|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 387
enthusiast
|
OP
enthusiast
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 387 |
the burning of Washington
None of my school books ever mentioned that the Americans burned various Canadian cities before they burned Washington, but I found them out when my dad showed me a history of Canada that said we did.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,156
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,156 |
What else did she tell you?Well, the definitive proof of her incompetence came when she tried to tell us that the name Montreal was a misnomer, because there was not actually a "Mount Royal" in Montreal. That seemed extremely suspect since I had been there and climbed Mount Royal on a rather warm day, and I was pretty sure I wasn't imagining things... The scary part is wondering how much incorrect information I got from her that I spout back on occasion to prove a point! This is why I check my Canadian history facts with other sources these days, because I "learned" them in her class... 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757 |
wondering how much incorrect information I got from her
Well, Bean, I reckon you are well ahead of the herd. At least you are casting a critical eye over your own store of knowledge, which is, I think, the sign of true wisdom. Many people lack this insight.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094 |
Speaking of the early US and Canada, I recall hearing somewhere that Nova Scotia was originally close with the 13 colonies and was actually a 14th colony, but they abstained from declaring independence with the others. I'm doubtful of the verity of this, but I found it interesting. It would seem logical that it wouldn't be discussed in US History texts if it is indeed true, but has anyone else heard about this?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 218
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 218 |
Nova Scotia was originally close with the 13 colonies and was actually a 14th colony
At the onset of the war, many loyalists fled to Canada and primarily, Nova Scotia. In mid-1776, the Revolutionary War turned towards Canada with the aim to make Canada as a whole a "fourteenth colony" and to remove it as a base from which Britain could launch attacks and invasions. Calling Canada the "attempted fourteenth colony" is common in then literature, but I could only find scattered references to Nova Scotia proper being named thus.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 218
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 218 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
Darn those double posts.
'S'all right, Sweetie. If it bothers you, just "Edit" and delete one. Though I think if you simply empty the text and subject boxes, the post quietly goes away, instead of leaving a line screaming Post Deleted by Brandon.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146 |
Actually, if you look at the whole thing from a geopolitical point of view, although the British "won" the war, neither side really achieved its original war aims. In fact, the casus belli for the Americans (pressment of American sailors) wasn't even included in the articles of the Treaty of Ghent. The original war aims had got lost in the fog of war, rhetoric and poor communications.
What it all really proved was that the real cost of defending a country with a coastline as long as the US's was prohibitive given the communications and transportation available at the time. Similarly, the cost of attacking a country with a coastline as long as the US's was equally prohibitive. To win a territorial war, you must take and hold each piece of disputed territory. Neither side could do this in the War of 1812 - the Americans lacked the discipline necessary to achieve a successful invasion of Canada, and the British just really wanted the war to stop and were actually simply carrying out a police action. Their interests lay elsewhere at the time.
On the face of it, the Americans lost, hands down. At no time did they achieve their immediate battle aims in full, and they appeared to have no firm war aims at all. The Battle of New Orleans aside, they won few, if any, real and unequivocal victories, although the Indians fighting with them did. It cost a young country a bundle it could ill-afford for nothing other than a bit of national pride in return. Some say that it cemented the independence of the States, but that was pretty much a fait accompli by 1812 anyway, and I don't buy the argument.
FWIW.
The idiot also known as Capfka ...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,189
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,189 |
Surprised no one has mentioned our "illustrious" National Athem, The Star-Spangled Banner in this discussion. Francis Scott Key wrote the lyric while watching the British shelling of Ft. McHenry in Baltimore Harbor during this war (Sept.13-14, 1814). And, consequently, the US wound up with The Star-Spangled (usually mangled) Banner as our National Anthem instead of America (the Beautiful). For that alone you could say we lost the war! But, of course, all through school we were taught we won the War of 1812 simply because we staved the British off from attempting to conquer and take back our young nation. But they also taught us that Lincoln freed the slaves and everybody lived happily ever after...(Reconstruction? Jim Crow? Sharecropping? What's all that?) One war they never taught us except for a mere mention was the Mexican - American War (1846-48). I always wondered why they didn't (because it was a mighty sizeable conflict) until I discovered that Gen. Winfield Scott, violating centuries of wartime "etiquette," ordered the shelling of Veracruz and its civilian population. Wouldn't want schoolchildren to think that we Americans were responsible for relaunching ancient (and, now, modern) barbarism back into warfare, now would we? Note: The they referred to is "my teachers," of course. Obviously, as already noted on this board, lesson plans vary tremendously for a variety of reasons! 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146 |
Yep, I've noted in a number of American publications that the British wanted to "take back" the United States. Yet as far as I can remember from my reading of history, nothing could be further from the truth. The British were fully occupied in Europe at the time, and, in any case, were not in the slightest bit interested in colonial self-aggrandisement. That came some years later, well after the Napoleonic Wars. They were damned annoyed at the US for stirring it up at the time, and their sole war aim was to prevent the US annexing Canada. Plus, there was probably a punitive element to their actions - burning Washington had no strategic value, and I'm sure they knew that. It amazes me that anyone could have thought that Britain was seriously considering reacquiring the US at that time. They provided the minimum resources of the lowest possible quality to stave the US off - with a few exceptions. They wanted peace in the Americas. The conflict cost them too much at an awkward time both militarily and politically.
Again, FWIW.
The idiot also known as Capfka ...
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,810
Members9,187
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
458
guests, and
1
robot. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
