RootsWeb.com Mailing Lists
Next Page
Total: 20/1046
    1. Re: invite to OurAcadianRoots & OurLouisianaRoots
    2. Paul L LeBlanc
    3. On January 7th Ancestry/Rootsweb announced that beginning March 2nd, 2020, they will discontinue their Mail Lists functionality.  Upon receiving this notice Paul L. LeBlanc immediately began searching for another website that could accommodate the mailing list format he uses on Rootsweb.  After much research, he determined Google Groups was the best option.  So he has created two new public Google groups: “Our Acadian Roots” and “Our Louisiana Roots”, which between them will consolidate 77 Acadian and Cajun, 10 uniquely Louisiana, many French surname, and 32 Louisiana Parish Lists.  The new consolidated Genealogy research/discussion groups will focus not only on Acadian and Louisiana ancestors, but also on "All Early French in North America". Come visit the groups' new websites and take a look at the new format: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/ouracadianroots or https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/ourlouisianaroots If you would then like join either or both of them, just click "Join group to post" located at the top left of the page. If any questions or problem joining contact Paul at pleblan@aim.com If you would like to create your own "OUR ______ ROOTS" Google Group for your family or Parish/County, contact me at pleblan@aim.com .  I may have some ideas to help you get started.  In addition, we may be able to add your new group to our new and expanding research family. For more information, Paul L LeBlanc at pleblan@aim.com

    03/01/2020 11:31:14
    1. invite to OurAcadianRoots & OurLouisianaRoots
    2. Paul L LeBlanc
    3. On January 7th Ancestry/Rootsweb announced that beginning March 2nd, 2020, they will discontinue their Mail Lists functionality.  Upon receiving this notice Paul L. LeBlanc immediately began searching for another website that could accommodate the mailing list format he uses on Rootsweb.  After much research, he determined Google Groups was the best option.  So he has created two new public Google groups: “Our Acadian Roots” and “Our Louisiana Roots”, which between them will consolidate 77 Acadian and Cajun, 10 uniquely Louisiana, many French surname, and 32 Louisiana Parish Lists.  The new consolidated Genealogy research/discussion groups will focus not only on Acadian and Louisiana ancestors, but also on "All Early French in North America". Come visit the groups' new websites and take a look at the new format: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/ouracadianroots or https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/ourlouisianaroots If you would then like join either or both of them, just click "Join group to post" located at the top left of the page. If any questions or problem joining contact Paul at pleblan@aim.com If you would like to create your own "OUR ______ ROOTS" Google Group for your family or Parish/County, contact me at pleblan@aim.com .  I may have some ideas to help you get started.  In addition, we may be able to add your new group to our new and expanding research family. For more information, Paul L LeBlanc at pleblan@aim.com

    02/28/2020 10:43:56
    1. Re: [FRENCH-INDIAN] New Book on French & Indian war
    2. Leroy Wolfe
    3. Is there any reference in this book to a Col. Abraham Barnes from Maryland? Thanks, Susan Wolfe -----Original Message----- From: french-indian-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:french-indian-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Paul L LeBlanc Sent: Friday, May 09, 2014 8:34 AM To: acadian@rootsweb.com; metis@rootsweb.com; metisgen@rootsweb.com; FRENCH-INDIAN@rootsweb.com Subject: [FRENCH-INDIAN] New Book on French & Indian war In Leland's Today. I had not know how important this war was until I started doing Genealogy =========================== Crucible of War: The Seven Years’ War and the Fate of Empire in British North America, 1754-1766 Fred Andres is an Associate Professor of History at the University of Colorado, Boulder. His goal, like that of many historians, was to write a “book accessible to general readers that will also satisfy [his] fellow historian’s scholarly expectations.” In the Crucible of War: The Seven Years’ War and the Fate of Empire in British North America, 1754-1766, Fred Anderson succeeded marvelously. This book is an historical narrative describing the events, people, and politics associated with what the colonists called the French and Indian War. In these pages you learn how and where many future leaders of the American Revolution developed their political view points and honed their military skills. READ THE FULL REVIEW, with contents, at: http://www.genealogyblog.com/?p=31700 Crucible of War: The Seven Years’ War and the Fate of Empire in British North America, 1754-1766 is available from Family Roots Publishing; Price: $XX.XX. https://www.familyrootspublishing.com/store/product_view.php?id=2517 ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FRENCH-INDIAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

    05/09/2014 09:11:03
    1. [FRENCH-INDIAN] New Book on French & Indian war
    2. Paul L LeBlanc
    3. In Leland's Today. I had not know how important this war was until I started doing Genealogy =========================== Crucible of War: The Seven Years’ War and the Fate of Empire in British North America, 1754-1766 Fred Andres is an Associate Professor of History at the University of Colorado, Boulder. His goal, like that of many historians, was to write a “book accessible to general readers that will also satisfy [his] fellow historian’s scholarly expectations.” In the Crucible of War: The Seven Years’ War and the Fate of Empire in British North America, 1754-1766, Fred Anderson succeeded marvelously. This book is an historical narrative describing the events, people, and politics associated with what the colonists called the French and Indian War. In these pages you learn how and where many future leaders of the American Revolution developed their political view points and honed their military skills. READ THE FULL REVIEW, with contents, at: http://www.genealogyblog.com/?p=31700 Crucible of War: The Seven Years’ War and the Fate of Empire in British North America, 1754-1766 is available from Family Roots Publishing; Price: $XX.XX. https://www.familyrootspublishing.com/store/product_view.php?id=2517

    05/09/2014 02:33:36
    1. [FRENCH-INDIAN] Braddock Rd book
    2. Patricia Johnson
    3. I no longer have use for the following book. If anyone is interested in it, please contact me privately at gnepat8@att.net Pat Johnson Dayton, OH *Braddock Road Chronicles 1755. by Andrew J. Wahll. *pub. 1999 by Heritage Books, Inc. It is paperback, 514 pages including end notes, bibliography and index. It is in like-new condition.

    04/26/2014 06:49:24
    1. [FRENCH-INDIAN] CALL FOR AUTHORS: The SAGE Encyclopedia of War: Social Science Perspectives
    2. Mark Golson
    3. Greetings, The story of social science and war is a long one, going back to the Roman military in the late second century B.C.E., when soldiers became the empire's worst enemy, pillaging citizens and creating social turmoil. But it is a story that has not been amply told. A long list of reference works exists viewing war through the traditional lens of history and military science, emphasizing the big events, places, and people in wars across the ages. Setting itself apart, The SAGE Encyclopedia of War: Social Science Perspectives will view war through a different lens—that of the social sciences. Rather than a roster of battles, equipment, and winners and losers, the causes, processes, and effects of war will be illuminated with a cross-disciplinary work drawing from anthropology, communication and mass media, economics, political science and law, psychology, sociology, and more. Featuring approximately 700 entries organized A-Z across 4 volumes; the encyclopedia will be available in a choice of electronic or print formats. Each 1000-5000 word article will be signed by the contributor. The General Editor, who will be reviewing each submission to the project, is sociologist Dr. Paul Joseph, Tufts University. This comprehensive project will be published by SAGE Reference. We are currently making assignments with a deadline of June 1, 2014. If you are interested in contributing to this cutting-edge reference, it is a unique opportunity to contribute to the contemporary literature, redefining sociological issues in today’s terms. Moreover, it can be a notable publication addition to your CV/resume and broaden your publishing credits. SAGE Publications offers an honorarium ranging from SAGE book credits for smaller articles up to a free set of the printed product for contributions totaling 10,000 words or more. The list of available articles is already prepared, and as a next step we will e-mail you the Article List (Excel file) from which you can select topics that best fit your expertise and interests. Additionally, Style and Submission Guidelines will be provided that detail article specifications. If you would like to contribute to building a truly outstanding reference with The SAGE Encyclopedia of War: Social Science Perspectives, please contact me by the e-mail information below. Please provide your CV or a brief summary of your academic/publishing credentials in related disciplines. Thanks very much. Mark Golson Author Manager war@golsonmedia.com

    04/22/2014 06:13:59
    1. [FRENCH-INDIAN] Thomas Harford
    2. Sandra Ritch
    3. My 5x gr grandfather and immigrant ancestor was a Thomas Harford b. abt 1723 in Ire. acording to the Muster Roll for NY Provincial Troops 1755-1764. He was 41 when he enlisted in Capt. Barnaby Byrne's unit. This would make it abt. 1764. Most likely he was married by then as I have his children all born from abt1750 to 1765. Not sure where the unit orginated..perhaps Queens or Troy/Albany NY area. I don't know what port he arrived in but he lived in Westchester Co. and may have been in Or. Co. NY early on. He was in Westchester at the time until his death in 1797 in Salem, This Capt Barnaby Byrnes resided in Queens Co. NY officer from 1755-1763. It is written that on his Muster Roll as of Mar. 1760 there were 93 men of whom 42 were recorded as " born in Ireland". Between his 2 units he had 190 men, 46% were natives of Ireland. This was a large percentage of Irish in a section where only Dutch and English were supposed to have settled. Baranaby's will showed that he owned 2000 acres in Albany Co. He had a country estate in Jamaica, Queens Co. ..his will showed considerable wealth for that time. His will dated 6 Mar. 1771. He married a Jane Thodey of Queen's NY. Thomas also served in the Rev. War with his 2 sons Peter and Ephriam Harford of Bedford, Salem NY area. Thomas married a Anna June and they both died in late winter of 1796 in Salem.. one month apart. Are there further records for the men who fought in French and Ind. war besides Muster Roll info.? This post is in Rememberance of these early ancestors. LIfe wasn't easy for them but they all made it through. If anyone has any info on my Thomas I would greatly appreciate it. He was a tanner and would love to know how he got here... He area that he lived in Salem was known as Boutonville. He was a early settler there. It later became known as the Ward Pound Ridge Reservation. I believe he and some of his family is buried in the Cem. at this Park.. Known as the Col. Avery Cem. No grave marked for him but Ephriam is there with a stone. Thank you for taking time to read this long query. sandra fitch ritch

    05/29/2013 01:15:43
    1. [FRENCH-INDIAN] French and Indian War - Seven Years War and Colonial America 1600-1774
    2. Paul L LeBlanc
    3. Maybe a few pictures will get us going again http://www.historicalimagebank.com/gallery/main.php/v/album01/album10/?g2_page=1

    05/29/2013 03:53:20
    1. Re: [FRENCH-INDIAN] French and Indian War - Seven Years War andColonial America 1600-1774
    2. lena slauf
    3. unsubscribe -----Original Message----- From: Paul L LeBlanc Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 6:53 AM To: french-indian@rootsweb.com Subject: [FRENCH-INDIAN] French and Indian War - Seven Years War andColonial America 1600-1774 Maybe a few pictures will get us going again http://www.historicalimagebank.com/gallery/main.php/v/album01/album10/?g2_page=1 ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FRENCH-INDIAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

    05/29/2013 02:09:20
    1. [FRENCH-INDIAN] Provincials and Colonists
    2. Hi Darrel; Thanks loads. That is exactly the explanation that I needed. Charlie King Darrel wrote: The terms do not cover the same kinds of things. Colonist was a term of residence. Provincial was a term of military organization. On occasion "provincials" could also be used in a generic sense, to refer to Americans of all kinds, but in my experience that usage was *not* common. A "colonist" was someone who resided in one of the colonies, as opposed to being a resident of the British Isles (or some other country). A "Provincial" was a specific kind of soldier, a member of a unit raised and administered by one of the English speaking American colonies. Most Provincials were colonists, of course. However, it was possible for someone from (say) England to join a Provincial regiment. That would make him a Provincial, but not a colonist. Not all colonists were Provincials. Primarily, of course, that is because most of them remained civilians. Also, there were American soldiers who were not Provincials. The British government raised "regular" regiments in America whose soldiers were mostly colonists. The officers were British. The pay, uniforms, and regulations came directly from the British military establishment, of which they were a part. These regiments often went by names such as "Royal Americans". Sometimes these units were smaller than regiments, and you will read of "Independent Companies" of rangers, or of foot. These units, although American, were *NOT* Provincials. ____________________________________________________________ Penny Stock Jumping 3000% Sign up to the #1 voted penny stock newsletter for free today! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4de41424b768b1ed029st01vuc

    05/30/2011 04:02:46
    1. [FRENCH-INDIAN] Re F-I War and Rev War
    2. Hi: I'm answering Hans' comments. I still feel that this site should be ONLY for the French and Indian War. If you want to discuss the Rev. War, go on that rootsweb list and discuss it. As it is, I have nine ancestors who gave service in the Rev. War and two on my father's side, one of which was a Welch Fusilier at the Battle of Lexington and Concord. How did I get interested in the French and Indian War? Through finding that my ancestor ferried General Braddock and his troops and Colonel Washington across the Potomac. I have always been taught in school that Braddock's Road was in Pennsylvania. How little did I know that Braddock's Road started near what is now Washington DC through Frederick County, MD and crossed that the Potomac on my ancestor's ferry at Williamsport, MD. Braddock's Road then went thru what is now West Virginia to Cumberland, MD and up into Pennsylvania from there. I also heard that they came back the same way, minus the General, of course. I was in that area in 2002 and I can tell you, seeing where the ferry was located, seeing the river (although the Potomac was very low then) and the lay of the land brought all this history back to me. I became very much interested in the French and Indian War and I believe I have been on this list ever since. It's also unbelievable to me that my ancestors going west crossed on that ferry. How little did I know that 50 years later, the families would intermarry, probably never knowing about the ferry. Also thanks Darrell. Annie Message: 4 Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 17:45:23 -0700 From: "Hans Waagen" <bestrep1@ix.netcom.com> Subject: Re: [FRENCH-INDIAN] Can't we just keep this site for the French andIndian War? To: <french-indian@rootsweb.com> Message-ID: <33144CBDEF424706AB1C4F79B705152C@HANSWAAGEN> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Hi Annie, It is for the F&I War, but on occasion it drifts into the Revolution. Why? Because for example some who fought in the F&I War became Loyalists during the Revolution (for example, my wife's ancestor's regimental Colonel, Ruggles became one). They could not fight against the "mother" country and as such, remained loyal to the Crown. The Provincials learned their craft well during the F&I War, and were angry because of the condescending attitude the English showed them during that conflict (at the siege of Quebec in 1759, General Wolfe wouldn't use Provincial militia because of his disdain for them). So the history of the two conflicts are interwoven and to understand one, it helps to research both of them. Sincerely, Hans Waagen ----- Original Message ----- From: <cardi2@aol.com> To: <french-indian@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2011 4:53 PM Subject: [FRENCH-INDIAN] Can't we just keep this site for the French andIndian War? > > > > > > > > Hi: > > I thought this site was for the French and Indian War? At the time of > that War, we were English in this country. We weren't fighting England > then. > > I'm posting my ancestors who were in the French And Indian War or gave > service: > > Moses Thorpe, Connecticut > > Evan Watkins, Frederick County, VA. - Ferryboatman on the Potomac out of > Williamsport, MD. Ferried General Braddock, Colonel Washington and British > redcoats on their way to Fort Pitt. > > Annie > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FRENCH-INDIAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 00:54:56 -0500 From: "Darrell A. Martin" <darrellm@sprynet.com> Subject: Re: [FRENCH-INDIAN] Can't we just keep this site for the French and Indian War? To: french-indian@rootsweb.com Message-ID: <4DE33130.3060505@sprynet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed On 5/29/2011 7:45 PM, Hans Waagen wrote: > Hi Annie, > > It is for the F&I War, but on occasion it drifts into the Revolution. Why? > Because for example some who fought in the F&I War became Loyalists during > the Revolution (for example, my wife's ancestor's regimental Colonel, > Ruggles became one). They could not fight > against the "mother" country and as such, remained loyal to the Crown. The > Provincials learned their craft well during the F&I War, and were angry > because of the condescending attitude the English showed them during that > conflict (at the siege of Quebec in 1759, General Wolfe wouldn't use > Provincial militia because of his disdain for them). So the history of the > two conflicts are interwoven and to understand one, it helps to research > both of them. > > Sincerely, > > Hans Waagen Hans: There are lists for general colonial interest, and there are lists for Rev War. I do not participate in those lists. I understand when someone discusses a person or family with involvement in both the F&I and the Rev War. That makes sense. But I joined this list because it has a *specific* focus that interests me, and that is the French & Indian War -- not the Revolution. It can sometimes be useful to research both the F&I and the Rev War. However, it is more often true, in my experience, that things discovered about the Rev War are *inappropriately* believed to be true of the F&I when that is not the case. By the way, there were *NO* (English speaking) militia at Quebec. They would not have been sent that far afield -- not even the N.Y. militia of Albany and vicinity -- and if they had been, they almost certainly would have deserted in droves. There were, however, many Provincial units in Wolfe's army. His opinion of them was not high; the story you told is actually about Provincials. There is no such thing as "Provincial militia" properly speaking. In today's terms that would translate to something equally confusing like "National Guard Reserves". Darrell

    05/30/2011 01:30:50
    1. [FRENCH-INDIAN] Hans Waggens comment...
    2. In a message dated 5/30/2011 3:08:34 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, fre nch-indian-request@rootsweb.com writes: It is for the F&I War, but on occasion it drifts into the Revolution. Why? Because for example some who fought in the F&I War became Loyalists during the Revolution (for example, my wife's ancestor's regimental Colonel, Ruggles became one). They could not fight against the "mother" country and as such, remained loyal to the Crown. The Provincials learned their craft well during the F&I War, and were angry because of the condescending attitude the English showed them during that conflict (at the siege of Quebec in 1759, General Wolfe wouldn't use Provincial militia because of his disdain for them). So the history of the two conflicts are interwoven and to understand one, it helps to research both of them. My mother is a direct descendent of Brig Gen Timothy RUGGLES, her line actually daughtered out with her brother. I have worked some of the interesting facts about him and using both conflicts to verify information is very helpful. In RUGGLES case, he had printed, in 1765, a piece which was possibly used in the movie 'The Patriot' when Gibson's character gives his reason for not fighting in the upcoming conflict. He cites what horrific things went on in the F& I wars. RUGGLES cites that it would be a Civil War, A war of father against son, brother against brother, and that the interests of England would be drawn elsewhere as would her troops, as the American Colonies were not going to bring her the riches that other colonies could. In effect, there would be a separation without the need for war. Now what, you ask has that to do with the previous war...not a whole lot...but it does give one something to look for in print...and in doing so other interesting facts will be found. In looking for info on where he commanded and how some texts refer to him as General of the Brigade, and others as a Mass Militia Col. Out comes the story of the first battle of Lake George and The reports of Sir Wm Johnson. Where G Washington was a Major and then a Col, RUGGLES was a Col and then A general. Going forward, a quote when the British were attacking Breeds Hill by RUGGLES to the British commander (I willl have to refer to my notes to find it) but he says "Sir, your folly has ruined your cause. These are the men who fought with me in Quebec. They are not cowards, they will cause you more harm than you will believe possible" (roughly remembered) He states right to the face of this British general, that his belief that the Americans are not even worthy opponents, his thinking that they will quit and go home, has already set the stage for the British defeat years hence. His ability to speak that boldly to the face of a British High Commander speaks volumes. And there has to be a basis for it in the previous war. Hence why the two are so intertwined. So yes, keep this mostly about the French war, but understand why delving into some of the First American Civil War can be helpful. respectfully offered Bill Perkins first son of Adelaide RUGGLES (Walter James, William James, James Fredrick, Thomas Gilbert, Thomas Hutchinson, Richard, Brig Gen Timothy, ...)

    05/30/2011 10:17:25
    1. Re: [FRENCH-INDIAN] Can't we just keep this site for the French and Indian War?
    2. Darrell A. Martin
    3. On 5/29/2011 7:45 PM, Hans Waagen wrote: > Hi Annie, > > It is for the F&I War, but on occasion it drifts into the Revolution. Why? > Because for example some who fought in the F&I War became Loyalists during > the Revolution (for example, my wife's ancestor's regimental Colonel, > Ruggles became one). They could not fight > against the "mother" country and as such, remained loyal to the Crown. The > Provincials learned their craft well during the F&I War, and were angry > because of the condescending attitude the English showed them during that > conflict (at the siege of Quebec in 1759, General Wolfe wouldn't use > Provincial militia because of his disdain for them). So the history of the > two conflicts are interwoven and to understand one, it helps to research > both of them. > > Sincerely, > > Hans Waagen Hans: There are lists for general colonial interest, and there are lists for Rev War. I do not participate in those lists. I understand when someone discusses a person or family with involvement in both the F&I and the Rev War. That makes sense. But I joined this list because it has a *specific* focus that interests me, and that is the French & Indian War -- not the Revolution. It can sometimes be useful to research both the F&I and the Rev War. However, it is more often true, in my experience, that things discovered about the Rev War are *inappropriately* believed to be true of the F&I when that is not the case. By the way, there were *NO* (English speaking) militia at Quebec. They would not have been sent that far afield -- not even the N.Y. militia of Albany and vicinity -- and if they had been, they almost certainly would have deserted in droves. There were, however, many Provincial units in Wolfe's army. His opinion of them was not high; the story you told is actually about Provincials. There is no such thing as "Provincial militia" properly speaking. In today's terms that would translate to something equally confusing like "National Guard Reserves". Darrell

    05/29/2011 06:54:56
    1. [FRENCH-INDIAN] Can't we just keep this site for the French and Indian War?
    2. Hi: I thought this site was for the French and Indian War? At the time of that War, we were English in this country. We weren't fighting England then. I'm posting my ancestors who were in the French And Indian War or gave service: Moses Thorpe, Connecticut Evan Watkins, Frederick County, VA. - Ferryboatman on the Potomac out of Williamsport, MD. Ferried General Braddock, Colonel Washington and British redcoats on their way to Fort Pitt. Annie

    05/29/2011 01:53:59
    1. Re: [FRENCH-INDIAN] Can't we just keep this site for the French andIndian War?
    2. Hans Waagen
    3. Hi Annie, It is for the F&I War, but on occasion it drifts into the Revolution. Why? Because for example some who fought in the F&I War became Loyalists during the Revolution (for example, my wife's ancestor's regimental Colonel, Ruggles became one). They could not fight against the "mother" country and as such, remained loyal to the Crown. The Provincials learned their craft well during the F&I War, and were angry because of the condescending attitude the English showed them during that conflict (at the siege of Quebec in 1759, General Wolfe wouldn't use Provincial militia because of his disdain for them). So the history of the two conflicts are interwoven and to understand one, it helps to research both of them. Sincerely, Hans Waagen ----- Original Message ----- From: <cardi2@aol.com> To: <french-indian@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2011 4:53 PM Subject: [FRENCH-INDIAN] Can't we just keep this site for the French andIndian War? > > > > > > > > Hi: > > I thought this site was for the French and Indian War? At the time of > that War, we were English in this country. We weren't fighting England > then. > > I'm posting my ancestors who were in the French And Indian War or gave > service: > > Moses Thorpe, Connecticut > > Evan Watkins, Frederick County, VA. - Ferryboatman on the Potomac out of > Williamsport, MD. Ferried General Braddock, Colonel Washington and British > redcoats on their way to Fort Pitt. > > Annie > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FRENCH-INDIAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

    05/29/2011 11:45:23
    1. [FRENCH-INDIAN] Colinists or Provincials
    2. Hi All, Question: Were the people from the 'colonies' in the time of the F&I War called Provincials or Colonists, or both? In the Rev War they were called colonists but in the F&I War they were still 'with England' and so maybe provincials is a better fit. Thanks for the help, Charlie King ____________________________________________________________ Groupon&#8482 Official Site 1 ridiculously huge coupon a day. Get 50-90% off your city&#39;s best! http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4de2457d5cfcee1bd7st06vuc

    05/29/2011 07:07:38
    1. Re: [FRENCH-INDIAN] Colonists or Provincials
    2. Darrell Martin
    3. On 5/29/2011 8:07 AM, king133@juno.com wrote: > Hi All, > > Question: Were the people from the 'colonies' in the time of the F&I War called Provincials or Colonists, or both? > > In the Rev War they were called colonists but in the F&I War they were still 'with England' and so maybe provincials is a better fit. > > Thanks for the help, > Charlie King Charlie: The terms do not cover the same kinds of things. Colonist was a term of residence. Provincial was a term of military organization. On occasion "provincials" could also be used in a generic sense, to refer to Americans of all kinds, but in my experience that usage was *not* common. A "colonist" was someone who resided in one of the colonies, as opposed to being a resident of the British Isles (or some other country). A "Provincial" was a specific kind of soldier, a member of a unit raised and administered by one of the English speaking American colonies. Most Provincials were colonists, of course. However, it was possible for someone from (say) England to join a Provincial regiment. That would make him a Provincial, but not a colonist. Not all colonists were Provincials. Primarily, of course, that is because most of them remained civilians. Also, there were American soldiers who were not Provincials. The British government raised "regular" regiments in America whose soldiers were mostly colonists. The officers were British. The pay, uniforms, and regulations came directly from the British military establishment, of which they were a part. These regiments often went by names such as "Royal Americans". Sometimes these units were smaller than regiments, and you will read of "Independent Companies" of rangers, or of foot. These units, although American, were *NOT* Provincials. Darrell Darrell A. Martin a native Vermonter in exile in Illinois darrellm@sprynet.com

    05/29/2011 06:43:45
    1. Re: [FRENCH-INDIAN] Soldiers in the F&I War: volunteers?
    2. I was going to ask you to Google the information but thought I would take a look for myself and pass it on. http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/D/1776-1800/war/denny.htm All the recruits fit for service, from the different stations, were brought to York, formed into two regiments of eight companies each, destined for the State of Virginia. A few days spent in equipping, &c., and for the trial of soldiers charged with mutiny, General Anthony Wayne, the commanding officer, influenced, no doubt, by experience of the revolt last winter, expresses a determination to punish, with the utmost rigor, every case of mutiny or disobedience. A general court martial continued sitting several days; twenty odd prisoners brought before them; seven were sentenced to die. The regiments paraded in the evening earlier than usual; orders passed to the officers along the line to put to death Instantly any man who stirred from his rank. In front of the parade the ground rose and descended again, and at the distance of about three hundred yards over this rising ground, the prisoners were escorted by a captain's guard; heard the fire of one platoon and immediately a smaller one, when the regiments wheeled by companies and marchedhed round by the place of execution. This was an awful exhibition. The seven objects were seen by the troops just as they had sunk or fell under the fire. The sight must have made an impression on the men; it was designed with that view. There's more to be found, but I've got heart burn and I've got to get to bed. I found lots on this previously, I'll look in the morning at my old emails. Renee Waring -----Original Message----- From: Hans Waagen <bestrep1@ix.netcom.com> To: french-indian <french-indian@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sat, May 28, 2011 4:40 pm Subject: Re: [FRENCH-INDIAN] Soldiers in the F&I War: volunteers? I have a hard time believing this story. What is the reference for this vent or is it just anecdotal? My wife's ancestor was in Ruggles's regiment n Massachusetts during the F & I War, and also he served in the Revolution. s a result, I collected about 35 books on both events and I never heard or ead about a horrific event such as this. The only militia who were executed to my knowledge) were deserters or those who fled in the face of the enemy uring battle or who became "turncoats". Hans Waagen ----- Original Message ----- rom: "Darrell A. Martin" <darrellm@sprynet.com> o: <french-indian@rootsweb.com> ent: Saturday, May 28, 2011 11:58 AM ubject: Re: [FRENCH-INDIAN] Soldiers in the F&I War: volunteers? On 5/28/2011 7:18 AM, reneelwaring@aol.com wrote: > > I know of an event that occured here in York, PA that might shed some > light on this. During the Rev. War they gathered volunteers here to > fight on the American side with the promise that they would be paid in > British Script. Once they were gathered at the paymasters table before > leaving (so the money could be given to their families) they found that > they would be paid in American Script. Of course there was a ruccus. > Some of the men started trouble about it and to make a point the officer > in charge had seven of the men killed by bayonette, their friends ordered > to do it. Then they were marched around the parade ground on top of the > seven bodies. The remaining 13 troublemakers were hanged while the > forced marched away. > > Renee Waring Renee: Different war, very different circumstances. There was no significant split among the English speaking colonists during the F&I War. However, during the Revolution, it was as much a civil war as anything -- family members on opposite sides, neighbors likewise, and a LOT of very serious pressure -- including violence -- to choose one or the other. The incident you relate **may** have been a "sting" operation, to identify those who preferred English money (therefore, were supposedly not patriots). That's a guess. But during the F&I that sort of thing just did not happen. Darrell ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FRENCH-INDIAN-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------ o unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FRENCH-INDIAN-request@rootsweb.com ith the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of he message

    05/28/2011 06:26:00
    1. Re: [FRENCH-INDIAN] Soldiers in the F&I War: volunteers?
    2. Darrell A. Martin
    3. On 5/28/2011 3:39 PM, Hans Waagen wrote: > I have a hard time believing this story. What is the reference for this > event or is it just anecdotal? My wife's ancestor was in Ruggles's regiment > in Massachusetts during the F& I War, and also he served in the Revolution. > As a result, I collected about 35 books on both events and I never heard or > read about a horrific event such as this. The only militia who were executed > (to my knowledge) were deserters or those who fled in the face of the enemy > during battle or who became "turncoats". > > Hans Waagen Hans: The story would be implausible for Massachusetts. I don't know about Pennsylvania. The cultures of the two colonies/states were very different. But that's Rev War, and we are F&I ... Darrell

    05/28/2011 11:45:58
    1. Re: [FRENCH-INDIAN] Soldiers in the F&I War: volunteers?
    2. Darrell A. Martin
    3. On 5/28/2011 7:23 AM, reneelwaring@aol.com wrote: > > Did someone also mention that the British Soldiers wives were permitted to travel with them? They did the cooking and cleaning of uniforms. They also had hoors (sic.) with them. That was one of the jokes during the Rev. war. The women traveling with the American Soldiers were said to be prettier than the dogs traveling with the British. > > Renee Waring Renee: Camp followers cooked, cleaned, and sewed. They also nursed the sick and wounded. Depending on the specific type of unit, time, and place, they received army rations for their services, in addition to what they were paid by the soldiers. There is no doubt that some women "supplemented their income" but that was hardly the norm. Again, it is important to keep the F&I War and the Revolution separate. A LOT of things, besides details of uniforms and equipment, changed in the interval between the two conflicts. Darrell

    05/28/2011 08:04:25