Posted on 02/23/2010 11:24:57 AM PST by Palter
MASSACHUSETTS FACED a crisis in 1778. In the midst of the Revolutionary War, some 4,000 British and Hessian prisoners were living in miserable conditions in camps around Boston. Rumors surged that a British force would try to free them by force. The cry went up: get these prisoners out of Massachusetts.
Enter Thomas Jefferson and his Virginia neighbors. Thinking like a current-day congressman, Jefferson regarded the prisoners as an economic opportunity for the remote valley near his home at Monticello. The prison camp would pump money into his hometown of Charlottesville, along with much-needed craftsmen and laborers. It would be a bonanza. And there was an added benefit: some of the British and Hessian officers were excellent violinists, just the kind that Jefferson hoped would join him in the parlor at Monticello.
Thus began one of the more remarkable journeys of the Revolutionary War, and one of the greatest miscalculations of Jefferson’s career.
Massachusetts was only too happy to pass its problem to Virginia. The British and Hessians left behind most of their belongings and marched through blizzards, passing what one called the “quite grand’’ houses of Cambridge, the “antique Roman’’ buildings of Harvard College, the “thriving little city’’ of Worcester, and the “tolerably kind, but damned inquisitive’’ people of Springfield.
After two months, they reached Charlottesville and found the promised barracks were only shells, open to snow and wind. Some Virginians worried that Charlottesville was too remote to provide supplies to the prisoners and feared that many would easily escape. The governor of Virginia, Patrick Henry, was urged to send the prisoners elsewhere.
But Jefferson would not be deterred.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
What is the concern, though? It’s just a column of prisoners.
That was a different group marched to VA...
While the Grenadiers and the German officers were--for the most part--professionals, the average infantryman was a farm boy (not a Pharmboy).
They were in service to the local prince who paid them a yearly stipend and went wherever he sent them, but were not career soldiers by any stretch.
The records kept by the Brits, the Germans and even the Americans at the time were pretty good, and you should--with a modest amount of research--find out a fair amount about your ancestor. Many of the Germans kept diaries and some have been translated, but most still remain in German.
The Germans got a bad name here, partly because of the language problem. The English officers and German officers communicated with each other mostly in French since that was the likely language both groups had in common.
As an example, NJ was constantly patrolled by both sides...and when a Hessian patrol came upon an farmhouse that was actually a Loyalist household, it was bad news for the Loyalist. While they had a certificate from the Crown that protected them from the Redcoats, the Germans could not read it and took their provisions anyway.
“What is the concern, though? It’s just a column of prisoners.”
Huh? Why be concerned with manufactured history? Sorry. You’re probably right....nothing to see here.
Thanks for the post. Yes, it would be interesting to research my ancestor. It’s just a matter of tracing backwards. My father did a lot of research on his side, but since this is my maternal side, he only did peripheral research from those that were still living a few decades ago. I knew the ancestors from NJ were German.
You’re not explaining why it’s “weird”. I have no clue what you’re getting at, and I’m sure a majority would agree that they don’t know why there’s something “wrong” with the situation based on your cryptic comments (or why you think it’s “manufactured”).
My comments are not cryptic. I think there is a false note rung in what is supposed to be an historical event. WTF is so hard to understand about what I am saying or why am I saying it? If you are too lazy to look back at what the posts to see why it looks “weird” or too uncaring about whether or not history is accurate, let it go...I really don’t want to spend any more time on this. Thanks for thinking so deeply about it though.
Do you really need to cuss? Or insult? “Lazy” (to read too few words by you? Doesn’t take much effort to read those few words) or “uncaring”; about a person for whom the RevWar is near and dear to her heart (note my username). Don’t lecture me about historical accuracy.
They ARE cryptic. You just didn’t explain what is so “weird” about it, and no one else has stated similar concerns (not that there are a lot of comments).
I don’t let it go simply because I really want to know what is wrong about it? It makes me curious. What’s wrong with marching west? Simple question and your previous comments don’t answer it.
OK.
When you need to go south do YOU usually go a 100-150 miles west first? On foot? Through mountains?
Or does that seem normal to you?
I don’t want to write a book here, pal. I was making an observation that was pretty simple.
OK, thank you.
I have no solid idea, but west means avoiding the coast, which was possibly considered more vulnerable to enemy attack. There had been the CT raids (Danbury) earlier that year, and Newport RI was controlled by Brits for years. Otherwise, the Brits were masters of the sea and rebels had hardly anything of any kind of “navy”. The old Post Road was way too close to the coast.
I don’t know the details, but Springfield was not far from “Old New-Gate Prison”, which was used by Brits to hold rebels during the time (I saw a grave of a soldier in Hanover, CT, who had been held/died there). So if they used it during that time, it seems it might’ve been illogical to head too close there, but maybe being mostly guards(?) also, it wasn’t too risky.
That’s just my theory.
“That’s just my theory.”
Well, west will avoid the coast, but they could have gone by way any number of established routes that were nowhere near THAT far west.
You have an interesting theory, but the route goes along the lines and more towards a re-telling of the earlier marches of the prisoners to Albany than to the discussed march to VA. I doubt that, as according to any reliable history that I have read, the Hessians were marched from Boston to Albany and back (nearly) to Albany in order to get them to VA. And if your theory of “safer in the west” were true, why did they march them to Albany only to bring the back EAST, then back west? There is no sense to be made of it, I’m sorry.
And as for being “close to the coast” that was not the only other route; but even if it if it were, the grounds and cities were changing hands so rapidly at that point, that there was NO safe route and that kind of detour would have been totally unnecesary and even far riskier, venturing so far out with no local militia to offer protection.
The history has been conflated; they have confused the earlier “evacuation” of the Germans to Albany with the nefarious trip to VA to benefit jefferson; it is akin to John Kerry’s seared memory of being sent to Cambodia by an as yet to be elected Nixon.
Why the weirdness of it? I dunno. But my guess is as good as yours.
Just my opinion. History is degrading.
Pharmboy, I would like to be added to your RevWar/Colonial History/General Washington ping list, if I may. Am also pinging Diana in Wisconsin to see info re Hessians. Thanks!!
Your Obdt. Svt.,
P_____y
And I, kind sir, am even more obliged to you. Please accept my gratitude.
Thanks for the Ping LE! Please add me to your ping list too, Pharmboy.
I’m watching ‘The Crossing’ tonight. :)
Viewer comment: when me and my friend saw the movie, we were like "OMG! THERE HE IS!"
LOL.
Thank You, Kind Sir. *WINK*
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.