At 08:54 PM 6/5/2002 -0400, Holley Calmes (a friend) wrote: >Can you expound a bit on some evidence re the Brits inciting a civil >war? Not arguing-just curious. The success of the British strategy for the Southern Campaign was based upon the mistaken belief that there was a strong loyalist sentiment in the South that only had to be tapped. The Brit field commanders in the South quickly learned that this was not the case. The policy makers, far away in London, clung to the idea, long after it became a doomed strategy. The idea was that loyalists would show up in armed support of the British troops, and supposedly, in far greater numbers than the phenomenon noted of the rebel militia rising in great numbers whenever the Continentals appeared. It simply never happened, or if it did, was mishandled by the Brits. Loyalist militia in great numbers fighting rebel militia in great numbers, put bluntly, equals civil war. While the Brits never succeeded in this plan in an "organized" fashion, they succeeded to their chagrin and dismay (and also to that of their regular rebel counterparts), in an informal fashion. They did not succeed in creating the "orderly civil war" which was absolutely essential to their success (they didn't have the manpower to win otherwise), they spawned a wildfire sort of civil war over which neither they nor the official rebel leadership had a great deal of control. At times, this "wildfire" civil war was found to be an easier thing to start than to control or stop. Leaders in both camps said that if it could not be brought to and end, the population "would destroy itself". After Brit victories at Charleston and Camden, the loyalist militia acting on their own, wreaking some understandable revenge, violated the paroles of some sidelined rebel leadership (e.g., Pickens, Sumter, et al) which worked sorely at counter-purposes to the policies of the Brit regular commanders. Indeed, the point can be made that these rebel militia commanders, brought back into the fray by overexhuberant loyalist militia, were the ones who brought about British defeat when there was no longer a viable force of Continentals in the South. Let see, if I followed you correctly on another point. The rebels were motivated primarily by greed. Therefore the loyalists would have been characterized by ... (absence of greed?). Ahem. I'd put it this way. The rebels never intended to rebel, as such. They wanted to continue the large measure of self-government they had become accustomed to before George III came on the scene, determined to improve on the job performance of George I (who intentionally reaped the maximum economic benefit from the colonies with an absolute minimum of effort and expense, aka "salutary neglect"). When Geo. III, his ministers and those voting with them (the very best money could buy), belatedly attempted to impose additional restrictions on the colonies, the colonies did something the civics teachers taught us as one way to repeal a law, i.e., to collectively ignore it (the way prohibition was repealed in the US). Had Britain in 1776 agreed to what they themselves proposed after Saratoga, there never would have been a Revolution. The revolution came to an end not so much a military defeat as one of failed policy. After Yorktown, Geo. III, a constitutional monarch, did not have enough payola available to put together an administration or vote support willing to continue his policies. So it ground to a miserable end. This war simply cannot be understood if approached as a conflict between the forces of good and evil (quoting Dan Morrill). However, that might work if applied to the inner workings of one side or the other! Both Higginbottom and Mackesy do that for their respective sides, I suppose it's why I like them. John

John: I agree with you totally regarding the War in SC. One could spend their life just studying the War in SC and its effects on the citizens over a very long period of time. My ancestors fought in SC and when reading about the battles and highjackings along roads it was a nightmare painted in big, broad strokes. No one was safe anywhere. Fortunate were the folks living near the swamps and having a place to hideout. The loss early of Georgia opened SC to devastation from the Atlantic up the Savannah and into every region from sparsely settled villages to the towns. Reading about the War in SC is a difficult study when one visualizes the events. No words on the pages; images instead. Horrible, fearful images which our ancestors survived. It would be so interesting to be able to sit and listen to them tell their stories and how the war changed their lives forever. Had SC been lost to the British would we celebrate July Fourth today? Tree Mother ----- Original Message ----- From: John Robertson <jr@jrshelby.com> To: <AMERICAN-REVOLUTION-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 6:49 PM Subject: Re: [A-REV] Promotion of accurate historical study of Rev War > At 06:53 PM 6/5/2002 -0400, you wrote: > >Out of curiousity what state do you live in? > > I live in NC, but very near SC. The comments are based primarily on SC, > but also partially on NC. > > SC is probably the one colony in which the Rev War was a border-to-border > event, since it was the only colony in which the Brits established inland > posts and sought (with considerable success) to provoke a civil war. SC > had more battle/skirmish sites than any other colony (I'll arm-wrestle on > this *privately*, if anyone is so inclined) and had more war debt than the > other 12 colonies combined (it was then "total war", it was civil war, it > was late in the war when the other colonies felt they had "done their > share" and the Carolinas were essentially on their own, and all that was at > stake was the outcome of the war). The war could have been won or lost > there. The Continental forces in the > South had been decimated. All that stood in the way of defeat was the > backcountry militia, and there was a very viable British army still in the > field. And the watchword was that "the militia won't fight". > > We know how it turned out. > > I study the Rev War all over, wherever it happened. But there are few > places it gets more exciting, or more unpredictable (or unbelievable) than > in SC. > > John Robertson > > > > ==== AMERICAN-REVOLUTION Mailing List ==== > > > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 >

Dear James & Ed, Thank you. I appreciate your taking the time to read, research & respond with all the information that both of you sent to my inquiry. I enjoyed what I was able to look at, today and shall keep the sites and continue to use & peruse them. As you probably know Johannes Peter Uber is not on - The URL for the on-line Pa. State Archives is http://www.digitalarchives.state.pa.us/ . Do you or does SKS know if there are similar sites (which list the individuals that were soldiers/patriots) for MD, VA & other states? I tried changing the PA to MD but that didn't work. (Each state probably contracts with their own ktr or lowest bidder if they even have the same things on-line.) I understand from kind soul, Ed St.Germain, that another "German Regt." was the 8th Va., raised by Peter MUHLENBERG in 1776. And of course he told me - GERMAN REGT. or Bn. was raised in Md. and Pa. under the Congressional resolution of 25 May '76. Col. Nicholas Haussegger was in command 17 July '76-19 Mar. '77, and Col. (Baron) De Arendt from the latter date to I Jan. '8 1. In 1777 it became one of the 16 "ADDITIONAL CONT'L. REGTS." The unit disgraced itself at Trenton, 2 Jan. '77, during the NEW JERSEY CAMPAIGN and HAUSSEGGER surrendered or defected to the enemy. Thanks, again. TIA Deborah in the Maryland suburbs of Washington, DC, USA

At 04:08 PM 6/6/2002 -0400, holley calmes wrote: >Let me say a word or two about the Scots however. Having graduated from >the School of Scots History as taught by Doc M Gilchrist, who's way >smarter than I am, I'd like to make a few statements. > >Not all Scots hated England. It might be argued that the Scots who >emmigrated to the colonies had a grudge, (I don't know about that group) >but in general it was only about 1/4 of the Scot population who were >Jacobites or who were demonstrably anti-England. I think the movie >"Braveheart", which was second only in bogus history to Patriot, has >reinforced a view in this country that all Scots were always at war with >all English, and it just wasn't so. > >If you break down the British Army during the Rev, a clear 1/4 of the >officers and men were Scots. And they weren't forced! > >I am not speaking of the Scots Irish. That's a whole different kettle of >fish. This is true -- I should probably have been more specific, since most of the folks I'm referring to would probably fall under the category of Scots-Irish. I'm not as up on my history before they landed here as I could be (I wouldn't exactly consider myself an historical expert of any sort, at least not in any kind of organized way...I research willie-nillie as something catches my interest <g>). If I remember correctly, many of the Scots who went to Ireland were folks that refused to accept English authority, weren't they? If so, it would make sense that they brought their attitudes and feelings with them when they came to America. I haven't researched it, but I wouldn't be surprised if many of the Scots that came to the colonies were at the least luke-warm towards the English. It makes sense that the people willing to undertake the rather arduous task of crossing an ocean to settle a new country might be doing so in part because they're not happy where they are -- they'd be leaving something they didn't want as much as they'd be heading towards something they did want. I almost hate to admit it, but I enjoyed both Braveheart and Patriot (Patriot much more than Braveheart -- maybe I'd rather watch the British get beat by the Americans instead of fighting Scots <g>). I wouldn't say they were good history, any more than Gone With the Wind, but as entertainment, well, I'm shallow. I'll watch Mel Gibson any day of the week <g>. I hope that they had the same effect on some of their viewers that GWTW had on me -- I had never had much interest in the Civil War until I read that, but it caught my attention, and interested me enough that I wanted to learn about the period. If they can convert some folks into historians and genealogists, then at least they're useful as well as entertaining! Angie

Ed St.Germain and Deborah in the Maryland suburbs of Washington, DC, USA, Ed St Germain, thanks for the information on the German Regiment. My relative Jacob Weaver was in this regiment. Maryland State Archives web site: http://www.mdarchives.state.md.us/megafile/msa/speccol/sc2900/sc2908/html/vo lumes.html Volume 18 - Muster Rolls and Other Records of Service of Maryland Troops in the American Revolution. A good book on the German Regiment is " The German Regiment of Maryland and Pennsylvania in the Continental Army 1776 -1781 by Henry J. Retzer. I purchased my copy from the Maryland State Archives in Annapolis, Maryland. The book is published by Family Line Publications, 63 Main Street, Westminster, Maryland 21157. Family Line Publications web site: http://pages.prodigy.com/Strawn/family.htm Ron rzweaver@tqci.net --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses at tqci.net]

Dear Jan, Thank you for your reply. snip http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/UBER/1999-07/0933144744 Is this the man you are looking for? If yes, perhaps she will have answers for you. end snip Yes, Johannes Peter Uber but Denise Smith's electronic/web mail address at this site [Denise Smith - poliwogsis@webtv.net] & Dave Goff's - 'davegoff@bev.net' <'davegoff@bev.net'> is/are no longer valid. However, she received her Uber information from my cousin Michele Cragg. I am in touch with my cousins Michele Cragg & Douglas Mechler and with Merry Anne Pierson who all have large Uber family files on-line on the world wide web. As of now, it appears that the information regarding Johannes Peter Uber's military service was given by someone who has not yet responded to e-mail (which is the only point of contact we have for him) without sourcing documentation. I appreciate that you took the time to read, research, and reply to my inquiry. Thanks, again. Deborah in the Maryland suburbs of Washington, DC, USA

Angie: Thanks for the thumbs-up. I'm not trying to be contrary, just practical about human nature. Let me say a word or two about the Scots however. Having graduated from the School of Scots History as taught by Doc M Gilchrist, who's way smarter than I am, I'd like to make a few statements. Not all Scots hated England. It might be argued that the Scots who emmigrated to the colonies had a grudge, (I don't know about that group) but in general it was only about 1/4 of the Scot population who were Jacobites or who were demonstrably anti-England. I think the movie "Braveheart", which was second only in bogus history to Patriot, has reinforced a view in this country that all Scots were always at war with all English, and it just wasn't so. If you break down the British Army during the Rev, a clear 1/4 of the officers and men were Scots. And they weren't forced! I am not speaking of the Scots Irish. That's a whole different kettle of fish. Holley

Let see, if I followed you correctly on another point. The rebels were motivated primarily by greed. Therefore the loyalists would have been characterized by ... (absence of greed?). Ahem. Not at all and untidy logic there! I believe the Loyalists just figured they would prosper if they cooperated within the existing system. They could have been mistaken! I'm simply taking the position that economic factors were more forceful during the pre and immediate war period than we commonly give them credit for, and that most-not all but most-of the nationalistic sentiment came later. Just a pet theory. I'm not coming from the greed is evil point of view-in fact, greed is an unavoidable human motivator, and I'm highly entrepreneurial. Thanks for the rest of the report, too. I agree with what you said, I just have trouble with the word "incite" as opposed to say, expect or encourage. "Incite" has a different type of energy and intent from where I sit, but you know how tolerant I am:):) Keep up the good work, Holley

At 06:15 PM 6/5/2002 -0400, A-Flame Corporation wrote: >What about those who did not arrive from England, coming instead from >Germany, Ireland, Wales, France, and elsewhere? What about those who >spoke no English? Do you know of any Germans who wished to be proud >Englishmen? Irish? Welsh? French? I think not! I have to agree. Look, for instance, at the Carolinas. Some areas of North Carolina were settled largely by Scots -- they were hardly supporters of the English Crown. I can only imagine the rejoicing that many of them felt at the idea of the English having their red coats whupped <g>. Then look at South Carolina. A huge portion of the center of the state was settled by German and Swiss-German settlers. There are long-standing ties between English royalty and German royalty (all that marrying of cousins, you know). Many of these settlers fled their homes, for all the usual reasons (war, famine, religious persecution, etc), and went to England, especially London. And many of them felt that they owed their start in the New World to the Queen, who settled huge tracts of land on these folks to get them to emigrate. Admittedly, this wasn't strictly an altruistic measure; thousands of refugees flooding into London couldn't really be supported, so it probably seemed like a very good idea to ship them off somewhere else. The colonies were a terribly practical solution -- relieve overcrowding while you populate land you'd like to claim. Anyway, many of these people felt a great deal of loyalty to England, and some families in South Carolina were torn apart in much the same way as occurred a hundred years later during the Civil War. Much of what is taught about American history focuses on the New England area, which is only the tip of the iceberg. Schools only have so much time to cover some very complex subjects, and it's understandable that not everything can be covered, but it's a shame nonetheless. People can tell you there were 13 colonies, that the Declaration of Independence was signed on the 4th of July, and that George Washington won the war (and threw a dollar over the Delaware <sigh>), and that's about it. I overheard a conversation not terribly long ago that was inspired by Mel Gibson's "Patriot" -- and I just about choked on my coke when I heard the (self-proclaimed) expert announce that it was no wonder that no one had ever heard of any of the happenings in the movie, because none of it was as important to the outcome of the war as Bunker Hill. Interesting viewpoint... >There are, to my knowledge, no writings left by my ancient relatives, to >indicate their >opinions during this period. I would accept nothing less; as others here >have indicated, 1/3rd of the population was with England, 1/3rd was for >independence, and 1/3rd just wanted to get on with it. That's probably a pretty accurate summation. Not surprisingly, really. It's about the same thing you'd find today. Some of the people are passionately for whatever issue & nothing you can do will change their minds, some of them are passionately against & can't be swayed, and probably the overwhelming majority are somewhere in the middle and would really like to just be left alone <g>. The people in the middle are the ones that eventually make the difference, because sooner or later they'll come down on one side or the other... Angie

Southern Campaign Heritage Area Study: On May 23, 2002 Representative John Spratt (D-SC) introduced legislation (H.R. 4830) to direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a suitability/feasibility study to consider establishing the Southern Campaign of the Revolution Heritage Area in South Carolina. According to the legislation, South Carolina contains aspects of the country's Revolutionary heritage worthy of recognition and has the potential for various public and private entities to work collectively to develop a national heritage area. The study area includes over two dozen counties in South Carolina and an unspecified number of counties in North Carolina. The measure has been referred to the House Committee on Resources for action.

I don't think it likely that Johnannes was in the Continental Army, that was three years service and not many fathers and husbands could afford to be away from their farms for three years. It is possible if he had adult sons who could take over the farm but more than likely they would have joined the Continental Army. He probably did serve in the Pa. Militia but it may not have been in Westmoreland County. That area was hardly settled at the time of the Revolution. The Pa. Archives has lists of soldiers on their web page, its not complete there are many more in the printed Pa. Archives, you can find this at many libraries in Pa. The Pennsylvania Militia Law required every male between the ages of 18 and 53 to participate. If you can find a muster list that shows that he was paid for his services that constitutes evidence of his having actully fought. Many of those who are listed showed up for militia practice but never actually fought. The 5th and 6th series of the printed Pa. Archives have lists of people who served in the militia during the revolution. The index for the 5th series are the last two volumes of the 6th series, the index for the 6th series is the 7th series. The bulk of those who served during the revolution are in the 5th series, but there are a few in the 6th series, along with those who served in the War of 1812. If you should find him in the printed Pa. Archives that will tell you what county he served from, and if have his captains name you can use that to determine what township he lived in, in Pa. most of the battalions were organized by township (the exception being those places like Philadelphia where there would have been multiple battalions) and the captain was usually from the same township as his soldiers. If you can't find him in the militia lists you can also look for him in the printed Pa. Archives, 3rd series, this is a tax list for all of Pa. for the 1770 to 1780 time period. The last four volumes of the 3rd series is the index. The url for the on-line Pa. State Archives is http://www.digitalarchives.state.pa.us/ If your interested in learning more about the ins and outs of revolutionary war service in Pa. you can visit the web page of the Conestoga Area Historical Society at http://www.rootsweb.com/~pacahs/index.htm Look for the revolutionary war menu and then choose background information on the Revolution. Jim ----- Original Message ----- From: "Deborah Jaquiss" <djaquiss@pressroom.com> To: <AMERICAN-REVOLUTION-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 1:15 AM Subject: [A-REV] Johannes Peter Uber purportedly a Hessian in German Battalion, Continental Army2 > Can SKS please tell me if the above was a Battalion in the Revolutionary > Army? If so, where would I be able to find out if he really was an USA > revolutionary soldier? NSDAR has no record. > > My 5 x g grandfather was Johannes Peter Uber. From three different sources > I have the following information. Could someone please tell me if Hesse, > Loetzenberen, and the Palatinate are three mutually exclusive places or is > one within another? Does anyone have any idea where I should start looking > for Johannes Peter Uber's family in the Germanys or the Holy Roman Empire or > whatever that area was in 1730? Could anyone please give me some ideas of > where to start looking? Are there websites? > > John McDonald was united in marriage to Mary Uber (granddaughter of Johannes > Peter Uber), who was a native of Pennsylvania and was descended from an old > Hessian family that settled in the Keystone state soon after he > Revolutionary war. > > JOHANNES PETER1 UBER was born 1730 in Loetzenberen, Germany, and died June > 1809 in Greensburg, Westmoreland Co., PA, USA. He married ANNA MARIA > ZIEGLER. She died Unknown. > More About JOHANNES PETER UBER: > Baptism: Lutheran Church, Harold, Westmoreland Co., PA > Immigration: 1753, Traveled via ship Beulah to America1 > Military service: Revolutionary War, German Battalion, Continental Army2 > > JOHANNES PETER1 UBER from the Palatinate, Germany > > I would appreciate any KS that has any guidance or any possible assistance > no matter how small. > > TIA Deborah in the Maryland suburbs of Washington, DC > > > > ==== AMERICAN-REVOLUTION Mailing List ==== > > > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 > >

Dear Ed, Thank you for the information Re: German Battalion of the Continental Army you sent me. (see below) I appreciate that you have taken the time to read my inquiry and reply giving me a broad basic education/grounding about the German Battalion of the Continental Army. This definitely takes me forward in understanding of how my direct line ancestor was involved in the Revolutionary War. Thanks, again. Where would be the best places to find a record of Johannes Peter Uber's purported service in the German Battalion of the Continental Army. Does this mean that each individual in this battalion was individually disgraced or could an individual have gone on to be a "patriot"? Does anyone know where to look (other then the US Archives) for a record of Johannes Peter Uber's service? Are there websites? - books? I have tried & spent some time on the website Ed gave me "AMERICANREVOLUTION.ORG" but it is so big that I don't know what to look under for listings of the members of units if it even has that. Any KS with information and/or guidance please contact me as any tidbit is greatly appreciated. TIA Deborah in the Maryland suburbs of Washington, DC, USA >> snip >>: German Battalion, Continental Army > *************************** > GERMAN REGT. or Bn. was raised in Md. and Pa. under the Congressional > resolution of 25 May '76. Col. Nicholas Haussegger was in command 17 > July '76-19 Mar. '77, and Col. (Baron) De Arendt from the latter date to > I Jan. '8 1. In 1777 it became one of the 16 "ADDITIONAL CONT'L. REGTS." > The unit disgraced itself at Trenton, 2 Jan. '77, during the NEW JERSEY > CAMPAIGN and HAUSSEGGER surrendered or defected to the enemy. > For Revolutionary War information on the Internet, your first choice > should be AMERICANREVOLUTION.ORG > *******************************************************************end snip<<<<<< > >

In 2001, the DAR published the following book, which was a consolidation and updating of several smaller booklets done since the mid-1980s: African American and American Indian Patriots of the Revolutionary War. 200 pages. It is still available for purchase from the DAR Store at the same street address as below my name for $12.00 postpaid. Several people on the staff research the topic of minority participation in the Revolution on a daily basis because we find it fascinating and important. In October 2002, the DAR Museum will open an exhibit entitled "Forgotten Patriots: African American and American Indian Patriots of the Revolutionary War." It will run for about 10 months. On January 11, 2003, the DAR will host a historical seminar at our headquarters in downtown Washington on the same subject. We've invited many well-known historians who specialize in this topic to speak. The program is still being crafted. The DAR Library has had for years a significant African American research collection and we add new materials to it constantly. We also have an American Indian Collection which is used frequently by staff from the Bureau of Indian Affairs next door in the Department of the Interior. The DAR itself has an American Indians Committee (established in 1941) which focuses on supporting education. Eric G. Grundset Library Director DAR Library 1776 D St., N.W. Washington, DC 20006-5392 202-879-3313 egrundset@dar.org <mailto:egrundset@dar.org> -----Original Message----- From: Angie Rayfield [SMTP:carolinaroots@inmyattic.com] Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 11:57 AM To: AMERICAN-REVOLUTION-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [A-REV] Fw: Fw: DAR:Sar At 11:11 PM 6/5/2002 -0400, James L. Stokes wrote: > Ok, its a service organization, I don't see a big difference between the >two. OK, admittedly it's a murky area. But think of your church -- do you consider it a social group or a service group? I would imagine that if you were plugging it into one of the two areas, you'd consider it a service organization. The primary goal is not to provide a social experience or setting, although that's part of any group. > My grandmother, neither of them, would have qualified for the DAR, both >were the daughters of Irish immigrants. I'm pretty confident that both >wouldn't have been involved in the DAR, they both supported FDR and I >suspect that when the DAR refused to allow Marion Anderson (a Black singer) >to sing in the DAR Hall in Washington both would have been unhappy about it. >Its not that my grandmothers were advocates of intergration its just that >they were more advanced that the DAR and were supporters of the President >and his wife. Actually, I've seen this story two different ways. One is that the DAR refused to allow Marion Anderson to sing in the DAR hall. I've also seen stories, though, that indicate that the DAR Hall was in use for another event that day, and so not available. I couldn't tell you which is accurate -- it was a little before my time <g>. As a side note, though. I'm certainly not an advocate of segregation, so don't put words in my mouth (or credit me with thoughts that I don't have), but I also don't think it's terribly fair to judge actions taken 60 years ago against the standards that exist now. Segregated organizations were par for the course at the time (and this was not just a "southern problem;" segregation and racism were a northern problem, too). In some places, it wasn't just the social custom, it was the law, and many people simply accepted it as a fact of life. That doesn't necessarily make them bad people, or bad groups. It makes them a product of their times. > Does the DAR today do research into Black involvement in the American >Revolution or is that left for any Black women who might want to join. If I'm not mistaken, the DAR doesn't do research, as such. Its function is not as a research organization. They do serve as a repository for a great deal of data, they have educational programs, etc. I'm sure there are members of the DAR that are interested in the contribution of blacks to the Revolution, the same as there are people interested in the native American contribution, the German contribution, and so on, but the organization itself is not a research group. Angie ==== AMERICAN-REVOLUTION Mailing List ==== ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

At 11:11 PM 6/5/2002 -0400, James L. Stokes wrote: > Ok, its a service organization, I don't see a big difference between the >two. OK, admittedly it's a murky area. But think of your church -- do you consider it a social group or a service group? I would imagine that if you were plugging it into one of the two areas, you'd consider it a service organization. The primary goal is not to provide a social experience or setting, although that's part of any group. > My grandmother, neither of them, would have qualified for the DAR, both >were the daughters of Irish immigrants. I'm pretty confident that both >wouldn't have been involved in the DAR, they both supported FDR and I >suspect that when the DAR refused to allow Marion Anderson (a Black singer) >to sing in the DAR Hall in Washington both would have been unhappy about it. >Its not that my grandmothers were advocates of intergration its just that >they were more advanced that the DAR and were supporters of the President >and his wife. Actually, I've seen this story two different ways. One is that the DAR refused to allow Marion Anderson to sing in the DAR hall. I've also seen stories, though, that indicate that the DAR Hall was in use for another event that day, and so not available. I couldn't tell you which is accurate -- it was a little before my time <g>. As a side note, though. I'm certainly not an advocate of segregation, so don't put words in my mouth (or credit me with thoughts that I don't have), but I also don't think it's terribly fair to judge actions taken 60 years ago against the standards that exist now. Segregated organizations were par for the course at the time (and this was not just a "southern problem;" segregation and racism were a northern problem, too). In some places, it wasn't just the social custom, it was the law, and many people simply accepted it as a fact of life. That doesn't necessarily make them bad people, or bad groups. It makes them a product of their times. > Does the DAR today do research into Black involvement in the American >Revolution or is that left for any Black women who might want to join. If I'm not mistaken, the DAR doesn't do research, as such. Its function is not as a research organization. They do serve as a repository for a great deal of data, they have educational programs, etc. I'm sure there are members of the DAR that are interested in the contribution of blacks to the Revolution, the same as there are people interested in the native American contribution, the German contribution, and so on, but the organization itself is not a research group. Angie

Dear friends, The site recommended is grand! This is a school teacher that definitely teaches American History. http://www.harlingen.isd.tenet.edu/coakhist/index.html Margaret

Deborah, Go to this address: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/UBER/1999-07/0933144744 Is this the man you are looking for? If yes, perhaps she will have answers for you. Regards, Jan Deborah Jaquiss wrote: > Dear Ed, > > Thank you for the information Re: German Battalion of the Continental Army > you sent me. (see below) I appreciate that you have taken the time to read > my inquiry and reply giving me a broad basic education/grounding about the > German Battalion of the Continental Army. This definitely takes me forward > in understanding of how my direct line ancestor was involved in the > Revolutionary War. Thanks, again. > > Where would be the best places to find a record of Johannes Peter Uber's > purported service in the German Battalion of the Continental Army. Does > this mean that each individual in this battalion was individually disgraced > or could an individual have gone on to be a "patriot"? > > Does anyone know where to look (other then the US Archives) for a record of > Johannes Peter Uber's service? Are there websites? - books? I have tried > & spent some time on the website Ed gave me "AMERICANREVOLUTION.ORG" but it > is so big that I don't know what to look under for listings of the members > of units if it even has that. > > Any KS with information and/or guidance please contact me as any tidbit is > greatly appreciated. > > TIA Deborah in the Maryland suburbs of Washington, DC, USA > > >> snip >>: German Battalion, Continental Army > > > *************************** > > GERMAN REGT. or Bn. was raised in Md. and Pa. under the Congressional > > resolution of 25 May '76. Col. Nicholas Haussegger was in command 17 > > July '76-19 Mar. '77, and Col. (Baron) De Arendt from the latter date to > > I Jan. '8 1. In 1777 it became one of the 16 "ADDITIONAL CONT'L. REGTS." > > The unit disgraced itself at Trenton, 2 Jan. '77, during the NEW JERSEY > > CAMPAIGN and HAUSSEGGER surrendered or defected to the enemy. > > For Revolutionary War information on the Internet, your first choice > > should be AMERICANREVOLUTION.ORG > > *******************************************************************end > snip<<<<<< > > > > > > ==== AMERICAN-REVOLUTION Mailing List ==== > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

At 08:56 PM 6/5/2002 -0500, you wrote: > I think you have forgotten another Colony where the Rev War was a >border-to-border event, New York. <snip> > Also, it is thought that "the militia won't fight" in New York too. > Well, they >did, at White Plains, Fort Anne, and Saratoga, among other battles. We >know how >that turned out too. <snip> Nowhere was the contribution of militia more important than at Bennington. In my listing of the true heroes of Saratoga (the one "turning point" I never quibble over!), I place John Stark immediately after Benedict Arnold. Brit historian Piers Mackesy (a favorite of mine) refers to Stark as "that cross-grained New Hampshireman". Piers must have split some wood in his day. > Of course the British moved the border in 1776 to Westchester > County in 1776 >after occupying half of the State. So, it was a little more cramped. I find the following map to show some interesting patterns in battle/skirmish sites during the Rev War. http://jrshelby.com/britcols.jpg Please note that this is copyrighted, but it is o.k. to snag for your personal use (please check with me before using it in other ways). Its presence on the net wasn't intended to be permanent (I just never got around to removing it!). I made this originally (to print and laminate) in order to show to visitors to Cowpens National Battlefield (where I work a day or two most weeks) who expressed surprise that anything of significance happened in the South during the Rev War. We gotta remember how it used to be taught to us older folk. You can't tell it but there are close to 1000 points plotted on that map, many simply stacked on top of others. There were many, many more at sea than is shown on this map. The colors of the points have no significance. And of course, some locations involved multiple events at the same place (shown only once on the map). The pattern that you can see is that in the North, the sites tended to be along the coast (coastal raiding) and up the rivers. There is a dense pattern in the vicinity of NY, but is must be remembered that this involved 4 colonies and accumulated over about 7 or 8 years. Now look at the colony of SC. See how evenly distributed the sites are all over the colony (and extending a bit into NC)? Most of these sites accrued over a 2 year period. In most of these battles, there were no Continentals or Redcoats involved, just "civilians". In my efforts to find and plot the sites, I found more sites in SC than any other colony (and with half the list of remaining unknown locations also being in SC), with NY being next. This was no contest going on here, that is just the way it worked out. The brown line down the middle is the "Proclamation Line of 1763", to the west of which there was not supposedly to be any settlement. In NC, this line is today closely approximated by the Blue Ridge Parkway. Note the goodly number of battles to the west of that line. Note the dense little pattern around Boston. We often forget that all these accrued in only 8 months!

Deb: I trust these notes will help: *************************** GERMAN REGT. or Bn. was raised in Md. and Pa. under the Congressional resolution of 25 May '76. Col. Nicholas Haussegger was in command 17 July '76-19 Mar. '77, and Col. (Baron) De Arendt from the latter date to I Jan. '8 1. In 1777 it became one of the 16 "ADDITIONAL CONT'L. REGTS." The unit disgraced itself at Trenton, 2 Jan. '77, during the NEW JERSEY CAMPAIGN and HAUSSEGGER surrendered or defected to the enemy. Another "German Regt." was the 8th Va., raised by Peter MUHLENBERG in 1776, which was re-organized in 1777 and subsequently commanded by Abraham Bowman (22 Mar - 10 Dec. '77), John Neville (to 14 Sept. '78), and James Wood (to 1 Jan. '83). *********************************** German Battalion Following the recommendation of the previous month, Congress on June 27, 1776 authorized the German Battalion of four Pennsylvania and four Maryland companies to be raised among the German settlers in those colonies. The men were to be enlisted for three years-some of the first men to be so enlisted. On July 17, another company was added. On February 26, 1778 the German Battalion was officially made a part of Maryland's quota to facilitate supply and recruitment. The unit was numbered as the 8th Maryland, but was usually still referred to as the German Battalion. The battalion formed the nucleus of the Maryland Corps which also contained men from the rest of the Maryland Line and Rawlings' corps. Effective January 1, 1781 the battalion was broken up, most of its men going into Hazen's Regiment. The rest of the men were retained in the Frederick Detachment of the Maryland Line. COMMANDERS: Colonel Nicholas Haussegger June, 1776 - March 19,1777. Colonel the Baron De Arendt March 19, 1777 - January 1, 1781. ****************************** GERMAN BATTALION (8th Maryland) Authorized 25 May 1776 in the Continental Army as the German Battalion. Assigned 27 June 1776 to the Middle Department. Organized 6 July - 25 September 1776 at Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to consist of five companies from eastern Pennsylvania, two companies from Baltimore County, Maryland, and two companies from Frederick County, Maryland. Relieved 23 September 1776 from the Middle Department and assigned to the Main Army. Assigned 22 May 1777 to the 2d Maryland Brigade, an element of the Main Army. Relieved 24 May 1777 from the 2d Maryland Brigade and assigned to the 1st Virginia Brigade, an element of the Main Army. Relieved 22 July 1778 from the 1st Virginia Brigade and assigned to the 2d Maryland Brigade, an element of the Main Army. Relieved 24 November 1778 from the 2d Maryland Brigade and assigned to Hand's Brigade, an element of the Main Army. Relieved 8 October 1779 from Hand's Brigade. Assigned 16 September 1780 to the New Jersey Brigade, an element of the Main Army. Disbanded I January 1781 at Morristown, New Jersey, and Baltimore, Maryland. ENGAGEMENTS Trenton- Princeton Defense of Philadelphia ENGAGEMENTS -Continued Philadelphia- Monmouth Iroquois 1779 ****************** Best regards, Ed -- For Revolutionary War information on the Internet, your first choice should be AMERICANREVOLUTION.ORG

Can SKS please tell me if the above was a Battalion in the Revolutionary Army? If so, where would I be able to find out if he really was an USA revolutionary soldier? NSDAR has no record. My 5 x g grandfather was Johannes Peter Uber. From three different sources I have the following information. Could someone please tell me if Hesse, Loetzenberen, and the Palatinate are three mutually exclusive places or is one within another? Does anyone have any idea where I should start looking for Johannes Peter Uber's family in the Germanys or the Holy Roman Empire or whatever that area was in 1730? Could anyone please give me some ideas of where to start looking? Are there websites? John McDonald was united in marriage to Mary Uber (granddaughter of Johannes Peter Uber), who was a native of Pennsylvania and was descended from an old Hessian family that settled in the Keystone state soon after he Revolutionary war. JOHANNES PETER1 UBER was born 1730 in Loetzenberen, Germany, and died June 1809 in Greensburg, Westmoreland Co., PA, USA. He married ANNA MARIA ZIEGLER. She died Unknown. More About JOHANNES PETER UBER: Baptism: Lutheran Church, Harold, Westmoreland Co., PA Immigration: 1753, Traveled via ship Beulah to America1 Military service: Revolutionary War, German Battalion, Continental Army2 JOHANNES PETER1 UBER from the Palatinate, Germany I would appreciate any KS that has any guidance or any possible assistance no matter how small. TIA Deborah in the Maryland suburbs of Washington, DC

For anyone who might be interested you may find a transcription of the Rev War Pension application of Edward Wiett (living in Shenandoah Co, VA at time of service, application filed while living in Roane Co, TN): http://www.rootsweb.com/~vashenan/cem/wiett.html . Elaine