A History of the American People

independent government carried on. So the British were never at any point fighting a mere
collection of rebels or guerrillas. They were up against an embodied nation, and in the end the
point sank home. It was Washington who enabled all this to happen. And, in addition, he gave
the war, on the American side, a dignity which even his opponents recognized. He nothing
common did, or mean, or cruel, or vengeful. He behaved, from first to last, like a gentleman.
His resources were not great. At no point did his total forces number more than 60,000 men,
subject to an annual desertion rate of 20 percent. He was always short of everything-arms,
munitions, cannon, transport, clothes, money, food. But he managed to obtain enough to keep
going, writing literally hundreds of begging letters to Congress and state governments to ensure
there was just enough. He was good at this. In some ways running an army was like running a
big Virginia estate, with many things in short supply, and make-do the rule. He remained always
calm, cool, patient, and reassuring with all. As Jefferson testified, he had a hot temper-what red-
haired man does not?-but he kept it mostly well under control. He had to take on many of the
administrative responsibilities which Congress should have handled but, being weak executively,
did not. He got through a vast amount of paperwork. He had some good people to help him.
Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben did the drill side of the army, and in effect served as
Washington's chief-of-staff. From early 1777 he had as his secretary and principal ADC a
brilliant young New Yorker from the West Indies, Alexander Hamilton (1755-1804). Colonel
Hamilton had already served with distinction as an artillery officer, and he proved to be the most
effective aide any American commander-in-chief has ever had. But essentially Washington had
to do it all himself.
He was much criticized, then and later. Adams asked: Would Washington ever have been Commander of the Revolutionary Army or President of the United States if he had not married the rich widow of Mr Curtis?' General Charles Lee was amazed anyone called him great:He is
extremely prodigal of other men's blood and a great economist of his own.' One close observer,
Jonathan Boucher, summed him up: He is shy, silent, stern, slow and cautious, but has no quickness of parts, extraordinary penetration, nor an elevated style of thinking ... He seems to have nothing generous or affectionate in his nature.' A French observer, Ferdinand Bayard, said he lacked human animation:He moved, spoke and acted with the regularity of a clock.' But
another Frenchman, General Marqui de Barbe-Marbois, testified: I have never seen anyone who was more naturally and spontaneously polite. He could be compassionate, and a great actor too. Elias Boudinot, in charge of prisoners-of-war, who went to Washington in 1778 to plead for clothing for them, reported:In much distress, with Tears in his Eyes, he assured me that if he
was deserted by the Gentlemen of the Country, he would despair. He could not do everything-he
was General, Quartermaster and Commissary. Everything fell on him and he was unequal to the
task. He gave me the most positive Engagement, that if I could contrive any mode for their
support and Comfort, he would confirm it as far as it was in his Power.'' But he could also relax,
an eyewitness reporting from his HQ: `He sometimes throws and catches a ball for whole hours
with his aides-de-camp.'
With Washington deliberately fighting a war of endurance, the British strategy made no sense.
Indeed it is arguable that Britain had no discernible, and certainly no consistent, strategy from
beginning to end. It is a mystery that the British, with their political genius, and their very
uncertain touch with military affairs, should have rejected a political solution and put all their
trust in a military one. Lord George Germaine, placed in charge of the war by North, had no
military gifts. But then he had no political gifts either. He believed that the American militias
could never be any good, and that the Tory loyalists greatly outnumbered the revolutionary