‘Commoner-Knights’ and Napoleonic Spain: The Guerrilla Chieftain El Empecinado

‘Commoner-Knights’ and Napoleonic Spain: The Guerrilla Chieftain El EmpecinadoIn the autumn of 1809, at an important crossroads in the Peninsular War in Spain (1808-14), Napoleon began considering a complete overhaul of his occupation strategy. The change was prompted due to a shortage of funds in Paris to fuel the unexpected conflict, but played into the provincial nature of a growing guerrilla insurgency coalescing along regional lines led by local chieftains such Juan Martín Díez (El Empecinado). Spain’s official ruler was Napoleon’s older brother Joseph, installed as king in 1808 (a move sparking the war), but the true power lay with Napoleon himself, who often micromanaged affairs from Paris. When Napoleon was upset with his brother’s leadership, he refrained from mentioning him by name. “Let the King know that my troops in Spain have no power over the provinces,” Napoleon wrote his war minister General Henri-Jacques Guillaume Clarke in October of 1809, “and the feebleness of the…

Read more…
0 Replies
Views: 60

From 'Compliance' and 'Conciliation' to 'Hearts and Minds': The 19th–Century Origins of U.S. Counterinsurgency Doctrine

From 'Compliance' and 'Conciliation' to 'Hearts and Minds': The 19th–Century Origins of U.S. Counterinsurgency Doctrine In 1829, French general Gabriel Suchet published his Peninsular War (1808–14) memoirs and noted that in 1810 he believed the Spanish “appeared to yield ready compliance” to the French occupation – an assessment far from accurate. Rather, Suchet’s tenure as commander of Napoleon’s forces in northeast Spain witnessed some of the most intense fighting between Spanish guerrillas and French forces. A generation later, General Winfield Scott recalled his own role in the Mexican-American War (1846–48). In his memoirs, Scott lauded the “prowess” of the U.S. Army, but added that “valor and professional science could not alone have dictated a treaty of peace with double our numbers, in double the time, and with double the loss of life, without the measures of conciliation”. This semantic shift in the period between Suchet and Scott represents a profound change in military…

Read more…
0 Replies
Views: 147

President Tyler Mentions a ‘Massacre’ to Congress: The Beheading of Francisco de Sentmanat in Tabasco and Pre-War US-Mexican Relations, 1841–44

President Tyler Mentions a ‘Massacre’ to Congress: The Beheading of Francisco de Sentmanat in Tabasco and Pre-War US-Mexican Relations, 1841–44 The origins of the informal two-year alliance between Texas and Yucatan (1840–42), which served the purpose of frustrating an invasion of the former by Mexican authorities, originated in their initial cooperation and support of an insurrection in Tabasco. Although revolts were not uncommon in early nineteenth-century Mexico, the rebellion that erupted in late 1839 in the small but productive state abutting Yucatan on the southern end of the Gulf tested the authority of a national government still recovering from the humiliating three-month French blockade of Veracruz – an episode known as the Pastry War (1838-39). Like Texas and Yucatan, the Tabascan insurrection was sparked by the ongoing national political civil war between Mexican “federalists” who advocated states’ rights and “centralists” who believed a stronger and more consolidated…

Read more…
2 Replies · Reply by Benjamin J. Swenson May 1
Views: 102

Edward Preble’s Enduring Influence: The Barbary Wars and the Shaping of U.S. Naval Culture

Introduction The United States Navy was barely an experiment in the early 1800s.  The country had no institutional structure for cultivating naval leadership, no permanent fleet, and no great maritime legacy.  Often self-taught or informally trained, naval officers improvised doctrine instead of codifying it; ships were built erratically and run under limited funds. Yet within a generation, American vessels were patrolling distant shores, projecting power in the Mediterranean, and defeating seasoned British frigates in direct combat. This transformation did not occur in isolation, it emerged from a crucible of small wars, hard leadership, and contested waters.  At the center of this formative era stood a small group of officers who had cut their teeth during the Barbary Wars (1801–1815). Among them, Commodore Edward Preble (1761–1807) stands apart, not simply for his tactical victories, but for the disciplined, professional culture he imposed under combat conditions. His Mediterranean…

Read more…
4 Replies · Reply by Benjamin J. Swenson Apr 30
Views: 179

“Annexation as War” – The 1844 Presidential Election and US-Mexican Conflict

The U.S. presidential election held in late autumn of 1844 was not merely a contest over which party would administer the executive branch of the federal government, it was a referendum on whether the nation would go to war with Mexico. The margin of victory was razor-thin but the ascendancy of James K. Polk to the post of Commander-in-chief meant a plurality of voting Americans believed the United States should annex the breakaway state and accept the consequences: that incorporation of the Lone Star Republic meant inheriting an ongoing war with Mexico.[1] Right: One of several campaign banners Nathaniel Currier is known to have produced for the Democrats in 1844. It features two laurel-wreathed, oval portraits of Democratic presidential and vice-presidential candidates James K. Polk (left) and George M. Dallas (right). The print imitates the hanging drapes and tassels of cloth banners, aspiring to a "trompe l'oeil" effect. In the center, above the portraits, appear an eagle and…

Read more…
0 Replies
Views: 131

War of 1812 In The West Symposium March 22, 2025, Arrow Rock, Missouri

The War of 1812 In The West is always a great program.  This year's is March 22 In Arrow Rock, Missouri The 34TH Annual War of 1812 in the West Symposium                   Featuring Acclaimed Regional & National Historians.ARROW ROCK STATE HISTORIC SITE,39521 Visitor Center Drive, Arrow Rock, MO 65320Hosted by Missouri State Parks & Sponsored by the 1st U. States Infantry Regiment – Clemson’s Company.Open to the Public, no registration or fee required, featuring exhibits on the War of 1812.  March 22, 2025                                                  Saturday, March 22 2025:Ø   9am “RECONSTRUCTING FORT MIEGS: REBUILDING A WAR OF 1812 POST IN THE 21ST CENTURY” By Larry Nelson.Ø  10am “1st US INFANTRY AT LUNDY’S LANE: GIVE IT TO THEM MY BOYS!” by David Bennett Ø  11am “THE SIEGE OF FORT ERIE” by Richard BarbutoØ  12pm Break for Lunch.Ø  1pm “IN SEARCH OF: FORT LOOKOUT/DESHA’S BLOCKHOUSE & FORT INDEPENDENCE” by Michael HarrisØ  2pm “US RECRUITING IN SAINT GENEVIEVE – MISSOURI…

Read more…
0 Replies
Views: 122

Clayton-Bulwer Treaty of 1850: Anglo-American Epilogue of the Mexican-American War (1846–8)

Clayton-Bulwer Treaty of 1850: Anglo-American Epilogue of the Mexican-American War (1846–8) American diplomat Elija Hise’s journey to Guatemala in 1848 was the embodiment of the obstacles expansionists faced south of the Rio Grande and the reason Americans needed to deal diplomatically with the British to avoid a war centering around the isthmian contest that intensified after the Mexican conflict. In essence, the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty of 1850, designed to mitigate hostilities arising out of Central America, amounted to a geopolitical and continental epilogue to the 1848 Mexican-American War and Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. Imperfect as it was, the agreement was successful in that it prevented an immediate confrontation over a region both sides believed was essential to their future geostrategic and commercial interests. Although the Americans may have invoked, ‘the doctrines of Mr. Monroe and Mr. Polk,’ which emerged out of the Yucatan debate and became known in 1849 as the ‘Monroe…

Read more…
0 Replies
Views: 82

Korean origins of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance (1902-1922): Tonghak Peasant Revolt and Sino-Japanese War (1894–5) from an American Perspective (Part 2)

Korean origins of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance (1902-1922): Tonghak Peasant Revolt and Sino-Japanese War (1894–5) from an American Perspective (Part 2) The 1894 Korean Tonghak Peasant Revolt sparking the First Sino-Japanese War (1894–5) was used to showcase the 500-year-old Joseon Kingdom internationally as an underdeveloped and unstable state requiring reforms – a position supported by western powers justifying Japanese actions while simultaneously undermining Korean sovereignty and independence. The remedy espoused by states supportive of military intervention in the region at the expense of rivals such as the Chinese and Russians, was the perpetual occupation of Korea. British support for the Japanese in this regard influenced American perceptions of the isolationist kingdom – with the result being that U.S. officials eventually supported the Anglo-Japanese position and balance-of-power outlook in East Asia. The endgame in that geostrategic relationship was the formal establishment…

Read more…
0 Replies
Views: 121

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…
0 Replies
Views: 381

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…
2 Replies · Reply by Benjamin J. Swenson Oct 7, 2024
Views: 134
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