HistoryNet mastheadHistoryNetShop Summer Catalog

The Battle of Chippewa

By James B. Daniels | American History  | one comment  | Print This Post  | Email This Post

Nevertheless, Canada appeared very vulnerable. Its population was relatively small, and large numbers were descendants of the French colonists the British had conquered just a few generations earlier. Meanwhile, the vast military might of Great Britain was concentrated on warring with Napoleon in Europe, and in Canada, reserves of food or supplies to support a large British expeditionary force were limited. (In fact British forces survived their first winter in Canada only because treasonous New England merchants and farmers sold them food, choosing to line their pockets at the expense of their countrymen.) Another American advantage was the long border, pierced by the Great Lakes and a number of navigable rivers that could support an invasion force. With all of the obvious benefits that would accrue to the victor and no apparent difficulties, the U.S. Army marched into Canada. Capturing it should have been easy for a well-disciplined, well-trained army. Unfortunately the U.S. Army of 1812 was neither.

Subscribe Today

Subscribe to American History magazine

The campaign to conquer Canada quickly turned into a debacle. The generally pro-British, pro-commerce Federalists opposed to the war were concentrated in the Northeast along the best invasion routes into Canada. They refused to support federal troops marching through their states, causing logistical difficulties. They refused to call up their state militias, claiming that the Constitution limited their use to defense against invasion. Hamstrung by poor logistics and undisciplined troops and burdened with slow, ineffectual leaders, the Americans suffered badly at the hands of the British regulars, supported by their Canadian and Indian allies. American advances were tentative. Timid commanders surrendered strong positions rather than fight, even when they had the numerical advantage.

The skills that made armies successful in the early 19th cen-tury have largely been relegated to the parade field in the early 21st. Many observers in the years since the invention of automatic, long-range weapons wonder in amazement at what appears to be little more than a formalized style of suicide on the battlefield. Recalling the Minutemen of the American Revolution—who fired their accurate rifles from behind rocks and trees and picked off British officers—modern Americans often assume that the British were using tactics that had no effectiveness outside Europe. They are wrong. The mastery of these tactics—and the discipline required to execute them—meant the difference between defeat or victory in battle.

Warfare in the time of the American Revolution and the War of 1812 was limited by the weapons both armies carried. The rifle was extremely accurate for its day and could kill at relatively long distances, but a good rifleman could load and fire no more than one round per minute. This slow rate of fire meant that while riflemen could pick off enemy officers, a large body of men in a tight formation could successfully charge forward with bayonets fixed and overtake the riflemen before they could inflict more than just a few casualties on the attackers.

The smoothbore musket, on the other hand, in the hands of a competent infantryman, could fire up to three rounds per minute. Speed, however, came at the price of accuracy; beyond 50 yards, striking a man-sized target was more a matter of luck than of marksmanship. The only way that a body of men armed with muskets could put out a credible amount of effective fire was to stand massed together so that their fire was concentrated in the small area before them. Once their officers gave the order to charge, they would rush forward with long bayonets attached to the muzzles of their muskets. It was the hope of every infantryman that the sight of so many charging soldiers would cause the enemy to panic, break and run. If they did not, then the battle became a bloody hand-to-hand fight with bayonets, swords, fists and rifle butts.

Discipline was key. The rational human being will always feel a strong impulse to flee the danger and destruction of the battlefield. Patriotism and concern for the opinions of his fellow soldiers or the folks back home may get a man to the battle, but discipline instilled through long hours of training and drill keeps him where the fire is hot and death close. The necessity of standing in tight ranks to give a credible fire meant that the soldiers themselves formed an easy target for the enemy. When cannons were added to the mix, it took a level of discipline that defies modern understanding to remain in formation and slowly move toward the murderous fire in ordered ranks.

Pages: 1 2 3 4

Tags: , ,

HistoryNet.com Subject Locator
  1. One Comment to “The Battle of Chippewa”

  2. This stinks!!! You should go to dansbattleofchippawa.com!! This is horrible compared that!!!!!!!

    By Dracdk on Apr 2, 2009 at 11:59 am

Post a Comment

Please note that HistoryNet Staff cannot respond to requests for research of any type. Please visit our research forum to post research questions. If you have a question about our magazines, please use the contact us form.

Related Articles



SPONSORED SITES







HistoryNet Article Archives Historynet Spacer

OPINION POLL

Which of these World War I aircraft was the best fighter plane?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

See previous polls

STAY CONNECTED WITH US

RSS Feed
 
Get Our Daily HistoryNet Email
 
 


What is HistoryNet?

The HistoryNet.com is brought to you by the Weider History Group, the world's largest publisher of history magazines. HistoryNet.com contains daily features, photo galleries and over 5,000 articles originally published in our various magazines.

If you are interested in a specific history subject, try searching our archives, you are bound to find something to pique your interest.

 Get our RSS!
 Newsletter Signup

From Our Magazines

Weider History Group

Weider History Network:  HistoryNet | Armchair General | Great History | Achtung Panzer!

Terms of Use | Copyright © 2009 Weider History Group. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
Contact Us|Advertise With Us|Subscription Help