A Revolutionary People At War: The Continental Army and American Character, 1775-1783 [Paperback]

Charles Royster (Author)

Book Description

Release date: August 14, 1996 | ISBN-10: 0807846066 | ISBN-13: 978-0807846063

In this highly acclaimed book, Charles Royster explores the mental processes and emotional crises that Americans faced in their first national war. He ranges imaginatively outside the traditional techniques of analytical historical exposition to build his portrait of how individuals and a populace at large faced the Revolution and its implications. The book was originally published by UNC Press in 1980.

Editorial Reviews

Review

Represents a quantum leap in our understanding of the Revolution.

Edmund S. Morgan, New Republic

It is a work of art. . . . No student of early American history should miss it.

Journal of Southern History

Product Details

• Paperback: 452 pages
• Publisher: The University of North Carolina Press (August 14, 1996)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0807846066
• ISBN-13: 978-0807846063
• Product Dimensions: 6.1 x 1.3 x 9.2 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.8 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.8 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (10 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #401,044 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

29 of 30 people found the following review helpful

5.0 out of 5 stars Lock, Stock, and Barrel July 6, 2000

By Kevin F. Kiley

Format:Paperback

This is an excellent study of the Continental Army without which the Revolution would not have been won. Charles Royster is a first class historian and this is one of the best, if not the best, book he has written.

It is something of a social history and it gives a complete account of what the Continental army was like, its motivation, origins, and development, warts and all. I cannot think of another work that covers this topic as well as this one.

One of the most interesting facets of the book, though, is the appendix that covers statistics and the motivation of the Continentals. This gives a true and accurate picture of the Continentals and give them a human face. They weren't demigods, but soldiers who enlisted in an army that had a hard task ahead, and who sometimes failed, always endured, and finally won. In many ways it was the toughest, best army the US ever fielded. It definitely was the most enduring-no other American military force suffered from and finally overcame such an imposing set of obstacles. This book gives a much more accurate picture of the Continental Army than Charles Neimeter's American Goes To War. Charles Royster has a definite story to tell and he tells it with verve, panache, accuracy, and a definite empathy for his subject. This book is a definite must for any student of the American Revolution

15 of 16 people found the following review helpful

4.0 out of 5 stars What would it take for peaceable citizens to undertake a revolution against their government? January 7, 2006

By Roger D. Launius VINE™ VOICE

Format:Paperback

This is one of the key questions Charles Royster seeks to understand in this important analysis of the American Revolution. Following a chronological approach, Royster probes the ideology of revolution, the rise of an effective fighting force to conduct that revolution, and the control of that spirit of revolution. He concentrates on the intellectual issues that arose in the context of fighting the British Empire. He believes that the men in the Continental Army not only rebelled against the perception of British tyranny but also against the issue of militarism. Americans rushed to join the army in 1775 because of what he called a "rage militaire" that represented a disavowal of British colonical policies and rule. This reaction might have been virtuous and patriotic, but that emotion did not sustain the Continental Army over the long haul of difficult battles and hardships. So what did?

Royster asserts that the Continental Army both shaped and tested the ideals of the American Revolution. He notes that the vision of liberty and independence, freedom and eqality, and the desire to create a new promised land outside the authority of a staid Europe motivated the men of the army. Morale went up and down depending on their fortunes, but their faith in this vision remained. Royster's key point seems to be: "in the eyes of the revolutionaries, war put to the trial the military ardor and skill as well as the moral assumptions on which they based their hopes for American independence. To fail as defenders of ideals was to fail as Americans, to succeed was to give the victors, their country, and its liberty the prospect of immortality" (p. 3).

The Continental Army, in Royster's estimation, was both loved and hated.... It was needed for victory, but the ideals of the nation were non-militaristic and in many instances overtly pacifistic. There was a constant questioning of the role of the army in American society, especially after victory had been achieved. In spite of this, Royster believes generally remained a positive force precisely because of its leadership, patriotism, and professionalism. At the same time, there was always a suspicion that the army would act to subvert individual liberty. The tension was palpable. While the Continental Army won the war and ensured the creation of the American nation, it's role was never valued in the way that veterans believed appropriate.

The most interesting part of this book is the sense that the Continental Army embodied a national character or idealism. Did such a thing exist in 1775, 1776, 1783? If it did, it is a notoriously slippery concept, as it remains to the present. Without question, "A Revolutionary People at War" is a provocative statement of the role of the army in American life at the time of the founding of the republic. It may represent an overstatement of idealism, but it is an interesting one. Read more ›

18 of 22 people found the following review helpful

5.0 out of 5 stars Great read, well researched and presented October 19, 2003

By A Customer

Format:Paperback

In A Revolutionary People at War: The Continental Army and American Character, historian Charles Royster searches for and analyzes the "American character prevalent during the War for Independence." (vii) Royster finds that with regard to the Continental Army specifically and the Revolutionary populace in general, "allegiance to the `American'...side in the War for Independence was the prevailing sentiment" in the United States, and that this allegiance was based primarily on what he terms "a national character." (viii) throughout the course of this book then, Royster chronicles the revolutionary character of America's soldiers, and how it changed markedly as the war progressed. One of his central questions concerns the "ideals espoused during the revolution," and how the patriots' actions measured up to them. By 1783, Royster finds that the gap between ideals and reality was often significant. Eight years of war, it seems, "severely tested American's dedication to independence." (3)
Royster uses a prologue to define his terms with a useful essay on the idea character. The war would test Americans, especially those in their country's uniforms, and determine if they were worthy of victory. Eventual victory would of course demonstrate that revolutionary soldiers had the necessary virtue and selflessness to be deserving of such good fortune. Soldiers were keenly aware that the eyes of world were on them, and that their sacrifices would be remembered throughout the ages by countless generations of their descendents. Royster shows that Continental soldiers were inspired by religious beliefs, knowing that God was on their side.... These men also employed the language of slavery to describe their predicament-if they failed, they argued, Britain would not only enslave them, but their children as well. Thus, these men in arms had a sacred duty: "the struggle for independence was the greatest test of the chosen people. In it they bore the weight of both their heritage and God's promise for the future." (9)
In 1775, Americans began the war with high ideals in a period Royster denotes as the "Rage Militaire." The Continental army went about preparing to defend America in a uniquely American way, reflective of the national character. Royster points to simplified drill manuals, short-term enlistments, soldiers in hunting shirts and civilian control of the military establishment as evidence that Americans would wage a war based upon their own terms, not simply by mimicking the British. Yet by the end of 1776, the "contrasts between the ideals of 1775 and the conduct of the war" were apparent, in the form of battlefield defeats and Continental army's "lack of discipline and decorum." (58) Numerous desertions, for example, showed that not all American soldiers lived up to the ideals of patriotic sacrifice in the face of adversity. In fact, "not only did the Continental Army fall short of Americans' ideal of an army," Royster notes, but recruiting difficulties created "a network of evasion and corruption that spread far into the populace." (63) He asserts as well that as the virtues of the soldiers were called into question after reverses, desertions, and abuses, many revolutionaries distanced themselves from the army, and denied that it embodied the cause of liberty exclusively.
By early 1777, the army was not seen by Americans as virtuous. Many civilians began to associate active military duty with a class of people-the young, unattached, "shiftless" types who were more logically suited to the ardors of Continental service. This attitude greatly curtailed recruiting of army battalions to full strength. High enlistment bounties designed to encourage men to join the ranks attest to the fact that the spirit of sacrifice so widespread in 1775 was much reduced by the beginning of the campaign of 1777, as did unscrupulous recruiting officers, uncooperative civilians and unruly men in the ranks. Americans, Royster finds, were reluctant to rely upon a standing army to secure their liberties. They wanted "the moral miracle of a quick victory that came from [the] virtuous ardor of a chose people." (151) Too often, however, the army's behavior both on and off the battlefield did not live up to the expectation of those to whom they were charged to defend.
By the latter stages of the war, as Royster demonstrates, the differences between the ideals of virtue and common practice were in sharp contrast. As evidence, he cites the "extensive trade with the enemy" (272) in some areas of the colonies; excessive profiteering by suppliers of war materiel; graft among officers and men; and "the widespread failure to enlist." (276) Royster is clear to point out that these actions did not signify a weakening of desire for victory and independence, but a weariness and desperation instead. The bitter, internecine fighting in the Carolinas and the lower Hudson Valley demonstrated not a slackening desire for independence, but how far patriots had drifted from the ideals of the early days of the struggle.
What Royster finds in the end is that despite the inability of most Americans in and out of uniform to live up to the virtuous ideals of 1775, by the end of the war it matter little. Americans remembered the war as they wanted to, one in which men fought for liberty and won through sacrifice and honorable means. "The popular interpretation of victory in the Revolutionary War," he finds, "restored the citizens to their original and vital stature as the pillars of America's future glory." (360) While some readers may find his assertion that "the founding generation had left the country's strength, virtue and liberty intact" (366) a bit hyperbolic and subject to alternative interpretations, nevertheless Royster's story is one of ideals, trials, hardships, perseverance and undeniable victory. A Revolutionary People at War is a well-written, expertly researched analysis about character. Like the men described in its pages, the book succeeds remarkably well. Read more ›

4 of 4 people found the following review helpful

5.0 out of 5 stars America's True Feelings During the Revolutionary War July 9, 2007

By M. P. Procter Sr. VINE™ VOICE

Format:Paperback

Charles Royster attempts to dispel some of the many myths and legends of the American Revolutionary War in his book, A Revolutionary People at War: The Continental Army and American Character, 1775 -1783. While many Americans were raised with the notion that the "Spirit of `76" was prevalent throughout the sixteen colonies at the start of the Revolution, Royster shows the reader there were many conflicts within the revolutionary movement itself, like lack of desire for a standing army; theft by, for, and in the name of the army; proper use of discipline and executions; and many others. The book's timeline covers the entire war, from its birth in 1775 to the war's end in 1781. The text details stories not read in many history books: the drudgery of the soldier's life, the animosity the general population held towards the military and some of their tactics, and the general malaise of the American people regarding the length of the war. A Revolutionary People at War is well researched with over 30 pages of artwork, including portraits of some of the key figures of the time period. It does lack a bibliography and list of other noted works, which would assist the reader wanting to do further research.

Early in the struggle for independence, the American people experienced what Royster referred to as "...Rage Militaire...[what] the French call a passion for arms..." This was the result of perceived British injustices long before the battles of Lexington and Concord when American militias began mobilizing and training. This training did not reflect a mere duplication of the British model of warfare with parade and ceremony, but a uniquely American style that was adapted from "...Lewis Nicola's Treatise of Military Exercise and Thomas Pickering's `easy' plan......[which] emphasized simplicity, not show..." Most Americans believed the Continental Army could defeat the British quickly through courage and the perception that right was on their side. While most of the populace held the belief of Rage Militaire, they still feared having a standing army to fight the war. The British Monarchy's army still loomed large in their minds. The tyranny associated with a dictator is what most Americans feared and is addressed thoroughly throughout the early chapters.

Interestingly, the seamier side of the war is explored in great detail. While the cause of the Revolution and the Continental Army was noble, many soldiers and private citizens alike used the "cause" for profit. Soldiers turned to theft for many reasons, "...[they] argued that, since property would soon fall under British control, they might as well take it." Of course, there was plenty of crime amongst the soldiers while in camp or on guard duty, with crimes that ranged from petty theft to assault. Moreover, there were those who donned something that resembled a uniform, and since "...the Continental Army used a wide variety of uniforms, and officers had theirs privately made....Consequently, no one was surprised to find [officers] in varied but impressive military dress, riding around the countryside making arrangements for the army..." These "officers" bought and sold provisions to the army and in the name of the army at high markups making huge profits. Not only was theft a problem, but so was the use of profanity, poor personal and camp-wide hygiene, relationships between officers and their men, and general relations with the local population. Further still, the debate raged regarding proper punishment. Flogging was popular (usually via the cat-o'-nine-tails), but the argument over how many lashes one received pitted George Washington against Congress. He believed the standard one-hundred lashes too lenient, and Congress asserted that Washington's recommendation of five-hundred too severe. Further, Washington resorted to execution for the most serious of offenses, like treason or desertion. The problem lay with Washington's ploy of granting last minute pardons, resulting in the death sentence losing much of its sting as a deterrent to crime.

Even with the surrender of British General John Burgoyne at the Battle of Saratoga, the Continental Army had few victories. The other major win, although not against the British directly, was the victory at Trenton on Christmas 1776. Throughout 1777, most Americans believed victory and the end of the war was near. Throughout the harsh winter at Valley Forge, after poor performances at the Battles of Brandywine and Germantown, the morale of the army was at an all-time low. Criticism of General Washington ran rampant and the Rage Militaire that possessed the country in 1775 was all but gone. Many believed if he had achieved victory like Horatio Gates did at Saratoga, the war might have already been won. Washington, of course, weathered the storm to bring the army out of Valley Forge better trained (with the help of Baron von Steuben) and faced 1778 with optimism.

Royster's text continues with an even more gloomy assessment of the war. "Between May and October 1780, the popular expectation of imminent victory received three sharp blows: the surrender of Charleston, South Carolina...; the rout of Horatio Gates' southern army at Camden, South Carolina...; and the defection of General Benedict Arnold..." These challenges were overcome, of course, beginning with the appointment of General Nathanael Greene to the position of commander of the southern army in early 1780. The defection and betrayal of Arnold was harder to swallow, especially amongst Washington and his general staff. As Greene lamented of him, "How black, how despised, loved by none, and hated by all. Once his Country's Idol [sic], now her horror." Despite these setbacks, the Continental Army did prevail, effectively ending the war at the Battle of Yorktown in 1781.

When the fighting ended, Royster's final chapter describes the feeling of exhilaration felt by most of the country. As John Murray, a Newburyport, Massachusetts preacher was quoted, "`Joy dances in every eye. Pleasure beams in every countenance; and every bosom beats high with the emotions...'" However, lest the reader thinks A Revolutionary People at War will have an uplifting ending, he goes on to describe many other pressing issues, like paying the army. "The prosperity that the soldiers hoped for did not begin with their receiving back pay or even current pay. Washington tried to get Robert Morris [Congress' wartime financier] to obtain three months' back pay..."

The author brings to light in A Revolutionary People at War: The Continental Army and American Character, 1775 -1783 the darker side of the war. He is successful in bringing into focus how desperate the war years were. Yet despite the hardships and turmoil associated with the period, the Continental Army still overcame a formidable opponent and cleared the way for a federation of independent states. The reader could be nonplussed by these negatives because the outcome is known. If this were a novel rather than an historic overview, the ending surely would be different. It was with the hope and the perseverance of those involved that victory was attained. Read more ›