A Gallant Defense: The Siege of Charleston, 1780 (review)

The only recent book-length treatment of the British campaign against Charleston, A Gallant Defense examines the plans of and challenges faced by both commanders (Lieutenant General Sir Henry Clinton and his American opponent, Major General Benjamin Lincoln). Borick also examines the responses to the campaign of ordinary soldiers and civilians. He contends that economic factors motivated most soldiers and that "revolutionary principles alone fell short in persuading South Carolinians to join the Continental army" (p. 91). On the civilian side of the operations, Borick describes the cost in property and lives paid by South Carolinians and the interplay between civilian and military authorities during the campaign.

Borick argues that the campaign was "one of the critical points in the military history of the American Revolution, and it deserves greater attention" (p. xii). The siege of Charleston not only signaled a new British strategy to pacify the southern colonies, but also showed the contradictions between British policy and British actions. Whereas official policy was relatively lenient toward civilians, the actions of foraging parties appeared as indiscriminate pillaging, which gave the British "the character of an invading army, one to be resisted rather than welcomed" (p. xii).

In early February 1780, the British began landing troops on the sea islands south of Charleston and inexorably moved to invest the city. As the siege tightened, Lincoln considered evacuating the city in order to save the army. However, civilian authorities argued against evacuation, even threatening to attack the escaping Continentals. As matters deteriorated, the civilians called for surrender. Thus when the garrison surrendered on 12 May 1780, it was largely the responsibility of the civilian authorities.

Like a recent biography of Lincoln by David B. Mattern, Borick argues that Lincoln acquiesced to civilian authorities because, if he abandoned Charleston, "he risked losing their faith in him as a commander and their support for the cause of independence" (p. 225). Borick pins much of the blame on Lincoln's subordinates who made such mistakes as evacuating essential fortifications at the first sign of British approach. Nevertheless, Lincoln in turn is criticized for having chosen such incompetent subordinates. He is guilty of overconfidence in the aftermath of the fall of Charleston. Clinton gave locals a choice between assisting the British to root out rebels or being branded as traitors; "it was one thing to peacefully submit to the British forces, but to actively assist them . . . was quite another" (p. 238). Much of the state's militia did not aid the defense of Charleston, which left Clinton unsure of the strength of the resistance. Ironically, "by not turning out, rebellious South Carolinians freed themselves to fight another day" (p. 242). Given the setbacks, the resistance of South Carolinians was "even more difficult and even more remarkable" (p. 244) than resistance in the North.

Although the specialist will appreciate the detailed account of the operation, explanations of siege warfare and weapons also make A Gallant Defense accessible to nonspecialists. Borick makes good use of South Carolina sources, but comes up short on British archival sources. He has a somewhat jarring tendency to speculate on the emotional states of the combatants, such as "the surrender must have been particularly painful" (p. 220) for the Continentals. Nevertheless, A Gallant Defense is a welcome addition to the history of South Carolina and of the American Revolution.