MHO Home   Forum Home   Help   Register   Login
 
 
Welcome to MilitaryHistoryOnline.com.
You are not signed in.
The current time is: 12/14/2017 8:20:22 AM
 (1803-1815) Napoleonic Wars    
AuthorMessage
Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan, MI, USA
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 2960

The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/21/2016 7:56:10 PM
Well the war was officially over but the troops in New Orleans didn't know it!??

[Read More]

Of course here's a crash course on the War of 1812, if you need it!?

[Read More]

1812 !
MD
---------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

BWilson

top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 3525

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/22/2016 10:45:05 AM
MD,

 Yeah, those battles that happen after the war is over are -so- messy

 Second World War in Europe saw fighting in Czechoslovakia post-VE Day. Of course, "VE Day" was in the eye of the (Western) beholders; the Soviets and German Army Group Center saw things a bit differently.

Cheers

BW
---------------
With occasional, fatigued glances at life's rear-view mirror from the other side of time.

George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 5704

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/22/2016 12:07:34 PM

Quote:
Well the war was officially over but the troops in New Orleans didn't know it!??

[Read More]

Of course here's a crash course on the War of 1812, if you need it!?

[Read More]

1812 !
MD
--Michigan Dave



Dave, Horton's catchy tune is so wrong it's funny. Yes the British lost due to mismanagement that placed them in range of artillery and on a frontal assault, but Jackson did not chase the British anywhere.

Johnny Horton should not be used to discuss the facts of this battle. Pure equine waste but catchy as I said.

The British leader was Packenham and he was killed, as I recall.

A cease fire was called and bodies were collected and buried.

The British were going to mount another attack but the new leader of the army, Lambert, in consultation with the naval commander, decided that it would be a futile effort as the Americans were well protected behind the abattis that they had erected. I cannot recall why they didn't try to flank the Americans and then roll them up from the rear.

Where did they go? Well they headed to Fort St. Phillip and bombed it. Then it was on to Mobile Bay, Alabama (future), where they took Fort Bowyer..

Some Americans like to point to New Orleans as the last battle of the war and therefore grounds to claim victory.

But it was not. New Orleans and Fort Bowyer took place after the Treaty of Ghent was signed.

The British had attacked Fort Bowyer once before and were repulsed.

This time they laid siege from the water and on land and the commander of the fort surrendered to the British. Some accounts say that the men in the fort were quite drunk.

As this was the last land battle that was remotely associated with the War of 1812 and it was a British victory, then I suppose that I could declare Britain as the winner of the war.

That seems to be the logic surrounding the Battle of New Orleans.


I think that we have to acknowledge that the RN was sailing up and down the US eastern and southern coast line and laying siege where they chose. They had landed troops most famously near Washington and burned it. They failed to take Baltimore and Americans like to point to that battle as a great victory. It was but it was also a desperate defence of the homeland which was increasingly under attack by the enemy that the Americans had attacked in 1812.

Had the war continued, I think that we can speculate that the RN would have continued to select targets of opportunity on the coast.

The American attempts to invade Canada had failed.

But I would also agree that the British had not succeeded in defeating the Americans in their own territory but the shoe was on the other foot and the US had been invaded by the British.

The British had seized the coast of Maine in 1814. It was restored to the US with the Treaty of Ghent.

General Prevost screwed up a major attack in upper NY state in Sept. and he retreated.

My point is that the US was under attack in 1814. The US had started the war with an invasion of Canada and at the end, the US was invaded.

Take that Johnny Horton.

Dave, I enjoyed the guy who gave the summary of the war. He's the Bill Nye of history.


Cheers,

George





George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 5704

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/22/2016 5:07:21 PM
I was just thinking that there is no cemetery that contains the bodies of the British soldiers who died at New Orleans.

In fact, archeologists have not been able to find evidence of a mass burial site.

British diaries indicate that the task of burying someone in the soggy ground upon which they fought was a most difficult one.

So where did the British soldiers' bodies go?

The men in the ranks were apparently buried where they fell. All of their kit including uniforms was removed.

There is some evidence that the British were moved to a nearby plantation and buried in a mass grave.

Four officers including Packenham were embalmed and sent home in rum barrels.


It is possible that in the last 200 years that hurricanes and floods have simply washed away the bodies.


Cheers,

George

Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan, MI, USA
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 2960

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/23/2016 8:31:00 AM
George,

Has there ever been a concerted effort by either country to find them? Can't believe that they were washed away or the Gators got em??

Also are you saying the British made a terrible deal in the Treaty of Ghent??

MD
---------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 5704

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/23/2016 11:17:06 AM

Quote:
George,

Has there ever been a concerted effort by either country to find them? Can't believe that they were washed away or the Gators got em??

Also are you saying the British made a terrible deal in the Treaty of Ghent??

MD
--Michigan Dave



From what I understand, the land upon which the Battle of New Orleans was fought is low and swampy. The British had trouble burying their dead during the cease fire because they had to find a spot to dig where they wouldn't hit water.

There is a plantation next to the battle site where General Packenham died and while he was transported home, apparently a lot of the British other ranks were dumped into a mass grave on this plantation.

There were other reports that the owner of the plantation was upset because in subsequent years, bones and body parts would protrude above ground.

It has been 200 years and that is a lot of time for storms and hurricanes and whatnot to expose the mass grave and carry away the bodies. There were no markers and it was British practice to remove everything from the bodies before burial.

So it is unlikely that parts of uniforms or belt buckles or things of that nature would be found.

So yeah, it's a bit of a mystery. And with nearly 2000 deaths from battle and disease, we do wonder what happened to the bodies.

It is certain that they were not transported home. The British didn't do that except for important officers.



As for the Treaty of Ghent, I wouldn't call it a bad deal.

Although, there was considerable protest in London that the British did not exact vengeance upon the Americans who started the war.

It was felt that the Americans had taken advantage of the British who were already at war, defending the world from Napoleon's aggression.

And it was time to get back to business, something that the British were more than happy to do.

War is expensive and it was important to restore normal trade relations with the US. And the Empire had been at war for a decade.

Besides some New Englanders and people in Upper NY state never stopped trading with the British. This war started by the US was cramping their style.


Some historians do write that the Americans approached the peace negotiations with some trepidation. They expected that the British would be making demands to include reparations. Indeed, until the British negotiators got the word to wrap things up, they were talking about forcing the US to give up the NW Territory to the First Nations, and to surrender control of the Great Lakes to Britain and to give up Maine.

So John Quincy Adams, James A. Bayard, and Albert Gallatin of the US were prepared for some hard bargaining. Until the US victory at Plattsburgh, they were quite down in the dumps as the British had captured and burned the capital and they were in possession of parts of Maine. The Plattsburgh victory gave them hope that their bargaining position was better.

The British delegation shocked the Americans with their offer to accept a return to status quo ante bellum.

Wellington had advised them that a continuation of this war in order to punish the US or to reclaim the lost colonies would be very costly in terms of lives and pounds.

And there was still concern that war could break out again in Europe.

So this ill advised war, prosecuted by the US against Britain, settled nothing.

The Treaty of Ghent did not address any of the concerns that the US had before the war. Those concerns had largely been addressed by the British before the US crossed border at Detroit.

Both countries were essentially back where they started territorially. The British had to vacate Mobile Bay and the Maine coastline and part of the Illinois territory.

The Americans had a few troops on the NW side of Lake Erie. The British actually had more territory than the Americans.

But the response of the British and the Canadians did put a damper on the American imperialists like Henry Clay.

Clay's comment to the House of Representatives as he tried to stir up support for the war.


Quote:
It is absurd to suppose that we will not succeed in our enterprise against the enemy’s Provinces. We have the Canadas as much under our command as Great Britain has the ocean, and the way to conquer her on the ocean is to drive her from the land. I am not for stopping at Quebec or anywhere else; but I would take the whole continent from them, and ask them no favors. . . . We must take the Continent from them. I wish never to see peace till we do. God has given us the power and the means; we are to blame if we do not use them.[36]





Cheers,

George

GaryNJ
NJ, USA
New User
E-2 Private
Posts: 7

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/23/2016 8:33:46 PM
The most important result of the United States victory at New Orleans was that it eventually elevated Jackson to the presidency. The second important result was that it prevented the British from taking a large amount of loot that they could claim as a legitimate spoil of war. As per the insistence of the British the war was not over until both sides had ratified the treaty and that would not occur until February 16, 1815. As a result the British would have been legally in a position to claim as the spoils of war huge amounts of goods in the warehouses in New Orleans. The British actually brought with them some empty ships to help carry away the loot they expected to obtain. It’s important to note that the British commander had been given orders to ignore any report about the signing of a treaty and to only stop fighting when the treaty had been ratified by the United States.

George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 5704

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/23/2016 9:38:33 PM
Hello Gary NJ.

The Treaty was signed on Dec. 24, 1814. The British Parliament accepted the treaty and the crown signed it on Dec. 30. So one country had ratified simply because of its proximity to the site of negotiations.

The Battle of New Orleans took place on Jan. 8, 1815 so it is likely that the news of a negotiated settlement had not reached North America. That was only two weeks later.

Since there was no guarantee that Congress would ratify the Treat of Ghent, and did not do so until Feb. 16, it seems reasonable militarily, that hostilities should continue.

The operation against New Orleans was in the works even as the British failed to seize Baltimore. The British did send Pakenham to lead that operation as the person who was supposed to lead it was killed at Baltimore.

The seizure ofNew Orleans was part of the plan to divide the US north from the south and it was decided to continue with the operation. The British would have controlled all river traffic up the Mississippi to the Ohio. The US would have had difficulty in protecting the western lands it coveted and the Great Lakes.

Pakenham linked up with the fleet on Christmas Day just off New Orleans. That was the same day as the Treaty was signed so he would have known about the negotiations but not the signing.


The rumours that the British intended to pillage at New Orleans were propagated in the local press. That doesn't mean that it wasn't true. They had burned other places.

The British may have burned the place down had they won but I don't know that. There are reports that the soldiers were excited to see the city because of reports that it was beautiful.

This was a nasty war, especially on the main battlegrounds of the Niagara Peninsula. American soldiers were extremely violent and burned farms and took livestock and food from the people. As many of these people had actually emigrated from the US, the effect was to turn them against the American soldiers.

In their turn and in retaliation, the British crossed the Niagara River and burned as much as they could from Fort Niagara on Lake Ontario to Buffalo N.Y.

The Americans had burned the capital of Upper Canada, York (now Toronto}, and pillaged there. Actually they returned and sacked the place once more.

So the British retaliated in kind. The attack on Washington was likely a diversion but the burning of government buildings was seen as appropriate given what had happened at York.


For Canada, the most important result was that the British colonies had been saved from annexation. In my part of Canada, which was heavily damaged in the War of 1812, the defeat of the American land forces who greatly outnumbered the British regulars and militia, resulted in a feeling of strength and of nationalism.

So it was an important war in that regard and it is imbedded in the psyche of Canadians far more than it would be in that of Americans.

The war did set up the continent so that the two northern neighbours became friends and peace has prevailed ever since.

Cheers,

George


Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan, MI, USA
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 2960

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/24/2016 9:29:23 AM
So George,

The story sort of has a happy ending!

Doesn't it?
MD
---------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 5704

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/24/2016 11:10:20 AM

Quote:
So George,

The story sort of has a happy ending!

Doesn't it?
MD
--Michigan Dave


I suppose that it does. Over 200 years of peace and a border between us that has been largely undefended until recently. Even now there are no troops facing one another across a demarcation line.

But if peace reigned over BNA and the US in 1814, the British subjects and later the Canadians were concerned for many years afterward that the US had designs on our territory.

It wasn't an easy peace in other words because Canada was always fearful that the US would decide to take us over.

Even today the topic of merger is discussed in Canada. One author Diane Francis wrote a book fairly recently called, Merger of the Century in which she suggests getting rid of the border. Francis is a dual citizen but I think that her Yankee side is winning.

Conspiracy theorists suggest that the integration of our economies and our security systems is a sure sign that the US still covets Canada but rather than invade, it simply harmonizes the two cultures with Canada complicit in the process.

The US tried the military approach with 4 invasions from independence to the War of 1812. It's easier to absorb us gradually and let us help. That's the theory anyway.


Periodically we can find references to American writers or politicians who suggest that Canada should have been forfeited as payment for Britain's war debts to the USA but I don't think that they were serious.

Pat Buchanan is one US writer who advocates annexation of Canada.

Interesting word "annexation", isn't it? If it happened, I would substitute and invasion by imperialists.


George

George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 5704

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/24/2016 11:28:18 AM
Dave, you should take a look at a bill that was passed in the US Congress in 1866 which was the Bill to Annex Canada.


Quote:
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the President of the United States is hereby authorized and directed, whenever notice shall be deposited in the Department of State that the governments of Great Britain and the provinces of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland, Canada, British Columbia, and Vancouver's Island have accepted the proposition hereinafter made by the United States, to publish by proclamation that, from the date thereof, the States of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Canada East, and Canada West, and the Territories of Selkirk, Saskatchewan, and Columbia, with limits and rights as by the act defined, are constituted and admitted as States and Territories of the United States of America.
SEC. 2 And be it further enacted, That the following articles are hereby proposed, and from the date of the proclamation of the President of the United States shall take effect, as irrevocable conditions of the admission of the States of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Canada East, and Canada West, and the future States of Selkirk, Saskatchewan, and Columbia, to wit:


This was one year before Canadian Confederation and discussions about Canadian union had been going on for years. Didn't seem to matter.

This is the full text of the Bill to Annex Canada with all of the articles.

[Read More]


That bill plus the release of information in the 1930's that the US forces had a plan to conquer Canada was upsetting as you can imagine.


George



GaryNJ
NJ, USA
New User
E-2 Private
Posts: 7

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/24/2016 12:22:29 PM

Quote:
Hello Gary NJ.

The Treaty was signed on Dec. 24, 1814. The British Parliament accepted the treaty and the crown signed it on Dec. 30. So one country had ratified simply because of its proximity to the site of negotiations.

The Battle of New Orleans took place on Jan. 8, 1815 so it is likely that the news of a negotiated settlement had not reached North America. That was only two weeks later.

Since there was no guarantee that Congress would ratify the Treat of Ghent, and did not do so until Feb. 16, it seems reasonable militarily, that hostilities should continue.

The operation against New Orleans was in the works even as the British failed to seize Baltimore. The British did send Pakenham to lead that operation as the person who was supposed to lead it was killed at Baltimore.

The seizure ofNew Orleans was part of the plan to divide the US north from the south and it was decided to continue with the operation. The British would have controlled all river traffic up the Mississippi to the Ohio. The US would have had difficulty in protecting the western lands it coveted and the Great Lakes.

Pakenham linked up with the fleet on Christmas Day just off New Orleans. That was the same day as the Treaty was signed so he would have known about the negotiations but not the signing.


The rumours that the British intended to pillage at New Orleans were propagated in the local press. That doesn't mean that it wasn't true. They had burned other places.

The British may have burned the place down had they won but I don't know that. There are reports that the soldiers were excited to see the city because of reports that it was beautiful.

This was a nasty war, especially on the main battlegrounds of the Niagara Peninsula. American soldiers were extremely violent and burned farms and took livestock and food from the people. As many of these people had actually emigrated from the US, the effect was to turn them against the American soldiers.

In their turn and in retaliation, the British crossed the Niagara River and burned as much as they could from Fort Niagara on Lake Ontario to Buffalo N.Y.

The Americans had burned the capital of Upper Canada, York (now Toronto}, and pillaged there. Actually they returned and sacked the place once more.

So the British retaliated in kind. The attack on Washington was likely a diversion but the burning of government buildings was seen as appropriate given what had happened at York.


For Canada, the most important result was that the British colonies had been saved from annexation. In my part of Canada, which was heavily damaged in the War of 1812, the defeat of the American land forces who greatly outnumbered the British regulars and militia, resulted in a feeling of strength and of nationalism.

So it was an important war in that regard and it is imbedded in the psyche of Canadians far more than it would be in that of Americans.

The war did set up the continent so that the two northern neighbours became friends and peace has prevailed ever since.

Cheers,

George


--George


Hi George,

Thanks for the reply. It's my understanding that the treaty was rushed by courier from Ghent to London, where it arrived on December 26. The Prince Regent signed it the next day. It was the prerogative of the king, or in this case the Prince Regent acting in his place, to ratify treaties. The British Parliament was not in session at the time.

The instructions from Bathurst to Pakenham were written in late October while the negotiations were still taking place. No one knew at the time if the negotiations would be successful. The British position on insisting that the war would go on until both sides had ratified it "without alteration by either of the contracting parties" was a reaction to past treaties with the United States. In those treaties congress had unilaterally changed the treaties and then ratified them. Obviously, this practice was unacceptable and thus the insistence on ratification of the treaty with no changes to it before the war would end.

It is important to draw a distinction between the unfounded claims that British soldiers had been promised "beauty and booty" and what was considered legitimate spoils of war. The situation that occurred at Alexandria, Virginia at the time of the attack on Washington is what would have happened at New Orleans had the British not been defeated. At Alexandria, Virginia the British took "twenty-one prize ships filled with 16,000 barrels of flour, 1,000 hogsheads of tobacco, 150 bales of cotton, and $5,000 worth of sugar, wine, and other commodities." (Hickey, The War of 1812, page 209) The amount of prizes available at New Orleans was much greater than that and that is why they had some empty ships with them.

There is an excellent article on Napoleon Series about Pakenham and the instructions given to him. It is located here.
[Read More]

Gary

George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 5704

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/24/2016 2:03:24 PM
Many thanks for those letters. Enlightening.

Negotiations had been going on for months really, though the plenipotentiaries didn't get together in Ghent until Aug. 1814

Plunder and pillage seems to be a hallmark of this war.

Often armies seized foodstuffs to feed themselves but it doesn't explain the seizure of private property as spoils of war. Prizes, I suppose.

I recall that when the Americans attacked York in April of 1813 that the leaders of the town, not the military, placed a formal protest with the US because books had been stolen from the library. I would have thought that there was more to be concerned about. The books were returned.

I did have the date incorrect on the signing by the Prince Regent. One of my sources says that he signed it on Dec. 28, after approval of Parliament. Another says that the date of ratification was Dec. 30.

And there are a number of references to ratification by Parliament but that doesn't always mean that the House was sitting. I believe that the executive branch had the responsibility to make treaties. The crown signed them into law.

The British did not send their best people to Ghent. There were more pressing concerns with regard to Europe at Vienna, I think. That's where they sent their best people.

And always noted in my country is that having a representative from the British colonies in Canada was never considered.

The Americans sent some very competent people who didn't like each other very much but were well able to control the British delegates. I should say that it seems that the Americans were united in their dislike for John Quincy Adams. He and Henry Clay despised one another. But duty calls and they performed well during the months of negotiation.

Thanks for the link to the site.


George


Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan, MI, USA
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 2960

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/26/2016 9:42:09 AM
The US was glad the Brits were so pre occupied, This French British conflict also led to the US getting Louisiana from Napoleon for a song!?

Thanks for Franco English Conflicts,
Remember Lafayette, & the French Fleet, at Yorktown,as well!?
MD

---------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 5704

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/26/2016 11:48:55 AM
Yes it seems that on both occasions, the War of Independence and the War of 1812, the Americans took advantage of the historical enmity between Britain and France.


Yorktown was a chance for a little payback for the French, for the defeat that the British had hung on the French. as they sacrificed lives to protect the 13 colonies during the French and Indian Wars, finally driving the French from New France.

Would the US have won at Yorktown without the French fleet and French soldiers? There were nearly 11, 000 French and 8,000 Americans at Yorktown. Just 6,000 Brits.

The question was a serious one. Were the Brits on their last legs in 1781?

Opportunistic Frenchmen like Rochambeau and Lafayette certainly helped the US cause.


The US, I think because its honour had been sullied more than anything, decided to declare war in 1812 on the British even as the British were in tough against Napoleon, defending the free world. What was the US thinking? Whose side were they on?


Louisiana Purchase:

The US got Louisiana in 1803.

The US went after the remaining Spanish possessions after that.

The US had seized Spanish territory in East Florida in 1818. Ostensibly this part of the strategy to fight the Indians.

Britain had ceded all of Florida to the Spanish after the War of 1812. It had been British since 1763.

Andrew Jackson was a real piece of work, a dedicated Indian killer.

He argued that the Spanish were supplying Seminole Indians from the Spanish territory of West Florida.

So he invaded that too. He walked into Pensacola and kept going to Fort Barrancas which fell to the Americans.

The Spanish protested to the US and they pulled back beyond Pensacola. Apologies were issued and then the Americans continued to press for the sale of West Florida.

The Spanish were too weak to do anything about the American intrusion.

Clearly the US intended to have all of Florida and Spain ceded it to them in 1821. This was a military intervention leading to the Spanish giving up their claim to Florida.

Comparatively, Louisiana was a gift from Napoleon.


The US was clearly in an expansionist mood and that made other countries uneasy, including the British colonies of NA.


George


Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan, MI, USA
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 2960

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/26/2016 6:46:58 PM
George,

Jingo Bells, Jingo Bells, "Jingo" all the way!? (A US favorite carol.)

USA, Ya gotta love Jingoism!
MD
---------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 5704

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/26/2016 10:42:59 PM
Different times. There was a continent to discover and settle even if the original inhabitants protested.

There were competitors for all that land.

Certainly the US seemed to feel that it had a right to control the continent and that that control was inevitable. Manifest destiny.

But even that concept was argued about within the US, among the people and the politicians. Not all Americans accepted this manifest destiny as a concept, it could be closely tied to the imperialism of European nations that was distasteful to many Americans.

Cheers,

George


Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan, MI, USA
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 2960

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/27/2016 9:27:45 AM

Quote:
I was just thinking that there is no cemetery that contains the bodies of the British soldiers who died at New Orleans.

In fact, archeologists have not been able to find evidence of a mass burial site.

British diaries indicate that the task of burying someone in the soggy ground upon which they fought was a most difficult one.

So where did the British soldiers' bodies go?

The men in the ranks were apparently buried where they fell. All of their kit including uniforms was removed.

There is some evidence that the British were moved to a nearby plantation and buried in a mass grave.

Four officers including Packenham were embalmed and sent home in rum barrels.


It is possible that in the last 200 years that hurricanes and floods have simply washed away the bodies.


Cheers,

George
--George



George,

What a waste of good Rum! Also I have been to the Battle ground for New Orleans, & it was near the Chalmette

Plantation. Jackson and his troops positioned them selves behind earthen works along the Mississippi River in a place

where the Brits would be forced to concentrate because of swampy bayous on one side & the river on the other they didn't

have a chance! Jackson at the cost of only 13 killed, inflicted over 1,500casualties an capture almost 500 more !

Brits






Regards,
MD
---------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 5704

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/27/2016 10:06:00 AM
If the British had gone with their original plan to attack overland by heading down the road from Fort Bowyer toward New Orleans, they probably would have routed the Americans.

Instead they came straight at them over swampy ground at Chalmette. That's about 15 km south of the city.



This battle was better characterized as a series of engagements I think.


It is interesting that after that defeat, the British seized Fort Bowyer in Mobile Bay. From there they were going to march overland to New Orleans and try again.

They had tried once before to take the Fort, in September I believe and failed. Then they went to New Orleans anyway.

George

BWilson

top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 3525

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/27/2016 1:52:54 PM
 The map looks a product of the United States Military Academy, Department of History. They produce very useful works.

Cheers

BW
---------------
With occasional, fatigued glances at life's rear-view mirror from the other side of time.

George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 5704

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/27/2016 2:35:14 PM

Quote:
 The map looks a product of the United States Military Academy, Department of History. They produce very useful works.

Cheers

BW
--BWilson


I think that it was. Helpful to me. I always like a map to give me reference points to help me understand.

I just checked the credit for the map and it was, Courtesy of the United States Military Academy Department of History.


I was looking for one that showed the "river road" next to the Mississippi.

It could be this one marked as the "levee road".

[Read More]

[Read More]

When the British arrived in Dec of 1814, there were a number of engagements that preceded the big battle on Jan. 8.

The British engaged and defeated an American force with their vanguard of about 1800 men. All they had to do was to march down this road adjacent to the river and they could have taken New Orleans.

But the Americans put up a stout defence and though defeated, the British commander whose name escapes me, decided not to push along the road.

This gave Jackson the opportunity to build his breastworks along the canal where the big fight ensued.

I wouldn't mind seeing where this road went and how the British would have entered New Orleans had they pressed on.


Cheers,

George

BWilson

top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 3525

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/27/2016 3:27:39 PM
 If I had to take a guess, I would say N. Peters Street and River Road, as shown on current maps, most closely follow the route of the "Levee Road" shown on the old maps.

 You may also wish to look at pages 173 - 187 of the following if you have not done so already. [Read More]

Cheers

BW
---------------
With occasional, fatigued glances at life's rear-view mirror from the other side of time.

George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 5704

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/27/2016 3:47:25 PM
Excellent BW. The link shows several maps with "levee road". and "high road to New Orleans".

I had not read this essay so thank you. Greene is quite a prolific writer.

Canadian historians always mention New Orleans as an afterthought and inconsequential so it is interesting to read the details of the battle.

Cheers,

George

Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan, MI, USA
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 2960

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/28/2016 1:42:02 PM
George,

Here's a quick view of the battle field!

[Read More]

[Read More]

been there, done that!
MD

---------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 5704

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 12/28/2016 4:24:00 PM
Thanks Dave. I presume that both of these are American productions.

The first one features a park guide from Chalmette battle field. She said that as a result of the battle, the rest of the world perceived the US as a major power. Implied is that the US won the war.

I might quibble with both contentions. However the battlefield looks interesting.

The second one was also interesting. It kind of glossed over the reasons for the war and alluded to "some fighting along the Canadian border." I am going to suggest that four invasions of the British colonies was considerably more than some border skirmishing.


I found the analysis of the battle to be fascinating and that includes the interpretation of events leading to it. The famous night battle of Dec. 23, I believe seemed to be heralded as brilliant stroke of arms by Jackson.
In fact, the British won that skirmish. The video says that the Americans put the British on their heels and forced them to pause for a few days.

It is true that they paused and if the general in charge had been more bold, he would have charged up the levee road right into the town.

But he didn't and that gave Jackson the chance to finish his breastworks by the canal.

Otherwise I enjoyed the details of the battle and the interpretation that it was a closer run thing than too many accounts suggest.

And I am happy to see that the bravery of the British soldier was acknowledged.

Too bad that most people learn of this battle from the Johnny Horton ditty.

George


Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan, MI, USA
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 2960

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 1/3/2017 9:39:16 AM
George,

Detroit & the War of 1812;

[Read More]

MD
---------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

Dave G
Halifax, NS, Canada
top 50
E-4 Specialist


Posts: 92

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 1/3/2017 8:48:20 PM
All you need to know about the War of 1812 (if you're a hoser).

This song is mislabelled: it is actually by "Three Dead Trolls in a Baggie" -- not by the more famous group "The Arrogant Worms." ---[Read More]
---------------
Dave G

Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan, MI, USA
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 2960

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 1/17/2017 2:45:17 PM
If you didn't like Jackson as president, how are you going to like this guy!?

[Read More]

[Read More]

[Read More]



Go old hickory!
MD

---------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 5704

Re: The war of 1812: Ends with the Battle of New Orleans?
Posted on: 1/17/2017 3:21:47 PM
Probably no more than I would have liked Jackson but then I never lived in Jackson's time and if I had, who knows, I may have thought that killing a man in a duel, slaughtering Indians and invading sovereign territory of Spain when not at war with them, was just peachy.

Let's talk again if Trump sends troops into Canada or Mexico.

 (1803-1815) Napoleonic Wars    
 Forum Ads from Google