Follow TV Tropes

Following

History UsefulNotes / WarOf1812

Go To



''No Series/HockeyNightInCanada, there was no Creator/{{CBC}}''//
''In 1812, [[UsefulNotes/JamesMadison Madison]] was mad, he was the president, you know''//
''Well, he thought he'd tell the British where they ought to go''//
''He thought he'd invade Canada, he thought that he was tough''//
''Instead we went to Washington... and burned down all his stuff!''

to:

-> ''No Series/HockeyNightInCanada, there was no Creator/{{CBC}}''//
-> ''In 1812, [[UsefulNotes/JamesMadison Madison]] was mad, he was the president, you know''//
-> ''Well, he thought he'd tell the British where they ought to go''//
-> ''He thought he'd invade Canada, he thought that he was tough''//
-> ''Instead we went to Washington... and burned down all his stuff!''


''Oh, come back, proud Canadians, back before you had TV''\\
''No Series/HockeyNightInCanada'', there was no Creator/{{CBC}}''\\
''In 1812, [[UsefulNotes/JamesMadison Madison]] was mad, he was the president, you know''\\
''Well, he thought he'd tell the British where they ought to go''\\
''He thought he'd invade Canada, he thought that he was tough''\\

to:

-> ''Oh, come back, proud Canadians, back before you had TV''\\
TV''//
''No Series/HockeyNightInCanada'', Series/HockeyNightInCanada, there was no Creator/{{CBC}}''\\
Creator/{{CBC}}''//
''In 1812, [[UsefulNotes/JamesMadison Madison]] was mad, he was the president, you know''\\
know''//
''Well, he thought he'd tell the British where they ought to go''\\
go''//
''He thought he'd invade Canada, he thought that he was tough''\\tough''//

Added DiffLines:

''Oh, come back, proud Canadians, back before you had TV''\\
''No Series/HockeyNightInCanada'', there was no Creator/{{CBC}}''\\
''In 1812, [[UsefulNotes/JamesMadison Madison]] was mad, he was the president, you know''\\
''Well, he thought he'd tell the British where they ought to go''\\
''He thought he'd invade Canada, he thought that he was tough''\\
''Instead we went to Washington... and burned down all his stuff!''
-->-- '''Three Dead Trolls in a Baggie''', "The War of 1812"


The War of 1812 (1812-1815) is one of the most popular wars to ever grace North America. The Americans think they won it, the Canadians think ''they'' won it, and the British have ''no idea'' they fought in it. It's also one of the Americas' more unusual wars: It's called the War of 1812--but it lasted nearly three years. America's ''casus belli'' for declaring war on Britain was the latter's forced conscription of American sailors to fight in UsefulNotes/TheNapoleonicWars. The war's most famous battle was fought weeks after the ink on the peace treaty was dry. In the United States, it has been called the Second Revolutionary War. In Canada it is remembered as the war in which Canadians stopped the U.S. from trying to annex them. The British don't even remember it happened--and when they do, it's usually to gloat about burning the White House down, something for which [[AmericaWinsTheWar Canadians tend to take credit]] more often than not.

to:

The War of 1812 (1812-1815) is one of the most popular wars to ever grace North America. The Americans think they won it, the Canadians think ''they'' won it, and the British have ''no idea'' they fought in it. It's also one of the Americas' more unusual wars: It's called the War of 1812--but it lasted nearly three years. America's ''casus belli'' for declaring war on Britain was the latter's forced conscription of American sailors to fight in UsefulNotes/TheNapoleonicWars. The war's most famous battle was fought weeks after the ink on the peace treaty was dry. In the United States, it has been called the Second Revolutionary War. In Canada it is remembered as the war in which Canadians stopped the U.S. from trying to annex conquer them. The British don't even remember it happened--and when they do, it's usually to gloat about burning the White House down, something for which [[AmericaWinsTheWar Canadians tend to take credit]] more often than not.

Added DiffLines:


[[folder: Film ]]

* ''The Buccaneer'' is about the pirate Jean Lafitte and his men, who aided the American Army during the Battle of New Orleans in exchange for pardons.

[[/folder]]



to:

* ''Literature/TheShadowOverInnsmouth'' mentions the war in the backstory for the titular town. During the war, the British raided the town. This contributes to the town's decline.


The War of 1812 (1812-1815) is one of the most popular wars to ever grace North America. The Americans think they won it, the Canadians think ''they'' won it, and the British have ''no idea'' they fought in it. It's also one of the Americas' more unusual wars: It's called the War of 1812--but it lasted nearly three years. America's ''casus belli'' for declaring war on Britain was the latter's forced conscription of American sailors to fight in UsefulNotes/TheNapoleonicWars--which, in a fit of tragic irony, had all but ended even as the declaration of war was in transit across the Atlantic. The war's most famous battle was fought weeks after the ink on the peace treaty was dry. In the United States, it has been called the Second Revolutionary War. In Canada it is remembered as the war in which Canadians stopped the U.S. from trying to annex them, and as said, the British don't even remember it happened (except when they're gloating about burning down the White House[[note]]Amusingly, the evacuation of people and property in response to the approaching army meant that there was less for the thunderstorm and tornado which struck simultaneously (dousing the fires and driving off the army) to damage - so the arson was arguably a ''net positive''[[/note]]).

to:

The War of 1812 (1812-1815) is one of the most popular wars to ever grace North America. The Americans think they won it, the Canadians think ''they'' won it, and the British have ''no idea'' they fought in it. It's also one of the Americas' more unusual wars: It's called the War of 1812--but it lasted nearly three years. America's ''casus belli'' for declaring war on Britain was the latter's forced conscription of American sailors to fight in UsefulNotes/TheNapoleonicWars--which, in a fit of tragic irony, had all but ended even as the declaration of war was in transit across the Atlantic.UsefulNotes/TheNapoleonicWars. The war's most famous battle was fought weeks after the ink on the peace treaty was dry. In the United States, it has been called the Second Revolutionary War. In Canada it is remembered as the war in which Canadians stopped the U.S. from trying to annex them, and as said, the them. The British don't even remember it happened (except happened--and when they're gloating they do, it's usually to gloat about burning down the White House[[note]]Amusingly, the evacuation of people and property in response to the approaching army meant that there was less House down, something for the thunderstorm and tornado which struck simultaneously (dousing the fires and driving off the army) [[AmericaWinsTheWar Canadians tend to damage - so the arson was arguably a ''net positive''[[/note]]).
take credit]] more often than not.



[[folder: The British Civil War Part 3: The Re-Liberationating]]

The war was essentially an attempt by the USA (and more specifically, the 'War Hawks' of her inland states) to conquer British and Spanish North America (modern-day Canada and the present-day US state of Florida) and prevent the Amerindian tribes from forming a country (that could oppose westward expansion by the USA) while Great Britain was busy helping the very-nearly-conquered Kingdoms of Portugal and Spain fight 'The (Iberian) Peninsular War' against The Empire of France. However, they needed a ''casus belli'' for doing all this - if they started a war (of conquest) without one they could be accused of being an aggressive/expansionist country ([[{{Realpolitik}} not that that kind of thing really matters]], [[AppealToForce e.g. Napoleon's annexation of The Low Countries and The Rhineland]]). Thankfully, the wider war played right into their hands in this respect as well. Traders in the US had become rich from [[WarForFunAndProfit war profiteering]]; basically, selling food and guns to both sides in the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars. Both sides had declared an embargo upon each other, and commissioned privateers and used their navies to raid each others' shipping. However, after their sound victory at Trafalgar in 1805, the British were suddenly in a much better position to confiscate American trade bound for France -- and they did just that. Moreover, the expansion of the Royal Navy left them short of sailors.

Scraping the bottom of the manpower-barrel after two decades of near-constant warfare, the Royal Navy stepped up the conscription of sailors into the navy in domestic ports and began to search US vessels they encountered for deserters -- easily identifiable by their RN tattoos. Some ten thousand men were thus taken from American merchant vessels and pressed into RN service. [[note]] The 19th century wasn't a good time for exact or even approximate numbers for ''anything'', so nobody at the time had a good idea of just how many deserters had actually been reclaimed, or how many impressed sailors were Americans who had the misfortune of getting looked at by a RN captain who didn't care what your sob story was. It was perfectly possible for you to have ''retired'' or been honourably discharged from the RN, for instance, and still get impressed if you'd been foolish or desperate enough to be a sailor on a vessel registered in the US. [[/note]] The facts were, the Royal Navy had completely ignored the usual diplomatic channels and was basically ignoring the sovereignty of the government of the United States, which they hadn't even ''asked'' for permission to do this. This is partly because The Admiralty could well be told to sod off if they ''did'' ask ('it's easier to say sorry than to ask, be denied, and do it anyway', etc., etc.), but also because as far as they were concerned all the people involved were all British nationals anyway and it didn't matter if they technically didn't answer to the same government [[note]] Though the importation of African slaves reached its peak in the following decades, the massive influx of Germanic, Slavic, and Mediterranean peoples that made British (Celtic-Anglo-Saxon) ethnicities a minority in the USA came only in the 1870s-1920s. Moreover, there is no evidence to suggest any marked difference in accent beyond the tendency of US-born citizens to speak more clearly. English, and not regional dialect, was the first language of many US-born citizens and thus their (British-)regional accents weren't as strong. Culturally they were also more-or-less identical as well, as the first widely-read US-American poets and writers only cropped up in the latter 19th century. The only real difference was republicanism versus democratic constitutional monarchy, and that's not got ought to do with the price of bread. [[/note]] - sort of like East and West Germany, or Germany and Austria. The USA's overall/central government also had real troubles being taken seriously abroad and particularly at home. Although the USA was by now officially a ''union'' of states[[note]] thanks to some quick action in the post-war period by a real-life conspiracy of Big Men of the revolution who realised that many if not all of their countries would probably all rejoin Britain again if they didn't form a single country [[/note]] most of its own citizens still thought of it as a union of ''states'' (i.e. not a country, but an association of independent countries akin to the present-day EU).

The traders and coastal states of the USA which actually owned and operated the ships in question had mixed feelings on the prospect of a war -- on one hand, they were raking it in by selling to both France and the rest of Europe, and thus an end to war-trade was the ''last'' thing they wanted, although on the other hand the "theft" of their employees and the irksome nature of dealing with Britain's multiple "paper blockades" in the West Indies played havoc with their profit margins -- and it was on those reasons and their platform of 'resisting British oppression' and 'ending the tyrannical impressment of foreign neutrals to fight their wars' that got the 'War-Hawks' into the elected positions. They were backed up by a new generation of young Americans who had not experienced the hardships of UsefulNotes/TheAmericanRevolution and the economic crisis that accompanied and followed it, and were eager to prove their (patriotic) worth and wage a Second American Revolution/War of Independence to drive the British from the continent. That thing with [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chesapeake-Leopard_Affair USS Chesapeake and HMS Leopard]] also didn't help paint a positive picture of the British.

Meanwhile, around the Great Lakes in what is now Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois, the Indian tribes were uniting under a charismatic new leader, Tecumseh. Seeing this, the 'War-Hawk' generation suspected a British Conspiracy To Prevent American Westward Expansion, and clamoured for war with Great Britain. The British Cabinet viewed with favour the establishment of a [[TruceZone neutral state]] of American Indian peoples in the region, but didn't actually have enough confidence in their fighting ability to back them (though they did sell them some weapons). The western states of the Union (in what we would now call the Midwest and Upland South) would have nothing of Britain's "Conspiracy To Encircle Them With Colonies And Prevent America's Peaceful And Democratic Westward Settlement." The same states of the southern and western United States also considered [[AllYourBaseAreBelongToUs capturing British North America]] easy pickings and the next logical step after the Revolutionary War. Many people in said states -- not the ones actually affected by the disruptions to the thriving war-time trade -- [[CurbStompBattle considered Canada an easy prospect]], famously put by no less an authority than UsefulNotes/ThomasJefferson as [[HomeByChristmas "a simple matter of marching."]]

to:

[[folder: Prelude to War]]

The British Civil War Part 3: The Re-Liberationating]]

The war was essentially an attempt by
exact causes of the USA (and war, as you might expect, are disputed by historians. One view, more specifically, popular in past decades, is that the 'War Hawks' ''casus belli'' of her inland states) "Free Trade and Sailor's Rights" was merely a cover for American desires to conquer British and Spanish North America (modern-day America--that is, modern-day Canada and the present-day US state of Florida) Florida. Certainly some of the "War Hawks" desired this, but there were other factors--Britain had a long-term goal of establishing a Native American buffer state in modern-day Ohio, Indiana, and prevent Michigan. However meager it might have been, British support for Native American raids made Anglo-American relations worse, and encouraged the Amerindian tribes from forming a country (that could oppose westward expansion by view that the USA) while only way to get the the raids to stop would be to kick the British out of North America.

Meanwhile,
Great Britain was busy helping the very-nearly-conquered Kingdoms of Portugal and Spain fight 'The (Iberian) the Peninsular War' War against The the Empire of France. However, they needed a ''casus belli'' for doing all this - if they started a war (of conquest) without one they could be accused of being an aggressive/expansionist country ([[{{Realpolitik}} not that that kind of thing really matters]], [[AppealToForce e.g. Napoleon's annexation of The Low Countries and The Rhineland]]). Thankfully, the wider war played right into their hands in this respect as well. Traders in the US United States had become rich from [[WarForFunAndProfit war profiteering]]; basically, selling food and guns to both sides in the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars. Both sides had declared an embargo upon each other, and commissioned privateers and used their navies to raid each others' shipping. However, after their sound victory at Trafalgar in 1805, the British were suddenly in a much better position to confiscate American trade bound for France -- and France--and they did just that. Moreover, the expansion of the Royal Navy left them short of sailors.

Scraping the bottom of the manpower-barrel after two decades of near-constant warfare, the Royal Navy stepped up the conscription of sailors into the navy in domestic ports and began to search US American vessels they encountered for deserters. While deserters -- were supposedly easily identifiable by their RN tattoos. Some ten thousand men were thus taken from the letters "RN" tattooed onto them, there are numerous accounts of Americans getting caught up in impressment as the Royal Navy grew more desperate to replace manpower. Considering that at this point British and American merchant vessels citizens were still largely indistinguishable in culture and pressed into RN service. [[note]] The language, Royal Navy officers increasingly cared not to make a distinction. One American merchantman had almost been completely relieved of her crew. Granted, the 19th century wasn't a good time for exact or even approximate numbers for ''anything'', so nobody at the time had a good idea of just how many deserters had actually been reclaimed, or how many impressed sailors were Americans who had the misfortune of getting looked at by a RN captain who didn't care what your sob story was. It was perfectly possible for you to have ''retired'' or been honourably discharged from the RN, for instance, and still get impressed if you'd been foolish or desperate enough to be a sailor on a vessel registered in the US. [[/note]] The facts were, unfortunate American civilians.

Regardless,
the Royal Navy had completely ignored the usual diplomatic channels and was basically ignoring channels. They ignored the sovereignty of the government of the United States, which they of whom the Royal Navy hadn't even ''asked'' for permission permission--it's better to do this. This is partly because The Admiralty could well be told to sod off if they ''did'' ask ('it's easier to say sorry for forgiveness than to ask, be denied, and do it anyway', etc., etc.), but also because permission, as far as they were concerned all the people involved were all British nationals anyway and it didn't matter if they technically didn't answer to the same saying goes. The American government [[note]] Though the importation of African slaves reached its peak in the following decades, the massive influx of Germanic, Slavic, and Mediterranean peoples that made British (Celtic-Anglo-Saxon) ethnicities a minority in the USA came only in the 1870s-1920s. Moreover, there is no evidence to suggest any marked difference in accent beyond the tendency of US-born citizens to speak more clearly. English, and not regional dialect, was the first language of many US-born citizens and thus their (British-)regional accents weren't as strong. Culturally they were also more-or-less identical as well, as the first widely-read US-American poets and writers only cropped up in the latter 19th century. The only real difference was republicanism versus democratic constitutional monarchy, and that's not got ought to do with the price of bread. [[/note]] - sort of like East and West Germany, or Germany and Austria. The USA's overall/central government also had real troubles being taken seriously abroad and particularly at home. Although the USA was by now officially a ''union'' of states[[note]] thanks to some quick action in the post-war period by a real-life conspiracy of Big Men In spite of the revolution who realised that many if not all of their countries would probably all rejoin Britain again if they didn't form recently-ratified Constitution formally joining the former colonies into a single country [[/note]] "more perfect union," most of its own citizens Americans still thought of it as a union tight-knit alliance of ''states'' (i.e. not sovereign ''states'', a country, but an association of independent countries akin to little like the present-day EU).

European Union today.

The traders and coastal states of the USA which actually owned and operated the ships in question had mixed feelings on the prospect of a war -- on war. On one hand, they were raking it in by selling to both France and the rest of Europe, and thus an end to war-trade was the ''last'' thing they wanted, although on wanted. On the other hand hand, the "theft" impressment of their employees and the irksome nature of dealing with Britain's multiple "paper blockades" in the West Indies played havoc with their profit margins -- and margins--and it was on those reasons and their platform of 'resisting "resisting British oppression' oppression and 'ending ending the tyrannical impressment of foreign neutrals to fight their wars' wars" that got the 'War-Hawks' War Hawks into the elected positions. They were backed up by a new generation of young Americans who had not experienced the hardships of UsefulNotes/TheAmericanRevolution and the economic crisis that accompanied and followed it, and were eager to prove their (patriotic) worth and wage a Second American Revolution/War of Independence to drive the British from the continent. That thing with [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chesapeake-Leopard_Affair That thing]] with USS Chesapeake ''Chesapeake'' and HMS Leopard]] ''Leopard'' also didn't help paint a positive picture of the British.

British--and the British, too, weren't exactly happy [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Belt_Affair about the response]] visited upon HMS ''Little Belt'' by USS ''President''.

Meanwhile, around the Great Lakes in what is now Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois, the Indian tribes were uniting under a charismatic new leader, Tecumseh. Seeing this, the 'War-Hawk' War Hawk generation suspected a British Conspiracy To Prevent American Westward Expansion, involvement, and clamoured clamored for war with Great Britain. The British Cabinet viewed with favour the establishment of a [[TruceZone neutral state]] of American Indian peoples in the region, but didn't actually have enough confidence in their fighting ability to back them (though they did sell them some weapons). The western Western states of the Union (in what we would now call the Midwest and Upland South) would have nothing of Britain's "Conspiracy To Encircle Them With Colonies And Prevent America's Peaceful And Democratic Westward Settlement." The same states of the southern and western United States also considered [[AllYourBaseAreBelongToUs capturing British North America]] easy pickings and the next logical step after the Revolutionary War. not stand for such a plot. Many people in said states -- not states--not the ones actually affected by the disruptions to the thriving war-time trade -- [[CurbStompBattle trade--[[CurbStompBattle considered Canada an easy prospect]], famously put by no less an authority than UsefulNotes/ThomasJefferson as [[HomeByChristmas "a simple matter of marching."]]
"]] The British had a vocal, hawkish minority of their own as well: contemporary sources describe the hatred British citizenry felt for Americans, viewing them as upstart yokels. Just as in America, there were calls for a declaration of war--even calls for an invasion and reconquest of the former colonies.



The war was fought on multiple fronts, most notably ground combat between infantry and ongoing naval confrontations within the Great Lakes and the Atlantic Ocean. The British forces in North America were notably stressed, being undermanned and lacking much support from the main British Isles, which was still involved in the Napoleonic Wars. However, British General Isaac Brock and the Native leader, Tecumseh, proved capable leaders who arranged a powerful defence, even if they were lost all too soon. They also managed to bolster their ranks against the far more numerous Americans by recruiting [[GondorCallsForAid former slaves, Loyalists from the Revolutionary War, and befriending many Native peoples.]] The dangerously-overtaxed Royal Navy was forced to commit a full ''fifth'' of its ships[[note]] they committed just a handful of line-of-battle ships, but had to use a disproportionately large number of their 22-40 gun frigates and smaller types of ships[[/note]] to blockade the American coast and defend British shipping. The Royal Navy also conducted raids on American naval bases and port towns, one of the largest of which saw all the government buildings in UsefulNotes/WashingtonDC burned down, including TheWhiteHouse.

to:

The war was fought on multiple fronts, most notably ground combat between infantry and ongoing naval confrontations within the Great Lakes and the Atlantic Ocean. The British forces in North America were notably stressed, being undermanned and lacking much support from the main British Isles, which was still involved in the Napoleonic Wars. However, British General Isaac Brock and the Native leader, Tecumseh, proved capable leaders who arranged a powerful defence, even if they were lost all too soon. They also managed to bolster their ranks against the far more numerous Americans by recruiting [[GondorCallsForAid former slaves, Loyalists from the Revolutionary War, and befriending many Native peoples.]] The dangerously-overtaxed Royal Navy was forced to commit a full ''fifth'' of its ships[[note]] they committed just a handful ships (eleven of line-of-battle ships, but had to use a disproportionately large number which were ships of their 22-40 gun frigates and smaller types of ships[[/note]] the line) to blockade the American coast and defend British shipping. The Royal Navy also conducted raids on American naval bases and port towns, one of the largest of which saw all the government buildings in UsefulNotes/WashingtonDC burned down, including TheWhiteHouse.



->''"The success of US naval operations on the Great Lakes and of large American frigates in individual contests with smaller British ships in the Atlantic has often tended to disguise the strategic defeat inflicted on the United States by British maritime power in the war of 1812-15. The relative impact of the US ''guerre de course'' and the British Blockade is instructive."''\\
--'''Ian Speller''', [[note]] Director of the Centre for Military History and Strategic Studies at the National University of Ireland, Maynooth, and lecturer at the Irish Military College [[/note]] ''Understanding Naval Warfare'' (New York, 2014) p.57

One notable exception to the general indifference towards the war in the USA is the country's Navy, which sees the war as a defining moment in its history.

At the outset of war the United States Navy had few warships to speak of, with most of what it ''did'' have laid up in ordinary, and ''no'' ships-of-the-line--this was partially due to the relative youth of the service, but mostly because of the government's anti-military stance during Thomas Jefferson's administration. Without purpose-built ships for fleet engagements, the U.S. Navy couldn't hope to fight the Royal Navy on equal terms. The strongest ships in the American arsenal were the Navy's first six frigates, specifically designed by Joshua Humphreys to be "super frigates." Consequently, when the War of 1812 broke out commerce raiding was prioritized over any clashes with the Royal Navy.

The Royal Navy's own strategy was to try and blockade as much of the American coast as possible in order to prevent American warships and privateers from getting to sea, as well as to deprive America of its economic livelihood by preventing merchant ships from leaving port (and capturing those caught at sea). However, the concurrent Napoleonic Wars and demands of a global empire meant that the full might of the Royal Navy could not be brought to bear on the United States, especially considering the amount of coastline available to the Americans. Priority was placed on major ports, especially any where American warships were berthed. The Royal Navy was successful in bottling up some of the United States Navy for periods of time, but never all of it--in fact, there were multiple times in which American warships and privateers managed to slip out of port in spite of the British squadrons posted to stop them.

While the Royal Navy's control of the sea enabled numerous raids upon the American coastline and crippled the USA economy (practically recreating the problems caused by the Embargo Act of 1807) by all but annihilating the US merchant fleet, the US Navy successfullly reduced the profitability of British merchant shipping. During the war the Royal Navy captured or destroyed 1,407 US merchant vessels servicing the largely coastal country's population of roughly 7 million, and the US Navy captured 1,613 of the British merchantmen (of which 1/3 were recaptured) servicing the island country's population of 11 million and global empire. The British merchant fleet increased in size during this period, although construction costs and insurance fees for certain routes increased [[note]] in the darkest days of the US raiding campaign, Lloyd's of London based their insurance rates for a merchant ship traveling between the British Isles and either Canada or the West Indies at about 1/4 the value of both the ship and the cargo because they did not expect more than 3/4 to actually make it across the Atlantic without being either sunk or captured [[/note]], but the US merchant shipping basically ceased to operate as a result of these losses and the continuing blockade.

Key to morale and national mythmaking in the USA were the warship duels ("single-ship actions"), several of which were won by US heavy frigates - prompting the Admiralty to forbid duels with them. The heavy frigate USS ''Constitution'', in particular, demonstrated the worth of Humphrey's unorthodox frigate design by fighting and defeating four British frigate -- two of which were fought at once, albethey with (slightly) lesser armament and more fragile hulls -- and taking a fifth without much of a fight. These victories were bright spots of pride in a generally bleak picture for the Americans, and had the satisfying effect of dampening British hubris, and so to this day it is not unusual to hear claims to the effect that warship duels induced the British ''Naval Chronicle'' monthly periodical to call for peace.

Hitherto British pride had partly been based upon their command of the sea [[note]] Such was British strength that, in 1807, the Royal Navy successfully besieged neutral Denmark's city of Copenhagen in order to take almost ''all'' of the Royal Danish Navy into possession, just so that Napoleon couldn't do it first. [[/note]], but more upon their ability to win dozens of naval actions in which their forces had nominally been weaker (outgunned, outmanned, outnumbered, etc). This in turn was due to the greater practice that their large supply of gunpowder and favourable interest rates on loans (courtesy of the central Bank of England). British warships attained rates of fire up to ''three times'' that of their continental opponents, whose supplies and finances were relatively lacking. Single-ship actions like the defeat and capture of the ''Foudroyant'' (a French 80-gun ship-of-the-line) at the hands of HMS ''Monmouth'' (a 66-gun ship of the line) to fleet engagements like the Battle of Trafalgar itself were shining examples of this trend. From 1793 to 1815 the Royal Navy captured ''229'' frigates from the French, and only lost 17 to them in turn.

By 1812 the Royal Navy had managed to kill or capture the cream of the experienced naval officers and seamen of France and French-allied countries, leading to demoralized and self-defeating attitudes among the survivors - and a sense of dread or awe in neutral and British-allied powers. It also became a source of hubris for the British, who had come to see their naval hegemony as the natural order of things. To wit, a periodical called the ''British Naval Register'' had proudly declared, "The winds and seas are Britain's wide domain--and not a sail, but by permission, spreads!" During the War of 1812, this was mockingly quoted in American periodicals alongside lists of captured British ships.

to:

->''"The success ->''"In summing up the results of US naval operations the struggle on the Great Lakes ocean it is to be noticed that very little was attempted, and of large nothing done, by the American Navy that could ''materially'' affect the result of the war. [...] The material results were not very great, at least in their effect on Great Britain, whose enormous navy did not feel in the slightest degree the loss of a few frigates in individual contests with smaller British ships in and sloops. But morally the Atlantic has often tended result was of inestimable benefit to disguise the strategic defeat inflicted on the United States by British maritime power in States. The victories kept up the war of 1812-15. The relative impact spirits of the US ''guerre de course'' and people, cast down by the British Blockade is instructive."''\\
--'''Ian Speller''', [[note]] Director
defeats on land; practically decided in favor of the Centre for Military History Americans the chief question in dispute--Great Britain's right of search and Strategic Studies at impressment--and gave the National University of Ireland, Maynooth, navy, and lecturer at thereby the Irish Military College [[/note]] ''Understanding country, a world-wide reputation. I doubt if ever before a nation gained so much honor by a few single-ship duels."''
-->-- '''UsefulNotes/TheodoreRoosevelt''', ''The
Naval Warfare'' (New York, 2014) p.57

War of 1812''

One notable exception to the general indifference towards the war in America is in the USA is the country's United States Navy, which sees the war as a defining moment in its history.

At the outset of war war, the United States Navy had few warships to speak of, of note, with most of what it ''did'' did have laid up in ordinary, and ordinary. Furthermore, there were ''no'' ships-of-the-line--this ships-of-the-line, a necessity in fighting fleet battles. This dearth of ships was partially due to the relative youth of the service, but mostly because of the government's anti-military isolationist and defensive stance during of Thomas Jefferson's administration.administration. He preferred the idea of using large numbers of gunboats in combination with coastal defenses. Without purpose-built ships for fleet engagements, the U.S. Navy couldn't hope to fight the Royal Navy on equal terms. The strongest In fact, the heaviest ships in the American arsenal were the Navy's first six frigates, specifically designed by Joshua Humphreys to be "super frigates." Consequently, Because of this, when the War of 1812 broke out out, commerce raiding was prioritized over any clashes with the Royal Navy.

The Royal Navy's own strategy was to try and blockade as much of the American coast as possible in order to prevent American warships and privateers from getting to sea, as well as to deprive America of its economic livelihood by preventing capturing merchant ships or preventing them from leaving port (and capturing those caught at sea).port. However, the concurrent Napoleonic Wars and demands of a global empire meant that the full might of the Royal Navy could not be brought to bear on the United States, especially considering the amount of coastline available to the Americans. Priority was placed on major ports, especially any where American warships were berthed. The Royal Navy was successful in bottling up some of the United States Navy for periods of time, but never all of it--in fact, there were multiple times in which American warships and privateers managed to slip out of port in spite of the British squadrons posted to stop them.

them. Even when Napoleon was finally defeated and the British sent 15,000 soldiers (and 135 ships, just over a fifth of the whole Royal Navy) from the European theater to deal with the Americans, the U.S. Navy resisted annihilation.

While the Royal Navy's control of the sea enabled numerous raids upon blockades crippled the American coastline and crippled the USA economy (practically economy--practically recreating the problems caused by the Embargo Act of 1807) by all but annihilating 1807--and British commerce raiding wiped out the US merchant fleet, the US Navy successfullly reduced the profitability of British merchant shipping. During the war marine, the Royal Navy's inability to decisively defeat the U.S. Navy captured or destroyed 1,407 US merchant vessels servicing ''or'' to stop American privateers resulted in serious economic pain for the largely coastal country's population of British Empire as well. Americans gave as good as they got when it came to commerce raiding, taking roughly 7 million, and the US Navy captured 1,613 of the as many British merchantmen (of which 1/3 were recaptured) servicing as the island country's population of 11 million and global empire. The British Royal Navy took from the American merchant fleet increased in size during this period, although construction costs and marine. (Exact numbers vary from source to source.) All told, British insurance fees for certain routes increased [[note]] in rates ''tripled'' compared to the darkest days of the US raiding campaign, Napoleonic wars, even for a jaunt as short as between Liverpool and Ireland--American privateers especially liked prowling British home waters. During the war, Lloyd's of London based their insurance rates for a merchant ship traveling between the British Isles and either Canada or the West Indies at about 1/4 the value of both the ship and the cargo because they did not expect more than 3/4 to actually make it across the Atlantic without being either sunk or captured [[/note]], but the US merchant shipping basically ceased to operate as a result of these losses and the continuing blockade.

Key to morale and national mythmaking in the USA were the
captured.

Meanwhile, U.S. Navy warships won multiple
warship duels ("single-ship actions"), several of which were won by US heavy frigates - prompting actions") against the Admiralty to forbid duels with them. The heavy frigate Royal Navy. USS ''Constitution'', in particular, demonstrated the worth of Humphrey's unorthodox frigate design by fighting and defeating four other British frigate -- two warships--two of which were fought at once, albethey with (slightly) lesser armament and more fragile hulls -- and their combined number of guns nearly equaling her own--and taking a fifth without much of a fight. These While these victories were bright spots of pride in a generally bleak picture for the Americans, and had the satisfying effect of dampening did nothing to appreciably diminish British hubris, and so to this day it is not unusual to hear claims to the effect that warship duels induced naval power (the Royal Navy had well over 700 warships, after all) they had a ''powerful'' psychological impact on the British ''Naval Chronicle'' monthly and did much for American morale and perceptions of both nations worldwide. It was enough that the Naval Chronicle, a British periodical dedicated to call the Royal Navy, began publishing articles agape at American naval prowess alongside loud calls for peace.

Hitherto British pride Without appropriate context, it may be hard to understand why the U.S. Navy's victories had partly been based upon their command of such an impact. Prior to the sea [[note]] Such was British strength that, in 1807, conflict with America, the Royal Navy successfully besieged neutral Denmark's city of Copenhagen in order to take almost ''all'' of the Royal Danish Navy into possession, just so that Napoleon couldn't do it first. [[/note]], but more upon their ability to win dozens of naval actions in which their forces had nominally been weaker (outgunned, outmanned, outnumbered, etc). This most of Europe quaking in turn was due to the greater practice that their large supply of gunpowder and favourable interest rates on loans (courtesy of the central Bank of England). fear. British gun crews were renowned for their speed, allowing their warships attained rates of fire to attain up to ''three times'' that the rate of fire as their continental opponents, whose supplies and finances opponents. This allowed the Royal Navy to easily emerge victorious from battles in which they were relatively lacking. Single-ship outnumbered and/or outgunned, from single-ship actions like the defeat and capture of the ''Foudroyant'' (a French 80-gun ship-of-the-line) at the hands of HMS ''Monmouth'' (a 66-gun ship of the line) to fleet engagements like the Battle of Trafalgar itself were shining examples of this trend. itself. From 1793 to 1815 1815, in fact, the Royal Navy captured ''229'' frigates from the French, and only lost 17 to them in turn.

By 1812
turn. Such was British strength that, in 1807, the Royal Navy had managed to kill or capture the cream successfully besieged neutral Denmark's city of Copenhagen and took nearly ''all'' of the experienced naval officers and seamen Royal Danish Navy into possession just so that Napoleon couldn't do it first.

By the time
of France and French-allied countries, leading the War of 1812, the Royal Navy's reputation led to demoralized and a demoralized, self-defeating attitudes attitude among the survivors - and a sense most of dread or awe in neutral and British-allied Europe's naval powers. It also became a source of hubris for the British, who had come to see their naval hegemony as the natural order of things. To wit, a periodical called the ''British British Naval Register'' Register had proudly declared, "The winds and seas are Britain's wide domain--and not a sail, but by permission, spreads!" During the War of 1812, this was mockingly quoted in American periodicals alongside lists of captured British ships.
ships. In battle, American gun crews were almost as fast as those of the British. Despite being being a hundredth of the Royal Navy's size, the U.S. Navy--and America's privateers--gave the British one hell of a fight.



->''"The lessons of the war were taken to heart. Anti-American feeling in Great Britain ran high for several years, but the United States were never again refused proper treatment as an independent power."''
--> -- '''UsefulNotes/WinstonChurchill''', ''A History of the English-speaking Peoples: The age of revolution, Volume 3''



Losses are estimated at 5000 deaths on the British side and 15,000 on the American side; though most Canadian militia and Native losses went unrecorded, fairly important when some of the most important battles of the war were fought by the Natives. It also doesn't take into account the large number of British sailors who defected or deserted. No compensation was paid by either side for damages though the British did pay $1,204,960 in damages to Washington to reimburse the slave-owners whose slaves defected to the British side or escaped in the confusion of the war.

Today the war is largely forgotten due to its lacklustre outcome; other than being the source of the US national anthem, "The Star-Spangled Banner", the war is barely remembered there. In Canada, however, it was a defining event that fostered a quiet determination to remain British and distinct from the United States. After the creation of the Canadian nation, the outcome of the war became a point of national pride where the seeds of Canada's creation were planted. In Britain, of course, only historians remember it. That and people who watched ''Hornblower''. As for the actual outcome of the war, the only clear losers were the Amerindians, whose last best attempt at uniting in the face of European Expansionism had failed. Their populations devastated and displaced by the US campaign, they were no longer able to form a serious check to the western expansion of the United States. The United States also secured UsefulNotes/NewOrleans right at the last second -- if the war had dragged on another few months and The Cabinet had deemed it worthwhile to take New Orleans back, the relatively small and over-stretched US Army would not have been able to defend the town. As it was, they were very fortunate to capture it when they did, as it meant that there would be no foreign checks to US expansion through central-northern America either.

to:

Losses are estimated at 5000 deaths on the In terms of casualties, Historian Michael Clodfelter estimates that 2,200 to 3,700 Americans were killed in action, while 1,160 to 1,900 British side and suffered the same fate. In total, 15,000 on the American side; though most Americans and 10,000 British are thought to have died from all causes. Most Canadian militia and Native losses went unrecorded, fairly important when some of the most important battles of the war were fought by the Natives. It also doesn't take into account the large number of British sailors who defected or deserted. No compensation was paid by either side for damages damages, though the British did pay $1,204,960 in damages to Washington to reimburse the slave-owners whose slaves defected to the British side or escaped in the confusion of the war.

Today the war is largely forgotten due to its lacklustre outcome; other than being the source of the US American national anthem, "The Star-Spangled Banner", Banner," the war is barely remembered there. In Canada, however, it was a defining event that fostered a quiet determination to remain British and distinct from the United States. After the creation of the Canadian nation, the outcome of the war became a point of national pride where the seeds of Canada's creation were planted. In Britain, of course, only historians remember it. That and people who watched ''Hornblower''. As for the actual outcome of the war, the only clear losers were the Amerindians, Native American tibes, whose last best attempt at uniting in the face of European Expansionism expansionism had failed. Their populations devastated and displaced by the US campaign, war, they were no longer able to form a serious check to the western expansion of the United States. The United States also secured UsefulNotes/NewOrleans right at the last second -- if second--if the war had dragged on another few months and The the Cabinet had deemed it worthwhile to take New Orleans back, the relatively small and over-stretched US Army would not have been able to defend the town. As it was, they were very fortunate to capture it when they did, as it meant that there would be no foreign checks to US American expansion through central-northern America the Midwest, either.


The confrontation continued until late 1814 when spiralling military costs, fatigue, and general lack of enthusiasm for the stalemate-war caused the forces to [[PeaceConference enter peace talks]]. The Treaty of Ghent was the result, the agreement relegating all captured land back to whoever had originally owned it. The treaty was signed December 24, 1814 and took effect February 18, 1815, though the biggest battles of the war occurred during the peace talks and in the time it took for news about the treaty to filter down. Most notable of these was the Battle of New Orleans, a US victory which effectively secured the (gateway to the) Mississippi river system for them.

to:

The confrontation continued until late 1814 when spiralling military costs, fatigue, and general lack of enthusiasm for the stalemate-war caused the forces to [[PeaceConference enter peace talks]]. The Treaty of Ghent was the result, the agreement relegating all captured land back to whoever had originally owned it. The treaty was signed December 24, 1814 and took effect February 18, 1815, though the biggest battles of the war occurred during the peace talks and in the time it took for news about the treaty to filter down. Most notable of these was the Battle of New Orleans, a US victory which effectively secured the (gateway to the) Mississippi river River system for them.


A more comprehensive article and links to other related articles can be found on TheOtherWiki.

to:

A more comprehensive article and links to other related articles can be found on TheOtherWiki.
Wiki/TheOtherWiki.


Why is that the case? Well, the Brits had [[UsefulNotes/NapoleonBonaparte a certain Frenchman]] to deal with at the time. Compared to the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, the War of 1812 was a sideshow for the British Empire - but amusingly enough, British involvement in the War of 1812 forced The Duke of Wellington to use second-rate troops in Waterloo, as most of the British Army's veteran units were still coming home from North America. There were more troops on the field when Emperor Napoleon I won at Austerlitz in 1805, for instance, than there were English-speaking soldiers in all of the Americas in 1815 (that's 150k versus 87k for those keeping track). Napoleon's 1813 defeat by the ''Sixth'' Anti-Napoleonic Coalition at the three-day battle of Leipzig, the greatest gunpowder-battle ever (at the time), involved more than 600,000 soldiers with over 2,000 artillery pieces; the one-day Battle of New Orleans, the largest battle of the War of 1812, involved just 15,000 men and 16 cannons. Outside of the United States, the year 1812 itself is most strongly associated with Napoleon's catastrophically unsuccessful invasion of Russia, the destruction of his Grande Armée there (i.e. the decisive turning point in the war against him), and [[Music/PyotrIlyichTchaikovsky Tchaikovsky's]] famous overture (with the cannon fire at the end) commemorating Russia's part in these events.

to:

Why is that the case? Well, the Brits had [[UsefulNotes/NapoleonBonaparte a certain Frenchman]] to deal with at the time. Compared to the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, the War of 1812 was a sideshow for the British Empire - but amusingly enough, British involvement in the War of 1812 forced The Duke of Wellington to use second-rate troops in Waterloo, as most of the British Army's veteran units were still coming home from North America. There were more troops on the field when Emperor Napoleon I won at Austerlitz in 1805, for instance, than there were English-speaking soldiers in all of the Americas in 1815 (that's 150k versus 87k for those keeping track). Napoleon's 1813 defeat by the ''Sixth'' Anti-Napoleonic Coalition at the three-day battle of Leipzig, the greatest gunpowder-battle ever (at the time), involved more than 600,000 soldiers with over 2,000 artillery pieces; the one-day Battle of New Orleans, the largest battle of the War of 1812, involved just 15,000 men and 16 cannons. Outside of the United States, the year 1812 itself is most strongly associated with Napoleon's catastrophically unsuccessful invasion of Russia, the destruction of his Grande Armée there (i.e. the decisive turning point in the war against him), and [[Music/PyotrIlyichTchaikovsky Tchaikovsky's]] famous overture (with the cannon fire at the end) commemorating Russia's part in these events.
events.



[[AC:Literature]]

to:

[[AC:Literature]][[foldercontrol]]

[[folder: Literature ]]



[[AC:Live-Action TV]]

to:

[[AC:Live-Action TV]][[/folder]]

[[folder: Live-Action TV ]]



[[AC:Music]]

to:

[[AC:Music]][[/folder]]

[[folder: Music ]]



[[AC:Web Original]]

to:

[[AC:Web Original]][[/folder]]

[[folder: Web Original ]]


Added DiffLines:

[[/folder]]



to:

* ''Series/{{Taboo}}'' takes place in 1814 when the war between the United Kingdom and the United States is nearing its end. The main character uses the land rights over Nootka Sound on the Pacific Ocean that he inherited from his late father to manipulate the British Crown, East India Company, and the Americans against each other.


Not to be confused with [[UsefulNotes/NapoleonBonaparte the other]] [[TsaristRussia war of 1812]].

to:

Not to be confused with [[UsefulNotes/NapoleonBonaparte the other]] [[TsaristRussia [[UsefulNotes/TsaristRussia war of 1812]].


Why is that the case? Well, the Brits had [[UsefulNotes/NapoleonBonaparte a certain Frenchman]] to deal with at the time. Compared to the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, the War of 1812 was a sideshow for the British Empire. There were more troops on the field when Emperor Napoleon I won at Austerlitz in 1805, for instance, than there were English-speaking soldiers in all of the Americas in 1815 (that's 150k versus 87k for those keeping track). Napoleon's 1813 defeat by the ''Sixth'' Anti-Napoleonic Coalition at the three-day battle of Leipzig, the greatest gunpowder-battle ever (at the time), involved more than 600,000 soldiers with over 2,000 artillery pieces; the one-day Battle of New Orleans, the largest battle of the War of 1812, involved just 15,000 men and 16 cannons. Outside of the United States, the year 1812 itself is most strongly associated with Napoleon's catastrophically unsuccessful invasion of Russia, the destruction of his Grande Armée there (i.e. the decisive turning point in the war against him), and [[Music/PyotrIlyichTchaikovsky Tchaikovsky's]] famous overture (with the cannon fire at the end) commemorating Russia's part in these events.

to:

Why is that the case? Well, the Brits had [[UsefulNotes/NapoleonBonaparte a certain Frenchman]] to deal with at the time. Compared to the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, the War of 1812 was a sideshow for the British Empire.Empire - but amusingly enough, British involvement in the War of 1812 forced The Duke of Wellington to use second-rate troops in Waterloo, as most of the British Army's veteran units were still coming home from North America. There were more troops on the field when Emperor Napoleon I won at Austerlitz in 1805, for instance, than there were English-speaking soldiers in all of the Americas in 1815 (that's 150k versus 87k for those keeping track). Napoleon's 1813 defeat by the ''Sixth'' Anti-Napoleonic Coalition at the three-day battle of Leipzig, the greatest gunpowder-battle ever (at the time), involved more than 600,000 soldiers with over 2,000 artillery pieces; the one-day Battle of New Orleans, the largest battle of the War of 1812, involved just 15,000 men and 16 cannons. Outside of the United States, the year 1812 itself is most strongly associated with Napoleon's catastrophically unsuccessful invasion of Russia, the destruction of his Grande Armée there (i.e. the decisive turning point in the war against him), and [[Music/PyotrIlyichTchaikovsky Tchaikovsky's]] famous overture (with the cannon fire at the end) commemorating Russia's part in these events.


Scraping the bottom of the manpower-barrel after two decades of near-constant warfare, the Royal Navy stepped up the conscription of sailors into the navy in domestic ports and began to search US vessels they encountered for deserters -- easily identifiable by their RN tattoos. Some ten thousand men were thus taken from American merchant vessels and pressed into RN service. [[note]] The 19th century wasn't a good time for exact or even approximate numbers for ''anything'', so nobody at the time had a good idea of just how many deserters had actually been reclaimed, or how many impressed sailors were Americans who had the misfortune of getting looked at by a RN captain who didn't care what your sob story was. It was perfectly possible for you to have ''retired'' or been honourably discharged from the RN, for instance, and still get impressed if you'd been foolish or desperate enough to be a sailor on a vessel registered in the US. [[/note]] The facts were, the Royal Navy had completely ignored the usual diplomatic channels and was basically ignoring the government of the United States, which they hadn't even ''asked'' for permission to do this. This is partly because The Admiralty could well be told to sod off if they ''did'' ask ('it's easier to say sorry than to ask, be denied, and do it anyway', etc., etc.), but also because as far as they were concerned all the people involved were all British nationals anyway and it didn't matter if they technically didn't answer to the same government [[note]] Though the importation of African slaves reached its peak in the following decades, the massive influx of Germanic, Slavic, and Mediterranean peoples that made British (Celtic-Anglo-Saxon) ethnicities a minority in the USA came only in the 1870s-1920s. Moreover, there is no evidence to suggest any marked difference in accent beyond the tendency of US-born citizens to speak more clearly. English, and not regional dialect, was the first language of many US-born citizens and thus their (British-)regional accents weren't as strong. Culturally they were also more-or-less identical as well, as the first widely-read US-American poets and writers only cropped up in the latter 19th century. The only real difference was republicanism versus democratic constitutional monarchy, and that's not got ought to do with the price of bread. [[/note]] - sort of like East and West Germany, or Germany and Austria. The USA's overall/central government also had real troubles being taken seriously abroad and particularly at home. Although the USA was by now officially a ''union'' of states[[note]] thanks to some quick action in the post-war period by a real-life conspiracy of Big Men of the revolution who realised that many if not all of their countries would probably all rejoin Britain again if they didn't form a single country [[/note]] most of its own citizens still thought of it as a union of ''states'' (i.e. not a country, but an association of independent countries akin to the present-day EU).

to:

Scraping the bottom of the manpower-barrel after two decades of near-constant warfare, the Royal Navy stepped up the conscription of sailors into the navy in domestic ports and began to search US vessels they encountered for deserters -- easily identifiable by their RN tattoos. Some ten thousand men were thus taken from American merchant vessels and pressed into RN service. [[note]] The 19th century wasn't a good time for exact or even approximate numbers for ''anything'', so nobody at the time had a good idea of just how many deserters had actually been reclaimed, or how many impressed sailors were Americans who had the misfortune of getting looked at by a RN captain who didn't care what your sob story was. It was perfectly possible for you to have ''retired'' or been honourably discharged from the RN, for instance, and still get impressed if you'd been foolish or desperate enough to be a sailor on a vessel registered in the US. [[/note]] The facts were, the Royal Navy had completely ignored the usual diplomatic channels and was basically ignoring the sovereignty of the government of the United States, which they hadn't even ''asked'' for permission to do this. This is partly because The Admiralty could well be told to sod off if they ''did'' ask ('it's easier to say sorry than to ask, be denied, and do it anyway', etc., etc.), but also because as far as they were concerned all the people involved were all British nationals anyway and it didn't matter if they technically didn't answer to the same government [[note]] Though the importation of African slaves reached its peak in the following decades, the massive influx of Germanic, Slavic, and Mediterranean peoples that made British (Celtic-Anglo-Saxon) ethnicities a minority in the USA came only in the 1870s-1920s. Moreover, there is no evidence to suggest any marked difference in accent beyond the tendency of US-born citizens to speak more clearly. English, and not regional dialect, was the first language of many US-born citizens and thus their (British-)regional accents weren't as strong. Culturally they were also more-or-less identical as well, as the first widely-read US-American poets and writers only cropped up in the latter 19th century. The only real difference was republicanism versus democratic constitutional monarchy, and that's not got ought to do with the price of bread. [[/note]] - sort of like East and West Germany, or Germany and Austria. The USA's overall/central government also had real troubles being taken seriously abroad and particularly at home. Although the USA was by now officially a ''union'' of states[[note]] thanks to some quick action in the post-war period by a real-life conspiracy of Big Men of the revolution who realised that many if not all of their countries would probably all rejoin Britain again if they didn't form a single country [[/note]] most of its own citizens still thought of it as a union of ''states'' (i.e. not a country, but an association of independent countries akin to the present-day EU).



One notable exception to the general indifference towards the war in America is in the United States Navy, which sees the war as a defining moment in its history.

At the outset of war, the United States Navy had few warships to speak of, with most of what it ''did'' have laid up in ordinary, and ''no'' ships-of-the-line--this was partially due to the relative youth of the service, but mostly because of the government's anti-military stance during Thomas Jefferson's administration. Without purpose-built ships for fleet engagements, the U.S. Navy couldn't hope to fight the Royal Navy on equal terms. Indeed, the heaviest ships in the American arsenal were the Navy's first six frigates, specifically designed by Joshua Humphreys to be "super frigates." Because of this, when the War of 1812 broke out, commerce raiding was prioritized over any clashes with the Royal Navy.

to:

->''"The success of US naval operations on the Great Lakes and of large American frigates in individual contests with smaller British ships in the Atlantic has often tended to disguise the strategic defeat inflicted on the United States by British maritime power in the war of 1812-15. The relative impact of the US ''guerre de course'' and the British Blockade is instructive."''\\
--'''Ian Speller''', [[note]] Director of the Centre for Military History and Strategic Studies at the National University of Ireland, Maynooth, and lecturer at the Irish Military College [[/note]] ''Understanding Naval Warfare'' (New York, 2014) p.57

One notable exception to the general indifference towards the war in America is in the United States USA is the country's Navy, which sees the war as a defining moment in its history.

At the outset of war, war the United States Navy had few warships to speak of, with most of what it ''did'' have laid up in ordinary, and ''no'' ships-of-the-line--this was partially due to the relative youth of the service, but mostly because of the government's anti-military stance during Thomas Jefferson's administration. Without purpose-built ships for fleet engagements, the U.S. Navy couldn't hope to fight the Royal Navy on equal terms. Indeed, the heaviest The strongest ships in the American arsenal were the Navy's first six frigates, specifically designed by Joshua Humphreys to be "super frigates." Because of this, Consequently, when the War of 1812 broke out, out commerce raiding was prioritized over any clashes with the Royal Navy.



While the blockades were crippling to the United States economy (practically recreating the problems caused by the Embargo Act of 1807) and British commerce raiding was able to all but annihilate the merchant marine, the Royal Navy's inability to decisively defeat the U.S. Navy ''or'' to stop American privateers resulted in serious economic pain for the British Empire as well. Americans gave as good as they got when it came to commerce raiding, seizing roughly as many British merchant ships as the British had of American merchant ships. This caused insurance rates for the British to ''triple'' compared to the darkest days of the Napoleonic wars, even for as short a jaunt as between Liverpool and Ireland. During the war Lloyd's of London based their insurance rates for a merchant ship traveling between the British Isles and either Canada or the West Indies at about 1/4 the value of both the ship and the cargo because they did not expect more than 3/4 to actually make it across the Atlantic without being either sunk or captured.

Adding to that is the fact that U.S. Navy warships won multiple warship duels ("single-ship actions") against those of the Royal Navy. USS ''Constitution'', in particular, demonstrated the worth of Humphrey's unorthodox frigate design by fighting and defeating four other British warships--two of which were fought at once, with their combined number of guns nearly equaling her own--and taking a fifth without much of a fight. While these victories did nothing to appreciably diminish British naval power (the Royal Navy had well over 700 warships, after all) they had a ''powerful'' psychological impact on the British (and did much for American morale and perceptions of both nations worldwide). It was enough that the ''Naval Chronicle'', a British periodical dedicated to the Royal Navy, began loudly calling for peace.

Without appropriate context, it may be hard to understand why the U.S. Navy's victories had such an impact. Prior to the conflict with America, the Royal Navy had most of Europe quaking in fear. British gun crews were renowned for their speed, allowing British warships to attain up to ''three times'' the rate of fire as their opponents. This allowed the Royal Navy to easily emerge victorious from battles in which they were outnumbered and/or outgunned, from single-ship actions like the defeat and capture of the ''Foudroyant'' (a French 80-gun ship-of-the-line) at the hands of HMS ''Monmouth'' (a 66-gun ship of the line) to fleet engagements like the Battle of Trafalgar itself. From 1793 to 1815, in fact, the Royal Navy captured ''229'' frigates from the French, and only lost 17 to them in turn. Such was British strength that, in 1807, the Royal Navy successfully besieged neutral Denmark's city of Copenhagen in order to take almost ''all'' of the Royal Danish Navy into possession, just so that Napoleon couldn't do it first.

By the time of the War of 1812, the Royal Navy's reputation led to a demoralized, self-defeating attitude among most naval powers. It also became a source of hubris for the British, who had come to see their naval hegemony as the natural order of things. To wit, a periodical called the ''British Naval Register'' had proudly declared, "The winds and seas are Britain's wide domain--and not a sail, but by permission, spreads!" During the War of 1812, this was mockingly quoted in American periodicals alongside lists of captured British ships.

to:

While the blockades were crippling to Royal Navy's control of the United States sea enabled numerous raids upon the American coastline and crippled the USA economy (practically recreating the problems caused by the Embargo Act of 1807) and British commerce raiding was able to by all but annihilate annihilating the US merchant marine, fleet, the Royal Navy's inability to decisively defeat the U.S. US Navy ''or'' to stop American privateers resulted in serious economic pain for successfullly reduced the British Empire as well. Americans gave as good as they got when it came to commerce raiding, seizing roughly as many profitability of British merchant ships as shipping. During the war the Royal Navy captured or destroyed 1,407 US merchant vessels servicing the largely coastal country's population of roughly 7 million, and the US Navy captured 1,613 of the British had merchantmen (of which 1/3 were recaptured) servicing the island country's population of American 11 million and global empire. The British merchant ships. This caused fleet increased in size during this period, although construction costs and insurance rates fees for the British to ''triple'' compared to certain routes increased [[note]] in the darkest days of the Napoleonic wars, even for as short a jaunt as between Liverpool and Ireland. During the war US raiding campaign, Lloyd's of London based their insurance rates for a merchant ship traveling between the British Isles and either Canada or the West Indies at about 1/4 the value of both the ship and the cargo because they did not expect more than 3/4 to actually make it across the Atlantic without being either sunk or captured.

Adding to that is
captured [[/note]], but the fact that U.S. Navy warships won multiple US merchant shipping basically ceased to operate as a result of these losses and the continuing blockade.

Key to morale and national mythmaking in the USA were the
warship duels ("single-ship actions") against those actions"), several of which were won by US heavy frigates - prompting the Royal Navy. Admiralty to forbid duels with them. The heavy frigate USS ''Constitution'', in particular, demonstrated the worth of Humphrey's unorthodox frigate design by fighting and defeating four other British warships--two frigate -- two of which were fought at once, albethey with their combined number of guns nearly equaling her own--and (slightly) lesser armament and more fragile hulls -- and taking a fifth without much of a fight. While these These victories did nothing to appreciably diminish were bright spots of pride in a generally bleak picture for the Americans, and had the satisfying effect of dampening British naval power (the Royal Navy had well over 700 warships, after all) they had a ''powerful'' psychological impact on hubris, and so to this day it is not unusual to hear claims to the effect that warship duels induced the British (and did much for American morale and perceptions of both nations worldwide). It was enough that the ''Naval Chronicle'', a British Chronicle'' monthly periodical dedicated to the Royal Navy, began loudly calling call for peace.

Without appropriate context, it may be hard to understand why the U.S. Navy's victories had such an impact. Prior to the conflict with America, the Royal Navy had most of Europe quaking in fear.
peace.

Hitherto
British gun crews were renowned for pride had partly been based upon their speed, allowing British warships to attain up to ''three times'' the rate of fire as their opponents. This allowed the Royal Navy to easily emerge victorious from battles in which they were outnumbered and/or outgunned, from single-ship actions like the defeat and capture command of the ''Foudroyant'' (a French 80-gun ship-of-the-line) at the hands of HMS ''Monmouth'' (a 66-gun ship of the line) to fleet engagements like the Battle of Trafalgar itself. From 1793 to 1815, in fact, the Royal Navy captured ''229'' frigates from the French, and only lost 17 to them in turn. sea [[note]] Such was British strength that, in 1807, the Royal Navy successfully besieged neutral Denmark's city of Copenhagen in order to take almost ''all'' of the Royal Danish Navy into possession, just so that Napoleon couldn't do it first.

By
first. [[/note]], but more upon their ability to win dozens of naval actions in which their forces had nominally been weaker (outgunned, outmanned, outnumbered, etc). This in turn was due to the time greater practice that their large supply of gunpowder and favourable interest rates on loans (courtesy of the War central Bank of 1812, England). British warships attained rates of fire up to ''three times'' that of their continental opponents, whose supplies and finances were relatively lacking. Single-ship actions like the defeat and capture of the ''Foudroyant'' (a French 80-gun ship-of-the-line) at the hands of HMS ''Monmouth'' (a 66-gun ship of the line) to fleet engagements like the Battle of Trafalgar itself were shining examples of this trend. From 1793 to 1815 the Royal Navy's reputation led Navy captured ''229'' frigates from the French, and only lost 17 to a demoralized, them in turn.

By 1812 the Royal Navy had managed to kill or capture the cream of the experienced naval officers and seamen of France and French-allied countries, leading to demoralized and
self-defeating attitude attitudes among most naval the survivors - and a sense of dread or awe in neutral and British-allied powers. It also became a source of hubris for the British, who had come to see their naval hegemony as the natural order of things. To wit, a periodical called the ''British Naval Register'' had proudly declared, "The winds and seas are Britain's wide domain--and not a sail, but by permission, spreads!" During the War of 1812, this was mockingly quoted in American periodicals alongside lists of captured British ships.
ships.

Showing 15 edit(s) of 35

Top

How well does it match the trope?

Example of:

/

Media sources:

/

Report