The Archaeology of French and Indian War Frontier Forts

Introduction

Introduction Lawrence E. Babits The French and Indian War was a defining moment in American history. For the first time the various colonies organized and acted in concert. While this ultimately failed, they nonetheless worked together to defeat the French. The war marked the first time there was large-scale theaterlevel military activity in North America. The impact of over 40,000 British soldiers, their equipment, ideas, and money was dramatic and played a role in developing what turned into the American Revolution a few short years later. These changes can be seen in the popular introduction of a new architectural style and its accompanying furnishings and the rise of national figures, particularly George Washington and Benjamin Franklin. The period marks the British army’s introduction to the “American Way of War” and American perceptions about the vulnerability of the British army. In the long term, British logistical efforts during 1755–63 heavily influenced the notion that local North American resources could support British military forces. This misperception caused a disaster during the Revolution when two British armies, cut off from seaborne reinforcement and supplies, were forced to surrender. The British had forgotten that local support during the French and Indian War from an Anglo-American effort against a common enemy was much different than the situation throughout the Revolution. The war also generated a national debt that caused Parliament to seek ways of paying for the war and for postwar North American garrisons. In turn, new tax laws and the attempted enforcement of older navigation acts led to colonial resentment, smuggling, and resistance. Military construction activity on the Anglo-American frontier included settlers, colonies, and the British army working to create a defensive barrier against the French and their Indian allies. This study focuses on the frontier: 2 · Lawrence E. Babits a cutting-edge stress area where traditional styles and expertise, new technology , tactics, and attitudes were exposed to trial and error against an experienced foe who did not fight “by the rules.” Some Old World aspects worked, others did not. As the war went on, colonists, the French, and the British refined how they waged war. In terms of fortifications, various approaches can be seen in the documents, images, and the archaeological record. Each of these resources provides evidence and contributes to understanding the forts and the fortification system as a whole. The documentary evidence about fortifications includes initial, verbalized plans and directions to subordinates, inspection reports, and ultimately the sale or destruction of the posts. If the post was attacked, reports often contain supplemental details overlooked by the original planners. These documents are somewhat cryptic, often using image-laden, highly technical military and architectural terminology. They generally hold only snippets of information that must be tested against eighteenth-century language and extant examples of fortifications for more precise interpretation. The images include maps, plans for various sites and cross sections, and artistic views of fortifications. Two starting points are Mary Ann Rocque’s 1763 and 1765 publications of her deceased husband’s drawings (Rocque 1765 is used here) and holdings in numerous repositories. Many of these sites are referenced in the following chapters. While the images are exceptionally helpful, they are only thin sections in a fort’s chronology and may not accurately reflect earlier and later construction episodes. While the archaeological record is often the most incomplete, it can also be the most accurate. When features and artifacts are found on a site, they must be explained. In the search for meaning, specific questions are asked of documents and images that may not have been thought of before. In that sense, the presence of archaeological material might lead to new information . At the same time, if archaeologists do not ask the right questions of their artifacts, documents, and imagery, the answers are irrelevant (Pynchon 1987:251). As a total package then, the documents, images, and artifacts can provide a composite, interpretive impression of a fort site that allows the current generation, now celebrating the 250th anniversary of the war, access to the past. When interpretation is further augmented by a reconstruction , the learning process continues as even more detailed questions arise through the course of construction. This study focuses on a range of sites, extending from the southern frontier zones to the Great Lakes. It is not meant to be complete but Introduction · 3 representative. In conjunction with other studies, most notably Charles Stotz...