For most of America’s Founding Fathers, the choice was simple but extreme: continue to capitulate to Great Britain or go for broke in separating from England and its form of government. This article emphasizes that what got us to July 4, 1776, and through the successful American Revolution was a combination of competence and coincidence.
In many ways, it is a miracle that George Washington was still standing at the end. He had been nearly killed multiple times in conflicts preceding the revolution. Pursuant to his selection as commander of American forces, he constantly pushed the Continental Congress for more resources, risking his removal and replacement. While he lost more battles than not in the revolution, Washington triumphed through humility, perseverance and loyalty to his troops.
Although everyone loves a winner, American forces spent most of 1776 on the run and in retreat. Only when the momentum turned the next year did France consider an alliance with America against Britain. Here again, there were elements of luck and destiny. Washington’s friendship with him led Marquis de Lafayette to lobby for closer ties with the Americans, and later, the duo of Washington and Gen. Rochambeau commanded the Yorktown campaign precipitating Britain’s surrender. However, independence did not guarantee a permanent cordial relationship between the United States and France, as the next decade showed.
An English officer commented after American independence that the Brits were not defeated on the battlefield, but they were out-spied. Always a dirty and dangerous endeavor, this was an invaluable tool in America’s arsenal. The elaborate network included the Culper group, those operatives in Philadelphia, and selected French troops. While the capture and execution of Nathan Hale was a blow, being able to collect intelligence on British maneuvers allowed for American military victories and saved lives. It’s a good thing that Gen. Washington was willing to commit his own resources to fund most of these activities.
One perpetual question being debated by historians is whether America could have succeeded against Britain without Black and Native American support. Britain’s recruitment of those enslaved, with the promise of eventual freedom, had a two-edged impact: It was so effective that the Americans repeated the offer, along with allowing free Blacks to join the fight. Though Britain enjoyed a 2-1 margin in such troops, total Black support for England could have tipped the balance. Ditto for Native Americans, who also fought for England by a 2-1 margin. Still, the split in the Cherokee Nation and Iroquois Confederacy over which side to support in the American Revolution prevented ultimate British victory.
Of course, Delaware’s role in the signing of the Declaration of Independence is well-known. However, Caesar Rodney’s famous trek to Philadelphia masked a tenuous reality: There were splits in several state delegations, as they decided whether to back the bid for freedom. It is estimated that a third of American residents favored remaining under British control. State divisions would manifest themselves again during the ratification of the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution. So the “unanimous” part of the Declaration of Independence, while technically accurate, was a stretch.
As it turned out, America took two tries to form a government following independence, and the equality and consent enunciated in the Declaration of Independence have taken most of United States history to be realized. Despite these flaws, our freedom is the envy of the Earth, and no one should apologize for the exceptionalism that it engendered.
Dr. Samuel B. Hoff is George Washington Distinguished Professor Emeritus of history and political science at Delaware State University.
