Society of the cincinnati. It is my very special pleasure tonight to introduce cole jones will be speaking to us this evening about his new book captives of liberty, prisoners of war and the politics of vengeance in the American Revolution. Which has just come out from the university of pennsylvania press. We have known professor jones since 2010 when he received a society of cincinnati scholars grant to conduct research in our library in support of his doctoral dissertation on the administration of enemy prisoners of war and revolutionary america. We have since followed his career and accomplishments with great interest and admiration. He received his ph. D. From Johns Hopkins in 2014, went on to hold post doctoral fellowships at the New York Historical society. Since 2015 he has been assistant professor of history at purdue university. Captives of liberty is an important and thought provoking book that examines how the founding generation of americans grappled with the problems of prisoner treatment. We during the eight year conflict, American Forces captured more than 17,000 british and allied german soldiers as well as thousands more loyalists and british mariners. In fact, the number of enemy prisoners in american custody often exceeded that of the american soldiers in the Continental Army. These prisoners proved increasingly burdensome for the nation as the war progressed. What was to become of these men . How would they be confined . We who would pay to house and feed them . When and how should they be released . A series of thorny political issues compounded these logistical difficulties. In his top this evening, professor jones will take us from the meeting rooms of the Continental Congress to the prison camps of virginia and maryland and pennsylvania. Revealing the factors that coalesced to transform the conflict into a war for vengeance escalating violence precipitously. Please join me and very much looking forward to this top. Coal jones you. Excellent. Thank you everyone thank you so much for coming out. Thank you for that kind and generous introduction. I will grab my point or here. It feels like a homecoming to be back here at anderson house. The projects that ellen just described and the things that i will talk about and the book that came from that project was born here. This was my first archival trip as a historian for this project. I was working on a dissertation on Johns Hopkins on this issue. I did not know what i was looking for. I had a question, i wanted unanswered, i started finals answers here at the society. So it is really a great privilege to be back although i didnt note it has been ten years. It took me ten years from that initial question to come up with this book that we will talk about today. So with that lets talk about it shall we . What is this book all about . In short we, as ellen told us, this book examines how revolutionary americans dealt with enemy prisoners. British, hessians as well as american loyalists. In order to figure that out i had to begin with the premise which was that prisoners of war or problematic. They pose a whole host of logistical and political problems. Prisoners of war in fact have been a perennial problem in the history of warfare. What do you do when your opponent throws down his arms and stopped fighting . Begging for his life. Do you even accept that proposition . Do you take prisoners at all . Has that person forfeited his life . Can you just kill them out of hand . If you do agree someones surrender than what . Who will pay . How will you feed them . How will you clothes them . Shelter them . Guard them . Where we hold them . How long will you keep them . What will you do with them then . Will you just release them etc . Again it is a logistical nightmare in the best of circumstances. But it is even worse and more problematic when the two sides engaged in conflict do not view each other as equals. If you view your opponent as unlawful, uncivilized, maybe even subhuman, then what are you going to do with these prisoners . You will see them as criminals. As terrorists etc. We do not have to go very far back in our own history to remember how this issued played out in the opening stages of the war on terror. Last i checked, not long ago, the Guantanamo Bay prison is very much still in operation. What will you do with these people . Are they lawful combatants . No. This is a war on terror right . They are criminals. Okay. Why do we not send them on trial . Why not charged them with a crime . We cant really do that either right . So what do we do . People will be held in limbo. That is where my book comes in. It looks at an earlier conflict. In short, it asks how did these guys figure out this problem . How did they address it . What would the founders do . That was my question. How are they going to deal with the problems posed by these 17,000plus prisoners captured over an eight year war . Before vietnam, it was the longest war in american history. In order to tell this story, the story of the revolution, we actually have to go back to europe. We have to go back across the atlantic to the middle decades of the 18th century to try and understand how war was practiced in europe. In what we call the age of the enlightenment. This is a 19th century painting but i think it captures in many ways the culture of war practiced by europeans in the 18th century. Linear tactics. You see the french in the foreground. The french officers actually inviting the english and things like the honor of firing first. It is probably an apocryphal story but it gives you a sense of the culture of this conflict in europe. This will shape and color war in the American Revolution. This age of enlightenment was a period in which philosophers and scientists and men of reason believed that violence could be controlled. That violence was not an inherent thk we that everyone has to deal with. That it could be restrained. That humanity has value, that pain is bad and can be ameliorated. For centuries, society has accepted pain and violence as a way of life. Therefore that will play out in the actual practice of war. They will still fight, a lot. In fact for most of the 18th century europe is at war. But they will fight over limited goals. Historians call this the age of limited war. They will fight with regular standing armies. Not bands of mercenaries or civilians in arms. It will be trained regular troops. While these battles can be very violent, as the four french guards realize, it is controlled and limited to the battlefield. We may be the siege of the city or a town in the worstcase scenario, but violence is limited and controlled. Additionally, when the shooting stops, the violence stops. That is the idea. That violence will be limited to the battlefield and if prisoners are taken they will be treated humanely. They use that phrase. Humane treatment. Treated with humanity. The key to this whole system is the social order of 18th century europe which is a social order based on an aristocracy. There isnt an aristocratic culture at the top of the social order, a very high article and patriarchal order. A british officer and spanish officer. The spanish officer on the left, who wouldve happily hacked each other to death in the early 17th century over the differing politics and religions. Here in the late 18th century they are engaging in gentlemanly conviviality. Comradeship. They have something in common. They share this aristocratic culture of war. They are understanding of how war should be fought. That pertains, especially to prisoners. Officers like our spanish officer, if these captured he can offer his parole. Parole of honor in order to avoid imprisonment. He might go back home. He might stay in the night near city until he can be exchanged. That is the real point of taking prisoners. It is you want to take your enemy prisoners and then exchange them for your own troops who are in enemy hands. You want to do this as quickly as possible because regular trained troops are hard to come by. It takes a long time to form a standing army. You want your troops back. Especially your officers. So what belligerent nations would do in the 18th century is strident sign a treaty. A cartel at the outset of hostilities. France and britain are going at it and they will sign this treaty which will agree to how prisoners will be treated. More specifically, how quickly they will be exchanged. The cartel that was in place during the seven years war, we call it the french indian war, stipulated 14 days. You are only to be a captive 14 days before being released. It did not always work that way. Things broke down and there were breaches etc. What happened when there was a sort of breach of etiquette . What if your side abused a prisoner . How are you going to rectify that . What is going to happen . Well, for one thing they will invoke what they knew or called the law of retaliation. The law of retaliation is part of an expanding corpus of International Law that comes out of the enlightenment, stipulating how different nations should engage one another. So if you violate the accepted norms of war, if you abuse your prisoner, then we will take another prisoner and we will abuse that prisoner to the exact same level. The key here is proportionality. Retaliation is a in act of proportional violence in order to convince the other side they need to play by the rules. In the 18th century it acted very rarely in europe. In part because of this gentlemanly code of honor shared by officers on both sides of these conflicts. Another reason is the mere threat of retaliation was often enough to prevent abuse of prisoners. Plus both sides had a vested interest in getting their prisoners back. There was no un or International Court to adjudicate these things, they were done between two men just like that. On their word of honor. What about in america . We all know that warfare in america did not look like that right . What about in america . In part, because for most of the 18th century the european powers are not sending regular troops. Certainly not in large numbers. Most of the conflict in north america is fought by militia. Colonial militias on both sides. New france and new england. English colonies. There is a difference right there. You will not have the same standing armies. There is no aristocracy in the british colonies in north america that share the same values. Additionally and most importantly, north america is also home to the indigenous population. Different native nations who have their own culture of war. Their own understanding of what is acceptable violence in war. To take a scalp in the native culture of war is an accepted practice of warfare. In europe this would be seen as barbarism, savagely. Europeans tended to view their antagonist as uncivilized. Beyond the pale of civilization is what they would say and therefore not entitled to the same person protection. When European Forces are going to fight against native nations, they will often do so with extreme violence in the 18th century. Additionally, the officers observed these colonial forces have modeled themselves on their european counterparts. They do not do not want to be seen as more credentials, which is the term, they want to be seen as gentleman officers of this same cast. Heres an example of a new yorker, sir william johnson, a new york provincial troop. Hes showing himself restraining his native ally. This mohawk warrior who wants to scalp the four wounded french officer. He is protecting his fellow gentleman officer from violence. The french officer will have given his parole and be allowed to return to france until hes either exchanged or a cessation of hostilities ensues. So in 1775, when the Angle American elite decide to prosecute their grievances against parliament by force of arms in april. It is with the idea of warfare that they entered the conflict. They believe that they understand how their enemy is going to fight and they will fight by these rules. Prisoners of course would be treated humanely. Angle americans see themselves as british and civilized. The british on the other hand, 3000 miles across the atlantic have a very different idea. These were not just some recalcitrant colonial subjects, these are rebels and traders against the king. They pose a direct challenge of the supremacy of parliament and that cannot be tolerated. The British State in the 18th century had suppressed no shorter than three major domestic insurrections in britain. They had done so extremely violently. Rebels are to be punished. They are not to be conciliated or negotiated with. That is very clear. The british army comes over here and are forbidden by the Colonial Ministry from negotiating with the americans. They are not allowed to negotiate over terms of prisoners of war or anything like that. These are rebels in arms. Criminals. Therefore they are subject to civil justice. Heres a problem. You can capture 300 guys, maybe bring them back to london and put them on trial for treason and hang some of them. What do you do when you captured 3000 . That is a fact that is exactly what the british will do in the fall of 1776 in new york. What will they do with these prisoners . They cannot negotiate for the release because that would be legitimizing the americans. They cannot do that. Nor can we send them back to london. That would bog down our courts forever. What are we going to do . Guantanamo bay, 1776, we are going to hold them indefinitely. The problem is, new york city is burned. It is a ruin of a city. Where is general how going to put these prisoners where is general howe going to put these prisoners . Troop transport ships. The most famous is the jersey. Its only used as a prison ship later in the your. But nonetheless, the conditions on the prison ships for these american soldiers are going to be jersey primarily holds sailors are going to be atrocious. You can imagine. The filth, the disease when he put thousands of people on a ship like that moored in the brooklyn harbor. Consequently, fatalities are going to mount really quickly. That first winter of 7677 is really, really deadly for the americans. Historians estimate somewhere between 12000 and 18,000 American Service personnel died in british custody during the eight years of the revolutionary war. There were perhaps between 20 and 30,000 americans captured. We do not have great numbers for this. Thats over 50 though. That means if you will fall in british hands, you have over 50 chance of dying. Stories of these hellholes, these prison ships, are going to spread. American newspapers, propagandists, are going to launch latch on to this as evidence that the british are the barbarians. We are playing by the rules. We are doing things the right way. They are the ones who are savages. They are not civilized people. As one american officer says, general washington intends to show the british that americans are humane as well as brave. That we are not going to sink to their level. There is in ideological and political commitment to the way americans are going to treat prisoners of war. A great example of this is the capture of the hessian brigade at trenton on christmas 1776. About 900 hessian soldiers, german exhilarates troops, are captured. Washington specifically forbids his officers and soldiers from abusing these haitians. They themselves had behaved horribly during the campaign in new york. Oftentimes not taking american prisoners. He specifically forbids this. When they march these prisoners through philadelphia, crowds flock to the prisoners and begin flinging dung at them, flinging rocks and calling them names. Washington instruct his officers to calm the crowds. He allows these haitian prisoners to move towards central pennsylvania to work instead of being confined to jails. They will work on farms in return for meager wages and room and board. They are given a lot of freedom. They are not guarded, certainly not put on prison ships. Yet the british are still doing this. There is no headway here on this issue. Americans are still dying. When some are released, william how will release many of the men he captures, it will come back to their communities and they will be diseased and traumatized by the experience of these prison ships. Theyre going to tell their families, and anyone who will listen, about how barbaric the british can be. This will search support for the revolution. People who are on the fence are going to say this is wrong. Additionally, people are going to start saying it is time. Weve played nice too long. It is time. As one Citizen Rights to congress, it is time to revenge the innocent blood of your murdered children. If they put our men on ships we should put their men on ships. Retaliation. Proportional. Right . That is tolerated by the laws of war. But this call for retaliation is going to spiral into demands for vengeance. Vengeance is not proportional. It is an act of revenge. I call this process the politics of vengeance. As it turns out, George Washington does not have a monopoly on violence, he does not control. He has a limited control over the Northern Army that he commands but that is it. He does not control the states. He does not control the state militias. He has very little control outside his individual area. The states themselves who are now responsible to their constituents are going to enact retaliatory measures that will spiral into vengeance against first loyalists, americans who do not or unwilling to sign the oath of allegiance to state. It will be punished and then eventually britain as well. Loyalists have a particular hard time after the declaration of independence. Paradoxically, once independence is declared, loyalists will become,. All 13 states are going to make treason laws to punish loyalists. Not every state will use capital punishment, but most will engage in persecution of some kind. In particular, confiscation of land. Also executions as well. Most executions will be extra legal. They will not use the apparatus of the courts to do it. It will be more like mob or vigilante justice. A group will come to your house, drag you out and string you up. One american officer from virginia became so famous for hanging loyalists that they called it lincehs law. So the active hanging a loyalist became lynching. Loyalists will respond with violence and increasing violence against their oppressor. Whenever they can, they will rise up in rebellion and do so and retaliate on a similar scale. But its not enough just to target loyalists. You also have to target the british. The british are the epicenter of patriot animosity. Becoming barbarians upon the scale of civilization. Revolutionist will get an opportunity for revenge on a grand scale in october of 1777 when American General Horatio Gates captures the army at saratoga. We know this is the turning point of the American Revolution. They were both british officers, they both served together in the same regiment. There were old friends. Gates is going to sign what is known as a convention. Burgoyne will not surrender. He will sign a treaty that will allow him to go back to england on parole. As long as his men dont fight in america his whole army can go back. This is part of the gentlemanly culture of war that we talked about in the european context. If you are an american in milford, connecticut and your brother dies on a prison ship, suddenly you have 6000 british prisoners in your custody, now is the time to put them on on a prison ship. Now is the time to obtain justice for your murdered love ones. Ordinary americans are infuriated by the treaty. They will petition congress, demanding that they do something. That is exactly what will happen. In january of 1778 congress will repudiate the convention of saratoga. They will say we will not agree to this. The parliament of Great Britain must agree that the United States is a sovereign nation. They wont do that, thats the point of the war. Then the British Crown will reimburse the American Congress for all of the expenses of the prisoners up to that point. It was a vastly exaggerated amount of money they demanded. Parliament will say no. Parliament will stop sending supplies to these prisoners. If they arent going to be released they at the americans pay for them. Congress does not have the power of the purse. They have to ask the states for requisitions. Massachusetts has had enough of these guys. Congress orders them to march. Wintertime they will march from boston, massachusetts to charlesville, virginia. That is an unpleasant walk. You can imagine, especially if you have already walked from canada. Along this way prisoners will suffer every town they go through. They are pelted with stones, harassed, some murdered, etc. They are furious because of the way that they fought that campaign. They had employed native american allies, particularly the mohawk nation. The native american auxiliaries had not played by those gentlemanly rules they murdered a young loyalist woman. People are furious and demanding revenge. Turns out people of virginia are none too fond of these prisoners. It will wear out their welcome and the governor of virginia will stop paying. You are congresss problem, we have no money for you anymore. No money means no food. They are kept in these pens where there is no food. If you are starving you are more likely to contract a disease. You can imagine in the age of coronavirus how easily disease spreads. Imagine if you are 6000 thousand people held in an open air pen. One british surgeon at a camp in pennsylvania said the prisoners are falling sick so fast there are not men enough to bury the dead. He said the army is at the very jaws of death. Men are dying at an extreme right here. There they are entering captivity. They were not so cheerful when they left. There is a return of some of the prisoners of war showing prisoners who had died, had disease, etc. The Convention Army will never be officially released until the end of the war. They are held for fiveandahalf years. Congress will never agree to terms of the convention. The british will never agree to the american demands. They will be held until the treaty of paris ends the war in 1783. By that point there are about 20 of them left. Many have run away. Some have enlisted in the American Army to avoid the horrible conditions of the prison camps. Others have died. Washington is totally horrified by this. This is not the war he wanted to fight. Washington is an exemplar of the virginia gentlemen. He wants to play by european rules. He is thinking of his mentor, general braddock. He wants to live up to the standards. Each of the states is not only fighting against a foreign foe, they are fighting a civil war, internal civil wars with their own subjects that are rising up and rebellion in the name of the king to try to challenge their authority. Their own citizens are demanding they do something. They have to answer their constituents. Many, even in Washingtons Army by 1779, 1780, are demanding we fight british fire with fire. The gloves are off. This has gone too far. Washington throughout the war fights that impulse. Constantly fighting the impulse for revenge. Trying to talk people off the ledge. Trying to reason with congress. Congress will want to throw some hessian officers in a dungeon. Please lets not be rash, etc. Washington gets his opportunity to show he is in fact a europeanstyle officer deserving of that title in october of 1781. Another british general, this time charles cornwallis, will surrender his army at yorktown. Another roughly 6000 men. Those are the two big captures of the war, yorktown and saratoga. In the presence of the french who were very punk tillius about protocol, washington is able to demonstrate his magnum entity. He can offer cornwallis exceedingly generous terms. Not as generous as gates offered burgoyne. They will be prisoners of war but cornwallis will be allowed to return to england on parole. Almost all the officers of the army will go back to new york on their parole of honor not to fight until the exchange. The rankandfile will be marched into virginia, the interior where they will be provided the same rations and clothing as the Continental Army. They are protected against retaliation. It is in the surrender documents that these prisoners cannot be retaliated upon. That is really very magnanimous of him. You can imagine how the angry farmer in milford, connecticut whose brother is sitting on a prison ship feels about that. Not great. Even more so, the delegate the population of the southern states, cornwalliss army had spread terror, violence, etc. Provoking loyalist insurrections. Freeing enslaved people, etc. There is great demand for revenge. The delegates from South Carolina want to recall cornwallis. They petition to have cornwallis recalled to philadelphia so he may hang in front of congress. They are like that is what we need. We want him hanged. As you can imagine how that would play out. Congress cant afford to feed these guys any better than they can the army. What are they going to do with these people . They are bringing them to the same camp. They are bringing these prisoners to the same camp as the army in virginia and pennsylvania and maryland eventually. According to one of the prisoners, roger lamb, he wrote this after the war. I love what he wrote in here. Lord cornwalliss army was shut up here like a toad in a hole and full of venom. They are not pleased by the situation. Yellow fever is going through philadelphia. Before they are captured. It will spread to the camps in pennsylvania and begin taking the lives of these prisoners at a rapid rate. To the point we do have a fairly good records for the prisoners of the yorktown prisoners who were never exchanged. They are held until the treaty ends the war in 1783. The spring of 1783. The numbers. The mortality rate of the british prisoners of cornwalliss army is over 30 , which is higher the mortality rate of Union Prisoners at confederate prison andersonville in the civil war. We dont have photographs from the American Revolution, but that is what starvation and disease does to the human body. That paints some picture, i think, of the suffering these prisoners endured. Eventually they dont have enough food to keep even the emaciated ones alive. They agree to sell the hessians into indentured servitude. Anyone who refuses or resists being sold is sent to philadelphia to the new jail in philadelphia where yellow fever is rampant. A group of 128 men who are confined there in philadelphia for one year, of the 128, 20 perished in philadelphia. That gives you some sense. Washington was deeply, deeply upset by this. He could not control it. They could command his army, but not command congress. He was a subject of congress. Congress was answerable to the states. He had no power over that. He continually tries to arrange informal exchanges with the british, to no avail. They continue trying and can never agree on terms. The states are guarding the prisoners not giving them back to washington. No, they are our prisoners now. We will hold them in exchange for our guys. Washington has to confess he feels deeply embarrassed on the issue of prisoners. Prisoners on both sides are going to languish in captivity until the treaty of paris. This is an image done of american prisoners on the famous Jersey Prison ship. Showing the sunken faces of these men. We dont have any images for the british prisoners, but british pension applications, the survivors who made it through the captivity and made it home to apply for a pension, they read like a laundry list of misery, suffering and woe. A few quotes from members. Enlisted prisoners were in these camps talking about how their confinement left them really suffering. Bearing the scars of their captivity for life. Many dont actually live very long after they returned home. One british survivor, he said, the treatment of prisoners in general during the american war was harsh, severe, and in many instances inhuman. Thats a sad upsetting story. What are we going to make of that . How does this make us rethink the American Revolution . I think it forces us to confront an uncomfortable reality, which is the American Revolution was tragic for many people. We have this triumphant nationalist narrative of this revolution that belies the tragedy at the core of the eightyear civil war that divided these people. Many scholars recently observed this was a bloody, contradictory, divisive civil war. Too often we forget those horrors. The tale of these prisoners confirms that. Perhaps most importantly, the wartime experiences of these prisoners demonstrates americanscommitment to the restraint of violence, wartime violence was fragile. It was complicated and then eroded by the experience of the war itself. The act of waging this war degraded that prewar commitment to restraining violence and treating prisoners humanely. In short, i conclude its about time you help me with this we stop talking about the war for american independence. I hate that term. We need to Start Talking about the American Revolutionary war. This was a revolutionary war. It was fundamentally different in the practice of war. It was every bit as revolutionary in character as the french revolutionary war of the late 18th century. While the American Revolution itself did not devolve into the terror of the french revolution, and i have lots of ideas about why it did not, it could have. In places where the loyalists and the british actually posed a Severe Threat to the revolution, it did. It did devolve into cycles of vengeance and terror. Much like the case of the french revolution, revolutionary political change, getting rid of monarchy and creating a republic based on popular sovereignty had the consequence of removing war from the hands of elite gentlemen and escalating its violence along the way. Prisoners on both sides suffered. From the Vantage Point of these prisoners the American Revolution looks like a cautionary tale, not an inspirational one. Hi plead with you plea with you to emulate the aspirations of the founders, and other actions. We can do better. We must do better. Thank you very much. [applause] am happy to entertain some questions if we have time. Yes please. Have wondered for quite some time. You mentioned the hessians in trenton went to the redding area in pennsylvania. In maryland, frederick, we have a building commonly referred to as the hessian barracks. Did you find out which hessians were imprisoned there . Frederick, as well as Fort Frederick which was a separate entity further away, were the sites of these internment camps throughout the war. Frederick is used for british prisoners as well as hessian prisoners. Maryland will refuse to pay after a while. They have to go over the border to virginia or pennsylvania. I believe brunswick troops from Burgoynes Army were there for a while. We call all german auxiliary troops hessian. They came from many different principalities within what is now germany. Brunswick was one of the larger contingents that were captured at saratoga. Yes . inaudible charleston sure. Charlson is an interesting case. Henry clinton decides he wants to do Something Different than howe did. He will be much more humane to his prisoners he will parole the entire militia. But then these paroled militiamen will go off and join the forces, break their parole and he will become enraged because they did not play by the rules. When cornwallis takes over, he will retaliate on those prisoners violently. The Continental Army troops are initially kept in the barracks in charleston. But then when these violations of paroles happen, the british commander, i believe its nesbitt balfour, put them on prison ships to punish them for the violations of the rules. Yes . Thank you for your work. Its very novel and interesting. Thank you. How do you tell intentional harm when you are a prisoner versus gross negligence . I think you can make an argument with the british a lot of them arguably it was gross negligence and they did not understand how diseases work. Clearly at least gross negligence. You have cited some angry words by americans. How did they really translate into the intentional harm or the lack of funds and not well organized when it came to money and raising money, the appreciation of money . Thats a great question. It is a sliding scale. Where does gross negligence and cruelty begin . I would argue from the position of a prisoner if you are starving in a camp, it doesnt matter what the intentions were. There were actually violent intentions. In fact, for much of the war the british are willing to swap american sailors captured on the prison ships informally with the americans. Washington wants to do it. He wants to make these exchanges to release the prisoners. Congress cannot do that because they are under demand from the states to hold these prisoners for the purposes of retaliation. They use that language. We are holding these men. We will not exchange them. We will keep them locked up to punish the british for what they have done and show them they cannot push us around anymore. From the perspective of individual states, as well as many delegates in congress, it is intentional. They could have released british prisoners and got american prisoners in exchange, but they dont. Individual states will do it. Washington is able to get people exchanged through his contacts and informally negotiating with howe. There are no largescale major exchanges. In your research have you come across examples of how the british treated the irish rebels prior to the revolution . When i was in ireland, prior to the easter rising of 1916, previous rebellions, big and small, and the unifying characteristic was that the officers all got hanged. Did you find anything like that in your research . Yeah, so, what i was discussing in my book was how do you suppress the rebellion and do with the captives . It is actually scotland and the jacobite rebellion of 1715 and 1745. The british army will do that effectively the british army will do that effectively. They will capture the officer corps, they will be tried for treason and executed as a symbolic gesture. They also drive the scots out of their homes. Many are sold into indentured servitude, etc. Using extreme violence to crush the rebellion. The british were doing the same thing in ireland, particularly in 1798 with the major rising in ireland then. Because rebellions pose an existential threat to the state. They call into legitimate they call the legitimacy of the state of the question. You cannot negotiate with rebels without undermining the very foundation of government. Britain, the foundation of government is not the go to the god or the king. Its the parliament. Any challenge the parliament has to be punished. The fact that these are gaelic speaking, primarily, many catholics. It will make them seem uncivilized or alien to the british army. This will exacerbate this trend of violence. We see that is less so in the american case, which is a mitigating factor for many of these british officers. Yes . Im sure youve read the book by israel potter. inaudible right. I cant quite recall the reference in the book but the issue here at play, i think, is that the americans are shocked. They had not seen war like this. It is worth keeping in mind that the American Revolutionary war is fought right along the coast. The most settled places in north america. War used the be peripheral, distant. Western pennsylvania. Western new york. Canada, the west indies. They did not have them in bordentown, new jersey. There had not been major fighting since 1675. For many of these communities they have never seen war. Maybe one or two of the men in town had fought during the french and indian war, but many had not. They had this idealized vision of what war should be. It is like a painting. That is what war looks like in europe. It is pretty. There are flags in drums. That is not what happens in the American Revolution. Back there . Ironically the revolution brought about the emancipation of many slaves. Dunsmore, who committed the british, many of the loyalists allowed the emancipation of the slaves. It was chaos. Upwards of 20,000 enslaved americans had joined forces with the british. I was wondering if there is much documentation on what happened . Is a very sad story predictably. Dunmore issues this emancipation proclamation saying if you are a slave belonging to the revolutionaries, the rebels, if you are enslaved by the rebels, you may free yourself by joining the british by rallying to my standard. Initially just men to raise for his regiment, and then eventually after 1779 there becomes a general emancipation for the property of rebel masters what happens when they are captured by americans . There is a place called great bridge, virginia. Immediately the revolutionaries are confronted. What kind of know what we need to do to these british soldiers. We are less sure about the white loyalists. What do we do about the slaves . The initial desire to murder them right on the field of battle. One of the commanders has to intercede and prevent them from being murdered. He does this not out of humanity or goodness of heart. He wants to sell them and get the prophet from it. Many petition to get the property back. Even washington has to sign some of these. He does not seem to think it is a big problem sending property back. Throughout the war africanamericans in arms captured could be summarily executed on the spot. More often than not they are sold into slavery somewhere else. Sold into the west indies. Put on ships. Privateer vessels. There is a salt and lead mine in western pennsylvania where they sedt black loyalists, virginia does to work there. It is even more horrific than for the White British soldiers. inaudible yeah, its a real problem. The reason washington does not want to touch it is if you are born of the states, you are considered a citizen of that state after july 4, 1776. If you are caught in arms against that state, that is insurrection and treason. It is punishable by death. Washington cannot override the treason laws of the individual states. That is why he does not want to touch that whatsoever because he doesnt have the power to do that effectively. He is constrained. In reality, most loyalist prisoners are returned to the states. Some are tried. The same thing within britain. You cannot try 500 people for treason. This is an inchoate government. They dont have the resources to do that. There are executions and a lot of paroling. We will take your property. Get your property and leave. Go back to british occupied new york and things like that. It is a mix of exemplary terror not unlike in the irish and scottish cases, and some form of pardon and disenfranchisement. Our last question right here. I know in the case of a lot of the german soldiers, like roger lam, they settled in america. Do we know a rough estimate of how many pows actually stayed even the short answer is no, we dont. But we do know is there has persistently been a long story, which is these poor hessian mercenaries were sent over here. They were captured and they were shown the bounty of this american land. All this freedom and liberty and land to farm. They settled and prospered and became active members of the community, especially in central pennsylvania. There is a large germanspeaking population. That is the story. That one makes us feel good. Actually much more complicated than that. Congress in washington will try to make that happen. They will try to encourage the hessians to desert and join the American Army, to settle down. Just dont go back to the british. What my colleague has found that shes gone over to germany through the muster rolls. A lot of these guys come back. They do. They enlist in the wreck and army. When they get close to new york city they will run away. They will rejoin the regiment. We had this idea the germans were forced here and miserable and maltreated and had no loyalty. Princes sent them for money. It is not really true. These are regular basically professional soldiers. They have a sworn oath. They feel duty. They want they feel a duty and they want to get home at the end of the war. We dont really know. It is much more complicated than we would like it to be. Thank you well, and thank you to dr. Jones for his talk this evening. She argues that their expereinces influenced french politics and perspectives. The American Revolution institute hosted this event. Greetings, everyone