POSTING #96

"The Civil War of 1812"

I have a confession to make.

While I was studying Canadian history at high school and later at university I found the War of 1812 boring---extremely, even deadly boring.

To be sure there was the tragic story of brave General Brock being shot and killed by an American sniper as he led his troops up the hill in an effort to retake Queenston Heights from an American force that had managed to capture it.

And I liked the story about the tall monument on the top of Queenston Heights built in his honour by a grateful nation, topped with an immense statue of the General with a finger pointing---it is claimed---at Washington, with the implicit message, 'Don't ever try that again!'

I also admired the bravery of Laura Secord who trekked through dense bush to warn the British that the Americans had invaded---although I didn't much like her chocolates.

But the War seemed to be about several years of border skirmishes, the dates and locations of which I had trouble remembering. And when it ended, the pre-war borders remained intact.

My views about the War began to change after we moved to Virgil 2 years ago. Planning for a War of 1812 Bicentennial was heating up. I joined  one of the Niagara-on-the-Lake Bicentennial committees and started dipping into some histories about the War.

But last weekend, my views about the War did a sudden shift to a full 180 degrees away from 'boring'. I went to Buffalo for a lecture given by Professor Alan Taylor who has just finished a massive history of the War, called "The Civil War of 1812". (Pat couldn't come---she was attending a lecture on how to cut out patterns to make 1812 vintage clothes for us to wear during the Bicentennial!)

Taylor, a native of Maine,  teaches American and Canadian history at the University of California at Davis and has received a number of prestigious awards for previous books, including a Pulitzer Prize.

As I listened to the professor, I remembered a discussion with a retired historian in Kingston. She said that in history it was not important to know that the Battle of Hastings took place in 1066. Instead, it was important to know why it couldn't have taken place in 966 or 1166.

Professor Taylor's talk was full of the 'why's' of the War of 1812.

And suddenly, I saw the War in a new light and realized that it wasn't boring at all.

Let me jot down some points that I took away from his talk and from the questions period that followed. I should stress that these are my conclusions, not necessarily those of the good professor.

1. Americans have been taught that the British started the war, and that it consisted mainly of some naval battles and the glorious victory at New Orleans when General Andrew Jackson defeated an invading British force (this was in January 1815, a month after a peace treaty had been signed in Europe but word hadn't yet reached the North America combatants). Out of this battle came the US national anthem and the myth that the US won the War.

2. In fact, the US started the war, with a Declaration of War passed in 1812, primarily with the support of southern and western members of Congress. Congress decided to leave town without voting tax increases for the cost of the war, the argument being that the war would  cost very little because the residents of Upper Canada would welcome the US troops as liberators and would provide them with free shelter and food. (Remind you of another war?)

3. Americans have not been taught that most of the fighting in the War took place in the Great Lakes basin and that the US lost most of those battles.

4. The War should be seen as a kind of civil war with Americans, British Subjects, Irish settlers and natives on both sides of the border fighting each other, sometimes literally brother against brother.

5. Canada would almost surely have lost the war if it had not been for the support of native warriors at critical points. Instead of rewarding the natives for their invaluable help, Canadian authorities treated them abominably.

6. By the autumn of 1814, the War had almost bankrupted the US, and states in the north-east which were furious at the western and southern states who had pushed for the War, were threatening to secede from the union. If Britain hadn't offered the US a peace treaty, the US would probably have gone broke and split up.

7. Taylor argues that the War was not inconsequential as many American histories have suggested but that it had profound consequences for the US.

8. He sees the American Revolution as having two acts. The first act was the successful fight by the American colonies against the British in the period from 1776-1783. But that act left unresolved the issue of whether the new nation would tolerate a northern nation that was British. The second act was the War of 1812 in which the US attempted to finish the revolution by taking over its northern neighbour.   

9. The failure of the US invasion in the Great Lakes basin convinced most Americans that they had to share North America, and this in effect marked the true end of the American Revolution.

10. And on this side of the border, the War convinced Upper Canadians that they had to create their own country, a country that would have friendly relations with the US but would have to have its own institutions and values.

So, both nations were dramatically shaped by what I had thought was a boring War.

Not boring, at all.

000

My experiences with the border officers as I travelled to Buffalo for the lecture and later returned to Canada were interesting.

At the US border, the officer when he heard I was going to hear a lecture on the War of 1812 said, "Wow, I love the history of that period. I wish someone had told me about the lecture."

At the Canadian border on the way home, the officer when he heard that I had been to the War lecture almost hissed, "How biased was it?"

I said that I thought the lecture was fair and even-handed.

Looking skeptical, he asked, "Did they tell you that General Brock died when he fell off his horse, not when he was leading his troops into battle---stuff like that?"

I shook my head, and said that the speaker hadn't said anything like that.

With a look that said he was disappointed in how gullible I was, he waved me through.

000

One shouldn't extrapolate from two brief encounters.

But I will, anyway.

It seems to me that many Americans, including tourists who will come to our Bicentennial, are ready for a more accurate account of the War---an account of the kind conveyed in Professor Taylor's book.

For our part, we will have to suppress the urge to get even for past insults and slights. I believe the expression is, 'suck it up'.

In that connection, I am told that when the Bicentennial folks in Niagara-on-the-Lake were trying to find a motto to go below the logo they were developing, someone facetiously suggested, 'We Beat the Bast--ds!'.

It was decided to go with 'Upper Canada Preserved".

A wise choice!

000

If you like history, and relatives or friends are asking for hints about what you would like for Christmas, you might suggest Professor Taylor's book. I bought a copy at the lecture and it is a wonderful read.

Taylor is a skilled, subtle and good-humoured story teller who, I believe, has 'reset' the history of that period. All future histories of the War of 1812---whether written by Canadians or Americans---will have to start with his work.

Here are the details of the book:

The Civil War of 1812: American Citizens, British Subjects, Irish Rebels, & Indian Allies by Alan Taylor, published by Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group,

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

See you on November 28th for Posting #97 with more stories from our family’s universe! If you have comments or suggestions, please leave a comment at the bottom of this posting,  or email me at johnpathunter@gmail.com.