The Start: Jumonville's Glen and Fort Necessity
by Bruce L. Brager
|
"We have just finish'd a small palisado'd fort, in which, with
my small numbers, I shall not fear the attack of 500 men."
George Washington to Robert Dinwiddie, June 3, 1754 [1]
|
|
George Washington once touched off a world war. He did not start the war. The
powder was piling up, just waiting for a spark. However, by bad planning, by
losing control of some of his men, by signing a document he did not understand,
and by trying to cover up his errors -- behavior dramatically unlike that for
which he became noted later in his life and career -- Washington jumped into a
dangerous context and provided the spark that started a major explosion, a
world war.
The focus of the increasing tension was the area known as the Ohio River
Valley, occupied by American Indians, claimed by the French, and coveted by the
British. Particularly important was the strategic triangle of land where the
Allegheny River and the Monongahela River joined to form the Ohio River. This
is the modern site of the city of Pittsburgh. On a previous journey to the
area, in 1753, Washington had noted the strategic importance of this area and
suggested the British build a fort at the location. The French also noticed its
strategic importance, discovered the British had started to build a fort, and
threw out the British.
A British colonial force was already on the way when the French took over the
incomplete British fort. Washington was second in command of the total British
force. He was second in command of a small group of men operating
independently from the overall force. In late May, Washington learned of
the fort's fall to the French on April 18, 1754. On May 27, continuing to push
westward, Washington learned of a small French force seven miles from his
location. When the French camp was found, Washington, with 47 militiamen and
some Indian warriors, attacked the French camp. According to Washington's
diary, his men fired only when discovered by the French. He mentions that the
fight took 15 minutes until the smaller French force was defeated. The leader
of the French force and nine others were killed. Washington later wrote "the
Indians scalped the dead."[2] Washington continued to state that he thought the
French might have been faking a diplomatic mission as an excuse to attack the
English. Washington's report to Dinwiddie conveyed basically the same
information, simply that the Indians had scalped the dead, with no mention of
how they got to be dead.
The French claimed that their dead were killed, after trying to surrender, by
Washington's men or by his Indian allies. French claims were partly based on
uncertain evidence, though Washington's diary lends some credence to the idea
that he might have lost control of the Indians with his party.
What most likely happened is that a firefight started when the Virginians
reached the French camp, though each side later claimed the other fired first.
After a few minutes, the wounded French commander, Ensign Joseph Coulon de
Villiers de Jumonville, asked for a cease fire. He tried to explain his mission
to Washington, but in the middle of the explanation the Indian leader,
Tanaghrisson, known as the "half-king" because though he was a Seneca chief he
worked for the major Indian power known as the Iroquois Confederation, walked
up to Jumonville. He called out "you are not yet dead, my father," invoking the
powerful but kind role representatives of the French king claimed in dealing
with the Indians. He then raised his hatchet and smashed it into Jumonville's
skull. Before Washington could stop them, the Indians had killed the other
wounded Frenchmen.
Tanaghrisson was probably motivated by a desire to regain personal power he had
lost over the past few years by returning to the Iroquois with his new British
allies. Washington did not know it, but he had been given a lesson in the
importance of the Indians in the rivalry between Britain and France in North
America.
Immediately after the Jumonville Glen incident, Washington and his men returned
to their camp a few miles to the east, at Great Meadows, about 50 miles
southeast of what is now Pittsburgh. Washington anticipated French retaliation.
He ordered his men, and reinforcements who had arrived after the Jumonville
Glen incident, to build a wood stockade, which he named Fort Necessity.
Washington thought this was a good fort. "We have just finish'd a small
palisado'd fort, in which, with my small numbers, I shall not fear the attack
of 500 men."[3] Washington might have been right, had the French not shown up
with twice that number.
A force of 700 French and French Canadian soldiers, and 350 Indian allies, led
by the half brother of Jumonville, attacked Fort Necessity on July 3, 1754.
Washington had 180 men. Never much for lost causes, his Indian allies,
including the Half King who had started the whole mess, had left the scene. A
few hours of intense fighting followed, in a driving rain. Washington had only
cleared a 60 yard "field of fire" between the fort and the woods, less than the
killing range of the weapons of the day. The French forces were able to take
shelter in the woods, and shoot down into Fort Necessity.
Fort Necessity soon became flooded, ruining most of the Virginians' gunpowder.
Roughly one third of the British colonial force was killed or wounded compared
to only a handful of enemy casualties. Later that evening, the French commander
offered Washington the chance to surrender. Since the British and French were
not at war, Washington and his men would be permitted to return to Virginia.
All Washington had to do was sign the terms of capitulation.
Washington, due to a mistranslation, thought he was confirming that his men
killed Jumonville, or so he insisted the rest of his life. The actual French
word, "l'assassinate," was more loaded, meaning murder rather than just kill.
To make things worse, the document also mentioned that Jumonville had been on a
mission to deliver a communication from the French government to the British
government; in other words, a diplomatic mission. Washington might have learned
this earlier, had Jumonville's letter been fully translated before Tanaghrisson
acted, and been able to restrain the Indians. Tanaghrisson, who seems to have
understood French, probably realized this.
After signing this document, at little before midnight on July 3, Washington
and his men were permitted to head for home. George Washington touched off a
near unbelievable chain of events. Within not much more than a century of
Washington's errors, aided by the "force multiplier" of additional errors and
bad judgment, and by opportunities not missed, good judgments made, correct
decisions correctly carried out, and the lessons of experience learned, five of
the six major players in the North American continent were destroyed, or had
left the scene, or were substantially reduced in power and influence.
Historians can't even decide what to call the war for which Washington provided
the spark. In the world at large, it gets called the Seven Years War, an
odd name for a war where the fighting began in 1754, and was ended by treaty in
1763. But Britain, and France, the main European powers in America, did not
actually declare war on each other until 1756. So the American colonies get
dealt out of the picture, at least in the name. The "dispute" over the name,
and the new "British, French and Indian War," alternative, raises the issue of
the great complexity of this relatively unknown conflict. Of course, the best
name for a conflict which ranged from just east of modern Pittsburgh, to modern
day Canada, to the Philippines and India, by way of Cuba, is already taken –
World War One.
In 1754 George Washington was an inexperienced and overeager 21-year old
colonial militia officer, seeeking military glory as a way to enter the upper
reaches of Virginia social society. He did not, however, wake up one
morning and decide to do something rash and ill-planned. Washington,
barely appreciating what he was doing, stepped into a long and bitter
rivalry between Britain and France.
There would seem to have been little inherent conflict between British and
French interests. Britain, with a relatively small home territory, considered
itself a maritime power and concentrated its expansion overseas. France was
primarily a continental power. However, there were significant areas of
tension. The British royal house had been imported from Hanover; part of what
is now Germany. King George II still also ruled Hanover, and wanted to defend
that flat and easily invaded area.
Had anyone created a demographic map of America in 1748 they would have found a
relatively large British colonial population, estimated in 1743 as 1.5 million,
compared to a total French population in North America of fewer than 45,000,[4]
between what are now Georgia and Maine. This population stretched a few hundred
miles inland towards the Appalachian Mountains. This territory was surrounded
on land by territory controlled but sparsely settled by the French, except for
Spanish territory to the south.
The French feared being overwhelmed by sheer numbers. The British saw the need
to neutralize the potential danger from French Canada. The British thought that
if another war broke out, the French might use their forts on Lake Champlain as
jumping off points for a thrust aimed at penetrating the British colonies and
reaching the Atlantic. The British colonies would be split in two. One can see
why neither side was happy with the situation as it stood in 1748.
The latest in a series of wars had ended in 1748, in the European main theater
and the North American sideshow. With the end of that war, Anglo-American
colonists, feeling the need for new land, resumed a slow westward expansion -
into French-claimed areas of the Ohio River valley. The French, from their main
North American colony of Canada, were seeking to stop that expansion and to
secure their lines of communication with their colony of Louisiana.
The French government of Louis XV decided to stop what they saw as British
encroachment on French territory. Unfortunately for them, the military
resources available to the British in America were far stronger than those
available to the French in America. The superior British Royal Navy could
dominate the Atlantic Ocean, and seal off French territories from reinforcement
and supply from France. In Europe, the French could confront the British where
the French were stronger. The French, however, felt they had no choice but to
actively resist British encroachment in America as well as to resist Prussia,
Britain's aggressively minded chief ally and proxy, in Europe.
The French Act, the British React
In 1749, the military commander of New France sent an expedition to the Ohio
Valley. Its primary function was to plant a series of lead plaques announcing
French claim to the territory. These cute no trespassing signs were soon backed
up by more concrete measures. The French began building a series of forts at
strategic locations. The British began to build their own forts. Attempts to
settle differences by means of a commission proved unsuccessful.
With the failure of the commission, the French then sent a new governor-general
to New France, with specific instructions to take possession of the Ohio
Valley, and to remove all British presence from this area. In 1753, he had
several forts built in the eastern portion of this area, in what is now western
Pennsylvania. In response, Robert Dinwiddie, lieutenant governor of Virginia,
sent a young officer in the Virginia militia to deliver a letter demanding the
French leave. (Political disputes in Pennsylvania had prevented that colony
from acting to meet the threat to its territory.)
The young Virginia militia officer, George Washington, read Dinwiddie's
impressive-sounding letter to the commander of a French fort. The letter
declared that the lands of the Ohio River were "known to be the property of the
Crown of Great Britain," and "it is a matter of equal concern and surprise to
me, to hear that a body of French forces are erecting fortresses and making
settlements upon that river. . ."[5] Dinwiddie demanded to know by whose
authority and under whose instructions the French were acting. He ended by
requiring the peaceful and, one presumes, immediate departure of the French and
that the French "forbear prosecuting a purpose so interruptive of the harmony
and good understanding, which His Majesty is desirous to continue and cultivate
with" the king of France.[6]
The French responded the next day, showing how little they were impressed by
the letter or its deliverer. The French commander would forward Dinwiddie's
letter to the governor-general. However, until instructions were received from
his boss, the French commander was not leaving and would defend his position.
Washington took the French response back to Dinwiddie. On the way back,
Washington noted, and later suggested to Dinwiddie, that a piece of land, where
the Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers met to form the Ohio, would be a good
location for a fort. Dinwiddie responded by sending an expedition to build the
fort Washington had suggested. Superior French forces soon arrived at the
construction location, and threw the British out. The French finished the
fort. Washington's expedition, which failed so dramatically, was part of
a British force sent to regain control of the area.
In a historical irony, Washington and his men left Fort Necessity on July 4th.
Indications are that Washington later would appreciate the irony. On July 20,
1776, while awaiting the British attack on New York, Washington wrote a friend
and former colleague from the Virginia militia. After describing his current
crisis, he ended by remarking that "I did not let the Anniversary of the 3d or
9th of this [month] pass without a grateful remembrance of the escape we had at
the Meadows and on the Banks of the Monongahela. .. "[7]
By July 9, 1754, Washington and his men, burdened with carrying his wounded,
had only covered 50 miles east, to the place called Willis Creek. He reported
his defeat and capitulation to Virginia Lieutenant Governor Robert Dinwiddie,
who had dispatched his expedition in the first place. He presented the defeat
not as a near total disaster, but as a stalemate in which the Virginian and
British forces held out as long as they could against superior French forces.
Washington appears to have put at least some focus to the minor parts of the
battles, as well as to his own reputation. In a letter home written between the
two battles, to his brother John Augustine Washington, Washington did not
mention the earlier massacre of the French prisoners. He did write his brother
that "I heard Bullets whistle and believe me there was something charming in
the Sound."[8] The remark made it into the Virginia newspapers, and even
reached London. None other than King George II is supposed to have commented
"He would not say so, if he had been used to hear many."[9]
Dinwiddie then got a taste of the lack of colonial unity, or of concern for the
"French menace" in what was then called the west. He quickly reported to the
government in London about events at Fort Necessity. He urged Washington to
resume the offensive, and tried to raise reinforcements to send to Willis
Creek. Dinwiddie asked for funds from the Virginia House of Burgesses for
another campaign. He also sent urgent messages for help to the governors of
nearby colonies. North Carolina was the only colony to respond, and then with
the limitation that appropriated funds be spent only in North Carolina. This
offer was of little practical value.
The French, however, had been provided a dandy tool should they wish to
escalate the fighting. The Marquis Ange Duquesne de Menneville, the French
military commander in North America, commented after reading Washington's
confiscated diary that "He lies very much to justify the assassination of the
sieur de Jumonville, which had turned on him, and which he had the stupidity to
confess in his capitulation. . . There is nothing more unworthy and lower and
even blacker than the sentiments and the way of thinking of this
Washington."[10]
Show Footnotes and
Bibliography
Footnotes
[1]. The Writings of George Washington, from the Original Manuscript Sources,
1745-1799 , John C. Fitzpatrick, editor, Washington, DC: United States
Government Printing Office, 1931, page 73.
[2]. Donald Jackson, editor, The Diaries of George Washington , Volume
I, 1748-1765, Charlottesville, Virginia: University Press of Virginia, 1976,
page 196, entry for May 27, 1754.
[3]. The Writings of George Washington, from the Original Manuscript Sources,
1745-1799 , John C. Fitzpatrick, editor, Washington, DC: United States
Government Printing Office, 1931, page 73.
[4]. Marshall Sprague, So Vast So Beautiful a Land , Swallow and Athens,
Ohio: Ohio University Press, 1974, page 154.
[5]. Fred Anderson, Crucible of War , New York: Vintage Books, 2000,
quoted page 44.
[6]. Anderson, Crucible of War , quoted page 44.
[7]. Fred Anderson, The War that Made America , New York: Viking, 2005,
quoted page xix.
[8]. Quoted Joseph J. Ellis, His Excellency George Washington , New
York, Alfred A. Knopf, 2004, page 14.
[9]. Quoted Ellis, page 15.
[10]. Quoted Ellis, page 17 and 18.
Copyright © 2007 Bruce L. Brager.
Written by Bruce L. Brager. If you have questions or comments on this
article, please contact Bruce L. Brager at:
bbrager@juno.com.
About the author:
Bruce Brager is a writer specializing in military history, defense and foreign
policy. He is the author of ten published books and over fifty
published articles.
Published online: 11/17/2007.
* Views expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily represent
those of MHO.
|
