness and accuracy with even minor details in plans for attacks most likely made all the difference in numerous cases. For example, the attack on the British at Faneuil Hall in Boston and the move on Dorchester Heights were both American successes that may have ended quite diversely had it not been for the careful planning of such a great leader as General Washington. In that sense, information about Washington’s personality is critical as it really helps the reader to understand all the precise plans that lead up to American successes.
There were multiple turning points in this first section, but one that really stuck out for me was the dynamic change in the purpose for fighting the war. On pages 54-55, the author states “Initially, the purpose for fighting the war was for the defense of our own country and for public security, rather than for independence.” However, when General Washington raised a new flag, consisting of thirteen red and white stripes, on New Year’s Day in honor of the birthday of a new army, I think that action was symbolic that the American cause had wholeheartedly become for independence from the mother country.
Many of the events so far, especially the more descriptive American successes, have been cause and effect events. One such event that really intrigued me was when bad weather in the early spring favored the Americans when a violent storm prevented a British assault on the new fortifications at Dorchester Heights. Not only did the Americans benefit from the bad weather as they were saved from an attack, but also because a completely uncontrollable accident caused General Howe to give orders to evacuate Boston, which really was a triumph for the Americans.
In Amelia’s blog, I really liked how she was able to make good connections between how the soldiers lived during the war and tie that into everyday life for us and turn something less familiar into something many of us can relate to, such as “tightening our belts” during the period of recession and a lack of stable jobs, and the bad weather that Wisconsin winters oftentimes bring. I also thought it was unique that she was able to, in a way, put herself in someone else’s shoes and imagine how the families of soldiers fighting in the war must have felt.
As I continue to read 1776, I am definitely becoming more and more interested in learning about the way of life for the American people during the time of the American Revolution. It is amazing how many connections there really are between our world today and the world they lived in not so long ago. I look forward to more of these connections and hopefully some viewpoints from more perspectives further along in the book.
Katelyn, wonderful work using connections, cause and effect, turning points,etc. Clearly you are reading like a historian and you have gained a greater insight into the difficulties the American's faced as they began the Revolution. I agree that George Washington is a central figure as we all grew up learning. But know you can see why we celebrate his character. As far as turning points, you found a good one. Independence was a hugh step for the patriot. You also made excellent connections to the world today. Women in the armed forces today are doing just about everything men are doing. Can they go into combat? What are the restrictions? As you read and blog don't be afraid to ask questions like these. Your writing is excellent, keep up the good work. Mr. A
ReplyDeleteAshly Novander
ReplyDeleteHistory is often written by the victor. Thankfully, as I read the first section of David McCullough's 1776, the book wasn't completely focused on the struggles of the Americans. Reading other texts on the American Revolution in school and personal experiences with others often left me with the impression of bias towards the Americans and against the British. In contrast to this bias, David McCullough begins 1776 by introducing us to King George III as both "sincerely patriotic and everlastingly duty-bound." (p. 6) McCullough, while keeping the main focus on the Americans, displays detailed understanding of the British role, and notes that there was significant opposition to the war in London. I realized how much this paralleled other wars, particularly the current war. Americans, like the British then, wouldn't have to live in demolished or war torn towns but they still felt strongly opposed to the war. Comparing armies, the British then and the Americans today had a significant advantage over the Americans then and the Iraqi forces now. Yet, the weaker armies have the advantage in both situations of fighting on familiar soil, which they use to their advantage.
I was surprised to learn how many events in this section were victim to chance and circumstance, not just cause and effect. Perhaps the greatest of these is General Washington and General Howe. The two are almost perfect foils to each other. Washington was meticulous in everything that he did, not just war strategy. Whereas Howe was slow when not in war, and completely uncaring about understanding the enemy. Washington toiled over thinking about Howe's next move. It was completely shocking to learn that Howe hardly gave Washington a passing thought, despite all that the two had in common. Both could be considered nobles of their society and had much experience, though Washington's was far less in comparison. Katelyn brought it up in her post how Washington's personality certainly was a deciding factor in the fate of each battle, but I'd like to expand upon it. Howe's carelessness was just as a deciding factor. Had he taken Washington more seriously and spent more time on gathering intelligence of his army, I certainly think that the occupation of Dorchester Heights would've turned out quite differently. The British army bought into Washington's deceptive but clever concealing of the Continental Army's true strength based on lack of intelligence and had Howe's officers (and himself) taken the idea of occupying Dorchester Heights more seriously, the British almost certainly could've kept Boston under their possession.
Another event of pure chance was the discovery of Dr. Church's betrayal. Had that girl who worked for him not been caught, who knows how long he would have operated and what information he could've given away to the British? I would like to know what happened to the girl after she was caught. Did she become a prisoner of war like Dr. Church did because of her allegiance to him or was she placed under custody of a male family member (which was known to happen)? I'd also like to learn more about Dr. Church and if he was one of the British's more reliable spies who gave good information. I'm a little disappointed that McCullough didn't expound upon Dr. Church's importance as one of the first british spies to be caught. I'm hoping that the rest of the book will shed some light on some other similar instances of spies on both sides being uncovered.
(continued on next post)
Ashly Novander
ReplyDelete(continued)
I especially enjoyed reading not so much about the battles themselves but about individuals in the war. I connected with Nathanael Greene as his family, although hard working and well standing, didn't take education seriously and he had to teach himself. Despite his disabilities he would do whatever it took to join and fight for what he thought was right. I also liked reading about some of the artists the Continental Army employed just so they could get a better look at the enemy and what they went through. Specifically, I couldn't believe that John Trumbull crawled in the grass up to the enemy line just to get a sketch done! I'd love to see that sketch. As an artist I understand the type of willingness and dedication it takes to do something drastic in order to get a drawing done.
In response to Katelyn's post, I'd also agree that the change from defense to complete independence from Britain, but I disagree that flying the flag was the turning point. I feel it had more to do with the documents like Common Sense and the copy of King George's speech from October 1775 which really swayed people like Washington and Greene from that previous view. I also like the connections she made between women's role in the military today and back then. Despite obvious social disadvantages for women in the army they did still try to make a contribution and play an equal part. It's unfortunate though how certain social stigmas like "laundry is women's work" prevented the American army from taking proper care of itself which in theory could have prevented the need for volunteers to take care of soldiers sick with easily preventable diseases.
I hope that the section section of 1776 continues to be this in depth, but also takes more time to examine other viewpoints and the importance of lesser known figures in the war. I also hope that when McCullough makes claims if lesser known figures had been able to play a more significant part, the war could've ended differently, that he backs up these claims with a reason why he thinks so.
Dear Ashley, I look forward to having students like you in class this year! Lots of great insights, analyses and questions! I agree that opposition to war is always prevalant at home no matter who's war it is. I grew up during the Vietnam War and the opposition at home was pretty steep and may have been a factor when Nixon finally got us out in 73. I think the pressure on the British Government from the opposing party eventually forces the Brits to end the war and get out in 81. Also I really enjoyed your comments about General Howe! And yes , he will continue to underestimate the Americans. Check out what he does that leads to an American victory at Saratoga, the turning pt battle that gets the French involved on the American side. I believe he is relieved at that point and Clinton and Cornwallis end up running the war for the Brits. And of course your insight into the advantage of home court and the advantage of only needing to fight a defensive war is clearly prevalent in both the Vietnam situation and in the current Iraq War. I like your questions on Dr. Church. Its always interesting to note that espionage was going on in these early wars. I just remember Church as a big Patriot in the 1770's . Boy did he have us all fooled! Keep up the good work Ashley!
ReplyDeleteAshley, because of your art connections, you will almost certainly remember John Trumbell when he appears on the AP test next May! And you are right, Common Sense by Paine did have a hugh impact on turning colonists toward's Independence! Nice connection between laundry and sick soldiers. Keep at it Ashley, you are doing great!
ReplyDeleteKrystal Obermeier
ReplyDeleteIn reading David McCullough’s non-fiction book titled 1776, I truly realized how much has been hidden from me throughout my years as an average American student. It is not as though what I have learned thus far has been inaccurate, there is just so much more that I felt like I have never been exposed to. However, I cannot blame simply my past teachers for this predicament, but those who write our history books and curriculum. Mrs. Nancy Gajewski, my 8th grade history teacher, was the first person who really opened my eyes to the hidden facts of our American history-from all angles and perspectives. David McCullough through his highly descriptive explanations exposes the reader to both sides more equally than any other book related to our year of independence, in my opinion.
As mentioned earlier, 1776 is filled with wonderfully vivid descriptions between its bindings. Within the first couple of pages and throughout the book, I was able to visualize many scenes. One scenario that is particularly memorable is when King George III rides “his colossal golden chariot” in order to address Parliament. This description is multiple paragraphs long and while reading it I almost felt like one of those 60,000 people who were there to watch their King ride past with such royalty. My visualization occurred in multiple still pictures that ran together almost like a slideshow of sorts.
More than 230 years have passed since this book took place, and many substantial things have changed, including the fact that we are no longer under British rule. However many things have not changed. One thing that takes me by surprise was the use of alcohol by the American rebels. On page 29, it stated that it was estimated that each soldier was consuming a bottle of rum ‘a day per man’. This seemed to have such a negative effects on the army and society, yet nothing was done to stop it. It would take 144 years for the American prohibition to start, and it has been 77 years since it ended. Alcohol is the number one most abused drug in America, and it continues to be a nuisance to our society. Its roots dig deep into our history as a country and no lasting changes have been made to prevent its damages, which is very disappointing.
The first section of 1776 gives many different perspectives on the war itself. However there is one perspective on the American side that I still don’t agree with, and that issue is slavery. I knew it before, but it is still incredibly hard to grasp the fact that our leader at the time was, in fact, a slave owner. Times were different then, as we all know, but this one fact about the all-American hero, George Washington, remains a dark cloud over his heroic acts. Slavery was quite the norm back then, and many in today’s society would agree that slavery is not and was never okay. My perspective may have been different if I had lived when slavery was at large, but times have changed this.
In Ashley's blog, I especially was intrigued by her connection to this war and the current Iraqi war. I never would have made such a connection, even though there are so many similarities. Like Ashley, I also enjoy learning specifics about the important people in this story, you can make connections to the individuals which makes them more relatable.
By: Zach Burmeister
ReplyDeleteAs I began to read the novel by David McCullough entitled 1776, I couldn’t help but to question the importance of events that took place in hallowed year of 1776. Whether they were vital to the success of Americas Revolution or if they were just an event that made little or no affect on the outcome.
Henry Knox’s voyage would be from the department of Fort Ticonderoga on December 9th to his time of arrival, January 18th was definitely a significant event. He traveled from Fort Ticonderoga, a fort built by the French then captured by the British then later taken by the Americans, to Framingham twenty miles west of Boston. Of course the whole point of the expedition was to acquire guns to help defeat the British and that’s exactly what he did. Knox, transporting a multiplicity of weapons such as mortars, 12 and 18 pound cannons and one 24lb cannon, overcame many predicaments and dilemmas that would almost surely discouraged any other man. These dilemmas included blizzards, capsized boats, mountain wilderness, cannons that plummeted to the lake bed, and many days of heavy rowing into merciless headwinds. Following his selection of 58 mortars and cannons the accepted weight was around 120,000 lbs.
This story leads me to believe that it was a turning point. It not only supplied weapons and artillery to the Americans but it also was a great change in spirits. This is why I believe that the voyage of Henry Knox from Fort Ticonderoga was both a turning point and a chief factor in the success of the Continental Army. Now that spirits are higher than ever maybe congress and Washington will be more confident while attacking now that they know it’s possible.
As I continue to read I can predict just how the British Parliament and the people of England are going to take the loss of Boston. I believe that now all of the people who were for the war are now going to be full of humility yet they will stand strong for what they believe. And I believe John Hancock when he says, “The humiliation the British had been subjected to… would make them (England) an even more formidable foe”.
After this section of reading I feel now that since the greatest army in the world was defeated by a “rabble in arms” that now people throughout the world will want fair treatment out of their government. Not only the people of America, but the all the people of the world, learned a great deal of lessons and a vast amount of knowledge. I think that perhaps the greatest lesson of the war was learned both by the Colonists and the Red Coats. Learn from your mistakes. George Washington won’t look down on people for where they’re from, and to the English the war enlightened them greatly. The colonists figured out that if you stand strong for what you believe you will be able to achieve your goal. People learned that it helps to try to think of the other person’s point of view and not be close minded. If the British thought a little more about the colonists in America the war might not have happened at that time. On the flip side of intellectual lessons, there was a lot of knowledge shared and learned such as how to be a better leader and communicator, how to make guns and weapons more efficient, and without a doubt war strategies. All of these things were obtained from the events of “The Siege”.
Response to Krystal’s blog:
In Krystal’s blog I liked the way she linked her life and the lives of the people in the past. She did a good job of conveying her ideas on the Reading thought “Visualize”. I liked how particular she waswhen describing the scenes once again to us. I can tell she took her time to make this a great blog. Good Job.
Krystal:
ReplyDeleteDifferent points of view on historical events have always been available, but it is a reality that a country will focus on the point of view that benefits them. The British did have some excellent reasons for their behavior in 1776. About a third of the colonists supported the British point of view. Also your insights on rum and slavery were excellent. Each era has its own morally correct beliefs, it is hard to use today's standards on yesterdays actions if you do not have a complete understanding of the era you are discussing. Good ideas and thoughts.
Zach:
ReplyDeleteKnox's march from Ticonderoga was a turning point. It forced the British to leave Boston. It also gave the Congress hope they could declare independence and it gave Washington hope that his army could train and maybe win the war. The British on the other hand saw this as an act of treason and would respond in force. The evacuation of Boston would have a great cause and effect consequence on the war for independence. Thinking from both points of view is not an easy thing to do. The British believed they were right and so did the rebels. No one gave much thought about the other sides reasons and neither side wanted to compromise.
Jordyn Prell
ReplyDeleteBefore reading David McCullough's 1776, I previewed the pictures included with the first section. One of the pictures that I found particularly interesting was the diary page from Knox's diary about his journey to Ticonderoga and back. After reading the page, I predicted that part of the section would include Knox's difficult journey to and from Ticonderoga. As I read the selection, I found that Knox's expedition was very difficult and dangerous as well. His journey was in the middle of the winter; it included traveling through the Berkshire mountains and going across the Hudson River with 120,000 pounds of motars and cannons in tow. They had to travel through blizzards, deal with thin ice conditions on the river, and many days of rowing.
McCullough's writing makes it very easy to visualize the picture he is trying to portray. This is especially evident when he is describing the American camps and the outfit of the American soldiers. I can picture standing near the camps, seeing the tents of the soldiers all spread out; all of the tents are made out of different materials, some boards, cloth, bricks, stones, or branches. The soldiers are standing, none of them are wearing a proper uniform, like their enemy, but wearing homemade coats, shirts, and pants (which they had probably just thrown on before they left their house to fight in the war). All of the soldiers look dirty and rough from the many days on end without washing their clothing.
It is very important while reading and examining history to learn from what happened in the past. One thing that is revealed through 1776 is that in order to be a leader, one must have certain characteristics and qualities. Washington was the leader at the time and he had many of these characteristics found in great leaders. He was a very dignified and respected man. People could put their trust in him to get things done the right way. Citizens knew him to be a very good politician and a great leader. By examining Washington's characteristics, people can compare leader's today to what Washington was and see if the leaders today are truly good leaders.
While reading, it is also noticable to take note of the changes that have appeared when comparing the army back then and America's army today. One of the things that have changed is the number of people and the level of skill/experience that these people have. Back then, it was a volunteer army (like it is today), but back then, the majority of the soldiers went to war with little or no expierence at all. They learned what to do when they got there. In 1776, they also took volunteers that were very young, old, and even disabled. Now, soldiers have age restictions and have to go through training and boot camp before they are allowed to actually go to war. Another thing that is different between the army back in 1776 and the army today is the prevalence of sickness and diseases. Back then, diseases such as dysentery, typhus, and typhoid fever were killing many of the soldiers in the camp. Most of the diseases arose from the unclean, filthy conditions that were the camps. Today, soldiers are less likely to become sick because the conditions are much cleanier and the soldiers are able to have better personal hygiene. The soldiers today have definately benefitted from the change, because if they live in better conditions, they should be able to fight better.
In response to Zach: I agree with you that a major turning point was the journey to and from Ticonderoga. Not only did it supply the troops with cannons and motars, but like you said it probably raised the morales of the soldiers and other citizens on the American's side. I also think that your prediction of the people in England's reaction/response to the loss of Boston is probably very accurate to what those people felt. They were probably very saddened by the event.
Jordyn:
ReplyDeleteExcellent insights. Knox's journey was difficult, yet important to the early war. Washington had a diffiuclt task in keeping his army supplied as well as keeping his army around. You are correct is saying that it was all volunteer. Many of the soldiers stayed very short times and wanted to fight only in their local area. Unlike today's army everyone who wanted to fight was accepted and training was hands on until later in the war. Disease did kill quite a few soldiers, in some cases more than died in battle. It was a great accomplishment by Washington just to keep the army together in the field fighting. That was one reason why we would win the war.
Tim Soja
ReplyDeleteAs I was reading 1776 I thought it was interesting that on page 30 it tells of a father that brings his 14 year old son with him to Boston to fight the British there. I think that this is a very interesting fact because everyone thought it was a good idea at the time but over time this opinion has change. It has gone from take them to war, to leave them at home. And the British had the upper hand most of the time for the war of 1776. Also it isn’t like the father doesn’t now that his son could die. Another interesting piece of information I found while reading page 22 and 23 was Nathanael Greene a Rhode Islander who helped form the Kentish Guards, a militia unit, was disqualified from being an officer in it. Even though it says earlier that he self-educated himself and learned military tactics from buts he still wasn’t allowed to join. I believe however with or without that stiff leg that disqualified him that he will make something of himself in the war. I believe that he will even prove to be invaluable to the war. It is because Nathanael Greene was not allowed into the Kentish Guards that when he joined and became officer in Rhode Island group to join the continental army that his group was one of two that only looked like actual soldiers. And the only reason the troops from Rhode Island looked like soldiers was because Greene had been preparing them for military life with all of his knowledge of military arts, which caused Washington to notice him. The last interesting part is when the New Englanders increased their defense so much visitors (other New Englanders) came to visit to see, breastworks “in many places seventeen feet in thickness,” trenches “wide and deep,” “verily their fortifications appear to be works of seven years, while British had defense but nothing as grand. The New Englanders building of this fort and fortification can be seen as a change. The reason is that all New Englanders came round to see it and in turn gained confidence in the New Englanders army. And with the people having witness what their army could do more would support and join the New Englanders army.
I also find Jordyn's insights of the war to be interesting such as the part of Washington have great abilities that a good leader should have and it is because he had such abilities that he was able to help rally troops and help in the defense of the country
Tim, you've made some interesting insights in your blog. I too found Nathaniel Greene to be an intriquing character because of his rejection due to his physical disability. Just another great example of someone overcoming their disability and the importance of not underestimating someone because of appearances. I find it interesting that individuals in history like Greene learned their trade ( soldiering) from books. Did you know that he was a Quaker ( pacifisim is very important to them) and he was repremained in front of the Main Committee. He stood firm and told the committee that he would not be turned from studies that interested him and the case was dropped. He would become Washington's best General! When Gates was defeated at Camden in the South, Greene was but in command of the war in the south. Washington and Greene were very loyal to one another. Mr. A
ReplyDeleteAriana Nickmeyer
ReplyDeleteIn David McCullough’s 1776, I was able to visualize many of the historical occurrences that the author described. A visualization that particularly stands out in my mind is that of the Continental Army’s camp outside of Boston. On page 28 it is described as having tents and shelters that were mainly patched-together concoctions of whatever could be found. The book also extensively describes the conditions of the men itself, focusing mainly on their very low standards of hygiene and discipline. With both the portrayals of the camp and the accounts of what the army’s commander in chief, George Washington thought of his “raw materials;” it was very easy for me to visualize a very disorganized and haphazard encampment with chaos and wayward, inexperienced soldiers abound.
I was able to make a connection between the soldiers in the Continental Army and the soldiers in the U.S. army today. The men of the Continental Army missed their families very much, as do soldiers fighting for our country in the Middle East today. The lack of action during the siege at Boston also sharpened the soldiers’ longing to be home, where there was much work that needed to be done and a family to care for. Many soldiers wrote home quite frequently to share their thoughts with their loved ones, as soldiers today also do. In both cases, especially after the Declaration of Independence was written, the soldiers were putting their country above their personal life to fight for a cause they believed in.
A significant case of cause and effect in section one was when Henry Knox embarked on the immense task of bringing cannon back to the army’s encampment from Fort Ticonderoga. The very idea of traveling so far in winter, especially transporting such cumbersome objects as cannon, seemed hopeless to Washington’s advisors. But Henry Knox was determined and resilient, and through all the problems and difficulties he encountered, he was able to carry out the task without losing a single cannon. This in turn led to the Continental Army’s ability to occupy Dorchester Heights, which they achieved in a single night also due to great determination and strength. The British in Boston were stupefied when they saw that the Americans had the advantage in Boston, and seeing that they had no other choice, abandoned the city. The British then gained a grudging sense of respect towards the American army, and the American army gained confidence in themselves. This confidence caused them to be more enthusiastic about the war and more dedicated to their cause. Also, because of their evacuation of Boston, the British were able to amass greater numbers to move towards their new goal of New York.
Ariana, Excellent use of reading thoughts! I too could envision Washington's rag tag army! You also made great connections to the U.S.army today, but one big difference was that many of the rebels did return home as they were in the militia and were only responsible to defend their colony or area of the country. Washington, had a heck of a time. He did have a national army, these men were known as "Continentals". Your cause and effect comments were right on. Without the cannon's from Ft. Ticonderoga, the rebels would never had taken the Dorchester Heights! What a story, Knox was quite the smart soldier!
ReplyDeleteAriana Nickmeyer
ReplyDelete(cont'd)
Reading about the armies on both sides during the Revolution has shown me to a greater extent how much has really changed since then. During the 1700s, communication between leaders over great distances could take several days, or even longer when a message had to be sent across the Atlantic Ocean on a ship. This could lead to discrepancies and a failure to make a correct decision at the correct time, which could lead to disaster for either army. Today, an email between leaders only takes a second. The style of fighting has also changed remarkably. Guns in the 1700s were not always accurate, and had to be laboriously reloaded often. Cannon played an important role in who the victor in a battle would be, especially on ships. Compared to then, the advancements in today’s warfare have been tremendous. To name just a few progressions, today’s armies have automatic weapons, submarines, large and effective air forces, tanks, and weapons of mass destruction.
I liked how Tim recognized that Nathanael Greene never gave up on bettering himself in the army so that he could make the most impact, even though he encountered hardships. I also agree with the fact that the army’s hard work in constructing defenses boosted the New Englanders’ morale and faith in their army, which is essential.
Ariana:
ReplyDeleteEcellent insights to the information. Time and distance did have a great impact on the outcome of the war for Independence. The British used their advantage of military supplies to win most battles ion the war, but the colonists used their superior rifles to keep the war going until the British people got tired fighting the war. Morale was another big factor and the colonists won battles necessary to cultivate a positive attitude. Good thoughts.
Jordan Williams
ReplyDeleteIn the novel, "1776" by David McCullough, many tactics were used to show what would happen in each chapter or the novel as a whole. Before I started reading, I read through the chapter titles, the quotes at the begining and the various pictures with captions. The titles suggested that an army would come together and eventually there would be a battle. The quotes in each chapter begining such as in two suggested that Washington would be thought of as a great commander or as equal to as the King among his people. As for the pictures, they mainly depicted Washington, but also foreshadowed the British evactuation and Knox optaining the artillery.
Throught the first section, I mainly used visualization to understand the reading. A few parts where this was useful was: The first chapter how the author described the King and his entourage almost as a 'heavenly' figure; When they descibed Knox and his men struggling to get the artillery to Boston, It made me imagine going across fridged waters at all hours trying their hardest to get them to Boston.
As I read, I also tried to understand what events caused this siege to come about. After further investigation, I found out it was all of the taxes exc that the King had imposed on them which caused the colonists to revolt. Most of the colonists did not support the King after this, but many of them were still loyalists until the end.
By revolting against the King, some things were accomplished, but many were not. The mostly gained the freedom to govern the land, the things the soldiers and loyalists left behind, and the richs of the land. But they still did not have an abundance of gun powder as 'ole' Putt wanted so bad and no beef as Washington complained about towards the end.
Also, I have a few questions: First, How was Washington able to keep his cool after not being allowed to attack Boston FIVE times!? If I were in that situation, I would have for sure done it anyway. Second, why were Greene and Knox not appointed a higher position for being so professional. I know towards the end of the section, they recieved recognition, but I dont feel like it was enough.
Nate Fiene
ReplyDeleteReading about Washington trying to find good generals reminded me about Lincoln trying to find good generals in the Civil War. Both were beseiged with problems, from lack of military expierence, to lack of enough equipment. I was actually shocked by a lot of the same problems that both faced. I think that Washington will be able, though not easily, change his Contiental Army around. The Contiental Congress will not be easy to deal with, but in time I believe Washington will gain their trust and be able to convience them to do things his way.Washington, however, has his duty thrust upon him by Congress, owing to the fact that the politicians trusted him. Washington did not feel equal to the task, and felt that he may not succeed. Later down the road, however, their trust paid off and Washington, with a lot of help and luck, was able to defeat the British and play a big part in giving us our country. Since our days as colonies, we have become a world superpower, the richest and most powerful military on the planet.
Jordan;
ReplyDeleteexcellent skills in pre-reading. You were able to have some ideas of what might happen. Taxation without representation was a major cause for the rebellion against the King of England. The colonists wanted to protect their rights promised to them by the English Bill of Rights. After the rebellion began their were many problems in supplies, and the early battles were not won by the colonists because of that fact. Washington deserves a lot of credit for winning the war, along with the help of the French. He did keep the army together and prevented it from being captured. He was the father of our country and many colonists looked to him for leadership. One thing you do need to know is that the oyalists made up almost one third of the colonial population and a large percentage of people who were moderates wanted to make up with the King if possible.
Nate:
ReplyDeleteExcellent thoughts. Washington did have trouble finding qualified leaders for the army. Eventually some would emerge and foreign leaders would join the American cause. Congress did have problems getting supplies for the Continental Army, and eventually they would let Washington manage the war on his own. As time passes and experience was gained the leadership of the colonial army improved and the army itself improved. When the French showed up the tide turned and America was born.
Taylor Biundo
ReplyDeleteBefore I started reading the book 1776, I looked through the first section and previewed things like quotes the pictures and the chapter headings to get a better idea of what the first section would be about. The first quote I came across was at the beginning of chapter one. It said “The reflection upon my situation and that of this army produces many an uneasy hour when all around me are wrapped in sleep. Few people know the predicament we are in.” George Washington. At the beginning of the war, even before any of the fighting began, the Americans were at a huge disadvantage. They had to fill important positions with people were being “cast into roles seemingly beyond there experience or capacities”. Washington especially struggled because he did not have an engineer who could build proper defenses. He also had problems with supplying his armies with enough supplies. Another reason they were at a disadvantage was that there army was made up of mostly volunteers. I made a connection here with something I learned about in the past which was that a lot of times the Americans relied on minute men which had to be ready for battle at a moments notice verses the British’s huge, well trained armies.
Also I can understand how the British would be frustrated with the colonist demanding things like taxation with representation when if they were living in Great Britain they would be receiving the same taxes. Also the king has supplied the colonist with protection when they needed it from outside threats so I could see as king how the colonist might look ungrateful.
Through out this section I used visualize to understand the book better. With the help of the pictures too, you get an idea of both sides perspective. On page 26 in the book the author describes what Jamestown looked like “…with its numerous green hills falling away to blue water…” I could see what this looked like and it does help knowing what the surrounding looked like because it is so different from what places look like today.
Finally I completely agree with Jordyn’s thought about how leaders have a certain number of characteristics that make each of them fit to lead a country. George Washington had so many like most of the leaders who have lead the United States
Taylor, excellent predictions and connections. You are absolutely right about the condition of Washington's Army. I dont think his army ever numbered over 10,000 men at any one time. Many were minutemen or better named militia men who were responsible to a specific colony or city and ratherly left their homeland to fight with Washington's Continental Army. So his numbers would fluctuate throughout the war. I think when you consider taxation w/o rep the colonists felt the Parliament was not in tune with their colonial needs and philosophically the Bill of Rights guarenteed them representation in a legislature that made the taxes, and of course they were not rep. in Parliament, though agents like Franklin went over to England to lobby the Parliament. Keep up the good work Taylor.
ReplyDeleteTyler Timm
ReplyDeleteBefore I began reading the book "1776" by David McCullough, I decided to read through the reading thoughts section in our packet. These strategies led me to preview the chapter titles, from this I was able to make some predictions about what these chapters were going to be about. For example, chapter two is titled "Rabble in Arms", from this you can predict that the chapter will be about problems that the Americans faced in forming a national army. After reading chapter two I found that my predictions were, for the most part, correct. The chapter talked about how there was a lack of order and unity throughout the army. For the most part the continental army was made up of volunteers from different parts of New England, even though volunteers would soon come from other regions of the country over 90 percent of the army was made up of New Englanders. Washington, being from Virginia, at one point came to dislike New Englanders because of the lack of patriotism they showed.
Also, McCullough went into great detail when describing the appearance of the troops. He stated that only a few had what would pass as a uniform, and the others had on whatever they threw together before leaving home. I was able to visualize this easily because of movies I have seen in the past like The Patriot, and even though movies like this are not always historically accurate they do include accurate details such as problems with clothing and desertion that the Continental Army did face.
In response to Taylor,
I completely agree with your thoughts on Great Britain being frustrated with the colonies. Great Britain in many ways did have a right to be frustrated with our actions.
Tyler:
ReplyDeleteExcellent insights. The army Washington led was not trained until 1777-1778. It lacked supplies needed to fight and the soldiers were not all that enthusiastic about fighting for other colonies. Washington did a remarkable job of keeping the army in the field, fighting. He did well with what he had until the French showed up to help us win the war. Over time the army would become a well trained fighting force and they would hold their own against the British a number of times. This caused the war to drag on and the support to keep fighting fell apart in England by 1781.
Eli Frieders
ReplyDeleteBefore I started reading the book "1776", by David McCullough,I had decided I would go ahead and look into more about what the first part, "The Siege" was about. So I looked up the definition of siege to find that thefreedictionary online explains it to be, "the offensive operations carried out to capture a fortified place by surrounding it, severing its communications and supply lines, and deploying weapons against it". Upon gaining that knowledge helped to preview and guess what was going to happen within the first section. I had guessed that American were going to capture some land of the British and I was correct with their siege through Boston. One thing that really helped me to connect with the book and the time period were the pictures that they through in first part. Since I'm more of a visual learner it helped to see what they're surroundings were like and how they dressed.
While I was reading "the siege" I was starting to think then about the British Navy and how the American would defeat them without really any navy. It even says in one of the pictures between pages 52 and 53 that Britain had sent over 400 ships to battle against American. I just cannot comprehend how American could protect themselves from such an attack. I feel that the Navy will play an even more vital role in the Americans siege through New York. Although American gained lots of confidence after the success at the Dorchester Heights I wonder if that'll be enough in New York.
In response to Tyler,
I also found The Patriot a specifically great source to help me relate to the time period and how they had dressed.
Eli:
ReplyDeleteExcellent concerns and observations. The Americans did win a big battle and their confidence was uplifted when the British left Boston. But the British Navy would return to New York. The navy was their biggest asset. The Americans did not have a navy. The British would receive naval support in every batttle through out the war. The Americans had to stay in the conflict and hope for foreigh help to eventually win the war. Army morale would be a great factor and Washington would develop into a very good military commander.
Jadyn:
ReplyDeleteExcellent insights. Boston was in distress after the Intolerable Acts were passed and enforced. The colonies needed to organize for protection of their rights and their way of life. The British were a very powerful force. The colonists lacked supplies, money and a large army. They did have outstanding leaders who were able to adapt to the situation and come up with a plan and a cause that would not lose.
John Xiong
ReplyDeleteIn the historical novel, 1776 by David McCullough, he introduces the American Revolution, with primary sources that were directly from the heroes of the revolution. Throughout the first section I was able to generalize that King George III was a key role in the American Revolution. Being only twenty-two when he came to power, he had a decade and a half of experience on the throne; which, he used to fight against the American Colonies. That experience for King George III would be having knowledge of British war tactics and naval warfare. Furthermore, being experienced in war, he believed and enforced the attempt of Parliament over the colonies. Overall, this generalization would be repeated throughout the book with many important figures of the revolution, both British and American.
Many of the connections I had made were from my education of the world human population, which were connected to the illnesses and the camp fever that were fatal throughout the camps of the revolutionary soldiers. Illnesses and diseases occur when bacterial organisms or harmful material enter the body and causes harm to it. It was a smart idea for the officers to force the soldiers to bath in order the stay clean, thus preventing the camp fever and illnesses. Modern day there are not many cases of mass illness due to advances of the worlds health and medical technologies, thus is a critical factor in human survival.
A cause and effect within section one was when the returning soldiers had taken their weapons home with them. This creates a major problem for George Washington and all of the reenlisted soldiers because they did not have enough supplies of weaponry to use against the British. Though that is a great problem for the army, it benefits the soldiers who took them because they then have weapons that will help them if they come into trouble.
The change of the amount of soldiers that were fighting for the American Revolution only benefited those who left for their homes, but those who stayed or reenlisted did not. With the British having the same amount of soldiers and unchanged conditions, a decrease of arms and soldiers in American Army meant being closer to defeat. All important figures talked only of distress and gave sad reports to Washington. Though with some recruits still coming in, Washington knew the urgent need for soldiers, which he requested immediately from congress and provincial governments.
In response to Eli,
It is great that you took the time to look up the definition of the titled section, this proves that you take your time to get a head start of the book through trusted references.
Hannah Johnson
ReplyDeleteBefore I started reading the novel, 1776 by David McCullough, I took a look at the pictures. By doing so it helped me visualize throughout Part 1 what each person looked like. Also imagine what some of the battles were like. One of my favorite photos I found was the picture of the Cambridge mansion where Washington had his headquarters. One day I hope I can go see it.
Once I started reading Part 1: “The Siege”, many questions popped up into my head. One of the major questions I had was; why was the British army not at all concerned of the New Englander's plans? General William Howe never was concerned of who the enemy leader was or what his strengths or weaknesses were. If I was him, I’d find out as much as I could about the enemy and their leaders. If Howe would’ve been a little more concerned, he could’ve found out that the Rebellions were low in numbers and did not have much gun powder, only a few rounds per man.
A cause and effect was that Washington had a hard time keeping the men around to serve in his army or to enlist. The men were not receiving money when expected. Without money being brought in to help out their families they didn’t want to stay. Some men could make more money at their old jobs. Also men left to go back to their families because they couldn’t take being away from them any longer. The only thing that really kept the men around was the speeches Washington gave about the reason why they are fighting. To get their rights back of “Liberty, Peace, and Safety” (pg 63)These speeches motivated the men.
Much has changed in the army these days. Men and women can serve for their country now. Back then only white men were wanted and sometimes blacks if they were in numbers. Also everyone is now equipped with a uniform to wear. On page 32 it said most of them were always filthy looking from digging trenches and hauling rock. “Few of the men had what would pass for a uniform.”
To John’s response: I totally agree with your cause and effect of the soldiers taking back the weapons with them. By them doing that it caused more problems for the incoming reenlistments. They already didn’t have enough has it was. Now Washington has to take time to get more.
Hi John
ReplyDeleteI really appreciate the comments on the people involved, that is one of the great things about reading a book like this compared to just textbooks--so much of the individual gets left out and personalities do make a difference.
Love that you are using thinking like an historian and analyzing the information. I wonder if you are thinking of which theme may be most important in this part of our history. Looking forward to more of your comments.
Hi Hannah
ReplyDeleteGlad to hear you are interested in travel...it does make history come alive. I hope you do see some of the historical sites you are reading about.
As far as your question goes I think if you asked three historian you would get three answers but I will give you my take. Great Britain was by the point the greatest super power...why would they any 'back woods' group of farmers could take them on regardless of who was leading? Remember we now know have many examples (i.e the revolutionary war, Vietnam etc) that it can be done but at the time maybe no clear historical examples--maybe Hannibal taking his elephants over the alps..but still not the best example.
Love the question--as historians that is part of the fun--not every question has an answer but the questions are still worth asking.
(Cody Gresen) Before reading David McCullough's 1776, I previewed the pictures in the story.A picture that I found peculiar was the diary page from Knox's diary.This picture descibed his journey to Ticonderoga and the return.I then broke the picture down using skills I learned in APHUG,I used my analysis of the picture to predict his journey would be a troubled one.After making my prediction I read the section.In reading the section I concluded that my previous prediction was correct.He had many troubles with weather and traveling weight, such as crossing the Hudson River with 120,000 pounds of motars and cannons.
ReplyDeleteOne thing I was very aware of while reading "The Siege" was that the way the author wrote his story made it extremely easy to visualize each seen. It was evident through his vivid detail in each passage. His vivid details got me to think, while I was reading how accurate his descriptions of each scene were. I then started visualizing what I consider one of the most visually stimulating war movies of all-time "Saving Private Ryan". McCullough's details in his story brought very similiar imagery to my mind that I had seen in the movie
In Response to Eli,
ReplyDeleteI found it very effective as well to relate this book to historical movies we've seen (Cody Gresen)
Hi Cody
ReplyDeleteGlad to see you are using your skills from Geography too. Prediciting before you read is also a great skill and it is wonderful to use visualization to help analyze reading. Keep it up. I also wonder what other aspects of that section you found interesting--obviously this is just a small piece of section you read.
Mariah Endres
ReplyDeletePrior to reading David McCullough's novel 1776, I previewed the entire book to get a feel for what it was going to be about. I found that studying the pictures and reading their captions greatly helped to visualize the first section. As I progressed through the book, I took notice of McCullough's writing style. When introducing a new character, McCullough followed the introduction with a very detailed description of that person's past and/or things that made them unique. This helped to separate the characters that were important to the rest of the book and the ones that were not. Also, I found the details of Henry Knox's trip to and from Ticonderoga one of the more fascinating parts of section one. The fact that he did not give up and the tactics used to haul the guns in such a rough winter showed immense dedication to the "glorious cause." A dedication that helped win Dorchester Heights and instill hope and spirit to the soldiers.
McCullough includes many thoughts of a variety of people to help us understand their perspective. I was interested to find out that many times Washington did not see himself as the right leader for the job, whereas everyone else thought the exact opposite. Moreover, I was surprised when Washington had set an actual date for the move on Dorchester. Washington had been frustrated many times with the "stillness" of the war. Without congress and the war council's patience, Washington would have made his move long ago. Therefore, the occupation of Dorchester is considered a major turning point for the continental army.
In response to Cody, I agree that McCullough's vivid details helped to visualize each event. It made the book easier to follow and understand considering we did not live in that time period.
Mariah
ReplyDeleteSounds like you have great reading habits. Prereading is a great strategy for better understanding. So you found Knox's trip to be the most fascinating, I will be interested in some more details of why his dedication stood out etc. . . I don't know if you got a chance to see the musical (it was done recently by community theater) or the movie which you could check out..but 1776 does a great job of showing how negative Washington's correspondence with the continental congress is...I don't know if I would put the occupation of Dorchester as the major turning point but look forward to hearing your arguments --historians love to analyze and argue.
(Kaitlyn Beck)
ReplyDeleteBefore i started reading the novel 1776 by David McCullough, i looked at the title of section one. Once i found out the name of section one, which is "The Seige", i realized that i did not know what it meant. Trying to get the fullest understanding of the novel, i had looked seige up in the dictonary. I found that seige means; "the process of surroundnig and attacking a forieted place in a such way as to isolate it from help and supplies for the purpose of lessening the reistance of the defenders and therby making capture possible." After finding this out, i had a better idea of what could happen within the section.
As i was reading the book, i found that McCullough was very descriptive, especially when it came to describing the characters. Through the descriptions the reader can tell what an average day for such character would be like, and through the descriptions readers can identify who were the main characters.
Once i found out that George Washington was a leader within the American Revolution, i decided to do some background research on him to understand what i have read so far, and maybe get a sneak peak for the next chapters within the novel. In my research i had discovered that George Washington inherited part of his half brother Lawrence Washington's Ohio Company which its objective was to exploit the Western Islands. Once George Washington took over the estate he had also took over some of Lawrence's duties which corelated with the colony. After this, George Washington got command expierence within the French and Indian War. Since he had expierence commanding, this leadership in the Patriot Cause, and his political base, teh Second Continential Congress chose George Washington to be Commander-In-Chief in the Contiential Army.
As i was in the process of reading, I kept thinking "what if i was alive back then?", and then i thought that if i was a wife of a man within the army I would be super sad, upset, and frustrated. I would hate to not know what was going on, because i am someone that needs to know what is going on 24 hours a day 7 days a week. Not knowing what is going on, and what my husband was doing or where he was would make me go complety insane. I do not know how they could manage to keep insanity.
In responce to Hannah Johnson's comment, I think it is pretty cool how you looked at the pictures to go on a trip within your mind. I also agree with your questioning of why "General William Howe was never concerned of who the enemy leader was or what his strengths or weaknesses were."
Elyse Batien:
ReplyDeleteBefore reading "1776" by David McCullough, or any book for that matter, i like to read the last page in every book. In this case, every section's last page, but it didn't really help me connect in anyway to this book. So, next i looked at all the pictures in the inserts and read the captions. This did help me out by placing different questions through my mind. For example, the first page of all the picture inserts, there is a picture of the Washington Headquarters. This photograph made me wonder, "What was this "mansion" used for, and what was inside of it? Also, does it correspond into the actual battles, or planning, or what?".
When i opened to the title page for section 1, i wondered what "The Siege" meant, and i figured it would be important to know what a title in the book meant. So after research online, i found it meant: an attempt to capture a fort or town by keeping it surrounded by an armed force until it surrenders. (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/siege)This really got me thinking. "How did the innocents of the town under siege react? How did anyone react?", I kind of had a mental picture of chaos, and wreckage with men with guns and cannons surrounding a huge wall just outside a huge city. It reminds me of APHUG, where there would be "poor" housing on the outer of the city, and as it falls inward, farmland, middle class, rich, and then the core city. In that case, assuming this city under siege is built in that manner, the innocent citizens would be first target to an army, which lead to my questions above.
As I started reading, I found that it was simple to see who were the, lets say important people in this book. All thanks to the descriptions, and the thoughts all conjoined, it was not too hard to figure out, or predict who was the main people that this story revolved around. Which makes it a lot easier to read. Pretty much, common sense lead me to the understanding that George Washington was the leader of the American Revolution. So i decided to look some facts up on him as well. It turned out that the Second Continental Congress chose him as leader, and it turned out that more of my research gave away the other sections in the book. (oops) But I took it as a good thing and just decided more background knowledge would help to better understand the book.
In the packet, the section "Reading Like a Historian", it has a category of "Cause and Effect", so I decided to do a little research about what caused this book to be written, hoping it would help. I found that it was just a story showing Washington's struggles in order to form a firm, working army to fight the British. So I figured it was all pretty much a personal story of Washington's leadership.
In response to Kaitlyn's comment, I'm glad i wasn't the only one who looked up the word "siege", and i like how you asked yourself what it would be like if you lived during this time frame in history. And I have to say, I agree completely with how you would feel. Now knowing what's going on would kill me!
Emilee Charles
ReplyDeleteIn David McCullough's 1776, the events that occurred throughout the year show the growth and improvement that America and it's military had. To prepare myself to read this book I had briefed myself with a list of events that had happened in the year 1776, this way I would be able to realize which event what was going on and why it would be important to the overall outcome and success of the American Revolution. One event that struck me as am important role in the success of the war was Henry Knox's journey to Fort Ticonderoga for artillery, not only does his journy show the bravery that it took to be a part of the American Amry during this time but also how far one is willing to go to fight for something they believe in and want. One connection I made was to the muscial 1776, a favorite of mine, which starts out with showing how difficult it was to get congress to agree to fight for independence which thinking about the musical helped transition nicely into the book where it starts with the Americans already ready to fight. David McCullough shows both side very clearly in a non-bias way. There were many people who helped in the success of the American Revolution those mentioned in Section 1 included, George Washington, Henry Knox, General Lee, Nathaneal Greene, and more.
In response to Kaitlyn, you were very smart looking up background information about George Washington, and looking up the seige when you didn't understand the meaning of it, that shows that you care about what you are reading. I love the point you make about living back then, and having a husband who went off to war, that really starts to make me think how I would react to a loved one so close going into the war.
Jeff Marquardt
ReplyDeleteBerfore I started reading the book I looked at the pictures for the section to try to give myself a better perspective of the world as it was at that time. This always helps me cause I'm a very visual learner and seeing things to help me picture the time period is always a good thing for me.
As I started reading I found that McCullough uses lots of details and first person articles to back up the book. All of his detials help me to be able to visualize things better in the book.
In the very beginning of the book McCullough talked a lot about King George III and the the people involved with the revolution for the British. He talked about people I had never heard of before so I did some research so that I could better unstand what was happening. To me King George was almost remarkable because he took the throne at 22 years old and held it until died almost 60 years later. Another remarkable thing was that he was very popular for most of his rule. There have not been cases like that throughout history.
I think one of the main turning points in the first section was the Battle of Bunker Hill. Up to that point in the war the Colonists had won all battles and taken control of Fort Ticonderoga. Although the British won Bunker Hill they ultimately lost twice as many men as the Colonists. Ultimately after the battle the British were not strong enough to break the siege on Boston. Because of this the Colonists got more confident and that carried into the rest of the war.
In response to Kaitlyn Beck's post, i liked how she tried to think of herself living back then. That is a good way to get to understand the book and the time period better.
Elyse, good to hear from you, I really like your approach to learning vocabulary, but I think if you create a picture of a siege in your notebook and in your mind you will better remember the term. We are currently using somewhat of a seige in Afghanistan to defeat the Taliban, although they use the term "surge" in the news instead. It was a successful approach in Iraq as you know, and is now being used in Afghanistan. You in fact did visualize the siege and now you have that word permanently in your long term memory. I like your questions too. I also wonder about the civilians and can relate it to the current war. I know in Bosnia and in Kosovo in the 1990's the civilians really took it hard and the result was ethnic cleansing, a term I'm sure you are familiar with from APHUG. Nice work researching Washington, the key figure of the War itself and quite an interesting personality. YOu see background knowledge from Seminar and APHUG will help you in this course. Mr. A
ReplyDeleteKaitlyn, interesting that both you and Elsye looked up "Siege". That was great work and both of you have visualized the word and hopefully in the future you will create a picture of non-linquistic representation, symbol or some drawing that will help you bring meaning to a word. Like Elyse, you investigated Washington , which was very astute! The more background knowledge you have on him the better understanding you will get out of this book! Isn't it interesting that although he has some experience in the Fr. and Ind. War, it wasn't much and yet he is so successful against more experienced British full time Generals! Keep up the good work Kaityn.
ReplyDeleteEmilee, how did you prepare yourself for the book, did you find a timeline on line or what? And yes I agree the Knox expedition to get the cannon's from fort ticonderoga was quite spectacular! Nice job making connections to the musical - that's really neat. Music always helps the memory. Can you hear the songs as you read about the Declaration of Independence and the arguments in Congress? And yes Kaitlyn really did a nice job putting herself in the shoes of a soldiers wife!!!! Mr. A
ReplyDeleteHI Jeff, welcome back! Good job visualizing, using pictures and primary quotes to get a feel for the content. Great job looking into King George, yeah its pretty hard to believe someone as the leader of Great Britain at 22 years old! Im sure his advisors were probably taking advantage of his inexperience. You know they say he went MAD at the end of his life. He did have some type of illness. You may want to check into that! I do like your turning point! If you go to Boston you will see a hugh memorial structure on Bunker ( Breeds Hill) It was a really big deal for Bostonians. Sometimes a defeat is really a victory! Good assessment! Mr. A
ReplyDeleteSuzanne Phalen
ReplyDeleteWhile reading the first section of 1776 by David McCullough, there were many actions that both armies made that were important. The most important part of the first section of the book was when Washington and his army spent all night moving cannons to the top of the hill overlooking Boston. The whole first part of the book built up to this event. This was the first major turning point in the war because the loyalists realized that it would be harder than they originally thought. Washington and his army had outsmarted the well-supplied and experienced generals of the British Army by distracting them and creating a lot of noise so they could take over. It also changed the Patriot’s view on the war. They didn’t think they were going to see any action at all. Washington realized what the army was capable of doing and made decisions based on that for future actions. Was Washington really famous at that time? News didn’t travel very fast so there were a lot of people, at the beginning of the war, didn’t now know who he was. The way history is told, can make people sound like heroes that weren’t really at the time. Was Washington one of those people that were recognized as a hero many years after? It seemed like the people at the time did look up to him, which shows through the quotes in the book. The people, at that time, knew that they were not the strongest power on the planet, military wise. That did not stop them from trying to gain control of their country and fight for freedom from the British.
I agree with Jeff Marquardt's blog because the pictures enhanced the plot of the book. It was easier to imagine the people and see how they were dressed through the pictures.
Alex Tarras
ReplyDeleteIn the first section of "1776" author David McCullough describes King George the third and goes into a lot of detail about him and how he is viewed by certain people. The way that McCullough talks about him, it made him sound as if he was very different than any other king before him, and that he was very well liked. And I was wondering if he really was different than Kings that came before him, and if he was what made him different. My thoughts were maybe that because he was more like an average person that the people could connect with him more. That is how I would've viewed him.
I thought it was very interesting to read about the "infectious filth" that was involved with Washington's troops. It amazes me how dirty and unclean it was there and that more people did not die. I wonder if there wouldn't have been so much sickness and dying, if some of the soldiers would have re-enlisted. Because it would've been a better life style.
I agree with what Eli was saying in regard to the British Navy. Because the British had a very large navy and the colonies had nothing. I think that the Navy will end up playing a big part in this war.
Aaron Weaver
ReplyDeleteLike many other people reading 1776, before I started reading I also looked at the pictures scattered throughout the book to get an idea of the time period, lifestyle, and even the technologies available during the Revolutionary War. They really help develop the realness of the war into the reader's mind.
As I was reading, I found the contrast between the Continental Army and the British Army to be very interesting. McCullough describes the American force often times as being "ragtag men" many of which were "missing teeth or fingers, pitted by smallpox or scarred by past wars or the all-too-common hazards of life and toil in the eighteenth century". But despite being inexperienced and average common men, they were also "as worthy as people that ever marched out of step" and "accustomed to hard work, hard work being the common lot." Despite being inexperienced and "ragtag", the men were dedicated to fighting for freedom and their sovereignty from Britain. On the other hand, the British Army was very organized and experienced. They had even been donned as "the finest military force in the world." It almost seems as though because of this they had a certain arrogance that would later be their down fall. One general named James Grant even said "with 5,000 British regulars he could march from one end of the American continent to the other". These two military forces seem to be almost exact opposites from each other. One being very experienced and favored to prevail, the other a large group of laborers and common men brought together as soon as possible.
In addition, I agree with Jeff that the Battle of Bunker Hill was a turning point in the war. The British had arrived in America expecting to simply silence the "riotous rebels". Although Bunkker Hill was a British victory, the British casualties of 1,150 men dwarfed the American casualties of 450. After this battle, the British seemed to realize the Americans were "in it to win it", for lack of a better phrase.
I also agree with Alex's idea that less filth equals more men. I think is if less people were afraid of dying from the terrible conditions of many of the camps, more men would have enlisted.
Tyler Stokka
ReplyDeleteAs I was reading 1776 by David McCullough I was trying to understand the reason behind why handfuls of British soldiers were trading sides to the continental army. I was confused because in the book it had said that the British soldiers were the best equipped and best trained(pg.50) but yet, it also said that they were trading sides "Half-Starved and disgruntled" as was said on page 39. I don't understand how the British could have been the best equipped and yet still be half-starved; and better yet, page 25 talks about how the Continental Army had the British soldiers outnumbered by two! I don't understand why the British had so little food even though they were being "best equipped" by King George! Another question that comes to my mind that ties into this problem is how was the Continental Army so heartily supplied with such an array foods (pg.30) when this army was a militia! Wouldn't all the available men, fit to fight, be in the army? If all the men available were in the army, how could there have been farmers supplying all this food? This situation just doesn't make any sense since the Continental Army was supplying itself and yet could feed 2 times the amount of soldiers when the British couldn't even supply for their own soldiers which was half the amount of the Continental Army!
Another part in the book that really sparked my interest was the part where Colonel Henry Knox had led the parade of 58 mortars and cannons from Fort Ticonderoga back to Framingham. I was excited while reading this part because nothing could stop Col. Knox! The convoy had to endure harsh winter weather, the crashing waves and winds of Lake George, and the relentless mountains of the eastern shore of the Hudson! Knox didn't just stop there but he even had to pull up and restore a sunken ship with a cannon load on it, and pull up the 18-pounder cannon from the bottom of the deathly cold Hudson River! The ferocious persistence of this man is spectacular! It's as if he would stop at nothing to lug every single one of these cannons back to General George Washington. This scene not only painted a vivid picture in my head but it also reminded me of the long journey that families faced on the Oregon Trail in the 1840's. They faced many of the same problems like mountains, river and lake crossings, and accidents like broken equipment. They both used sleds and wagons and they even both used oxen as their "pullers". I was amazed at how these two events were very similar and yet they happened over 70 years apart.
Tyler Stokka (continuation)
ReplyDeleteI felt that one turning point was definitely the Continental Army’s capturing of Dorchester Heights. The British knew themselves that whoever would capture Dorchester Heights would have a strong advantage in winning this battle. I felt the plan to take Dorchester Heights was ingenious and very clever! If the British would have taken Dorchester Heights first it would have been a disaster and would have cost the Continental army the whole war! This is why I feel that this move was a crucial turning point in the war, everything was at stake, so General Washington decided to go all in and give it all the army had to defeat the British.
In the British army and the Loyalists leaving, I felt that this was an incredible change that helped the Continental Army in unbelievable ways. Not only did it give the Continental Army lots of supplies but it also built the morale and gave them the feeling that they could conquer anything. This accomplishment gave the United States its platform for building a new country on the basis of freedom, liberty, and justice for all!
I find Suzanne's point about General Washington's fame at the time of the war very interesting. It's crazy to think that everything was communicated by letters sent by horseback or ships. In the book it said something to the effect that General Howe had waited to see what the British were to do to prepare for the harsh winter and he didn't get a letter back from Britain 3 months later telling him what to do when the harsh effects of winter had already taken its toll!
Andrew Reiche
ReplyDeleteIn David McCullough's Part One of his book 1776, he is very descriptive about the 13 colonies situation in the War of Independence from the British. On page 31, McCullough describes the camps of the soldiers as "Infectious Filth." These troops lacked clean water and cooking utensils which lead to deadly diseases and a low morale of the troops. Also, their camps lacked solid shelter to sleep in, which may have lead to long nights with very little sleep. On top of that, the author makes it apparent that the personal hygiene of the soldiers was very very poor. They rarely bathed which lead to many harmful parasites such as lice and fleas. One soldier remembered seeing "a dead body so covered in lice that it was thought the lice was the cause of death." (pg 31). From these recordings, our present army conditions have improved tremendously. We really have great respect for them now but we don't realize that their conditions now are greatly enhanced from when our first army took the battlefield. This gives me a much greater respect and appreciation for our first army.
Another interesting piece of Mr. McCullough's part I that I found was that of George Washington's devout compassion for the very early 13 colonies. He spent hours on end daily recruiting, training, and preparing for the fight for independence. He even went as far as to fight in the war, risking his life, for the soon to be country he loved. With that said, some of our presidents since Mr. Washington may have not been as committed to having a top-notch military as others have. This may be because they may not have had as much experience in this field as others. After finding this out, I couldn't help but ask myself this question... if a president is elected and does not have as much experience in the military field, w97kd they sacrifice the commander in chief role to someone else for the betterment of our country or keep the job to add to their prestige??
Kaylee Wedow
ReplyDeleteWell to start off, I found that the British Occupation of Boston was a smart move, but it was also extreamly stupid. Fro being smart, the location was great. You have water on one side so you alway can have a way of getting fresh fish and water (after getting the salt out). Plus the British had easy access to the ocean, which gives them the oppertunity to leave, go to another place, and/or get supplies from other places. as for being stupid, the British were set on there ways of having everything extravagant. It seemed to me that the higher-ups had meals that were very ornate. It was like they could only do it this way, instead of conserving food. I also thought that the British were not prepared for the seige. They underestimated the American forces, the weather, and the speed of incoming reinforcments and supplies. They waited until the last possible moment before evacuating and even then the timing was bad. TLH: I think the turning point is when the British decided to leave Boston. It gave the Americans a great advantage in supplies and boosted moral. Not to mention that it deminished the Englishand Loyalists moral and made some of them question the reason the British forces are there.
My next point is that George Washington really didn't lead "his" troops. He may have been the "head honcho", but if he hadn't had his generals, the war would have gone a completely different direction. It is mentioned several times that Washington wanted to invade Boston, and without his generals the American force would have been destroyed. I feel that Washington and his group of Generals should have gotten equal praise because the seige was only possible because the Generals all worked together. TLH: I think that the Americans chose to use people that had no military experience, but had new ideas that changed the way the war went. The choice to use younger men in leader positions changed the way things are in America now because there are new businesses with young people running them. The younger generation has more say in society now.
I agree wtih Andrew's question above, would they give up that position of power? It is a very interesting question to ask because now we have people who are solely in charge of our military and the President has a say in the matter of warfare, but I don't think that a President would step down. I think that they would just change the person who is the Sec. of War.
Suzanne, Some good insights into the importance of Henry's Knox's expedition to bring the cannons to Boston. Not sure if it qualifies as a turning point, but it did certainly boost morale and it did show up the British! Use more reading thoughts in your next blog. YOur questions about Washington's notoriety prior to the war are good. I think you answered your question in saying that people in the colonies knew of his reputation as a businessman, soldiers, and wealthy landowner. Despite his lack of experience, and he did have some, he turned into quite a respected leader.
ReplyDeleteHi Andy, Good analysis and summary of the army's condition. However , when making these comments tie them to either a reading thought or one of the inquiry categories from Thinking like a Historian. I did like your question about the President's role as Commander in Chief and bring up an interesting scenario. Fortunately, all Presidents have advisors - National Security, Sec. of State, Sec of Defense, CIA director , etc. to help them make foreign policy decisions. Remember when we studied Carter and Clinton in Seminar. Neither man had any military background, yet they had good advisors that helped them make big decisions.
ReplyDeleteKaylee, you identify some interesting thoughts about the occupation of Boston and Washington's leadership. However, when you talk about TLH be sure to identify the specific inquiry category like change/continuity or cause and effect, etc. I agree with your assessment of the British extravagance. In fact, Gentleman Johnny Burgoyne ( One of the top Generals) really lived high on the hog, as they say and had an entourage of women following along and had quite the parties. He would pay for this extravagance at the Battle of Saratoga , where his entire army would be captured by General Gates and General Arnold. And yes , there were several Generals that should get more credit.
ReplyDeleteCarly Phillips
ReplyDeleteDavid McCullough’s historical non-fiction novel 1776 certainly opened my eyes to an abundance of information about the Revolutionary war. As a student, I have always had somewhat of a difficult time relating history to things in the modern world, which is essentially the reason for studying our past. My difficulties were put aside quickly in the first section of 1776 where I was able to make many connections. Much of the section was a narration of the beginning of the Revolutionary War in Boston and the many hardships the soldiers were put through. Winter in the northern part of America can be as we all well know, very harsh. But, unlike our daily lives now, the soldiers back in late 1775 and early 1776 were not treated to heating and proper shelter to help them through the cold and storms that British Admiral Samuel Graves described on page 73 as, “…So severe it cannot even be looked against, and by the snow freezing as fast as it falls, baffles all resistance—…”. Although just surviving in the weather was a remarkable feat for the troops, one mission that was put on Colonel Henry Knox’s shoulders really stood out in my mind as a reader. Knox was to retrieve tons and tons of artillery from Fort Ticonderoga (located in upstate New York) and transport it all the way to Boston without the benefit of our modern conveniences such as semis, planes, etc. Although the mission was extremely successful, I couldn’t help think the whole time about how much easier it would have been for Colonel Knox if he had the luxuries we do today.
When starting to read 1776, I noticed I was subconsciously evaluating McCullough’s bias. Through the evaluation, I believe that the author keeps the book fairly unbiased. McCullough seems to take a “tell it like it is” sort of approach with everything. Not once did I notice him seeming to favor a side, or when I thought I did, the book would soon switch perspectives. For example, the entire first chapter of the book is filled with a miniature biography of King George III and the British view of the American rebellion. Immediately after, chapter two starts off with a miniature biography of general officer Nathanael Greene, then launches into the point of view with the Americans. Through evaluation of the author, I believe that 1776 is a great unbiased report of the Revolutionary war.
1776 is abundant with information from battles such as Bunker Hill, Boston, etc. While reading of all the events, the cause and effect of decisions, tragedies, etc. are extremely evident. The Revolutionary War could have changed so drastically that the British would still have control of America even with one minuscule change. For example, on page 93, had there not been some sort of miracle that allowed around only 14,000 Americans to do between 15,000 and 20,000 men’s work of getting all of the many weapons ready, the victory at Boston may not have occurred. This, through cause and effect, could have lost the Americans the war.
Carly Phillips (continued)
ReplyDeleteIn the first section of 1776, readers learn a lot about the conditions of the American camps. Although I have been taught about the Revolutionary War every year since kindergarten, this is one factor that definitely has never crossed my mind. Both through the eyes of the British and an unbiased author, I read about the extreme filth, disorder, and disease of the American troops. What was the most interesting was that both of the views were the same. A British soldier would be expected to think of the Americans as filthy, because as their enemy they will always find faults. But, to have an unbiased take on the conditions, it was very evident that some of the order and habits of cleanliness were needed in the American camps. It strikes me as amazing that even though the British definitely had better soldiers, better equipment, more tradition, etc. the Americans through spirit, strategy, and perhaps luck pulled through to win the war.
I definitely agree with Kaylee and her thoughts about Washington. Although no one can deny that he did help us through a war that could seem impossible, there is still so much credit that should go to the other generals. As I said earlier, the British pulling out of Boston was a huge step in America winning the war. If Washington had somehow changed that, it could have been disastrous.
Breanna Baumann
ReplyDeleteBefore opening a book, i like to take a look at the title page as well as the back cover to read the summary and reviews. Because of the title and summary, as well as the illustration on the cover, i knew that the book would be about the revolutionary war between the Americans and the British. Also, before i started reading section one, i read the title "The Siege" and questioned whether this meant the British would capture a fort or town that the Americans were previously controlling. Once I previewed the pictures for section one, I'm guessing David McCullough will be introducing and characterizing the lead Generals of both the Americans and Brits since many of the included pictures were portraits of them. I also wondered after reading the caption of teh diary entry who Henry Knox is and what is his importance. I know that he must have taken a journey to Ticonderoga during the bitter months, but for what reason? It was discovered after reading that it was an important trip that he took in order to have more fire arms and cannons. Due to the other pictures, im guessing this section will take place in Boston for some time, until the British evacuate as i predicted. I think Boston will be in poor condition from the British before they left.
While reading "1776", i was able to relate that war for freedom from the British to the war being fought right now in the middle east. The way soldiers had to be away from there familes is obviously very similar, including how they miss eachother and familes worry that their soldier wont be okay in the end. Though while the soldiers were able to communicate with their family back then, the technology these days make the communication more convienent.
I also made a connection when the author briefly took us through the battle of Bunker Hill. I have previously learned about this particular battle in previous history classes and was able to apply my background knowledge so i knew more details and could better imagine it.
Using the past: When thinking about the past, even times before 1776, we can make sense of the present. The revolutionary war was being fought for independance for the Americans from the british. One way we can learn from the past is learn from experience; for example if one stategy worked while fighting a battle or worked to help solve multi-nation conflicts, that strategy may be useful in the future. we can also learn from mistakes or bad decisions made by the Generals or Congress.
I deffinatley agree with Carly on her comment about the conditions of the American troops and also find it shocking that they were able to pull through the war and defeat British in the end after being defeated thremselves many times in order to have freedom from them.
Megan Gebert
ReplyDeleteBefore I started reading the book, 1776, I decided to preview the pictures in the middle of the book and look at the chapter names to give me some sort of insight into what I would be reading. The first chapter, entitled "Sovereign Duty" seems to be an oxymoron because the troops for the struggling 13 colonies had a very low morale. As soon as their required time of service was up, they were heading for the hills. Many solders were also unable to be paid because money was scarce. However, Washington seems to be determined for the future of the 13 colonies and would rally his troops (what was left of them)with stunning speeches and he carried an aura of power around him. Futhermore, he irradiated confidence around his men at all times. This aura of confidence led his troops to have the strength to take the high ground in the battle of Boston, this high ground being Dorchester Heights. This event led me to predict a future of scrappyness by the colonies, a group of men who will stick through to the end for the cause of freedom. They'll always be around, never down but never up either. Always just chipping away at the enemy. They made tents out of whatever was available and needed resources often seemed to be not attainable. In other words, you played with what you were dealt with. However, if you compare the army of 1776 to the army of today this "scrapper" look, has disappeared completely. The army today has so much technology at their disposal, such as manless droids and advanced radar capability. Their camps are more advanced and they are built to handle the amount of people serving in that area. Back in 1776, they had horses and cannons. Their only way of communication was pen and paper. Now, there are several ways of communication and you can be connected to any commander within the second. But, back to the story. This Dorchester Heights event was a slight turning point in the war due to the fact that the British learned of the smarts of the colonies side. The British at this point, and also further along in the book, fail to realize this fact that the Colonists are at the same level of intelligence as the British and this therefore cost the British this war. The British repeatedly used this train of thought and it cost them. Even though this is getting a bit ahead of myself, this only proves my opinion of this first event being a minor turning point.
It seems that Carly and I are on the same page. We made similar connections about the same events. We both saw that the soldiers in 1776 were under very hard conditions thus leading to the low morale. Also, we agree on the idea that the Colonists were scrappers who were going to search for resources far and wide and were always going to be a thorn in the side of the British. We were not going to be going away anytime soon. The Colonists weren't going to make a mistake to lose the war, they would lose that battle to keep that possibility of winning always an option. The British on the other hand, never saw this plan of attack by the Colonists and therefore were now adequately prepared for this. Clearly, both Carly and I have pointed out that this 1st section is the cornerstone of both sides attack plans and these would give the foundation to both of these causes.
Trevor Kraeger
ReplyDeleteIn part 1 of “1776” by David McCullough, I previewed each of the chapter titles and quotes in this part to try and make a prediction as to what may happen in each chapter. For example, the first chapter quote was a little poem saying long live the King of England and other phrases like that showing loyalty to King George III, and from this poem I inferred that the first chapter would probably be about how Britain got involved in the American Revolution and what thoughts were going through the King’s mind as to how this will affect his political status amongst the people in Britain. I also had a great mental picture in the third chapter, Dorchester Heights, when Henry Knox made his almost nearly impossible journey up to Fort Ticonderoga to get some more artillery to help strengthen the Continental Army. Just the journey of transporting this immensely heavy mortars and cannons over 300 miles in deep snow and frozen lakes and rivers is quite an act of true pride and courage.
There was also a pretty decisive turning point in the first part that greatly effected the overall outcome of this war and that was the decision of Washington to send Knox and his men up to Fort Ticonderoga to get that heavy artillery. This was a turning point because when Knox returned to Boston with those weapons, Washington was able to set up a very intimidating fort facing the British fleet and preventing the redcoats from coming in and taking over Boston completely. And then also, the choices Washington made to pick generals was quite a gamble since the top ones he trusted most and installed a large amount of responsibility had never been involved in a war and they learned everything from books but in the end it turned out to be a smart choice as the regiments these men lead helped to push the British out of Boston and move to a new area.
Finally, I agree with Jordan’s question as to why wouldn’t Knox be moved up to a higher status than what he is at because of the courageous act he did for Washington and was what caused the British to leave Boston.
Hi Carly, welcome to APUSH! First of all I like your writing style, it will serve you well in AP. You did a nice job making connections, especially with the harsh conditions of the revolutionary times. Your conclusion that the author was unbiased was based on evidence - good work with that ! By the way, I too marveled at the feat of Knox and his cannons! Quite an accomplishment considering the times! Also good use of cause and effect.
ReplyDeleteBreanna, Excellent pre-reading strategies! Good use of the reading thought - connnections- Do you have any relatives deployed in Iraq or Afghanistan? Using the past to understand the present is an excellent strategy as well. Keep up the good work!
ReplyDeleteMegan, you made an interesting interpretation of "Sovereign Duty". Well, if the soldier is incontrol of the duty can he or she leave when he/she wants? If you are in a state militia do you have go fight in another state? These are all interesting issues for the colonial soldier and quite the problem for General Washington, who saw his army come and go! Good thing he did have Continental soldiers who's enlistments were longer and were national in scope. I think you are right in your analysis of Washington's character - confidence was a key component. The soldiers trusted him as well. Nice connection between the army's condition in 1776 and the army today! Keep up the great work!
ReplyDeleteTrevor , good use of prediction as a reading strategy! Yes, I too was able to visualize Knox's expedition, quite the feat! Remember Knox was in charge of the entire army's artillery, a very important position! Knox was at most of the key battle where he was in charge of the artillery ( cannons). He did a great job at Yorktown when the British were defeated at the end of the war that he was made a Major General. So , yes , he was a big deal! Nice job with your turning point! Keep it up!
ReplyDelete-Luke Carter-
ReplyDeleteFor me, the most interesting part of section one of David McCullough’s book “1776” was the depiction of the British politics concerning King George’s speech expressing his desire to increase the size of the royal army in order to “put a speedy end” to the American rebels who, he believed, were ultimately intending to “[Establish] an independent empire.” The subsequent debates and speeches within the parliament regarding this request reminded me of the politics regarding the most recent Iraq war. The vast majority of parliament agreed with the king and were concerned for things such as the “interests and honor of the kingdom” much like the majority of congress agreed with president Bush to eliminate Iraq’s dictatorial regime and install institutions of freedom and democracy in its place (the interests of America) and also fight on the notion that America needs to be viewed as powerful and superior to the rest of the world (to uphold the honor of America). However, within parliament was an opinionated majority that was more liberal and pragmatic than their fellow lawmakers. This minority was more considering of the point of view of the American colonists and were concerned that the actions recommended by the king were in disregard of the rights of the colonists, who were, it was pointed out, still British subjects. One member even proposed the “repeal of every act concerning America since the incendiary Stamp Act of 1765,” a very wise proposition in hindsight. I found the questioning of the logic of King George’s assertion that the colonists were intent to rebel and create an independent empire similar to the modern politicians who questioned the intelligence that led to the conclusion that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. However it must be mentioned that King George had acquired the “friendly offers of foreign assistance,” the lack of which was a major arguing point for dissenters of the Iraq War.
I also noticed that the changing perspectives throughout this first section helped to create a sort of nonbiased tone to the book. Even though much of the information itself is provided by people with very evident biases, I felt that the biased information was usually presented near oppositely biased information which could be compared and evaluated in order to find ideas common in both perspectives, which can usually be taken for truth. Also, by showing the perspectives themselves instead of the dry facts that could be brought out from these perspectives created a sense of humanity and closeness to the historical figures than is usually present in nonfiction books.
Lastly, I agree with Trevor on the importance of Knox’s mission to Fort Ticonderoga. With the help of the cannons brought by Knox, the continental army was able to drive the British out of Boston, and allowed the army to ultimately push forward in the war and defend New York City, which was difficult enough for the army as it was, and would probably have proved impossible if Washington had to attempt to regain control of the city while holding the British in Boston at the same time.
Before reading 1776 by David McCoullough, I decided to flip through the book and glance through the pages. Right away I could tell that this book would be on the Revolutionary war between the Colony of America vs. Britsh for independence. Like Breanna had mentioned, when I looked at the title including "The Siege" I wondered whether it meant that the Americans or the Britsh were going to "siege" and take over land belonging to either one of them.
ReplyDeleteAs I read further and continued to read the next few pages, I found that I was learning more and more new things about George Washington himself. I was shocked to read that he couldn't even read by the age eleven. Although I do realize that times were much different back then on the topic of eduation, I was still amazed that even HE wasn't educated. I was also impressed to find out that Washington was only the age of twenty-two in 1760. I find that very impressive. Another thing I came to learn was the "madness" of King Goerge the third. The disease that was talked about in the book is "Porphyria." The author did not thouroughly explain what this disease was, therefore it confused me. Wanting to know more about it, I looked the word up online. I learned that the word Porhyria is a greek word meaning "purple." The definition that i found says that it means a genetic abnormality of metabolism causing abdominal pains and mental confusion. I found this very interesting to learn that he was not mentally "okay".
Reading this section reminded me of how different today is compared to back then with what has changed. During the time of the Revolunionary War, only white males were allowed to fight for the Colonies of America. The Native Americans,Hispanic, & etc., were not able to show their pride and fight for what they believed in. Today not only men from different ethnic groups are allowed to join the forces, but women have the oppertunity as well.
On the other hand, it seems as if many Americans still have the same mind-set as they did in 1776. I remember reading in this section that 60,000 mean lined up in Saint James Park to join. That's incredible. Today, there are still thousands of men and women willing to put their lives in risk to fight for what they believe in.
Mikaela Koch
ReplyDeleteBy previewing the section and seeing the title, "Sovereign Duty" I could see that something didn't match up. By looking at my previous knowledge about the war, I knew that the soldiers had a very low morale at this point. They had no motivation to fight and no one was really getting paid. They were not under one cause so to speak and really thought that they would easily be able to handle the British and send them back home with their tail between their legs. However, they did not invision a long drawnout bloodbath that would turn into a grind and the strongest mental team would prevail. But, when these soldiers realized that the latter would be the reality, morale hit rock bottom. However, no matter the morale the remaining soldiers would chip away at what the British, picking them off one by one on marches between camps. They weren't going to go down without a fight. They were always the underdog but they liked that about themselves. It should be noted that these Colonial soldiers would use whatever they have at their disposal, just to get the job done. The whole look of the army was just scrappy. They were like that dog that would just latch on to your leg and never let go, because they were determined to get your attention.
I'm agreeing with Trevor on the part about the Dorchester Heights mental picture. For Knox to make that journey with those heavy cannons and artillary and set up a perimeter to gain the high ground speaks volumes about the determination of the Colonists.
Lucus Carter, I see you procrastinated to the final day! NIce connection between the Revolution and the current war in Iraq! Good assessment of McCullough use of both perspectives, which I agree, leads to an unbiased representation. Good work Luke.
ReplyDeleteBridget, Good to hear from you in the waning minutes of summer! Good use of prediction and pre-reading! I too have always wondered why they called him"Mad" King George. He wasn't Crazy he has a disease. I don't think this was discovered until the late 20th century. Nice work looking it up. Remember Indians and Blacks fought mostly, but not entirely on the side of the British. Why do you think that is?
ReplyDeleteMikaela - you need to use the reading thoughts and/or the Thinking LIke a Historian categories. Interesting comments about the mental attitudes of the colonial troops.
ReplyDeleteCody Schiro
ReplyDeleteI read David McCullough’s non-fiction book titled 1776, I realized how much I didn’t know about the American Revolution and what was going on in England at the time, and I certainly didn’t know much about what was going on pre-America Revolution. It is not that what I have learned up to this point is wrong, it was just missing some details better explained in this book. In my opinion David McCullough explanations expose the reader to both sides more equally than any other book that I have read about our independence. Within the first couple of pages and throughout the book, I was able to visualize many scenes. One scene that is easy to visualize is when King George III rides “his colossal golden chariot” in order to address Parliament. This description is multiple paragraphs long and while reading it I felt that if I could have been one of those 60,000 people who was there to watch their King ride past with such royalty would have been a life changing event that I wouldn’t soon forget. More than 230 years have passed since this book took place, and many substantial things have changed, including the fact that we are no longer under British rule. However not many things have changed. One thing that was interesting to me was the use of alcohol by the American rebels. On page 29, it stated that it was estimated that each soldier was consuming a bottle of rum ‘a day per man’. This seemed to have such a negative effects on the army and society, yet nothing was done to stop it. Alcohol is the number one most abused drug in America, and it continues to be a vile drink that can turn the nicest person alive into something unrecognizable. Its long, deep influence in our history as a country and no lasting changes have been made to prevent its damages, which is very disappointing, but there is hope because some places like Minnesota are regulating how strong the alcohol in the beverage is and they close their bars early on don’t sell beer in gas stations like in Wisconsin. The first section of 1776 gives many different perspectives on the war itself. However there is one perspective on the American side that I still don’t agree with, and that issue is slavery. I knew that slavery was a big part in our history, but it is still incredibly hard to grasp the fact that our leader at the time was, in fact, was a slave owner no matter how nice they were treated. Times were different then, as we all know, but this one fact about the all-American hero, George Washington, remains a dark cloud over his heroic acts. Slavery was quite normal back then, and many in today’s society would agree that slavery is not and was never okay. But I cant grasp the fact that people thought it was ok to own people, and it makes me sick that people beat other people just because they were tired and sick. There is no acceptation for it and I’m glad there is no more in our society, the next thing we need to get rid of is discrimination because they are people also. Even though I am only a third done with this book I am very pleased with all of the new things I’m finding out about. I feel that I will enjoy the rest of this book and cant wait to finish it.
I agree with Mikaela they did seem to use any means of force or any weapon they had to get the job done. They were sick of British rule and their passion to win and get the British out was tremendous. And with their strong mental attuide they could do anything.
Cody Schiro
ReplyDeleteWhen I was reading David McCullough’s non-fiction book titled 1776, I realized how much I didn’t know about the American Revolution, I didn’t know what was going on on either sides before the revolution. I truly didn’t know all that much dating up to it either. It is not that I have been misinformed, but rather under informed because there is so much about this time period it would be impossible to cover it in a 5th grade history class. Mrs. David McCullough descriptively explanations and exposes the reader to both sides more equally than any other book I have read that was related to our year of independence, and in my opinion this book is by far the most interesting on about it also. This book is filled with extremely vivid descriptions. Within the first couple of pages and throughout the book, I was able to visualize many scenes. One scene that is easily visualized is when King George III rides “his colossal golden chariot” in order to address Parliament. This is a multi-paragraph description and while reading it I felt that it would have been an awesome experience to be one of those 60,000 plus people who were there to watch their King ride past with such royalty. My visualization occurred in multiple places that made a movie in my mind, like it usually does when reading, especially with a vivid and precious author like McCullough. More than 230 years have passed since this book took place, and many things have changed, including the one major event this book is based on and that is the fact that we are no longer under British rule. However not many things have changed. One thing that takes me by surprise was the use of alcohol by the American rebels. On page 29, it stated that it was estimated that each soldier was consuming a bottle of rum ‘a day per man’. This seemed to have such a negative effects on the army and society, yet nothing was done to stop it. Alcohol is the number one most abused drug in America, and it continues to be a drain to our society. Its effects go way back into our history as a country and not efforts have been made to changes damage it has brought on our society. But there is hope because some states actually regulate the alcohol percentage so one would need to consume an entire store to get drunk, which is a good thing considering all the bad it brings. It can turn the nicest down to earth person into something unrecognizable and embarrassing to be around. But since some states are regulating it, like Minnesota who has a far lower alcohol have percentage which is nice because then society is not a bunch of drunks. The first section of 1776 gives many different perspectives on the war itself. However there is one perspective that I don’t agree with American on, and that is the issue of slavery. I knew it happened before, but it is still a hard thing to wrap my mind around the fact that our leader at the time was, in fact, was a slave owner no matter how good they were treated he still owned human beings. Slavery was quite normal back then, and many in today’s society would agree that slavery has never been acceptable. My perspective is that it is not ok on any means to own a person because you paid for them once and they worked for free till they died or escaped. I understand that owning slaves was a “must” because people had large farms to tend to, but hire our own people then. Its like society today hasn’t changed much since then either because we bring in illegal’s to do our work for far below minimum wage just because its cheep or we send our stuff to be made in different countries. This is not ok because the people that could be employed in America cant get a job because factories are moving or bring in illegal’s.
Mikaela-i agree that people back then would have done anything to get the Brits out of America by any means possible. And that is admiral because if they hadnt decide to do so then we might be under British rule still.
Jack Schneider
ReplyDeleteIn reading the first section of David McCullough's book, 1776, I read about Washington trying to find good generals reminded me about Lincoln trying to find good generals in the Civil War. Both were overwhelmed with problems, from not having enough experience with the miltary. The Continental Congress will not be easy to deal with, but in time I believe Washington will gain their trust and be able to convince them to do things his way. Washington did not feel equal to the task, and felt that he may not succeed. Since our days as colonies, we have become a world superpower. Later down the road, however, their trust paid off and Washington, with a lot of help and luck, was able to defeat the British and play a big part in giving us our country. I also tried to understand what events caused this blockade to come about. After further exploration, I found out it was all of the taxes that the King had imposed on them which caused the colonists to revolt.