American Warfare in the Pre-Civil War Era

In the late seventeenth century, three forces struggled for control over North America: the English, French, and Spanish. However, since Spanish power was in decline, English and French forces came to dominate in the struggle. The British colonists who enjoyed a manpower advantage used several tactics, including privateering, to impede the flow of supplies to the French forces. Simultaneously, there were significant differences in military power between the colonies. Virginia, for example, was “so little troubled . . . and her Indian enemies so weak, that the militia virtually ceased to exist.” The French, by contrast, who enjoyed greater unity of command, were able to adopt the tactics of Native Americans more readily. 

The French may at first have seemed superior to the British colonists in the struggle for North American domination. However, since the English came to North America in large family units, they had greater need for land than the French and pushed the frontier in order to expand their territory, while willingly resorting to almost any method of warfare, no matter how ruthless. The Native American fur trade and the establishment of Native American alliances played an important role in that the colonists managed to subordinate the Native Americans, making them less self-sufficient by exchanging manufactured goods for pelts. Diseases brought by the Europeans, along with a reliance on tribal divisions, pitting different tribes against each other, further contributed to the inability of the Native Americans to use their numerical superiority to their advantage. 

The colonial wars also differed from European wars of the era, because the colonists were fighting over fishing rights and religious differences in addition to land dominance. The officers who arrived from Britain brought with them a style of warfare that was motivated by religion, and which sanctioned the burning of villages and the annihilation of civilian populations. An important factor relating to the type of warfare the colonists waged is the recognition that they had arrived in America with the “proper attitude.” In other words, they had prior knowledge that it was going to be rough and they would likely have to fight. 

Warfare in America might have developed as it did, because war to the colonists was a matter of survival. They were not fighting for the purpose of controlling an enemy government, but for the purpose of subduing the whole enemy population. Simultaneously, fighting “war to the death,” an idea adopted by the colonists from their European origin, was foreign to the Native Americans. Thus, European mentality toward war, the use of guerrilla tactics, improvements of the militia, better training, and an increase in artillery, were factors that contributed to colonial success. 

Based on these factors, military historian John Grenier has identified a “First American Way of War” that comprised both irregular and unlimited type warfare, not quite European, but also not quite Native American. The colonists filled a void, and thus complemented the British forces. European guerrilla tactics, by contrast, differed from those that the colonists developed. Petite guerre, or small wars, in the British tradition, was never accepted to the same degree as in the colonies. The Jacobite Rebellion of the early eighteenth century in Great Britain and Ireland, for example, was viewed as a victory of regulars over irregulars. Although guerrilla tactics were not considered a legitimate way of war in Britain, they were used against rebellious populations. From the British perspective, irregular forces appeared superior only if there were great disparities in numbers, poor training, or misconduct among the officers of the regular troops. In North America, however, and particularly as colonists would attempt to break their ties with England, irregular forces recognized that they could not fight a well-trained and numerically superior army of regular troops using direct assault tactics, but had to rely on cunning and surprise if they were to turn the tide to their advantage.

 

BUY