William C. Davis is the author of the new book The Greatest Fury: The Battle of New Orleans and the Rebirth of America. His many other books include Crucible of Command. He is a retired history professor who taught at Virginia Tech.
Q: Why did
you decide to focus on the Battle of New Orleans in your new book?
A: The
decision came out of discussions between me and my agent Jim Donovan of
Dallas.
I am very
interested in the events and the characters involved in the 1800-1830 period of
the new republic, and particularly in what was then known as the
Southwest—Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, and Texas.
There have
been several books on the British Invasion of Louisiana, but none that delved
deeply into the British records abroad in England and Scotland, or that
exploited the incredible mass of eyewitness letters published in the newspapers
of the time.
There is
still a lot of misconception about both the battles for New Orleans and their
impact, and the opportunity to present some fresh ideas was also attractive.
Q: What
would you say are some of the most common perceptions and misconceptions about
the battle?
A: There are
two misconceptions that have been particularly tenacious.
One is that
the battle was won by Tennessee and Kentucky riflemen. That reflects a growing
interest in the new “western” peoples of those states and a tendency to
romanticize men who were already becoming folk heroes in their own lifetimes,
like David Crockett, Reuben Kemper, Sam Dale, et al.
It also
reflected the East and West’s desire for individuality in their heroes, especially
the daring, resourceful, and unerringly accurate marksman of the James Fenimore
Cooper Leatherstocking novels.
The fact is
unarguable that it was American artillery that won the battle of Jan. 8,
1815, and inflicted horrendous casualties on the British.
But cannon
operated by gun crews are mechanistic things without personality. The
buckskin-clad Kentucky or Tennessee rifleman was both more romantic and more
acceptable to American aspirations; hence from the outset people who were not
actually in or at the battle began glamorizing those individuals.
The other
misconception is that, since a peace treaty had already been signed—though not
yet ratified by Congress—the battle was unimportant in its impact on the peace
that followed.
It is a fact
that by this time authorities in London had lost interest in reclaiming
Louisiana for their ally Spain, and just wanted the war to end. But it took two
months for communications to get from London to the British commanders in the
Gulf, and fully a month for news from New Orleans to reach Washington, and nearly
another month from Washington to London.
In short,
there was no way for quick reactions across the Atlantic. Had the British taken
New Orleans in January 1815, it would have taken weeks for the news to reach
London, and just as long for any response to get back to New Orleans.
Three or more
months could pass before the captor of lower Louisiana could have any
instructions from home, be they orders to hold it in spite of the treaty, or to
hand it over and evacuate. During those months the British could have done
untold damage to Mississippi Valley trade and commerce, confiscated millions of
dollars worth of cotton and other goods then stored in New Orleans.
At the same
time, the local population of Spanish heritage could have reasserted Spain’s
claim, and it was a persuasive claim at that. Britain was resolved not to aid
Spain in reclaiming Louisiana or at least New Orleans, but Britain was also
resolved not to oppose it either.
In the end,
New Orleans and Louisiana were highly likely to have remained American
possessions, but in the interim between a British victory and a British
withdrawal, many things could have happened that would have impacted the
region’s future for the coming generation.
Q: Can you
say more about the legacy of this battle?
A: Besides
the impact stated above, the battle left multiple legacies.
For one,
thanks to the growing newspaper press in America that followed events at New
Orleans breathlessly, the attention of the states east of the Appalachians was
refocused on the “west” as never before.
The heroes
of the battle became American heroes. It made Jackson president, our first from
west of the mountains. It promulgated the “rifleman” mentioned above, who would
be the dominant American folk hero until the post-Civil War emergence of the
Cowboy.
Thus the
victory created a model of what Americans wanted to see themselves as
being—rugged, independent, and individualistic.
Q: How did
you research the book, and did you learn anything that particularly fascinated
or surprised you?
A: The variety
and quantity of primary sources available is staggering.
The Public
Record Office and National Archives in England are loaded with masses of
reports, diaries, series of correspondence, and more, most of which has never
been thoroughly exploited. The Scottish National Archives are much the same,
and private papers in the National Library of Scotland are almost as
substantial.
In the
United States, the massive papers of Edward Livingston, close confidant of
Jackson’s and an aide on his staff, have never been examined for material on
the campaign, and several repositories in New Orleans itself have major
collections, especially the Historic New Orleans Collection.
Beyond
manuscripts, the newspapers of the era offered a major opportunity, especially
since the development of digitization and optical character recognition
programs have made it possible now to search hundreds of thousands of pages of
period newspapers.
I probably
found 300 or more letters written from New Orleans in the newspapers, and for
previous generations the only way to find them would have been to blow out my
eyes spending years scanning microfilms. Now that same research can be done in
a few weeks.
Q: What are
you working on now?
A: Right now
I am working on restoring a 1928 Pierce Arrow convertible coupe, a nice break
from writing.
I have
completed the editing and annotation of a remarkable Civil War correspondence
until recently unknown and still in private hands, the 524 1863-1865 letters
between Confederate General Gabriel C. Wharton and his wife, Nannie, which
should be published in the next 18 months.
Beyond that,
I am discussing a book on the Lewis and Clark Corps of Discovery with my
publisher, but no fixed plans as yet.
--Interview with Deborah Kalb. Here's a previous Q&A with William C. Davis.
No comments:
Post a Comment