Forum

Korean origins of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance (1902-1922): Tonghak Peasant Revolt and Sino-Japanese War (1894–5) from an American Perspective (Part 1) by Prof. Benjamin J. Swenson

Korean origins of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance (1902-1922): Tonghak Peasant Revolt and Sino-Japanese War (1894–5) from an American Perspective (Part 1) In 1884 the Japanese-sanctioned Gapsin Coup (갑신정병) in Seoul failed resulting in the reassertion of a pro-Chinese regime in the Kingdom of Korea. For ten years between 1884 and 1894 Japan slowly and methodically restored its presence on the peninsula. This was accomplished by encouraging Japanese merchants and farmers to settle Korean lands, accelerating Japanese naval supremacy in East Asia, and effecting commercial treaties designed to slowly accumulate economic and political leverage at the expense of her East Asian neighbor. The actions of Japan during this period, in combination with a growing anti-elitist sentiment among Koreans toward their ruling class, resulted in a rebellion by peasants whose main goals included ousting foreigners from the country and fortifying it from outside influence by creating a strong and modern nation.…

Read more…
Started by Benjamin J. Swenson
0 Replies
Views: 318

The Inauspicious Naming of the ‘War of 1812’ and Gulf Theater

The Inauspicious Naming of the ‘War of 1812’ and Gulf Theater In mid-1848 the second Anglo-American war was finally given its name. On June 23 of that year, at the conclusion of the Mexican-American War (1846–48), the Daily Union of Washington DC ran an article titled “The Triumph of Truth.” The article outlined a recent report on U.S. Treasury expenditures in the war with Mexico and of the previous conflict, which used the term “war of 1812” for the first time. Up until the end of the Mexican War, the term most people used to describe it was the “late war,” and because the conflict beginning in 1846 with Mexico had become the most recent, the second war with the British required a name – as uninspiring and unromantic as it was. “The late war has done more to secure the permanence of our republican institutions,” President James Madison later stated to Congress in an 1815 annual message, “and to establish for us a character abroad, than its most zealous advocates and sanguine friends…

Read more…
Started by Benjamin J. Swenson
2 Replies · Reply by Benjamin J. Swenson Oct 7
Views: 85

Mexican-American War and Caste War: Coinciding Conflicts in the Gulf of Mexico, 1847

Mexican-American War and Caste War: Coinciding Conflicts in the Gulf of Mexico, 1847 The Caste War of Yucatan (1847–1901), which erupted at the height of the Mexican-American War (1846–8) due to a myriad of internal and external events impacting the region marks a particularly tragic chapter in the history of ethnic conflict in the Americas. In 1816, Americans began fighting the Seminoles in Florida, and that conflict – fought in unfamiliar territory that favored guerrilla tactics – endured until 1858. The Yucatan peninsula, with its similar humid lowlands, rain, mud, and terrain that mitigated the effectiveness of the cavalry-centric warfare fought in much of northern and central Mexico, was larger and included a borderless frontier abutting the neighboring states of Guatemala and British Honduras (Belize). Until now, historians have overlooked the undeniable connections between the eruption of Yucatan’s Caste War in 1847 and US-Mexican conflict.[1] Right: Fighters during the Caste…

Read more…
Started by Benjamin J. Swenson
0 Replies
Views: 79

The Breakaway Republics: Texas, Yucatan, and US-Mexican War, 1835-1848

The Breakaway Republics: Texas, Yucatan, and US-Mexican War, 1835-1848 Editor's Note: The following article is from excerpts of Benjamin J. Swenson's new book to be released this fall. Addiitonal publication details below. A major and overlooked issue surrounding the Mexican-American War (1846–8) is that the region was already in a state of crisis in the 1840s. Although many are aware of the role the breakaway Republic of Texas (1836–46) and its annexation to the U.S. played in provoking the conflict, the Republic of Yucatan opposite the Gulf was an important player in the larger geostrategic and international conflict affecting numerous countries – notably Great Britain and the smaller Central American states. Thus the beginning of Yucatan’s Caste War in 1847, at the height of the US-Mexican conflict, was no coincidence. The Yucatecan independence movement, which emulated the one that began in Texas in 1835, influenced the way Americans perceived Mexico leading up to US-Mexican…

Read more…
Started by Benjamin J. Swenson
2 Replies · Reply by Benjamin J. Swenson Aug 5
Views: 146

Texas Rangers, Presidential War Powers, and Mexico City Campaign, 1847–8 (Part 3)

In the summer of 1847 at the height of the Mexican-American War President James K. Polk sent a mounted regiment of Texas Rangers under Colonel John Coffee “Jack” Hays to Mexico to confront guerrillas attacking US Army convoys between Mexico City and Veracruz. That force, which contributed to lifting a siege against a small US Army garrison in the city of Puebla, was sent in response to a request submitted by General Winfield Scott, who went on to seize the capital in September. What Scott did not know was that federal officials authorized the regiment to enter the war as militia. Three months after Polk met privately with Hays in Washington DC, Secretary of War Marcy informed General Zachary Taylor that the mounted units from Texas selected to be sent to Veracruz had “come out as militia, as distinguished from volunteers”. Although the Texans were excellent counterinsurgency fighters, their designation complicated Scott’s population-centric war strategy, and caused friction between…

Read more…
Started by Benjamin J. Swenson
0 Replies
Views: 67

"Texas Rangers, Presidential War Powers, and the Mexico City Campaign, 1847–8 (Part 2)" by Benjamin J. Swenson, PhD

In the summer of 1847, using presidential powers authorized by Congress, US Commander-in-Chief James K. Polk sent a mounted regiment of Texas Rangers under Colonel John Coffee “Jack” Hays to Mexico to confront guerrillas attacking US Army convoys between Veracruz and Mexico City. Accompanying that force, which contributed to lifting a siege against a small US Army garrison in the city of Puebla, was Polk’s younger brother, William H. Polk, who had recently resigned his post as chargé d’affaires of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies in Naples. The force was sent in response to a request submitted in April by General Winfield Scott, the commander of the campaign to seize the Mexican capital. However, what Scott did not know was that federal officials authorized the regiment to enter the war as militia operating under a semi-separate set of laws governing military conduct – which was another indication of Polk’s tendency to micromanage the war to Scott’s consternation. Three months after…

Read more…
Started by Benjamin J. Swenson
0 Replies
Views: 126

Texas Rangers, Polk's Presidential War Powers, and Mexico City Campaign, 1847–8 (Part 1)

In late April of 1847, at the height of the Mexican-American War, General Winfield Scott, the commander of the campaign to seize Mexico City, asked General Zachary Taylor for mounted units to fight guerrillas attacking U.S. supply convoys along the vital logistics route stretching from Veracruz to Puebla. Scott did not specifically request Texans but simply wrote he needed “a competent fighting force” of cavalry units. Having experienced cavalry-centric “Indian” warfare for a generation in the borderlands, the Texas Rangers were aptly suited for the role. Motivated and hardened after years of defending the Republic of Texas the frontier fighters were authorized by federal officials to enter the war as militia operating under a semi-separate set of laws governing military conduct. This designation legally complicated the population-centric counterinsurgency efforts Scott and West Point-trained officers were attempting to instill within the U.S. Army. The dichotomy between the…

Read more…
Started by Benjamin J. Swenson
0 Replies
Views: 136

US Army COIN Doctrine Origins: Mexican-American War, 1846-8 (Part 2)

Open for Business and Scattering Gold: U.S. Occupation of Mexico City and Army Counterinsurgency Doctrine, 1847-8 (Part Two)During the Mexican-American War (1846–48) the U.S. Army implemented an innovative population-centric strategy designed to mitigate animus among Mexicans and reduce the potential for guerrilla warfare in occupied areas. The decision to eschew the traditional practice of forced requisitions, informed U.S. Army counterinsurgency methods for years to come – including in the Philippines. Other policies included paying for goods at equitable market rates, facilitating trade between the capital and coastal region by protecting conveys from guerrilla attacks, rescinding the alcabala tax directed at poorer Mexicans seeking to sell their goods in areas controlled by the U.S. Army, and respecting the property rights of Mexicans. These policies were implemented throughout U.S. occupied Mexico but were particularly important to success in Mexico’s large metropolis.[1]The…

Read more…
Started by Benjamin J. Swenson
0 Replies
Views: 97

"Why War in 1812?" by Jim Gallen, JD

Why did the United States go to War in 1812?  What compelled this nation, less than thirty years from its War of Independence with a vast wilderness awaiting development and hostile Indians beyond its frontiers, choose to take on its former colonial Mother Country?  This was a war sought by the United States, not Great Britain.  Engaged in a series of Coalitions against existential threats posed by Revolutionary and Napoleonic France, Britain had no appetite for a third war in North America in sixty years.  In an age in which news traveled no more rapidly than the fastest ship or horse, British offers to placate American demands were insufficient to keep swords sheathed.  So, what were the issues that drove these eighteen loosely United States to prod the Imperial Lion while it was striking in another direction?  The United States contained sections with diverse interests.  Several issues have been advanced as sufficient casus belli.  America was a trading nation whose economy had…

Read more…
Started by Jim Gallen
1 Reply · Reply by Benjamin J. Swenson Apr 2
Views: 71

US Army COIN Doctrine Origins: Mexican-American War, 1846-8 (Part I)

Open for Business and Scattering Gold: U.S. Occupation of Mexico City and Army Counterinsurgency Doctrine, 1847-1848 (Part One)If difficult military occupations, which often devolve into violent insurgencies, are reflections of the intensity of animus existing between belligerents during war, then the U.S. Army’s occupation of Mexico City is a case study in conciliating a conquered capital. The occupation that began in the fall of 1847 and lasted roughly a year reached a high level of amity between the invading army and citizenry. Particularly important to U.S. rule over Mexico’s massive city was the continuation of local commerce buttressed by policies allowing Mexicans to police their own people while simultaneously subject to martial law under the jurisdiction of U.S. forces. General Winfield Scott’s benign counterinsurgency initiatives for military occupation, informed by Henry W. Halleck’s study of the guerrilla insurgency in Spain against Napoleon (1808-1814), would go on to…

Read more…
Started by Benjamin J. Swenson
0 Replies
Views: 169
102 Members
Join Us!

American Revolutionary War Battles

1775

  • April 19 - Battles of Lexington & Concord, MA
  • April 19, 1775-March 17, 1776 - Siege of Boston, MA
  • May 10 - Capture of Fort Ticonderoga, NY
  • June 11-12 - Battle of Machias, MA/ME
  • June 17 - Battle of Bunker Hill, MA
  • September 17-November 3 - Siege of Fort St. Jean, CA
  • September 19-November 9 - Arnold Expedition, ME/CA
  • December 9 - Battle of Great Bridge, VA
  • December 31 - Battle of Quebec, CA

1776

  • February 27 - Battle of Moore's Creek Bridge, NC
  • March 3-4 - Battle of Nassau, Bahamas
  • June 28 - Battle of Sullivan's Island (Charleston), SC
  • August 27-30 - Battle of Long Island, NY
  • September 16 - Battle of Harlem Heights, NY
  • October 11 - Battle of Valcour Island, NY
  • October 28 - Battle of White Plains, NY
  • November 16 - Battle of Fort Washington, NY
  • December 26 - Battle of Trenton, NJ

1777

  • January 2 - Battle of the Assunpink Creek, NJ
  • January 3 - Battle of Princeton, NJ
  • April 27 - Battle of Ridgefield, CT
  • June 26 - Battle of Short Hills, NJ
  • July 2-6 - Siege of Fort Ticonderoga, NY
  • July 7 - Battle of Hubbardton, VT
  • August 2-22 - Siege of Fort Stanwix, NY
  • August 6 - Battle of Oriskany, NY
  • August 16 - Battle of Bennington, NY
  • September 3 - Battle of Cooch's Bridge, DE
  • September 11 - Battle of Brandywine, PA
  • September 19 & October 7 - Battle of Saratoga, NY
  • September 21 - Paoli Massacre, PA
  • September 26-November 16 - Siege of Fort Mifflin, PA
  • October 4 - Battle of Germantown, PA
  • October 6 - Battle of Forts Clinton & Montgomery, NY
  • October 22 - Battle of Red Bank - NJ
  • December 19-June 19, 1778 - Winter at Valley Forge, PA

1778

  • June 28 - Battle of Monmouth, NJ
  • July 3 - Battle of Wyoming, PA
  • August 29 - Battle of Rhode Island, RI

1779

  • February 14 - Battle of Kettle Creek, GA
  • July 16 - Battle of Stony Point, NY
  • July 24-August 12 - Penobscot Expedition, ME
  • August 19 - Battle of Paulus Hook, NJ
  • September 16-October 18 - Siege of Savannah, GA
  • September 23 - Battle of Flamborough Head

1780

  • March 29-May 12 - Siege of Charleston, SC
  • May 29 - Battle of Waxhaws, SC
  • June 23 - Battle of Springfield, NJ
  • August 16 - Battle of Camden, SC
  • October 7 - Battle of Kings Mountain, SC

1781

  • January 5 - Battle of Jersey, Channel Islands
  • January 17 - Battle of Cowpens, SC
  • March 15 - Battle of Guilford Court House, NC
  • April 25 - Battle of Hobkirk's Hill, SC
  • September 5 - Battle of the Chesapeake, VA
  • September 6 - Battle of Groton Heights, CT
  • September 8 - Battle of Eutaw Springs, SC
  • September 28-October 19 - Battle of Yorktown, VA

Photos