History

STAT E M E N T O F NAT I O N A L S I G N I F I C A N C E

RE V I S E D D R A F T R E P O R T

JA N U A R Y 30, 2003

RevolutionaryRoute

TH E NAT I O N A L PA R K SE R V I C E

NO R T H E A S T A N D CA P I TA L R E G I O N S

GO O D Y, CL A N C Y & AS S O C I AT E S , P L A N N I N G A N D A R C H I T E C T U R E

RO B E R T A. SE L I G , PHD, P R O J E C T H I S T O R I A N

Washington-RochambeauTHE

C O N T E N T S 1

1 Introduction and Findings

2 Study Legislation, Purpose and Tasks

3 Historical Narrative

4 Significance Themes

5 Historic Use of the Route

6 Resources

7 Bibliographic Essay

8 Study Team and Illustration Sources

Contents

I N T R O D U C T I O N A N D F I N D I N G S 1-1

Congress authorized the NationalPark Service to identify the range ofresources and themes associatedwith the route; identify alternativesfor NPS involvement with theroute’s preservation and interpreta-tion; and provide cost estimatesfor any acquisition, development,interpretation, operation, andmaintenance associated with thealternatives presented in thestudy (PL 106-473). Although thestudy authorization was notstructured as a proposed NationalHistoric Trail (NHT) under theNational Trails System Act (16USC 1241 et seq.), the study willapply the criteria of the Act todetermine the feasibility and desira-bility of designation as one alterna-tive for NPS involvement. Toqualify for designation as an NHTthe route must meet three criteria:

(1) It must be a trail or routeestablished by historic use andbe historically significant as aresult of that use. The routeneed not currently exist as adiscernible trail to qualify, butits location must be sufficient-ly known to permit evaluationof its public-recreation andhistorical-interest potential. A designated trail shouldgenerally accurately follow thehistoric route, but may deviatesomewhat on occasion ofnecessity to avoid difficultrouting through subsequentdevelopment, or to providesome route variations offeringa more pleasurable recreation-al experience. Such deviationsshall be so noted on site. Trailsegments no longer passabledue to subsequent development

as motorized transportationroutes may be designated andmarked on site as segmentsthat link to the historic trail.

(2) It must be of national signifi-cance with respect to any ofseveral broad facets ofAmerican history, such astrade and commerce, explora-tion, migration and settlement,or military campaigns. Toqualify as nationally signifi-cant, historic use of the trailmust have had a far-reachingeffect on broad patterns ofAmerican culture. Trailssignificant in the history ofnative Americans may beincluded.

(3) It must have significant poten-tial for public recreational useor historical interest based onhistoric interpretation andappreciation. The potential forsuch use is generally greateralong roadless segmentsdeveloped as historic trails andat historic sites associated withthe trail. The presence ofrecreation potential not relatedto historic appreciation is notsufficient justification for desig-nation under this category.

This report focuses on Crite-rion 2, national significance.Future documentation will beprepared to evaluate theWashington-Rochambeau Routeagainst the other criteria, pendingreview of this draft Statement ofSignificance. Later phases of thestudy include developingmanagement alternatives andpreparing an EnvironmentalImpact Statement as part of thefinal report to be submitted toCongress. The ultimate objectiveof the study is to determine howbest to promote the preservationof, public access to, travel within,and enjoyment and appreciationof the outdoor areas and historicresources associated with theWashington-RochambeauRevolutionary Route.

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

The study team, comprisingprofessional staff from the NPSNortheast and National CapitalRegions, with assistance fromrespected scholars andconsultants, makes the followingfindings regarding nationalsignificance:

(1) The Washington-RochambeauRoute is of national signifi-cance as a domestic cross-cultural experience.

The Route is significant as: a) an indispensable component

of the campaign of 1781: itis the route that took thecombined Franco-Americanarmies to victory;

b) a watershed in the develop-ment of an Americanidentity: in 1781–82, thethirteen colonies took agigantic step towardbecoming a nation;

c) a prime illustration of theAmerican RevolutionaryWar as a truly diverse effort;and

d) a visible expression of thehope for independence andthe gratitude that greetedthe returning French armyon its march north in thesummer of 1782.

1 Introduction and Findings

This report evaluates the national significance of the trailknown as the Washington-Rochambeau Revolutionary Route,which leads from Newport, Rhode Island, to the siege of

Yorktown, Virginia, and back to Boston, Massachusetts. It is a networkof land and water routes traversing nine states and the District ofColumbia over which traveled the American and French armies andnavies, either individually or combined, at different times betweenJune 1781 and December 1782.

(2) The Washington-RochambeauRoute is of national signifi-cance as a manifestation of the international war effort.The Route is significant as: a) a symbol of the global

character of the AmericanWar for Independence;

b) the culmination of thecrucial contributions ofFrance to the achievementof American Independence;

c) an example of joint Franco-American cooperation underWashington’s overallleadership; and

d) the first true acknowledge-ment of America as asovereign nation.

Subsequent chapters present thestudy’s legislative background, abrief historical narrative of theroute, a description of the signifi-cance themes in greater detail, adiscussion of the historic use anddevelopment of the route, and asummary of the types of resourcesassociated with the route. Thereport concludes with a biblio-graphic essay on historicalsources.

1-2 I N T R O D U C T I O N A N D F I N D I N G S

LEGISLATIONThe Washington-RochambeauRevolutionary Route NationalHeritage Act of 2000 directed theSecretary of the Interior—inconsultation with preservationgroups and agencies at the stateand local levels—to submit toCongress a study of the 600-mileroute followed in 1781 byAmerican and French armiesunder the command of GeneralGeorge Washington and GeneralJean Baptiste Donatien de Vimeur,comte de Rochambeau. The alliedforces marched through RhodeIsland, Connecticut, New York,New Jersey, Pennsylvania,Delaware, and Maryland en routeto Yorktown, Virginia, where theyengaged and defeated Britishtroops under General Charles

Cornwallis in one of the mostdecisive victories of the AmericanRevolutionary War. Followingwinter encampments, the Frencharmy returned to Boston,Massachusetts, in the summer of1782, along the path it had takenthe previous year.

Forty-two members of Congress,including seven from outside theproject area, joined the bill’soriginal sponsors, RepresentativeJohn Larson (CT) and SenatorJoseph Lieberman, (CT) inintroducing the legislation.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDYUnder the act (now Public Law106-473) Congress authorized theNational Park Service to study the

route taken by General Washing-ton and the General comte deRochambeau to assess whetherthe National Park Service shouldbe directly involved in thepreservation and interpretation of its resources.

Should the NPS determine thatthe route is nationally significantand has the potential for publicrecreation, Congress coulddesignate it a National HistoricTrail. Designation could enablethe NPS to assist a variety ofgroups, projects and activitiesassociated with the trail’spreservation and interpretation.The study will also identifynonfederal alternatives forpreserving and interpreting thisimportant part of America’shistorical heritage.

TASKS• Route reconnaissance

• Historical research > Historical narrative> Bibliography> Resource inventory

• Public meetings andoutreach

• Newsletters

• Scholars’ symposium

• Draft determination-of-significance report

• Management alternatives,with and without NPSinvolvement, for preservingand interpreting the route

• Cost estimates

• Final report and EIS

• Recognition in place for the 225th Anniversary of theWashington-RochambeauMarch in 2006

L E G I S L A T I O N , P U R P O S E & T A S K S 2-1

2 StudyLegislation, Purpose, and Tasks

The study team briefed the National Conference of State Historic PreservationOfficers on the Washington-Rochambeau Revolutionary Route study inWashington, March 2002. At the podium is John Shannahan, State HistoricPreservation Officer of Connecticut.

A scholars’ symposium on theWashington-Rochambeau route was held at West Point in June 2002.

2-2 S I G N I F C A N C E T H E M E S

France had supported the coloniessince the summer of 1775, wellbefore their final break with GreatBritain on 4 July 1776, and hadformalized the relationship in two treaties of February 1778. The decision to send ground forcesacross the Atlantic for stationing on the American main-land, however, had only been madein January 1780, following threeunsuccessful French attempts todefeat Britain: a failed amphibiousassault on the British stronghold atNewport in 1778; another assaultat Savannah, Georgia, in 1779; andan equally disastrous attempt at aninvasion of England in the summerof the same year. Though LouisXVI and his foreign minister,Charles Gravier, comte deVergennes, had placed no highhopes in the invasion scheme, theseeming inability of France tolighten the pressure on theContinental Army was strainingthe alliance with the United States.

The American troops, for theirpart—short of men, weapons, food,clothing, training, and money—were not strong enough to attackthe British forces and win adecisive battle. They adoptedinstead a defensive strategy ofcontainment.

The shift in favor of sendingFrench troops to America came inlate January 1780, and on 2February the king approved theplan, code-named expéditionparticulière. Come May, a fleet of 32transports, seven ships of the line,two frigates, and two smallerwarships, commanded by CharlesHenry Louis d’Arsac, chevalier deTernay, a 57-year-old chef d’escadrewith 40 years’ experience, set sailfrom Brest for the New World.Besides their regular crews, de

Ternay’s ships carried Rocham-beau’s troops of the expéditionparticulière: four regiments of

infantry, one battalion of artillery,about 600 hussars and lightinfantry in Lauzun’s Legion, plussupport staff—in all, nearly 6,000officers and men. But the troopsarrived too late in the campaignseason and with too many sick toembark on any military action.Late in September 1780, Rocham-beau met with General GeorgeWashington, commander-in-chiefof the Continental Army. Washing-ton favored attacking New York,occupied by General Sir Henry

Clinton, but concurred that thefighting forces were not yetadequate. The French armywintered in Newport, while thecavalry wintered in Lebanon,Connecticut. Late in May of 1781,Washington and Rochambeau metagain at Wethersfield, Connecticut,and decided to join their forcesoutside New York for a possibleattack on the center of Britishpower in America. While keepingan eye on General CharlesCornwallis, in Virginia, the French

H I S T O R I C A L N A R R A T I V E 3-1

The arrival of 55-year-old General Jean Baptiste Donatien deVimeur, comte de Rochambeau, with an army of 450 officersand 5,300 men in Narragansett Bay off Newport, Rhode

Island, on 10 July 1780, marked the beginning of a most successfulmilitary cooperation that culminated 15 months later in the victoryat Yorktown.

3 Historical Narrative

Rochambeau, Washington, andLafayette at the siege of Yorktown,

October 1781

3-2 H I S T O R I C A L N A R R A T I V E

and American armies would meeton the Hudson River for an attackon New York “as the only practi-cable object under present circum-stances,” as Washington wrote toRochambeau on 13 June 1781. Amarch southward had been ruledout, since the summer heat woulddecimate the troops.

From his headquarters in New-burgh, Washington implored thevarious states to fill their quotasand to gather supplies for man andbeast for the coming campaign.The Continental Army’s chiefengineer Louis le Begue de Presledu Portail thought the main armyalone would need, among othersupplies, an initial allotment of3,106 horses and 2,132 draft oxenduring the summer campaign. InNewport, French quartermastergeneral Pierre François de Béville’sassistants started drawing mapsand picking campsites. The Frencharmy’s American purchasing agent,

Jeremiah Wadsworth, begancollecting the vast amounts ofprovisions needed to feed the men,their 2,000 or so horses—just forthe wagon train he drafted 855horses, the artillery added another500—and more than 600 oxen. On11 June, a French convoy carrying592 infantry and 68 artilleryreplacements arrived in Boston,but only about 400 were healthy

• the regiment Bourbonnais underthe comte de Rochambeau, toleave on 18 June;

• the regiment Royal Deux-Pontsunder the baron de Vioménil, toleave on 19 June;

• the regiment Soissonnais underthe comte de Vioménil, to leaveon 20 June; and

• the regiment Saintonge underthe comte de Custine, to leave on 21 June.

Each division was led by anassistant quartermaster generaland preceded by workmen whofilled potholes and removedobstacles. Dressed in gaiters, wigs,and tight-fitting woolen under-wear, each man carried, in addition

to his musket, equipment weigh-ing almost 60 pounds. Next camethe horse-drawn carriages of thefield artillery and the staff baggagetrain, followed by the ten regi-mental wagons, one per company.They carried the tents of thesoldiers and the luggage of theofficers: 300 pounds for a captain,150 pounds for a lieutenant. Nextcame a wagon for stragglers, thehospital wagons, wagons forbutchers, others loaded withsupplies, and wheelwrights andfarriers bringing up the rear.

To avoid having to march in theheat of the day, the regiments gotup early: reveille was around 2:00am and by 4:00 am the regiments

enough for duty. Since Rocham-beau had to leave 400 men behindas garrisons in Newport andProvidence and detach 700 men tothe navy, he had around 425officers and 3,200 enlisted menplus at least 500 servants, 239wagon conductors, and 15 cooks inhis columns.

After Rochambeau’s army sailedfrom Newport to Providence, theFirst Division of the French forcesmarched out of Providence onMonday, 18 June 1781, forWaterman’s Tavern. Three dayslater the volontaires étrangers deLauzun, about 600 cavalry and lightinfantry men, left their winterquarters in Lebanon, Connecticut.They followed a route some 10-15miles to the south of the infantry,protecting its flank. Rochambeau,who rode in the First Division, hadestablished the following order forthe march:

Rochambeau’s copy of “General Map of the Camps and Marches of the FrenchArmy commanded by General Rochambeau, 9 June 1781 to 1 December 1782,” is in the collection of the Library of Congress and attributed to Louis Alexandre deBerthier. The yellow line indicates the land and water routes of the march to andfrom Williamsburg, with deviating green and red branches indicating, variously:separate sections of the return route; flanking travel by Lauzun’s Legion throughConnecticut and New York (en route) and through New Jersey (returning); and the route of the wagon train from Scott’s House in Maryland to Williamsburg.

French troops board ships in theharbor at Brest in preparation for the voyage to Newport in May 1780.

were on their way. Captain SamuelRichards of the Connecticut Line,on leave at home in Farmington, inJune, recorded that “They marchedon the road in open order, until themusic struck up, they then closedinto close order. On the march, aquartermaster preceded and at theforking of the road would be stucka pole with a bunch of straw at topto shew the road they were totake.”

The next campsite, 12 to 15 milesaway, was reached between 8:00am and noon, and the soldiers setup tents according to their eight-man chambrées. Here they receivedmeat, bread, and other supplies for

dinner. Captain Richards wasamong the many spectators who“viewed their manner of encamp-ing over night, the perfect mech-anical manner of performing allthey had to do: such as diging acircular hole & making nitches inwhich to set their camp kettles forcooking their food.” While generalofficers lodged in nearby taverns,company-grade officers slept twoto a tent near their men. This order,with variations, was maintainedfor the entire march.

The early arrival provided anopportunity to meet the locals,who came from afar to see theFrench, and for dancing with

the “beautiful maidens” ofAmerica, music courtesy of the regimental bands.

On 2 July, the duc de Lauzun andhis legion joined Rochambeau’sinfantry on its march across the

New York line to Philipsburg inWestchester County. There theFrench met up with GeorgeWashington’s 4,000-manContinental Army on 6 July 1781.The Continental Army had spent atense and difficult winter aroundMorristown and in the HudsonHighlands. As winter turned intospring, the army barely maintainedits strength while Cornwallis wasmarching almost at will across thesouthern colonies. Despairingly,Washington wrote on 9 April: “Weare at the end of our tether,and…now or never our deliverancemust come.” The campaign of 1781had to produce results.

Upon learning that the Frenchforces had left Newport,Washington on 18 June ordered histroops quartered around WestPoint, New York, to leave theirwinter camp beginning on 21 Juneand to join up with Rochambeau’sforces approaching fromConnecticut. The Continental

Army marched to the Franco-American camp at Philipsburg. On8 July, Washington reviewedRochambeau’s troops, which,according to the comte deLauberdière, “appeared in thegrandest parade uniform. M. deRochambeau took his place in

front of the white flag of his oldestregiment and saluted GeneralWashington. … Our generalreceived the greatest complimentsfor the beauty of his troops. It istrue that without doubt those thatwe have with us were superb atour departure from France.”


The encampment of the French troops outside of Trenton, NewJersey, 1 September 1781.

Now protected by local ordinance, thesite of the French encampment atBolton, Connecticut, has never beendeveloped.

Several former taverns in whichFrench officers lodged while on theroute still stand in Connecticut.

Oliver White Tavern (ca. 1750) across the road from the campsite in Bolton,Connecticut. An upstairs bedroom displays holes in the ceiling and in the wallsthat are reputed to have been made by French bayonets or sabers.

The following day, Rochambeaureturned the compliment, but heand his officers, such as Baron vonClosen, were in for a surprise. “Ihad a chance to see the Americanarmy, man for man. It was reallypainful to see these brave men,almost naked with only sometrousers and little linen jackets,most of them without stockings,but, would you believe it? Verycheerful and healthy inappearance. A quarter of themwere negroes, merry, confident,and sturdy. … Three quarters of theRhode Island regiment consists ofnegroes, and that regiment is themost neatly dressed, the best underarms, and the most precise in itsmaneuvres (sic).”

Naked and hungry, yet confidentand cheerful — such were theallies with whom Rochambeau hadjoined his forces for an attempt onNew York.

But the attack on Sir HenryClinton never materialized. While

New York may have been theirprimary objective, the two generalsalways tried to keep their optionsopen. In the same letter of 13 Junein which Washington hadreminded Rochambeau “that NewYork was looked upon by us as theonly practicable object,” he hadalso suggested that “should we beable to secure a naval superiority,we may perhaps find others morepracticable and equally advisable.”

Following the death of Admiral de Ternay, the comte de Barras hadarrived in May to take command ofthe French fleet inNewport. Sufficient toprovide transport andartillery for the Frencharmy, this fleet was notstrong enough, norintended to, attack theBritish navy.

The only person whocould provide that navalsuperiority was Admiralde Grasse in theCaribbean, but thedecision of where hewould sail was his alone.On 28 May, Rochambeau,who never liked the ideaof attacking New York,wrote to de Grasse that

“There are two points at which anoffensive can be made against theenemy: Chesapeak and New York.The southwesterly winds and thestate of defense in Virginia willprobably make you prefer theChesapeak Bay, and it will be therewhere we think you may be able torender the greatest service. … Inany case it is essential that yousend, well in advance, a frigate toinform de Barras where you are tocome and also GeneralWashington.” As he was weighingthe odds of a successful siege ofNew York, particularly after theGrand Reconnaissance of 21–23July, Washington’s thinking tooturned to Cornwallis: on 1 Augusthe wrote in his diary that he “couldscarce see a ground upon wch. tocontinue my preparations againstNew York, and therefore I turned

my views more seriously(than I had before done) to anoperation to the southward.”

For the time being, all thetwo generals could do waswait for news from de Grasse,who would determine thepoint of attack. When theylearned from the fast frigateConcorde on 14 August thatde Grasse was headed for theChesapeake with all theships and troops he had beenable to gather, they quicklyshifted gears.

Fortunately the tacticalsituation in the south hadchanged as well: Cornwallishad done exactly whatWashington and Rocham-beau would have wanted

him to do. In late June,Cornwallis had alreadybriefly occupiedWilliamsburg, but on 19July, he began his march toYorktown and Gloucester,where he started digging in on2 August 1781. This wasknown in Philipsburg on 14August when the decision wasmade to march south.Everything was falling intoplace, but there was no time tolose. De Grasse would onlystay until 15 October, and asWashington wrote in his diary,

“Matters having now come to acrisis and a decisive plan to bedetermined on, I was obliged...togive up all idea of attacking NewYork; and instead thereof toremove the French Troops and adetachment from the AmericanArmy to the Head of Elk to betransported to Virginia for thepurpose of co-operating with theforce from the West Indies againsttheTroops in that State.”

From among the troops assembledat Philipsburg, Washington chosethe Rhode Island Regiment, theFirst New York Regiment, the Light


Some road segments along the Washington-Rochambeau route remain intact and, except fortree growth obscuring what was open farmland,retain the topography and alignment that alliedarmies experienced in 1781-82.

Andrew Corsa (1762-1852)—Guide to Washington andRochambeau during the Grand Reconnaissance, 21-23 July 1781.

Roadside markers commemorate theWashington-Rochambeau Route inmany states. This Connecticut serieswas erected by the state with theassistance of local groups, includingchapters of the Daughters of theAmerican Revolution and the Knightsof Columbus.

Infantry Regiment, the SecondContinental Artillery, the ArtificerRegiment and the Corps of Sappersand Miners, which, together withhis Guard, amounted to about1,500 officers and men. To thesetroops were added the New JerseyLine and Hazen’s CanadianRegiment, about 600 officers andmen, who were ferried from NewJersey across the Hudson to joinWashington. The Second New YorkRegiment caught up with theContinental Army at Trenton.

On 18 August, the two armies—4,200 French and 2,000 Americansplus support personnel—headedsouth. The left column of theFrench army, artillery and militarychest, left Philipsburg on the 18th,

the right column (i.e., the infantry)departed on the 19th. The Con-tinental Army followed no formalmarching order. Marching alongthe Hudson, the two armies metonly at river crossings, such asfrom Stony Point to King’s Ferry onthe 24th, or on the Delaware atTrenton on 2 September.

Deception and secrecy had beenvital for the success of the plan,and in both armies as few officersas possible were informed of thedecision to march to Virginia.Boats were built ostensibly for thepurpose of crossing over to StatenIsland from the Jersey shore, ovenswere built in Chatham, contractsfor foodstuffs to be delivered in

New Jersey were issued, letterswere written and sent via the mostdangerous routes with the expressintent that they be captured, anddifferent rumors as to the purposeof the troop movement werespread. Even though “some wereindeed laughable enow’,” asWashington’s private secretaryJonathan Trumbull, Jr., wrote, theyachieved their purpose of keepingClinton in New York andCornwallis in Yorktown guessinglong enough for the allied armiesto disengage.

Once Trenton was reached, therecould no longer be any doubt thatCornwallis was the target of thecampaign, and as the Frenchmarched through Philadelphia, the

Freeman’s Journal reported on 5September that “the appearance ofthese troops far exceeds any thingof the kind seen on this continent,and presages the happiest successto the cause of America.”

That same day, 5 September,Washington and Rochambeaulearned of the arrival of de Grassein the Chesapeake. But Williams-burg and Yorktown still lay morethan 200 miles south, and threemore weeks passed before the siegeof Yorktown began on 28September.

Washington rode on toWilmington while Rochambeauspent the night of 5/6 September inChester. The next day, Rocham-beau encamped with his FirstDivision in Wilmington, while

Washington and his entouragehurriedly crossed into Delaware toHead of Elk, where most of theContinental Army was alreadyencamped. At Christiana theyencountered the Second New YorkRegiment of some 420 officers andmen under Colonel Philip VanCortlandt, which had just arrivedfrom Stony Point, New York, withthirty flatboats “so large that ittook a wagon and eight horses todraw them.”

The Second New York Regimentand Moses Hazen’s Regiment—which had floated down the Dela-


Grenadier, Soissonnais regiment

Grenadier, Bourbonnais regiment

Grenadier, Royal Deux-Ponts regiment

Cannonier, Auxonne Artillery

Fusilier, Saintonge regiment

ware from Philadelphia then upthe Christiana River with ColonelLamb’s Second Continental Artil-lery—spent the next two days, 7and 8 September, “Constantlyimployed in Loading and trans-porting ammunition together withother stores to the Head of Elk.”

Washington had hoped to findenough vessels at Head of Elk totransport both armies to Yorktown,but only twelve sloops, eighteenschooners and a few dozen smallervessels were waiting there. Theywere barely enough for most of theContinental Army, Rochambeau’sgrenadiers and chasseurs, and forthe infantry of Lauzun’s Legion,about 3,000 men in all. Anxious toreach Mount Vernon after a six-

year absence, Washington and asmall group of aides rode aheadand reached his estate on 9September; Rochambeau and hisstaff arrived the following day. On12 September, the twocommanders continued theirjourney, which ended with a visit to Admiral de Grasse on hisflagship, the Ville de Paris, on 18September. The commanders wereready for the siege to begin, buttheir troops were still far behind.On 11 September, Dr. JamesThacher of Scammel’s LightInfantry set sail from Head of Elkfor the Chesapeake on the Glasgow,with four other officers and sixtymen. The remainder of the troops,between 3,800 and 4,000 men,marched through Baltimore and

reached Annapolis on the 18th.Embarking on 15 vessels sent by deGrasse, they set sail for the JamesRiver, arriving near Jamestown onthe 24th and reachingWilliamsburg on 25 September.Three days later, on 28 September,the two armies set out for andreached Yorktown. Concurrentlythe duc de Lauzun’s cavalry, whichhad separated from the wagontrain, took up siege positions atGloucester Point across the riverfrom Yorktown.

Pressed for time, knowing that deGrasse would only stay through 15October, Washington had decidedto open the siege without thesupplies carried on the Frencharmy’s wagon train, which had setout from Annapolis on 21September. Traveling via Bladens-burg, the train crossed the Potomacinto Virginia at Georgetown—aprocess that required two days.Passing through Colchester,Dumfries, Fredericksburg—herethey crossed the Rappahannock—Bowling Green, and Hartfield, thewagons reached Williamsburg on6 October.

The First Parallel was dug on 6 October, and on the 9th Frenchand American siege guns openedfire on the British defenders. Thecompletion of the Second Parallelwas blocked by a portion of theBritish outer works—two detachedearthen forts called Redoubts 9 and

10, located 400 yards in advance ofthe British inner defense line onthe extreme right of the siege line.On 14 October, Allied artillerybombarded Redoubts 9 and 10most of the day, preparing them forAmerican and French assaults.That evening, Colonel AlexanderHamilton took Redoubt No. 10while the French carried No. 9. Thecapture of these redoubts enabledthe besiegers to finish the SecondParallel and to construct the GrandAmerican Battery which,combined with the Frenchbatteries, formed a continuous linewithin point-blank range of theBritish inner defense line. On 18 October, two British officers,an American officer and a French

officer met at the home ofAugustine Moore to negotiatesurrender terms. Around 2:00 pmon 19 October 1781, the Britishtroops with their AmericanLoyalists and German auxiliariesmarched out of Yorktown to laydown their arms.

On 27 October, the troops of themarquis de Saint-Simon, who hadsailed from the Caribbean with thefleet of Admiral de Grasse, began tore-embark. On 4 November de Grasse’s fleet sailed out ofLynnhaven Bay for Fort Royal inMartinique, where it arrived on 26 November. The ContinentalArmy, too, left for New York almostimmediately after the siege was


OFFICERSREGIMENT COMMANDING OFFICER & MEN

Commander-in-Chief’s Guard Captain Caleb Gibbs 70

Rhode Island Regiment Lt.-Col. Jeremiah Olney 360

First New York Regiment Col. Goose Van Schaick 390

Second New York Regiment Col. Philip Van Cortlandt 420

Combined New Jersey Regiment Col. Mathias Ogden 330

Canadian Regiment (Congress’s Own) Brevet Brigadier Moses Hazen 270

Light Infantry Regiment Lt.-Col. Alexander Scammel 380

Second Continental Artillery Col. John Lamb 200

Corps of Sappers & Miners Captain James Gilliland 50

Artificer Regiment Lt.-Col. Ebenezer Stevens unknown

total: approximately 2,500

Strength of the Continental Army on the Washington-Rochambeau Route

Source: Charles H. Lesser, The Sinews of Independence. Monthly Strength Reports of theContinental Army (Chicago, 1975), p. 208. Unit strength figures—rounded to the nearest 10— arefor 26 September 1781; no strength reports for August have survived. The figures for the closestsurviving report are given for the Artillery and Sappers & Miners (July 1781) and for theCommander-in-Chief’s Guard (June 1781).

Strength of Rochambeau’s forcesafter the Siege of Yorktown

Source: Inspection reports for 9-12 November 1781, Fonds Vioménil. Académie François Bourdon,Le Creusot, France.The strength for Lauzun’s Legion, stationed in Gloucester, is taken from a review of 1 October 1781in Colonies D2c32, Archives Nationales, Paris, France.

REGIMENT COMMANDING OFFICERS & MEN

Bourbonnais marquis de Montmorency-Laval ca. 70 officers and 1,025 men,

incl. 221 detached and 105 sick

Soissonnais comte de Saint Maisme ca. 70 officers and 1,044 men,


Saintonge comte de Custine ca. 70 officers and 1,030 men,


Royal Deux-Ponts Christian comte de Deux-Ponts ca. 70 officers and 1,029 men,


Auxonne Artillery, de la Tour, de Chazelle, ca. 52 officers and 545 men,

Miners and Workers de la Chaisse incl. 227 detached and 48 sick

Lauzun’s Legion duc de Lauzun ca. 45 officers and 550 men

incl. 8 sicktotal: ca. 377 officers and 5,223 men,



over. By 20 November, Head of Elkwas reached; they crossed theHudson at King’s Ferry on 7 December and moved into winterquarters. The French spent thewinter of 1781-82 at sites in andaround Williamsburg. Hamptonprovided lodging for Lauzun’sLegion until February 1782, when,at the request of General NathanaelGreene, it relocated to CharlotteCourt House on the North Carolinaborder.

Yorktown provedonce and for all toAmericans that theFrench could fightas well as anyone.Out of the victoryarose the “new”Frenchman whosevirtues wereextolled by IsraelEvans, a militarychaplain, whowhile still on thebattlefield ofYorktown spoke “of that harmony,that emulation, and that equal loveof danger which subsisted amongthe allied troops, as if the samegenerous fire of true glory glowedin their bosoms, or one patriot soulanimated them to the cheerful per-formance of every military duty,and to encounter every danger.Witness the emulation of thoseFrench and American troops, whoat the same time entered the

trenches of the enemy, and withequal intrepidity and vigour ofattack, stormed some of theirredoubts.”

History did not bestow the epithet“the Great” on Louis XVI, but theyear 1782 saw a series of festivitiesin which a grateful America cele-brated the birth in October 1781 ofLouis-Joseph-Xavier-François, thelong-awaited dauphin and heir tothe throne of France. Two winter

quarters in NewEngland and inVirginia, 1,300miles of marchesthrough nine of thethirteen colonies, amonth of fighting,and thousands ofpersonalencounters alongthe way hadbrought the Frenchand Americanpeoples closertogether than they

had ever been before.

Rochambeau’s march north fromJuly 1782 provided Americans anopportunity to give thanks to theircountry’s ally, for when the Frenchinfantry sailed out of BostonHarbor on Christmas Day 1782,King George III and Parliamenthad acknowledged the UnitedStates “to be free Sovereign andindependent States.”

Marker along the Washington-Rochambeau Route inConnecticut.

The Washington-RochambeauRevolutionary Route.

3-8 H I S T O R I C N A R R A T I V E

Born in 1725 into a wealthyfamily that could trace itsancestry in the Vendôme to theyear 1378, Jean-Baptiste Donatiende Vimeur, comte de Rochambeau,was George Washington’s seniorby seven years. Destined for thepriesthood, he left ecclesiasticalorders after the death of his olderbrother and embarked on themilitary career appropriate for amember of the high aristocracy.

A cornet inthe cavalryRegiment ofSaint-Simonin 1742, hebecamecolonel of hisown infantryregiment in1747, soonafter he hadreached theminimumage of 21.Severelywounded inthe battle ofLawfeld inJuly of the same year, he took over the Regiment

Auvergne in 1759, and distin-guished himself the next year inthe Battle of Klostercamp duringthe Seven Years’ War, where hisregiment lost 58 of 80 officers andmore than 800 men as it turneddefeat into victory. Promoted tomaréchal de camp (major general)in recognition of his bravery inFebruary 1761, he becameinspector general of the Frenchinfantry in March.

Barring anotherwar, Rochambeauhad reached thezenith of his careerjust as Washingtonwas settling downto the life of asquire. Followingthe death of hisfather when he waseleven, Washingtongrew up on theperiphery ofVirginia’s landedaristocracy, withlimited financialresources and fewprospects. Washing-

ton learned early that he had torely on himself if he wanted to

succeed. An opportunity arosewhen his older half brotherLawrence, Virginia’s adjutantgeneral and owner of MountVernon, introduced him to someof the colony’s most influentialfamilies, such as the Belvoirs andFairfaxes, who arranged for himto become surveyor of CulpeperCounty in 1749.

Washington’s military careerbegan in 1754 when he becameColonel of the Virginia Regimentsent into the Ohio Valley tooppose French incursions. Thefollowing year he participated inGeneral Edward Braddock’s disas-trous campaign. Although notimplicated in the defeat, heresigned his commission in 1758to marry Martha Dandridge, oneof Virginia’s wealthiest widows,the following year. Ten yearsearlier, Rochambeau had marriedThérèse Tellès da Costa in 1749.

The outbreak of the AmericanRevolution found Washington onthe side of the rebels: “I think theParliament of Great Britain hathno more right to put their handsinto my pocket, without my

consent, than I have to put myhands in yours for money,” hewrote to Bryan Fairfax on 20 July1774. His fel-low delegatesin the SecondContinentalCongressunanimouslyelected theVirginian tocommand theContinentalArmy on 15June 1775; hewas 43 yearsold.

For the nextseven years of the war,Washingtonled the Con-tinental Army in a series of bat-tles and skirmishes with themuch more formidable Britisharmy and navy. After the siege ofBoston, he commanded his troopsthrough the New York, NewJersey, and Philadelphia cam-paigns, before wintering andtraining at Valley Forge (1777-78)and returning north, outside of

New York by the time Frenchtroops were sent to America.Washington’s reputation had

grown as aneffective leader of great strength,integrity, andperseverance. Hisskills in militarystrategy had beenmost apparent atthe battles ofPrinceton (1776)and Trenton(1777).

In 1778 Francejoined the war onthe side of theAmericans andthe following yearembarked on anambitious plan to

invade Great Britain. Rochambeau,54 years old and father of twochildren, was appointed to com-mand the first wave of assault.After cancellation of the plan,King Louis XVI appointed him tocommand ground forces beingsent across the Atlantic to assistthe Continental Army in itsstruggle with Great Britain.

The Two Generals

Jean-Baptiste Donatien de Vimeur,comte de Rochambeau

Commander-in-chief General GeorgeWashington

H I S T O R I C N A R R A T I V E 3-9

The king could not have made a more fortunate choice. Whenthe two generals met for the firsttime at Hartford in September1780, they took an immediateliking to each other. The quiet,patient, matter-of-fact Rocham-beau approached his task inAmerica in the calm andmethodical way of a professionalsoldier, never challenging theoverall leadership ofWashington and always keepingan eye on the reason for his pres-ence in America: the defeat ofGreat Britain. The equallyreserved Washington, oftenjudged as cold by outsiders, inturn deferred when necessary tothe military expertise of hisFrench ally while reserving thefinal decision to himself. AtYorktown they reaped therewards of their collaboration.

Rochambeau returned to Francein the spring of 1783. Elected tothe Assembly of Notables in1789 as a liberal, he voted to sup-port the demands of the ThirdEstate. Commanding officer ofthe Army of the North in Sep-tember 1790, he was appointedthe last Marshal of France under

the ancien régime in December1791. Opposed to an offensivewar against the anti-Frenchcoalition, he resigned hiscommission in May 1792. In1794, during the Terror period ofthe French Revolution, Rocham-beau was arrested andimprisoned for six months in thenotorious Conciergerie, known asthe “vestibule of the guillotine.”The duc de Lauzun had alreadybeen executed, as had otherformer officers of the king’sarmies. Rochambeau escaped thesame fate only because theexecution of Robespierre thatyear ended the Terror.

A few years later, First ConsulNapoleon Bonaparte introducedhis generals to Rochambeau ashis, the comte’s, pupils. Amongthe officers was now Louis-Alexandre de Berthier, thecartographer of the Washington-Rochambeau route, and otherveterans of the American war.Rochambeau replied toNapoleon: “The pupils have farsurpassed their master.”Rochambeau died in May 1807.

The victory at Yorktown had notended the war and it was anothertwo years before the last Britishforces left the territory of theUnited States. In his FarewellAddress in Annapolis, Washing-ton expressed his happiness “inthe confirmation of our Indepen-dence and Sovereignty” and hispleasure for “the opportunityafforded the United States ofbecoming a respectable Nation.... Having now finished the workassigned me, I retire from thegreat theatre of Action.”

Washington returned to MountVernon on Christmas Eve 1783,after an absence of more thaneight years, to enjoy the life of acountry gentleman. But it wasnot long before he was calledback to that “great theatre ofAction” he thought he had leftfor good. In 1789, the Americanpeople elected Washington thefirst president of the UnitedStates. As he had shaped theContinental Army and led it tovictory, he now helped shape theyoung nation and lead it throughits first difficult years, servingtwo terms. He died at Mt. Vernonin December 1799.

A statue of Rochambeau marks the site where the Frenchtroops landed in Newport, Rhode Island, in July 1780.

A 1933 first-day cover issued for the Connecticut Tercentenary, commemorates theWashington-Rochambeau meeting that launched the campaign to Yorktown.

origins Indian trails and mountain passes.Boston Post Road in Massachusetts and Connecticut; Albany PostRoad in New York; Assunpink Trail in New Jersey; King’s Highwayin Delaware.

1763February 10 First Treaty of Paris ends the French and Indian War. France cedes

Canada and territories east of the Mississippi to Great Britain.

1764April 5 British Parliament passes the Sugar Act.

1765March 22 British Parliament passes the Stamp Act.

March 24 British Parliament passes the Quartering Act.

1767June 29 British Parliament passes the Townshend Act imposing duties on tea,

paper, and other items imported into the colonies.

1770March 5 British troops in Boston fire on rioters. The event becomes known

as the Boston Massacre.

April 12 Repeal of most of the Townshend Act duties.

1773December 16 Boston Tea Party.

1774March 31 British Parliament shuts down Boston Harbor under what the British

call the Coercive Acts and colonists call the Intolerable Acts.

May 20 British Parliament passes the Quebec Act, sharpening the dividebetween Canada and the lower 13 colonies.

September 5 First session of the First Continental Congress. It adjourns inOctober.

1775February 9 British Parliament declares Massachusetts to be in rebellion.

April 19 Battles of Lexington and Concord, the “shot heard ’round the world.”

May 10 First session of the Second Continental Congress begins.

June 14 Congress establishes the Continental Army and appoints GeorgeWashington its commander-in-chief the following day.

1776May 2 First shipment of arms and ammunition in support of the American

rebels leaves France for the New World.

July 4 Congress ratifies the Declaration of Independence.

1777July 31 Congress appoints the marquis de Lafayette a major-general in the

Continental Army. Dozens more French volunteers will join theContinental Army over the next few years.

October 12 British forces under General John Burgoyne are surrounded atSaratoga. They surrender within a week.

1778February 6 American representatives in Paris sign a “Treaty of Amity and

Friendship” and a secret “Treaty of Alliance” with France.

May 4 Congress ratifies Treaty of Alliance with France.

June 28 Following the Battle of Monmouth, Lafayette returns to France andrequests more assistance from the king.

July 11 First official use of the term United States of America.

July 29 French Admiral d’Estaing arrives with a fleet outside Newport, RI, to support the American attack on the city. The attack fails.

1779April 5 A French Acte Royal sets 17 June 1778 as the date when hostilities

with Great Britain began.

June 23 Spain declares war on Great Britain.

October 9 Franco-American forces are defeated at Savannah, GA.

May 12 Charleston, SC, falls to the British.

Timeline



1780winter Lafayette returns from France to Morristown, NJ, with the promise

of more support from the king.

July 10 Commanded by Admiral de Ternay, a fleet carrying some 450 officers and 5,300 men under the comte de Rochambeau sails intoNarragansett Bay in Newport.

September 21 Generals Washington and Rochambeau meet at the HartfordConference.

September 25 Benedict Arnold’s attempt to hand West Point over to the Britishfails.

1781May 22 Washington and Rochambeau meet at Wethersfield, CT, to discuss

their strategy for the upcoming campaign.

June 10 The French infantry leaves its winter quarters in Newport.

June 19 The Regiment Bourbonnais is the first French unit to cross intoConnecticut from winter quarters in Rhode Island on its way toPhilipsburg, NY.

June 21 Lauzun’s Legion leaves Lebanon, CT, for Philipsburg, NY, on a routethat covers the left flank of Rochambeau’s infantry.

July 6 French forces join the Continental Army near Philipsburg, NY.

August 18 The Franco-American armies depart Philipsburg for Virginia.

September 5 In the Battle of the Capes, Admiral de Grasse prevents a British fleetfrom entering Chesapeake Bay.

September 28 The siege of Yorktown begins.

October 19 Cornwallis surrenders. The Continental Army marches north to itswinter quarters in early November. French forces will spend thewinter of 1781-82 in and around Williamsburg.

November 4 Admiral de Grasse sails from Yorktown for Martinique.

December Lafayette sails back to France.

1782July 1 Rochambeau’s infantry begins its march north to Boston.

November 30 Preliminaries of Peace between the United States and Great Britainare signed in Paris.

December 25 Rochambeau’s infantry sails out of Boston Harbor for the Caribbean.Lauzun’s Legion winters in Wilmington, DE.

1783January 20 Preliminaries of Peace between France, Spain, the United Netherlands

and Great Britain are signed in Paris.

April 3 Hostilities end in the territory of the United States.

September 3 Second Treaty of Paris ends the American Revolutionary War. GreatBritain acknowledges the independence of the United States ofAmerica.

October 5 A final transport of 85 French soldiers sails from Baltimore for Brest,where it arrives on 10 November 1783.

November 2 Congress disbands the Continental Army.

1784January 14 Congress ratifies the Treaty of Paris.

1787December 7 Delaware is the first state to ratify the Constitution.

1789February 4 George Washington is elected first president of the United States.

April 30 George Washington is sworn in as first president of the United States.

1791December Rochambeau is named Marshal of France, the last marshal under the

ancien régime.


Detail from a map drawn bySimeon DeWitt in 1781, depictingthe route of the Continental Armythrough Wilmington, Delaware, on4 September 1781.

Detail from a map drawn by SimeonDeWitt in 1781, depicting theembarkation point of most of theContinental Army and Rochambeau’schasseurs and grenadiers at Head ofElk in September 1781. About 200Continental Army troops embarked afew days later on French transports inAnnapolis. On the return march inNovember and December 1781, theContinental Army sailed back to Headof Elk; no Continental Army troopsmarched the routes to or fromWilliamsburg even though DeWitt hadmapped them.

Tent patterns and modelsused by Rochambeau’s forcesas regulated in a 1753ordonnance.

American brush huts, September1777. Detail from “The Battle ofPaoli” (Xavier della Gatta, 1782).



The dates of the encampments are those ofthe first regiment of the four-regimentFrench army. Regiments usually camped atthe same site one day apart from eachother. When marching together, Americantroops preceded French troops. Thereforemany of the encampment dates representthe mid-point of a train of marching troopsand succession of encampments.



S I G N I F I C A N C E T H E M E S 4-1

The Washington-Rochambeau route issignificant as an indispensable componentof the campaign of 1781: It is the routethat took the combined Franco-American armies to victory.

By early 1781, the war in America had reached an impasse and thecolonies were, in the words of George Washington, “at the end ofour tether.” But the very presence of French forces and theknowledge of their cooperation in the coming campaign liftedmany spirits. On 17 May 1781, Washington’s aide Tench Tilghmanwrote to Robert Morris that he would “set out tomorrow with HisExcellency for Weathersfield where he is to have an interview withthe Count de Rochambeau. … The expectations of the people arehigh and perhaps they may expect a change more suddenly than itis possible to affect one.” A month later, on 18 June 1781, ThomasRodney, Delaware’s representative to Congress, reported fromPhiladelphia, of “this unlimited confidence we have placed in theCourt of France and indeed when there (sic) own interests is notmaterially in view perhaps she may do better for us than we couldfor our selves.” If a victorious peace could be achieved, Rodney was convinced that “if they give us our rank among the nationsour Own natural advantages will soon lift us above them all.” Thatpeace arrived in the wake of the decisive victory at Yorktown inOctober of that year, a victory the Washington-Rochambeau routemade possible.

Keeping the armies suppliedwas an enormous andexpensive task. Rocham-beau, who could not

impress needed services and had to pay for everything he needed,required a minimum of 375,000 livres per month to keep his armysupplied. On 15 July 1780, hisAmerican agent, Jeremiah Wads-worth, estimated that the French inNewport would need “two hundredcattle that will average 400 lbs…andtwo hundred Sheep” per week, withan additional 200 head in reserve. To meet the needs of his clients,Wadsworth’s agents spread outacross New England and as farsouth as Pennsylvania to purchaseanimals.

Wadsworth’s order books reflect thescale of the operation. On 25January 1781, he received an orderfor 3,000 barrels of flour, 300 barrelsof salt pork, 15,000 gallons of cider,1,000 cwts (cwt=hundredweight,approximately 112 pounds) of peas,

3,600 gallons of vinegar and 300cheeses, to be delivered by 15March. Once the campaign hadstarted, Wadsworth and his agentsset up supply depots at the camp-sites. While the French army wasencamped at Philipsburg, dailyrations were 1 pound of bread, 8

ounces of corn, and 1 1/2 pounds offresh beef: Henry Champion ofColchester, Connecticut, alonedelivered 927 oxen and 356 sheepfrom 5 July to 11 August.

The French had hard currency topay with, but Washington’s purchas-ing agents did not. Given the oppor-tunity, American farmers preferredto sell for specie to the French thanfor Continental dollars or on creditto their fellow countrymen. On thesame day that he received theFrench order, Wadsworth lamented“the American Army is literallystarving.” That plight continued forthe rest of the war. On the march toVirginia, Colonel James Hendricks

wrote from Alexandria on 21 Sep-tember 1781, that as long as Frenchagents paid with specie, “theAmerican Army will be starved.”

Once the siege had begun, supplyneeds pushed the logistics systemto its limits. Deputy quartermasterEphraim Blaine wrote to Delaware’schief executive Cesear Rodney on 4 October 1781, that the siege armyconsumed “Sixty thousand Rationsper day,” and pleaded “Men whoare day & night upon fatigue andexposed to the greatest Dangerought to be regularly Supplied withProvisions and every refreshmentthey are entitled to–for God sake giveme every Assistance and let no

Supplying Marching Armies

T H E ROU T E AS D O M E S T I CC RO S S -CU LT U R A L E X P E R I E N C E1a

4 Significance Themes

French Army bill of exchange signed by Chief Treasurer César Louis de Baulnyand redeemable in Paris

4-2 S I G N I F I C A N C E T H E M E S

excuse prevent the Commissionersfrom doing their duty.” Vast amountsof foodstuffs made their way south:on 15 November 1781, Samuel Canbyof Brandywine Village, Delaware,and Zebulon Hollingsworth ofMaryland, sent 3,569 bushels ofwheat to Virginia; another 9,333bushels followed on 21 January1782. But they were for the French;the Continental Army had long sincebeen in winter quarters on theHudson.

Artillery lieutenant comte deClermont-Crèvecœur was one ofmany who recorded in his diary howthe French troops supplementedtheir diet with local produce. "Welived very well during our passage

through [Connecticut]. The poultryhere is excellent and quite cheap.The Americans crowded round, notonly to hear the bands, but alsoloaded with every sort of produce,so that the camp was a continualmarket, offering the most deliciouswares." The money they spent gavea boost to local economies, as evenAmericans such as Dr. Thacheradmitted. "They punctually paid theirexpenses in hard money, whichmade them acceptable guestswherever they passed; and, in fact,

the large quantity of solid coin whichthey brought into the United States,is to be considered as of infiniteimportance at the present period ofour affairs."

But the French needed other food-stuffs as well, primarily flour, 2.5 tonsdaily, for bread, which played amuch larger role in their diet than inthat of the Americans. Americansbaked their own bread. "They troublethemselves little with provisions:actually they are given just a bit ofcorn meal of which each soldiermakes his own bread," observed thecomte de Lauberdière. For theFrench, however, this would not do.For the officers, wheat flour forwhite bread was imported fromFrance and the Caribbean. Amongthe rank and file, complaints aboutthe poor quality of bread werepersistent.

The route is an essential component of the brilliant strategy thatresulted in the defeat of Lord Cornwallis. The complex designemployed great secrecy and diplomacy in coordinating the rapidmovement of large land and water forces over long distances. Itinvolved extensive intelligence and logistics, provisioning, lodging,mapping, and diversions, culminating in the successful siege. Theloss of Britain’s last operational field army convinced London thatthe war in America could not be won by military means and thatserious peace negotiations could no longer be avoided. Fifteenmonths later, Parliament accepted America’s independence.

The Yorktown Campaign ranks among the most important militarycampaigns fought on American soil, including the SaratogaCampaign of 1777, the Gettysburg Campaign of 1863, andSherman’s march to the sea in 1864. Ultimately no road is moreimportant in American history than the Washington-Rochambeauroute, which, in its political consequence, brought about thecreation of the United States as an independent nation. The victorywon in Virginia stood at the end of a journey that went almost theentire length of the east coast of the colonies, passing throughdozens of villages and touching the lives of a majority of theAmerican people along the way. Through personal contact; byproviding shelter, transportation, or pasture; or as suppliers of thevast amounts of foodstuffs needed to feed the armies along theway, thousands of Americans could say that they, too, contributedto victory.

National and international in scope, yet local in focus, the routeprovides a unifying theme for the war effort on many levels, as itenables a large number of communities to participate—in a waythat no single site can—in commemorating the people and eventsof the war through their local history, traditions and circumstances.

French Navy bill of exchange signed by Guillaume-Jacques-Constant comte deLiberge de Granchain, chief administrative officer of the French fleet in Newport,redeemable in Paris.

Continental Loan Office bill ofexchange, redeemable in Paris.

S I G N I F C A N C E T H E M E S 4-3

The Washington-Rochambeau route is significant as a wwaatteerrsshheedd iinn tthheeddeevveellooppmmeenntt ooff aann AAmmeerriiccaann iiddeennttiittyy: In 1781/82, the thirteen colonies took agigantic step toward becoming a nation.

The campaign of 1781 ranks with the Battle of Bunker Hill and thewinter at Valley Forge as one of the most important symbols forthe American states’ coming together as a unified nation. TheArgentine author Jorge Luis Borges once wrote that, “History ismere history. Myths are what matter: they determine the type ofhistory a country is bound to create and repeat.” Americacontinues to define itself along the lines of events and mythscreated in and by the War for Independence. One of the mostpersistent but necessary fictions of the conflict is the assumptionthat America won her independence by herself, with the concom-itant propensity to discount the vital contributions of France after1775. It is one of the goals of the Washington-Rochambeau route toamend that perception.

Though the presence of thousands of French is but little knowntoday, its long-range effects were immense. In a continuous andlarge-scale educational process, Franco-American encounters alongthe 600-mile-long route challenged centuries-old prejudicesharbored by anti-Catholic, anti-French colonists. The Washington-Rochambeau march allowed Americans to see the French for thefirst time as allies rather than as enemies and showed them thatthe French were not the effeminate dandies of British propaganda

In 1775, most Americans,especially in New England,viewed the French as an oldenemy rather than a new friend.

Twelve years of peace since the endof the French and Indian War in 1763had done little to eradicate preju-dices rooted in a long tradition ofPuritan anti-French and anti-Catholicsentiment and experience,continuously reinforced on thebattlefields of Canada. For decades,

British propaganda had portrayedFrenchmen as effeminate dandieswhile contrasting French absolutistdespotism with the liberties enjoyedby the colonists as British subjects.

Rochambeau’s officers experiencedthis hostility at the beginning of themarch. Artillery lieutenant comte deClermont-Crèvecœur believed that“the local people, little disposed inour favor, would have preferred, atthat moment, I think, to see theirenemies arrive rather than theirallies.” He thought the British wereto blame; they “had made the Frenchseem odious to the Americans...saying that we were dwarfs, pale,ugly, specimens who livedexclusively on frogs and snails.”

This reception hurt all the morebecause the French were equallybound by their preconceived notionsof what they would encounter.Theirs was an idealized image of anAmerica peopled by noble savages

and citizen-soldiers who had risenagainst the British empire in auniversal spirit of patriotism andsacrifice. Butinstead ofsacrifice manysaw only greed.Axel von Fersenwrote to his fatherin Sweden inJanuary 1781, that“the spirit ofpatriotism onlyexists in the chiefand principal menin the country,who are makingvery greatsacrifices; the restwho make up the great mass thinkonly of their personal interests.Money is the controlling idea in alltheir actions.” They “overcharge usmercilessly.”

Even more difficult to comprehendwere the societal norms of America.New England society in particularwas composed largely of equalswho saw no reason to defer tosomeone simply because he had atitle of nobility and wore epaulettes.Property rights were sacred, whichmeant that the rules of warfare weredifferent in America. The chevalierde Coriolis told his father: “Here it isnot like it is in Europe, where whenthe troops are on the march you cantake horses, you can take wagons,you can issue billets for lodging, andwith the aid of a gendarme over-come the difficulties the inhabitant

might make; but in America thepeople say they are free and, if aproprietor who doesn’t like the look

of your face tells you he doesn’twant to lodge you, you must go seeka lodging elsewhere. Thus the words:‘I don’t want to’ end the business,and there is no means of appeal.”Such language was anathema to anobility unfamiliar with Americannorms.

Just as far removed from Europeanexperience and norms, Americansdid not find it inappropriate that theirmilitia was officered by “shoemakerswho are colonels.” Being an officerwas not a trade, and Americanswere sincere when they asked theirFrench counterparts “what theirtrade is in France.” Much to hisamusement, the duc de Lauzun roseconsiderably in the esteem of hishosts when he replied to the ques-tion about his trade that he himselfdid not have one, but that he had

Franco-American Encounters

T H E ROU T E AS D O M E S T I CC RO S S -CU LT U R A L E X P E R I E N C E1b

Wartime British propaganda made the French troops outto be ineffectual, more concerned with their appearancethan with matters military.


nor were they surrounded by Jesuit priestscarrying pails of holy water. In towns and alongrural roads and campsites, crowds came out tomeet the troops. The American view of theFrench underwent a thorough revision, and inthe process Americans found themselves.

If the shared experience of the war bound theFrench and the Americans together, the encounterwith foreign forces provided tens of thousands ofAmericans in hundreds of communities theopportunity to set the frameworks of their ownAmerican identity.

Crossing nine states and the District ofColumbia, the Washington-Rochambeau routetouches on or runs close to every major battle-field and site of American revolutionary triumphand disaster in New England and the Mid-Atlanticstates, with the notable exception of the Saratogacampaign. By the time Williamsburg, the stagingarea for the siege, was reached, Washington’sarmy contained troops from ten states as well asFrench-Canadians of Moses Hazen’s Regiment,making the Washington-Rochambeau route

an outward symbol of the shared sacrifices and struggles and theultimately successful cooperation of all rebellious colonies forindependence.

uncle who was a “mareschal deFrance.” To the people of Lebanon,Connecticut, this meant that hisuncle was a farrier (maker ofhorseshoes), a very necessary andthoroughly honorable occupation.

But as time wore on, ancientprejudices faded through personalencounters. Americans realized thatFrenchmen were human just likethey were. During the summer of1780, William Channing wrote to EzraStiles, president of Yale University,that “Neither Officers nor men arethe effeminate Beings we wereheretofore taught to believe them.They are as large & as likely men ascan be produced by any nation.”Attitudes changed wherever Frenchtroops marched along the coast.From Newport, Rhode Island,General William Heath informedGeorge Washington on 16 July 1780that “The Legion under the com-

mand of the Dukede Lauzun… is asfine a Corps as everI saw.” VirginiaMilitia ColonelFontaine echoedthese words whenhe wrote on 26 October 1781,that “the French arevery different fromthe ideas formerlyinculcated in us of apeople living onfrogs and coarsevegetables. Finertroops I never saw.”

By the time Frenchforces left in 1782, Clermont-Crèvecœur could write, “Foreignersare cordially welcomed by thesegood people. You find a whole familybustling about to make you happy.”Baron von Closen could sum up his

experiences in these words: “Wehave, on the whole, been treatedwonderfully well wherever the armyhas marched.”

French troops restduring the marchtoward Yorktown inone of the fewcontemporarydepictions of themarch that havesurvived.

The allied armies marched along thisstretch of the Old Post Road at theMaryland/Delaware border.


The Washington-Rochambeau route issignificant as a prime illustration of theAmerican Revolutionary War as a truly diverse effort.

The colonies of the eighteenth century were, like the United Statesof today, a nation of immigrants, defined by their multiracial,multi-ethnic, and multicultural composition. The ContinentalArmy of 1781 reflected this reality with a degree of racialintegration that would not be achieved again until the twentiethcentury during the Korean War. Close to 25% of the troopsencamped at Philipsburg, New York, were African-Americans,serving mostly in integrated units. The First Rhode Island,organized in Providence in 1778 with African-Americanenlistment, received a large core of black soldiers. There were alsoGerman-speaking regiments in the Continental Army, and as lateas 1781, the Canadian Regiment (Congress’s Own), which by nowhad become a regiment for any recruit not from one of the lowerthirteen colonies, still had two companies recruited among theFrench-speaking inhabitants of Canada. This multi-ethnic andmultiracial picture was rounded out by a liberal sprinkling ofNative Americans.

But the French troops fighting in America as part of the expéditionparticulière were multi-ethnic as well. The officer corps of the armyof the ancien régime recruited itself from among the European, notjust the French, nobility, and the army itself was divided into

‘Afew Minutes past, acurious Phenomenonappeared at the Door ofour Congress. A German

Hussar… in his Uniform, and onHorse back, a forlorn Cap upon hisHead, with a Streamer waiving fromit half down his Waistband, with aDeaths Head painted in Front abeautiful Hussar Cloak ornamentedwith Lace and Fringe and Cord of

Gold...a Light Gun strung over hisshoulder…a Turkish Sabre…by hisSide—Holster and Pistols upon hisHorse—In short the most warlikeand formidable Figure, I ever saw.”

John Adams’s letter of 6 July 1775 to James Warren provides a vividillustration of the diversity of thepeople willing and anxious to fightfor American independence. In 1775,the population of Britain’s lowerthirteen colonies stood at about 2.5 million, of which some 500,000were African slaves and theirdescendants. Though Englishmenstill formed the majority nationalgroup in the rebellious colonies as a whole, they were no longer themajority in the colonies south ofNew York: in South Carolina onlyabout one-third of all whites were ofEnglish origin. Next came the

Scotch-Irish with about 25% to 30%,followed by about 275,000 German-speaking settlers. The remainder ofthe Europeans came from a scatter-ing of French Huguenot, Swiss,Dutch, Swedish, and Scottishimmigrants.

The ethnic composition of theContinental Army reflected thissociety at large, with the importantexception that most of the officerscame from English stock, the earlierand by now better-off group ofimmigrants, while the rank and filewas recruited from among the morerecent and poorer immigrants.Foremost among them were theScotch-Irish. The Presbyteriansamong them, about 33,000 between1771 and 1775, had come foreconomic reasons; the Catholics,more than 10,000 between 1770 and1775 alone, had been deported asconvicts. What bound them togetherwas their animosity toward theEnglish, leading the bishop of Derryto warn Lord Dartmouth in 1775 ofthe “near thirty three thousandfanatical and hungry republicans”that had recently emigrated toAmerica.

Both anecdotalevidence andstatistical datasuggest thatthe Scotch-

Irish were indeed in the forefront ofthe rebellion. If Hessian Jager Capt.Johann Heinrichs would “not callthe war an American Rebellion, it isnothing more than an Irish-ScotchPresbyterian Rebellion,” historianCharles P. Neimeyer uses 1777 as hisbenchmark to argue “that roughlyone out of four Continental soldierswas of Irish descent.”

With the exception of pacifist groupssuch as Dunkers, Mennonites, orMoravians among them, Germans asa rule supported the RevolutionaryWar as well. As early as 31 October1774, Joseph Hewes, North Carolina’sdelegate to Congress, could writethat “the Germans who compose alarge part of the inhabitants of thisprovince are all on our side; thesweets of liberty little known in theirown country are here enjoyed bythem in its utmost latitude.”

Using 1778 as his benchmark,historian Charles P. Neimeyerestimates 12% of the ContinentalArmy to have been “German or ofGerman heritage.”

Ethnic Groups in theContinental Army

T H E ROU T E AS D O M E S T I CC RO S S -CU LT U R A L E X P E R I E N C E1c

The Freeman’s Journal, Philadelphia, No. XXVII, 24 October 1781


French and foreign regiments aswell. Rochambeau brought threeFrench infantry regiments and theRoyal Deux-Ponts of the infanterieallemande, recruited in the Duchyof Zweibrücken, in the HolyRoman Empire, and in theGerman-speaking parts of Alsaceand Lorraine ruled by the Frenchcrown. He also brought thevolontaires étrangers de Lauzun, a

600-man light infantry and cavalry unit under the duc de Lauzun.

Women and children have always formed an integral part of the world’s armies, and it was no different in the AmericanRevolutionary War. Even though their numbers were alwaysstrictly limited, at least in theory, and attempts were made to keepwomen of questionable conduct out of the camp and to keep thosewithin closely supervised, Washington found it impossible to dowithout them. The vast majority of them were either the wives ofsoldiers or women looking for employment who were primarilyused as washerwomen “to keep the Soldier’s clean” or assigned for

“the use of the Hospital.”

The earliest available general returnfor the Continental Army ofDecember 1777 gives the number ofwomen drawing rations (equal tothat of an enlisted man) at about one

In May 1775, the SecondContinental Congress establishedthe Continental Army, America’sfirst army, composed mostly of

New England militia units andMinute Men besieging Boston. Sincethe establishing law did not specifyrace in regard to the right, or duty, ofa man to serve, these troopsincluded many a black veteran ofLexington, Concord, and Bunker Hill.Arriving at his headquarters inCambridge in July 1775, newlyappointed commander-in-chief

George Washington convened aCouncil of War to discuss, amongother topics, the role that blacks,free and slave, were to play in themilitary. The council decided thathenceforth no “deserter from theMinisterial army, nor any stroller,negro, or vagabond” would berecruited. The Continental Army wasto be a white army.

When the colonies declared theirindependence in July 1776, fewblacks remained in the ranks of theContinental Army. When soon afterthe British had captured New YorkCity and were threateningPhiladelphia, a frightened Congressordered the states to raise 88infantry battalions to serve for threeyears or the duration of the war; inDecember, Washington wasauthorized to raise another 16battalions. When enlistment did notmeet manpower needs, Congressasked the states in January 1777 tofill their units “by drafts, from theirmilitia, or in any other way.”

Washington opened the door toblack Americans in instructions torecruiting officers of 12 January 1777to “enlist none but Freemen,” theimplication being that the recruitscould be black as long as they werefree. Black Americans became anintegral component of the Conti-nental Army when New Englandstates began to accept slaves asrecruits. • New Jersey, May 1777: permits

masters to enlist slaves as substi-tutes.

• New Hampshire, early fall 1777:opens the door to slaves to fill thestate’s quota.

• Connecticut, October 1777: allowsslaves to enlist.

• Connecticut, June 1780: raises anall-black unit. The 2nd Company,4th Connecticut Regiment— 48black privates and noncommis-sioned officers—served untilNovember 1782.

• Valley Forge encampment,January 1778: Washington legal-izes the New England arrange-ments and approves RhodeIsland’s plan to raise a blackregiment.

• Rhode Island, March 1778: raisesthe First Rhode Island Regiment.Some 250 former slaves andfreedmen served in the FirstRhode Island, including at thesiege of Yorktown, where theregiment was led by Lt.-Col.Jeremiah Olney. The First RhodeIsland stayed on active duty forfive years, through the end of thewar in November 1783.

• Massachusetts, spring of 1778:raises an all-black unit, the“Bucks of America,” under

Samuel Middleton, the onlyknown black commissionedofficer in the Continental Army.

• New York, after March 1781:actively recruits slaves to enlist inthe army.

• Maryland, October 1780: accepts“any able-bodied slave between16 and 40 years of age, whovoluntarily enters intoservice...with the consent andagreement of his master” as asoldier.

• Maryland, after May 1781: all freeblacks are subject to the draft.When Lord Cornwallis seems tothreaten their state, desperateregimental commanders raid jailsand gallows for likely recruits. On17 April 1781, Colonel ZachariaForrest asks Governor ThomasSims Lee “to send some ordersrespecting the Negro man undersentence of Death, he is so youngand healthy and would make afine soldier if acquitted.”

• Virginia, May 1777: the draft lawgreatly increases the number ofblacks in the Virginia line.

• Virginia, winter of 1777-78: freeblacks are the first to be called upas the draft is more strictlyenforced. “It was thought thatthey could best be spared,”Governor Thomas Nelsoninformed George Washington on 21 November 1777.

When faced with a draft notice,Virginia masters often presented aslave to the recruiting officer as afree man and therefore able to be asubstitute. Many a runaway also toldthe nearest recruiter that he was freeand anxious to wear the uniform of a

African American SoldiersA recruiting poster for the Royal Deux-Ponts regiment. Both “Deux Ponts” and“Zweybrücken” mean “two bridges.”

Louis Armand de Gontaut-Biron,duc de Lauzun.

Continental soldier. To put an end tosuch behavior on the part of somemasters and to the self-emancipation of slaves, the Virginialegislature amended the Militia Lawin June 1777. It forbade “anyrecruiting officers within thisCommonwealth to enlist any negroor mulatto into the service of this, oreither of the United States, untilsuch Negro shall produce acertificate...that he is a freeman.”

Once the war was over, manyVirginians tried to deny slaves theirfreedom, even when it was a well-deserved reward. But even alegislature such as Virginia’s,dominated by slave-owners, feltobliged to speak out against thisobvious injustice. In the fall of 1783,it passed a bill condemning ownerswho “contrary to principles ofjustice and to their own solemnpromise” kept their substitutes asslaves. They were freed by law withinstructions to the attorney generalof Virginia to act on behalf of formerslaves held in servitude despite theirenlistment.

At the same time, however, Virginiacontinued a practice begun inOctober 1780 of offering each recruitwilling to serve for the duration ofthe war a bonus of 300 acres of landand the choice of a healthy blackmale slave between the ages of 10and 30 years or £60 in specie. Theslave bonus was financed by aspecial tax on whites owning morethan 20 slaves.

On 24 August 1778, an army reportlisted 755 African-American soldiers

as serving in the Continental Army.When the French and Americanarmies joined forces at White Plainsfor the march to Virginia in June 1781,their numbers had almost doubled:French officers estimated theAmerican army tobe about one-fourth black.Among them wasthe First RhodeIsland Regiment,which Closenconsidered thebest Americanunit: “the mostneatly dressed,the best underarms, and themost precise in its maneuvres.”Throughout thewar, Americanpolicy towardblack soldierswavered betweenexclusion andgrudging admit-tance in times ofneed. Some 5,000 blacks, 1% of the500,000 African-Americans living inthe American colonies, are thoughtto have fought on the American side.Many more, 80,000 to 100,000African-Americans, are said to havefled behind British lines, where anunknown number served in the RoyalArmy. It is not that they werenecessarily pro-British, but that firstand foremost they were pro-black,prepared to support the side thatheld out the greatest promise offreedom and a better life. That sidewas the British, though their prom-ises rarely came true. Thousands

who had fled behind British linesdied or were recaptured by theirAmerican masters, thousands moreended up as property of Britishofficers or as slaves in the Caribbeanpossessions of the crown. Between

1775 and 1785, morethan 65,000 slaveswere brought into theport of Kingston inJamaica alone, thoughthe main slave traderson the island recordedbut few ships arrivingfrom Africa. Even whenthe British wanted tokeep their promises,the result was oftendisappointing. Accord-ing to American histo-rian Sylvia R. Frey, all of 1,336 men, 914 women, and 740children were manu-mitted “as a reward fortheir wartime services”and transported toNova Scotia, wherethey were given the

poorest land. A few hundred endedup in England. Neither welcome noraccustomed to life in the CanadianMaritimes, about 1,200 of thesurvivors left for Sierra Leone inFebruary 1792.

African Americans who enlisted inthe Continental Army usually servedin integrated units, on equal footingand pay with their white comrades.Most became professional soldiers,serving for at least three years, if notfor the duration of the war. It wastheir professionalism that officerslike Closen admired.


woman for every 44 NCOs and men, or 2.5%. At the beginning ofthe 1781 campaign in June, a return for the brigades encamped atNew Windsor (except the Connecticut Line) shows 137 women,one for every 32 men. Male-female ratios varied from a high of 1 woman for every 11 men in the artillery (429 men) and 1 forevery 14 men in the Commander-in-Chief’s Guard (69 men) to a low of 1 to 87 in the New Hampshire Brigade. About 40 to 45women, one-third of the 137 women listed in the return, can bereasonably expected to have accompanied the troops on the marchto Yorktown.

Only a tiny fraction—fewer than a dozen altogether—of women,such as Deborah Sampson, are known to have enlisted under thepretense of being male and to have served until they werediscovered and dismissed. One of them, Anna Maria Lane, enlistedin September 1777 (maybe earlier) with her husband, and followedhim and his regiment after her gender was discovered until the endof the war. Another woman, Mary Ludwig Hays McCauley,followed her husband into battle at Monmouth in June 1778 andbecame famous as Molly Pitcher.

Soldiers of the First Rhode IslandRegiment and of the CanadianRegiment (Congress’s Own) from the Journal of Jean-Baptiste-Antoine de Verger, a sub-lieutenant in the RoyalDeux-Ponts Regiment.

Hussar, volontaires étrangers de Lauzun

Insignia of the Fifth Regiment ofHussars (Lauzun Hussars) until itsdissolution as an active regiment inthe French military on 1 January 1976.Its traditions were preserved inreserve units until 31 December 1992.


Women were not con-sidered necessary tothe administration ofthe French army and

therefore did not officially exist. Thearmy rarely approved marriages, butwhen it did, the women, though notallowed to live in the barracks, atleast received a daily bread ration.

Both Rochambeau’s French andForeign regiments brought womenwith them from Europe. In Frenchregiments, women were buttolerated, but Foreign regiments suchas the Royal Deux-Ponts wereallowed 30 women each. On themarch, they received pay of 1 sol per

day and a bread ration. Officially,Rochambeau could have brought but30 women and their children from theRoyal Deux-Ponts. The number ofcamp followers in 1781 approachedthis total, but only one-quarter werefrom the Royal Deux-Ponts.

The most reliable numbers are in theembarkation lists of 1782. WhenRochambeau’s infantry left Boston onChristmas Day 1782, it embarked 25women and 4 children: • Bourbonnais: 5 women or children• Soissonnais: 6 women and 1 child • Saintonge: 5 women or children • Royal Deux-Ponts: 6 women and

3 children (at least two were girls,one but 4 years old)

• Artillery: 3 women

The siege artillery as well as Lauzun’sLegion wintered on the Americanmainland and left in May 1783. Anembarkation list dated Philadelphia, 4 May 1783, gives 5 women aspassengers “à la ration” (i.e., soldier’swives). That brings to 34 the total ofwomen and children in Rocham-beau’s infantry and cavalry.

One of the families traveling withRochambeau’s forces emerged fromanonymity. While the Royal Deux-Ponts was encamped on the propertyof the Rev. George Colton in Bolton,Connecticut, on 22 June 1781, this“Presbyterian minister…a large,fleshy man, very prosperous, married,but childless, suggested to the wifeof the grenadier, Adam Gabel, of theRoyal Deux-Ponts, that she leave him

one of her daughters. He would adoptthe four-year-old as his own child, inreturn for some 30 louis to ease thecampaign for her.” Baron Closenrecorded, however, that “The grena-dier and his wife, who were verymuch attached to this child of four,steadily refused M. Coleban’s (sic)offer, and thus proved their finecharacter and disinterest.” Cromotdu Bourg, Closen’s fellow aide-de-camp, remembered the incident aswell: “The host of M. de Rochambeauwas a minister at least six feet threeinches in height. … This man, whosename was Cotton (sic), offered thewife of a grenadier to adopt her child,to secure his fortune and to give herfor herself thirty Louis in money. Sherepeatedly refused.” The familywalked on to Yorktown, spent the

winter and spring of 1781-82 inWilliamsburg, and walked back toBoston in the summer and fall of1782, from where they returned toEurope.

In June 1781, Rochambeau hiredwagoners and cooks in Connecticutfor the march south; 7 of the 15 cookswere female. If they are added to theknown American and French womenand children, the combined totalreaches 80–85. This number isvirtually equal to that of the womenaccompanying the troops ofCornwallis surrendering at Yorktown.

Women in Rochambeau’sArmy

One of the womenaccompanying the armies toYorktown was Sarah MaryMatthews, born in 1756 in

Blooming Grove, Orange County, NewYork. After her first husband hadbeen killed in an early battle of theRevolutionary War, she married

Aaron Osborn in January 1780.Osborn was a commissary sergeantin Captain James Gregg’s company ofColonel Goose Van Schaick’s FirstNew York Regiment.

In the summer of 1781, she and theother women in her regiment—in herold age she remembered the wives ofLieut. Forman and Sgt. Lamberson aswell as a black woman namedLetta—traveled with the regimentacross New Jersey, workingalternately as a seamstress,washerwoman, and baker for thesoldiers. In Baltimore she boarded aship and sailed down ChesapeakeBay to Williamsburg. At the siege ofYorktown she cooked for four sol-diers besides her husband, carryingwater and taking care of woundedsoldiers. At some point she encoun-tered Washington who asked: “Youngwoman, are you not afraid of thebullets?” “No,” she replied, “thebullets would not cheat the gallows.”

The end of the war found Matthewsat Continental Village in New York,and when Osborn left her for anotherwoman in 1784, she married a thirdtime in 1787. Forty years later, in 1837,she applied for a pension and sub-mitted her autobiography andRevolutionary War experiences aspart of the application. Her applica-tion was successful and she lived toenjoy her pension for another 20years. Sarah Matthews died on 26 April 1858, at about 102 years old.

One Woman’s Story

Sarah Matthews(1756-1858)


When artillery lieutenantClermont-Crèvecœurfirst encountered theContinental Army at

Philipsburg in July 1781, he wasstruck by the number of “childrenwho could not have been overfourteen” enlisted in its ranks. One ofthem could well have been JohnHudson of the First New Yorkregiment, which was encamped atPhilipsburg. Born on 12 June 1768,Hudson was still two months shy of

his13th

birthday when he enlisted in a militialevy raised in April 1781 near Canaan,New York. Next his unit marched toSaratoga, where Hudson became asoldier in the Continental Army.

“The levies mounted guard with theregular troops, and one morning justafter being relieved at the usual hour,

I had gone into our quarters and wassitting on the ground with my gunbetween my knees when it went offaccidentally… the guard immediatelycame in with a file of men and tookme to the guard house. Here aconversation took place between thesergeant major and quartermastersergeant, and one of them remarkedwith an oath, that it was a shame togive a boy like this an hundred lashesfor what was notoriously an accident.This was said, purposely loud enoughfor me to hear. Then turning to me headded—’Come my lad, the best wayfor you to get out of this, will be toenlist—come along with us.’”

Hudson enlisted for the duration ofthe war in the First Company, CaptainAaron Aurson, First New YorkRegiment. Three months later, he,and the dozens of teen-age boys inhis regiment, were on their way toVirginia. Historian Charles P.

Neimeyer estimates that about 20%of the soldiers in the “New York regi-ments… were teen-aged boys.” Inneighboring Pennsylvania, 122 (11%)of 1,068 soldiers who gave their ageupon enlistment were seventeen oryounger.

After the war, Hudson movedwestward, eventually settling insouthern Ohio. In 1846, the 78-year-old Hudson told his story to CharlesCist, publisher of Cist’s Advertiser inCincinnati, who published Hudson’sreminiscences in his weekly paper.

French enlistment records containthe names of child-soldiers as well.Numbering about half a dozen perregiment, boys aged 15 and youngerwere enfants de troupe. The sons ofsoldiers who could enter the rolls athalf-pay at the age of six, they begantheir careers as musicians until theywere sixteen, when they could enlist

as regular soldiers. Inspectionreports of Rochambeau’s units(except Lauzun’s Legion) on 10 and 11 November 1781 (i.e., rightafter Yorktown) list five enfants de troupe in theSaintonge and one in the Royal Deux-Ponts.

Children as Soldiers

British troops stack weaponsfollowing the surrender atYorktown in this 1784 sketch.

Under 1781 garrison condi-tions, the number of femalecamp followers in theContinental Army stood at

around 3% of the rank and file,somewhat higher for Washington’sLife Guard and technical troops such

as the artillery, somewhat lower forlight troops. Under campaign cond-itions, numbers of female followerslikely dropped to around 1.5 % or less

of rank and file strength, again withthe above exceptions.

By the time the Continental Army haddisengaged from the British at NewYork in August 1781 and was makingits way across New Jersey, itnumbered about 2,650 rank and file.Though the table below is basedprimarily on estimates and patternsestablished before 1781, it provides a reasonable estimate of the numberof women that accompanied thearmy to Virginia.

Women in the ContinentalArmy in 1781

Combined New Jersey Regiment 6 women (1.0% of strength)First New York 5 women (1.5%)Second New York 5 women (1.5%)First Rhode Island 7 women (1.5%)Moses Hazen’s Regiment 4 women (2.0%)Second Continental Artillery 9 women (4.0%)Scammell’s Light Battalion 4 women (1.5%)Washington’s Life Guard 3 women (based on June 1781 return)Corps of Sappers and Miners 1 woman (based on June 1781 return)Corps of Artificers 2 women (estimate)Total: 46 women and an unknown number of children

Source: John U. Rees, “‘The Miltitude ofWomen’: An Examination of the Numbersof female Camp Followers with theContinental Army.” The Brigade DispatchVol. 23 No. 4, (Autumn 1992), pp. 5-17 ; Vol24 No. 1, (Winter 1993), pp.6-16; and No. 2(Spring 1993), pp. 2-6; “The Number ofFollowers with Continental Regiments.”The Brigade Dispatch, Vol. 28 No. 1,(Spring 1998), pp. 2-8 and No. 2, (Summer1998), pp. 2-12, 13, and “‘The Proportion ofWomen which ought to be allowed’:Female Camp Followers with theContinental Army.” The Continental Soldier.Journal of the Continental Line Vol. 3,(Spring 1995), pp. 51-58


The Washington-Rochambeau route issignificant as a visible expression of thehope for independence and the gratitudethat greeted the returning French armyon its march north in the summer of 1782.

After a string of defeats and setbacks during the previous years—the failed siege of Savannah in 1779, the treasonous desertion ofBenedict Arnold in September 1780, and the mutiny at Morristownin the winter of 1780-81—the victory at Yorktown in the fall of1781 gave Americans hope that independence might finally bewithin reach. When news of Yorktown reached Wilmington,Quaker and mill owner Samuel Canby recorded in his diary that“people seem… more disposed to expect an Independance mighttake place.” Others were even more optimistic. On 22 October1781, Robert R. Livingston of New York informed Francis Dana ofthe victory and expressed his hope that “you will not fail to makethe most of this intelligence which must fix our independence notonly beyond all doubt but even beyond all controversy.”

This hope and gratitude toward the French allies expressed itself inthe celebrations that greeted them on their return march of 1782,and in the many celebrations for the birth of the dauphin in Juneand July of 1782. Concurrently Congress passed a resolution on 29 October 1781, which called for the construction of a monumentat Yorktown to commemorate the victory. In view of the state ofAmerican finances, Livingston wondered in a letter of 16December 1781 to Benjamin Franklin whether the monumentought not be postponed until a better time. It took a full centurybefore the Yorktown Victory Monument was unveiled at thecentennial of 1881.

T H E ROU T E AS D O M E S T I CC RO S S -CU LT U R A L E X P E R I E N C E1

d

‘The duc de Lauzuncarried the news of theYorktown victory backto Versailles, but his

announcement was overshadowedby the birth of the dauphin.... The

birth was first announced in theUnited States at Williamsburg,where much of the French armywas stationed for the winter. Threemonths later the Providencenewspaper announced the birth,and it seemed at first that the eventwould pass without extensive

comment in the United States. But as the victory at Yorktownstrengthened the resolve of theUnited States and France to seek a punitive peace treaty with GreatBritain, based on their combinedsuccess, it seemed a propitiousoccasion to reaffirm Americanloyalty to the alliance.

“The origins of the celebrations forthe dauphin’s birth were totallypolitical, which is not surprising.Anne César, chevalier de laLuzerne, the French minister to the United States, carefully studiedthe needs of the alliance andattempted to arrange events

accordingly. … Symbolically, thecelebrations of the birth offeredAmericans a chance to bid fare-well to the French and torecognize the value of their aidand alliance. This remainedimplicit in the celebrations, at

least thirty to forty of which wereheld throughout the summer of1782. In newspaper coverage atleast eighty, and probably closer toone hundred, articles appeared inAmerican papers describing thecelebrations. No other event duringthe Revolution, with the possibleexception of the Silas Deane affair,received so much concentratedattention in the American press.”

From: William C. Stinchcome, “AmericansCelebrate the Birth of the Dauphin” inDiplomacy and Revolution. The Franco-American Alliance of 1778 Ronald Hoffman and Peter J. Albert, eds. (Charlottesville, 1981),pp. 39–72, pp. 56–57.

1782: Celebrating Franco-American Friendship

Description of celebrations for thebirth of the dauphin in Dover,Delaware, 4 July 1782, from thePennsylvania Packet.

The memory of the successful Franco-American cooperation alongthe Washington-Rochambeau route has survived in manymanifestations, such as the houses and homes where French andAmerican officers stayed and in the campsites for the enlisted men.It continues to survive in dozens of monuments, historicalmarkers, gravestones, and in the various Rochambeau HighSchools along the route. It is kept alive in commemorative eventssuch as the annual Rochambeau Day in September in Hartford,which commemorates the Hartford Conference of 1780, and the

victory celebrations in October inYorktown. It can be found in localnames such as French Hill and HussarsPlace, and in the names of towns alongthe route such as Crompond, New York,re-named Yorktown Heights in 1787. In1778, George Rogers Clarke founded acity in what would become the state ofKentucky and named it Louisville after

the King of France. Ten years later, citizens of Vermont, a state thathad not even existed during the Revolutionary War, foundedVergennes, named after the French foreign minister.


Statue of Admiral de Grasse at CapeHenry, Virginia.

Rochambeau Bridge over the Housatonic River, Newtown,Connecticut.

Stone tablet honoring French soldiersat West Hartford, Connecticut.

Rochambeau Middle School,Southbury, Connecticut.

(above) Marker in Lebanon, Connecti-cut, where Lauzun’s Legion winteredfor eight months, 1780-81. (right) Old St. Peter’s Church in VanCortlandtville, New York, served as amilitary hospital in 1781-82. EightFrench soldiers who died while beingtreated there are buried in the churchcemetery.

Plaque in Pompton Plains, NewJersey, marks the passage of theallied forces along what is now thestate’s Route 8.

Plaque at the Odell House inGreenburgh, New York, Rochambeau’sheadquarters during the Philipsburgencampment of 1781.

This monument honoring thecontribution of the French Army to theAmerican Revolution was dedicated inLebanon, Connecticut on October 19,2002.

The name Rochambeau has beenadopted for a variety of sites andland uses.


By 1782, only Barbados, Antigua, St. Lucia and Jamaica remained inBritish hands, and on the mainlandthey had lost control of DutchGuyana as well. When Admiral SirGeorge Rodney captured the tinyDutch island of St. Eustatius inFebruary 1781—a vital entrepôt andtransfer point in the Caribbean—booty estimated to be worth morethan £3,000,000 (more than 70 millionlivres) fell into his hands, enough tocover the expenditures of Rocham-beau’s army six times! St. Eustatiuswas retaken by Bouillé on 26November 1781 but never recoveredfrom the devastation it sufferedunder British occupation.

Warfare in the unhealthy climate ofthe Caribbean extracted anenormous price in human lives. AtYorktown, Rochambeau suffered noteven 200 casualties in dead andwounded: between March andDecember 1781, the French navyoperating in the Caribbean sufferedmore than 5,000 casualties, mostly todisease. In his defeat in the Battle ofthe Saints in April 1782, de Grassesuffered more than 3,000 casualties.

In the fall of 1778, the duc de Lauzunsailed to Africa with a military forceof about 400 men and took Senegalin January 1779. The Dutch entry intothe war in December 1780, meantthat the French fleet could now useDutch bases on the Cape of GoodHope and in Ceylon and that theglobal war would return to theAfrican continent. In July 1781, thePondichery regiment and the

Canonniers-bombardiers de l’Indearrived at Capetown to reinforce theDutch garrison. In May 1782, theVolontaires du Luxembourg, aFrench colonial corps transferred toDutch service in April, joined them.

With bases along the long sea routeto India, France could hope to regainsome of the influence and territoryshe had lost there in 1763 and duringthe first years of the current waragainst Britain. All French posts inIndia had fallen between August andOctober 1778. From this nadir, Francebegan a steady build-up of forces. Inthe summer of 1780 the fourbattalions of colonial troops on theÎle-de-France (Mauritius), some 1,500men, were joined by the SecondBattalion of the Austrasie regiment.In late March 1781, Admiral deSuffren sailed from Brest in theCaribbean-bound convoy of deGrasse but broke with his convoy forthe Cape in April. Once the FirstBattalion of the Austrasie and the 3rdLegion of the Volontaires étrangersde la Marine had also arrived in Indiain October 1781, these forces underthe marquis de Bussy—a veteran ofthe Seven Years War in India withthorough knowledge of the countryand its people—joined with thenative forces of Indian ally Hyder-Aliat Porto Novo on 25 February 1782.On 19 March 1783, four more infantrybattalions and an artillery brigade,some 2,300 men, arrived from France;British forces—15,000 men, including3,500 European troops—were losingcontrol of the military situation bothon land and on sea, where Admiral

de Suffren beat British AdmiralHughes off Cuddelore. British powerin India was preserved by the arrivalon 29 June 1783 of a frigate bearingnews that Preliminaries of Peacebetween France and Great Britainhad been signed on 20 January 1783.

In Europe, French and Spanishforces captured the British strong-hold of Fort St. Philip at Port Mahon(Minorca) on 5 February 1782. Theywent on to reinforce a combinedFranco-Spanish force of some 28,000 men laying siege to Gibraltar,defended by General Elliot with 7,000British troops. A general attack on 13September 1782 failed.

The expansion of the conflict meantthat by the summer of 1781, evenbefore the victory at Yorktown,French priorities and war aims wereshifting. Rochambeau was to get 830replacements in 1781; 600 Frenchtroops were to go to India, and 4,000to the Caribbean, where France nowhad to protect Dutch and Spanishpossessions as well. But as thestrategic and political situationdeveloped, the ministry in Parisdecided to limit the replacements toRochambeau to two dozencannoniers of the First Battalion ofthe Auxonne Artillery and a few well-placed officers who arrived on thefrigates l’Aigle and la Gloire only inmid-September 1782. Meanwhile, the contingent to India wasincreased by 3,900 men to 4,500: bythe end of the war France had moretroops in India than in America.

The Washington-Rochambeau route issignificant as a symbol of the globalcharacter of the American War for Independence.

The American War for Independence was a worldwide conflictthat the fledgling United States was able to survive only with thesupport of the French and, to a lesser extent, the Spanish and theDutch governments. Commemorating the Washington-Rochambeau route introduces Americans to the little-known factthat America’s independence was won with the help of powerfulfriends, that it was won as much in the East and West Indies, inAfrica, and in Minorca as it was on the American continent. Thisinternational alliance kept Britain from concentrating her forces inthe colonies, which gave Washington, Rochambeau, and de Grassethe breathing room they needed to execute the campaign.

The 1778 Treaty of Alliancebetween France and theUnited States and the entryof Spain and the Nether-lands into the conflict in

1780, turned the American rebellioninto a global contest. By 1781, the war

in America was but one, and by farnot the largest, theater of war.

In the West Indies, the marquis deBouillé, governor-general ofMartinique, had captured BritishDominica as early as 7 September1778. During the course of the war, 27 French metropolitan infantry bat-talions, smaller detachments and twoartillery battalions joined the colonialinfantry, artillery, and volunteerbattalions in the West Indies, bringingthe total to more or less 48 battalions.By comparison, Rochambeau broughtto America in 1780 all of 8 infantrybattalions, one battalion of artillery,and 600 light troops.

The War for Independence as a Global War

T H E ROU T E AS M A N I F E S TAT I O N O FT H E I N T E R NAT I O NA L WA R E F F O RT2

a

Soon after the alliance betweenFrance and the United States wassigned, copies of the treaty text

appeared in both countries.


13 Colonies Great Britain France

1700 0.2 million 5–6 million 20 million1750 1.0 million 6.5 million 23 million1775 2.5 million 8.0 million 25 million 1789 4.0 million 9.0 million 26 million

In 1775, London had more than 700,000 inhabitants, Paris some 500,000.There were at least 20 cities in twelve European countries that had morethan 100,000 inhabitants. American cities were considerably smaller:

Philadelphia 28,000 Newport 11,000New York City 23,000 Baltimore 10,000Boston 16,000 Providence 4,500Charleston 12,000 Wilmington 1,200

The Washington-Rochambeau route issignificant as the culmination of the crucial contributions of France to theachievement of American independence.

The success of the Yorktown Campaign and the winning ofAmerica’s independence were made possible by monarchistFrance’s political, diplomatic, financial, and military assistance tothe American colonies. Through her generous aid starting in 1775,France first figuratively, and then, beginning in Newport in June1781, literally, walked side by side with the American rebelstoward independence. Without France’s aid, the United Statescould not have prevailed against the Royal Navy, the British army,or the resources of the motherland.

The Continental Army used French arms and ammunition, cannonand powder, uniforms and saddles, none of which could havereached America’s shores without a powerful French fleet toprotect the merchant ships. French naval forces managed to keepthe British at bay, which meant that troops could be transportedfrom France, from the West Indies, and along the US coast withrelative safety. The loss of Britain’s absolute mastery of the sea wasa decisive factor in America’s victory. Without this loss, Frenchweapons, Rochambeau’s troops, and French gold would never havereached America.

French actions should not be taken for granted. Rochambeau couldhave acted much less tactfully in his relations with Washington.Admiral de Grasse could have concentrated on capturing lucrativeBritish islands in the West Indies. Louis XVI and Vergennes couldhave ruined the whole strategy by establishing as a priority amilitary effort to regain French Canada, as was advocated by some

T H E ROU T E AS M A N I F E S TAT I O N O FT H E I N T E R NAT I O NA L WA R E F F O RT2b Population

as a Resource


politicians in Versailles as well as by some members of themilitary. Colonel Desandrouïns, Rochambeau’s chief engineer inAmerica, submitted such a plan to the war minister, prince deMontbarrey, and the naval minister, comte de Sartine in August1778. Under the honor code of the eighteenth century, Admiral deBarras, who had assumed command of the fleet in Newportfollowing the death of Admiral de Ternay, could have refused toserve under de Grasse, who had once been his junior in rank.Instead, everything was done to subordinate French interests toAmerica’s needs, to assist an American victory, and to bring aboutthe complete independence of the United States.

Nowhere does the crucialimportance of the Frenchparticipation in the warbecome more obvious,

and the dependence of the colonieson French assistance more appar-ent, than in the naval componentsof the war, since the colonies hadno capital ships of their own. At theoutbreak of the rebellion in 1775,Great Britain enjoyed absolutemastery of the seas vis-à-vis theAmerican rebels. The entry of Franceinto the war in 1778, and later of

Spain (1779) and the Netherlands(1780), ended that advantage.

More important than absolutenumbers was where vessels weredeployed. Until 1778, Great Britainwas able to concentrate all of hernaval forces in the North Americantheater and in the West Indies;once France had joined theAmericans, the distribution ofBritish Naval forces changeddramatically (chart, right). In 1777,more than 40% of the Royal Navy,25 to 27 ships, had been inAmerican water. The perceivedFrench threat to the Sugar Islandsreduced the presence of the RoyalNavy in American waters by two-thirds. The high number of vesselsfitting in British ports or on convoyduty in 1780 and 1781 clearly showsthe strain on the Royal Navy. Finally,the reduction in numbers of British

ships in North American andEuropean waters after Yorktown—with all the freed-up capacity goingeither to the Caribbean or toIndia—indicates that Britain wasprepared to cut her losses on theAmerican mainland but determinedto defend her other possessions.

In the spring of 1781, when GreatBritain had all of 37 capital ships inNorth America and the West Indies,France had 30 ships either in theCaribbean or en route there andanother 8 in North America or enroute there. (Six were in India, withanother five en route. There werealso 20-plus Spanish capital shipsin Havana and other Caribbeanports). Since the Royal Navy had toleave a number of ships to guardBritain’s Caribbean possessions, deGrasse in 1781 enjoyed thetemporary superiority in numbersthat enabled him to take theinitiative, and the calculated risk,that made the victory at Yorktownpossible.

The Role of the French Navy

1778 1779 1780 1781 1782

Britain>70* 37 50 59 57 55<70* 29 40 42 37 39

66 90 94 94 94France >70 28 38 44 44 42<70 24 25 25 26 *23

52 63 69 70 65*(after Battle of the Saints)

Spain >70 — 50 40 45 43<70 — 8 8 9 11

— 58 48 54 54The Netherlands >70 — — ? 1 1 <70 — — 11 13 18

— — 11 14 19

* >70 = ships with more than 70 guns<70 = ships with between 50 and 70 guns

Source: Jonathan R. Dull, The French Navyand American Independence: A Study inArms and Diplomacy, 1774-1787 (Princeton,1975), pp. 359-376.

Elsewhere/North West fitting/America Indies Europe India convoy duty, etc.

1778 14 (+13)* 4 (+1) 30 1 (+1)* 2 1779 8 27 (+1) 31 (+10) 8 51780 5 (+6) 31 (+6) 25 5 161781 10 27 28 5 (+5)* 191782 8 45 17 11 (+6)* 7*Figures in parentheses indicate number of additional vessels en route.(Order of battle as of 1 July 1778 and 1779; 1 April 1781 and 1782)

Distribution of British ships, 1778-1782

The value of the eighteenth-century coins was determined by their weight andbullion content irrespective of the issuing country. All coins, which arereproduced in original size, have the same observe and reserve images withoutdenominating a specific value.

British crowns, Spanish Milled Dollars, and French écus were similar in size,weight, and silver content and circulated freely in the colonies. While encampedat Head of Elk in early September 1781, Rochambeau loaned Washington 24,000écus in French coin to pay the Continental Army; Robert Morris repaid the loan inFebruary 1782 with Spanish dollars, the famous Pieces of Eight.

One French écu, often called a French Crown in the colonies, representsapproximately three weeks wages for a common soldier in Rochambeau’s army.

1 écu or six livres 1/20 écu or 6 sols1/10 écu or 12 sols

1 sol or 12 deniers 1 liard or 3 deniers1/2 sol or 6 deniers


Between 1776 and 1783,France spent 1,054 millionlivres on the war effort. 91% of this outlay had to be

financed by loans, and by the end ofthe war her total constituted debtstood at 4,538 million livres with anannual debt service of more than 200million. At the same time the marquisde Lafayette’s annual income ofabout 100,000 livres made him one ofthe wealthiest people in France. A 74-gun ship cost about 1 millionlivres to build and equip, and in 1776,the ordinary income of the Frenchcrown stood at 377.5 million livres.

Most of the money after 1775 wentto the navy: its budget rose from 33 million livres in 1775 to 169 million in 1780 and peaked at almost 200 million in 1782. During these

same years, the army budget in-creased marginally from 93.5 millionlivres in 1775 to 95 million in 1783.

Expenditures for the expéditionparticulière were minimal within theoverall war effort. American historianClaude C. Sturgill has computedthem at 12,730,760 livres, about 1.2%of the total cost of the war. Throughintermediaries such as Beaumar-chais, the colonists received about 2 million livres’ worth of aid in kind;outright French subsidies amountedto about 9 million. Between 1778 and1782, the United States obtained 18

million livres in loans to be repaidafter the end of the war. Another 6-million-livre loan from France in1783 brought French expenditures in direct support of the Americanrebels, including those for theexpédition particulière, to about 48 million livres—less than 5% oftotal expenditures.

Britain’s expenditures for the warran to 2,270.5 million livres. Morethan 40% of this total was funded byloans as well, which raised hernational debt from £131 million (3.013million livres) to a staggering £245million or 5.635 million livres. In 1783,a full two-thirds of Britain’s taxrevenue went to servicing a debtthat was 25% larger than that ofFrance, even though Britain’spopulation was only one-third thesize of France’s.

Robert Morris, who assumed thesuperintendency of finance in 1781,estimated the US public debt in Julyof 1782 at about 30 million Spanishmilled silver dollars. Financial insta-bility continued until the ratificationof the federal constitution in 1789.When the federal governmentassumed all state expenditures forthe war (approximately $25 million in1783), in 1790, the total domesticdebt, state and federal, stood atabout $27 million. Arrears in interestpayments added another $13 million.Funded in the Compromise of August1790, which brought the seat of thefederal government to the South,less than $160,000 of the federal debt

was still outstanding in 1817. Eventoday, the federal debt containsarrears open since the RevolutionaryWar. ($55,757.80 was merged into thetitle “old debt” in 1880).

The American foreign debt for thewar was paid off relatively quickly.At the end of 1789, that debt stood atabout $11.7 million, close to 60million livres. Throughout the 1780s,only the Dutch loans (28 million livresby 1788) had been served. With thehelp of further loans from Amster-dam, the debt to Spain was paid offby 1794, and on 3 March 1795,America’s remaining public debt toFrance was paid off as well. Settle-ment of private debts (e.g., with theheirs of Beaumarchais) took until1835.

François Soulès in his Histoire destroubles de l’Amérique Anglaise(Paris 1787; vol. 4, p. 200), gave theUS debt, domestic and foreign, in1786 as $42,942,837 or 230 millionlivres (at 5.4 livres per dollar). Basedon Alexander Hamilton’s figures of1790, the cost of the war to theUnited States ran about $27 million(146 million livres) or $40 million withinterest included (216 millionlivres)—about 13% of the 1,054million livres spent by France and6.5% the 2,271 million Great Britainspent in the failed attempt to keepher colonies.

The Financial Cost of the War

During the encampment atHead of Elk, Washingtonpaid his troops with about24,000 écus he had

borrowed from Rochambeau.

“This day,” 8 September 1781,wrote Major William Popham, “willbe famous in the annals of Historyfor being the first in which theTroops of the United Statesreceived one month’s Pay inSpecie—all the civil and military

staff are excluded.” For many aContinental soldier this was indeedthe first and only time he everreceived “real” money during hisyears of service. Private Martinremembered that “we each of us

received a MONTH’S PAY, inspecie, borrowed, as I was informed,by our French officers from theofficers in the French army. Thiswas the first that could be calledmoney, which we had received aswages since the year ‘76, or thatwe ever did receive till the close ofthe war, or indeed, ever after, aswages.” Another enlisted man,John Hudson of the First New YorkRegiment, who had celebrated buthis 13th birthday on 12 June 1781,recalled that it was at Head of Elkthat “I received the only pay that Iever drew for my services duringthe war, being six French crowns,which were a part of what RobertMorris borrowed on his own creditfrom the French commander tosupply the most urgent necessitiesof the soldiers. My comradesreceived the same amount.”

A Soldier’s Pay

On 6–8 September 1781, the alliedarmy camped just south of Hol-lingsworth Tavern in Elkton,Maryland. Washington paid histroops with hard currencyborrowed from Rochambeau.

The allied supply wagon train left theAlexandria, Virginia, encampment

(right) on 26 September for Yorktown.


The Washington-Rochambeau route is significant as an example of jointFranco-American cooperation underWashington’s overall leadership.

Planning for the march and its execution stands as a testimony tothe professionalism of the French and American general staffs.Planning such an extensive campaign that depended on thecooperation of the French navy must have been very difficult formen of different languages, backgrounds, and cultures. MostAmericans, including General Washington, spoke no French andhad to communicate through interpreters, mostly Frenchvolunteers in the Continental Army. Rochambeau spoke noEnglish; neither did many officers on his staff, with the notableexceptions of the chevalier de Chastellux and the duc de Lauzun.Here, too, the communications gap was bridged by Frenchmensuch as Du Bouchet and Fleury who had served in the ContinentalArmy. American officers such as Henry Knox were largely self-taught. The French were career soldiers, and their engineers andartillery officers had trained at the most advanced military andtechnical schools of the time.

Washington’s command of a foreign army as well as his own onAmerican soil is an extraordinary episode, unique in US history.There would have been no Yorktown and no Americanindependence without Washington. The American force he leddemonstrated his tenacity in holding together and building aneffective army, trained and disciplined in the crucible of war. Yet assupreme commander, he proved enormously flexible, keeping onexcellent terms with his more experienced military partnerRochambeau, who in turn accepted Washington’s leadership for

T H E ROU T E AS M A N I F E S TAT I O N O FT H E I N T E R NAT I O NA L WA R E F F O RT2c the common good. Together they recognized the opportunity that

offered itself in Virginia, but it was Washington who took thebrave decision to change strategy and march south, and togetherthey brought the campaign to a successful conclusion.

That victory would have been impossible without the navalcomponent provided by the fleet of Admiral de Grasse, but thecoordination of the movements of land and naval forces,thousands of miles and three-weeks in travel time apart, was themost difficult component of the campaign. The virtually flawlessexecution of the campaign has led American historian Jonathan R.Dull to single it out as the “most perfectly executed navalcampaign of the age of sail.”


François Joseph Paul comte deGrasse—born into an oldnoble family in southernFrance in 1722—was a career

officer in the French navy, andserved the king in campaigns in theMeditarranean, in India, and in theCaribbean.In 1779 he commanded asquadron under the comte d’Estaingat Grenada and was commandingofficer of the French fleet in theCaribbean once d’Estaing had sailedfor Europe after the unsuccessfulsiege of Savannah. His healthfailing, the 58-year-old officer sailedfor France in late 1780 as well.

His stay in France was short. On 22March 1781, Louis XVI promoted deGrasse to rear admiral, and sent himback to the West Indies with 20

ships of the line, three frigates and156 transport. Concurrently, thevicomte de Rochambeau sailed forNewport with badly needed cash forhis father, and the news that thesecond division of infantry wouldnot be coming after all. Rocham-beau was free to draw up his ownplans for the coming campaign,possibly in cooperation with deGrasse, who could provide navalsupport. De Grasse’s convoy,reinforced by six ships of the linefrom Martinique, arrived off PortRoyal, Martinique, on 28 April.British Rear Admiral Samuel Hoodwas waiting for him, but in a strokeof that good fortune that wouldshine on the Franco-Americanalliance all year, Hood had but 18

ships of the line against de Grasse’s26. Hood’s superior, Admiral GeorgeRodney, had captured the Dutchisland of St. Eustatius in February,and booty estimated at more than£3,000,000 (70 million livres) hadfallen into British hands. Wanting toprotect the loot, Rodney hadwithdrawn four of Hood’s ships,giving de Grasse the superiority heneeded to get his convoy safely intoPort Royal on 6 May. Following hisconquest of Tobago in early June,de Grasse sailed for Santo Domingo,where four more ships of the linejoined his fleet on 16 July.

As de Grasse was sailing for SanDomingo, Rochambeau on 8 Junelearned of the admiral’s arrival in theWest Indies. On 15 June Rocham-beau had information from deGrasse that he would be in SanDomingo later that month and couldbe in American waters by 15 July atthe earliest. Rochambeau immedi-ately dispatched the aptly namedConcorde to San Domingo toapprise de Grasse of Franco-American plans. He also informed

him of Cornwallis’s arrival inVirginia, and hinted strongly that hewould prefer de Grasse to sail forthe Chesapeake:

There are two points at whichan offensive can be madeagainst the enemy; theChesapeak and New York. Thesouthwesterly winds and thestate of defense in Virginiawill probably make you preferthe Chesapeak Bay, and it willbe there [sic] where we thinkyou may be able to render thegreatest service.… In anycase it is essential that yousend, well in advance, afrigate to inform de Barraswhere you are to come andalso General Washington.

Upon reading this letter in mid-July1781 (it took even a fast sailingfrigate two-and-one-half to threeweeks to make the trip), de Grasseopted to sail for the Chesapeake. Hischoice involved considerable risk,since it was based upon readingbetween the lines of Rochambeau’sletter. If the Franco-American army

remained before New York ratherthan marching to Virginia, thecampaign of 1781 would end infailure, and like d’Estaing, he toowould return from America indisgrace. Next, de Grasse madeanother bold gamble. Rather thandetaching ships to protect theannual homeward-bound convoyfrom the Caribbean, he entrusted itto the care of a single 64-gunvessel. The risk was rewarded: theActionnaire left San Domingo with126 merchantmen in late Octoberand made it safely to France.

The stage was set when de Grasseraised anchor with 28 ships of theline and supporting frigates at CapFrançais (Haiti) on 5 August andheaded north. His ships werebursting with passengers: an 80-gun-ship, 190 feet long, a 46-footbeam with a hold of 22 feet, carrieda regular crew of some 940 men.(Most of them were needed to workthe cannon: it took 15 men toservice just one of the thirty 36-pounders on the main deck duringbattle). They were also carryingsome 3,000 men of the infantryregiments Gâtinais, Agenais, andTouraine under the comte de Saint-Simon, 100 artillerymen, their guns,and 100 dragoons.

Along the way de Grasse dis-patched the frigate Aigrette toHavana to pick up 1.2 million livresthat Rochambeau had requested in July to pay and feed his army. It took all of five hours to collectthese funds from public and privatesources, and on 17 August theAigrette rejoined de Grasse’s fleet.

On 31 August de Grasse’s fleetdropped anchor in the mouth of theYork and the next day beganunloading men and material for thesiege of Cornwallis.

De Grasse’s hour of glory was still tocome. Cruising off Cape Charles, thelookout on the Aigrette at around9:30 a.m. on 5 September reportedsails approaching from east-north-east. The sails were those of ViceAdmiral Thomas Graves, RearAdmirals Samuel Hood and SirFrancis Drake and their 19 ships ofthe line—two 98s, twelve 74s, one70, and four 64s—a 50-gun ship, sixfrigates and a fire ship. Going fullspeed, around 6 knots, or 7 mph,they were making straight for themain entrance of the bay.

Though he knew that 19 sails wereapproaching Hampton Roads, therewas not much de Grasse could do.Wind and tide were against him, andmuch of his personnel was on land.De Grasse had to leave some 90officers and about 1,900 men behindwhen he cut cables around noon asthe tide was turning. De Grasse’sflagship, the 104-gun Ville-de-Paris,three 80s, seventeen 74s, and three64s moved out of the channel tomeet the enemy. Short of hands andhampered by the north-northeastwind, they were slow forming abattle line: De Grasse, the 11th shipin line, did not clear the bay untilalmost 1:00 p.m.

Rather than order “close action”and head straight for the French lineas it was straggling out of the bay,Graves at around 2:15 p.m. gave

Admiral de Grasse and theBattle of the Capes

French ships are lined up on the left and British on the right in this painting ofthe Battle of the Capes.


order to get into “line ahead” for-mation: Graves wanted to bring hisvessels into a roughly parallel posi-tion with the approaching Frenchfleet. The maneuver not only took 1 1/2 hours to perform, it alsogreatly extended the heretoforetight formation of the British fleet.This gave the French time to clearthe entrance of the bay. As Graveslined up for battle, his fastest ships,which had been in the lead, foundthemselves at the end of thecolumn. That included Hood on theBarfleur, who had been fourth inline, but now had fifteen shipsahead of him. Three 74s underDrake, already leaking badly whenthe fleet had sailed from New Yorkfive days earlier, formed the newlead division.

As the ships took their places in theline, Graves, much to the conster-nation of his officers, ordered themto wait for the French center tocome abreast. This allowed deGrasse to bring up his rear. Whenbattle commenced, he not onlywould have five more ships and1,794 cannons versus 1,410 Britishguns—but thanks to Graves, theywould also be sailing in closerformation than their opponents. Hisbest and fastest ships would line upwith Graves’s slowest and weakest.The two fleets were arranged likethe sides of a funnel when Gravesraised the flag to head toward theenemy. According to the London’slog, it was precisely 3:46 p.m.; sixhours had passed since the fleetshad spied each other. Whathappened next has been debatedever since.

Hood later claimed that Gravesforgot to lower the flag signaling“line ahead” as the standard “closeaction” went up. Graves maintainedthat he flew “engage the enemy”throughout the day and hoisted“line ahead” only twice. Hood andhis captains, according to Graves,misunderstood the signal. Irrespec-tive of flag signals, once the cannonbegan roaring, Hood knew that thebattle had begun and should havefallen on the French rear. Why hedid not will always remain amystery.

Confusion reigned on board theBritish fleet: Drake’s leaky divisionfollowed the signal and at 4:15 p.m.the Shrewsbury opened fire, butwith the wind blowing toward landand the French fleet, British vesselscould only use their upper gundecks while the French couldemploy their full firepower. Hoodcontinued with “line ahead,” untilGraves sent a frigate ordering himto attack at once. But the Frenchheld the advantage: when hundredsof cannon began to spit fire anddestruction, de Grasse’s ships firedbroadside after broadside intoDrake’s division, which still had toturn before its cannon could reachthem. Seven ships, including Hood’sBarfleur, never caught up. At 5:30p.m. they began trading long-distance fire; an hour later Gravesordered the fleet to disengage.

Both fleets spent the next day, 6 September, making repairs anddrifted to the south on the 7th. At nightfall on the 9th, de Grasseheaded back north. As he

approached he saw de Barras’fleet riding at anchor inLynnhaven Bay. De Grasse knewthat he had achieved his goal:Washington and Rochambeauwere on the way, and with deBarras’ seven ships of the lineand two transports safely in theBay, Cornwallis was caught. Graves returned briefly to theChesapeake on the 13th only tofind de Barras there. Seeingthat it would be unwise to attackthe now 35 French ships with his 18,Graves—unaware thatRochambeau and Washington weremarching on Yorktown—returned toNew York. On his arrival, he wasdejected. He wrote to the Earl ofSandwich, “The signal was notunderstood. I do not mean to blameanyone, my Lord. I hope we all didour best.”

De Grasse’s victory at the Capeshighlights more than any otherevent the vital importance of theFrench navy for American indepen-dence. It was de Grasse’s fleet thatkept the Royal Navy from rescuingCornwallis when it sailed out tomeet the British on 5 September1781. There was no ContinentalNavy that could have stoppedGraves, Hood, and Drake.

Though he spent but two months inAmerican waters and never set footon American soil, de Grasse isamong the three Frenchmen whocontributed most to Americanindependence. His “strategicvision,” writes Jonathan R. Dull,“made possible the most importantnaval victory of the 18th century.”

American army: 9,150• Continentals 350 officers and 5,500 men (return of 9/26/1781,

including 411 sick) [includes Lafayette’s forcesand other reinforcements who joined along themarch

• Militia 3,300 officers and men

French army: 9,300• Rochambeau’s forces 425 officers and 5,300 men (return of 11/11/1781,

including 741 detached and 427 sick) • Saint-Simon’s forces 225 officers and 3,300 men (including 800

marines)

French navy: 28,400• French marines 5,200 officers and men (minus about 800 marines

at Gloucester)• Ship crews 24,000 officers and men (18,000 under de Grasse,

6,000 under Barras)

British forces: 9,700• 15 September 8,885 effectives, plus 840 naval personnel • 19 October 7,247 rank and file (4,750 fit for duty), plus 840

naval personnel for a total of 8,100 rank and fileat surrender. The force comprised 4,418 Britishtroops, 1,900 German auxiliaries, and 800Loyalists (of whom 142 from North Carolina didnot surrender). The vast majority of the missing1,600 men were casualties.

Distribution of the ArmedForces at Yorktown

Admiral François Joseph Paul,comte de Grasse


The Washington-Rochambeau route is significant as the first true acknowledgement of America as a sovereign nation.

If the alliance of 1778 brought the diplomatic recognition of theUnited States as a sovereign nation, the behavior of French troopstoward their American allies put this recognition to the test.Recognizing General Washington as the commander-in-chief of the joint force brought much-needed prestige. The parade ofRochambeau’s troops before the Continental Congress, the reviewof these same troops by Washington, and the surrender of BritishGeneral Charles O’Hara to American general Benjamin Lincolnrather than to Rochambeau all proved that the French wereprepared to treat their ally as an equal on the international scene.

By its alliance with France, the United States gained internationalrecognition, and through its recognition by the French army, theContinental Army as an outward symbol of American sovereigntywas elevated from a rebel revolutionary force to the status of anational army. In the US military in particular, French influenceremained strong long after the end of the conflict. Throughout thewar Americans lacked the expertise and training necessary in thetechnical branches of the armed forces, such as the artillery,engineering, or cartography. French volunteers provided thisexpertise. Training and expertise provided by French advisers andvolunteers helped shape the Continental Army and its successor,the United States Army, into a skilled, professional fighting force.Even today, the US Army Corps of Engineers awards the FleuryMedal for excellence in engineering, while the coat of arms and themotto of the US Army Engineering School are that of the Frenchschool at Mezières: Essayons!—Let us try!

In late September 1782, Americanand French forces met at Peekskillto say their farewells. To the French,the transformation of the Continen-tal Army since Yorktown was star-tling. On 20 September, the Frencharmy passed in review beforeWashington, and then, on the 22nd,Clermont-Crèvecœur and his fellowofficers “went to watch the man-euvers of the American army andwere truly impressed. This proveswhat money and good officers cando to make good soldiers.… we

found 8,000 of the American army.Now they were all uniformed andwell groomed. We were struck with

the transformation of this army intoone that was in no way inferior toours in appearance. Their officerstoo were well turned out.”

Rochambeau and his staff wereimpressed as well and gave theContinental Army the highest praisepossible in the late eighteenthcentury when they put it on par withthe army of Frederick the Great. Dr. James Thacher described thescene thus: “The whole army wasparaded under arms this morning inorder to honor his Excellency CountRochambeau on his arrival from thesouthward. The troops were allformed in two lines, extending fromthe ferry, where the count crossed,to head-quarters. A troop of horsemet and received him at King’s

Ferry, and conducted him throughthe line to General Washington’squarters, where, sitting on his horseby the side of his excellency, thewhole army marched before him,and paid the usual salute andhonors. Our troops were now incomplete uniform, and exhibitedevery mark of soldierly discipline.Count Rochambeau was most highlygratified to perceive the very greatimprovement, which our army hadmade in appearance since he lastreviewed them, and expressed hisastonishment at their rapid prog-ress in military skill and discipline.He said to General Washington,‘You have formed an alliance withthe King of Prussia. These troopsare Prussians.’ Several of the prin-cipal officers of the French army,who have seen troops of differentEuropean nations, have bestowedthe highest encomiums and applauseon our army, and declared that theyhad seen none superior to theAmericans.”

T H E ROU T E AS M A N I F E S TAT I O N O FT H E I N T E R NAT I O NA L WA R E F F O RT2

d

US-French Encampment atPeekskill, September 1782

Peekskill encampment site, drawn byRochambeau’s cartographer LouisAlexandre de Berthier.


John Singleton Copley, “The Death of MajorPierson, 6 January 1781.”

On 6 January 1781, a French landing party ofabout 800 men under the command of Baronde Rullecourt landed on the Channel island

of Jersey. In the subsequent fighting bothRullecourt and Major Francis Pierson of the

95th Regiment were killed. The French forcewas defeated and had to surrender but such

raids forced Britain to commit substantialresources to the defense of the waters

around the British Isles.

Island of St. EustatiusUntil its capture by British Admiral Rodneyon 3 February 1781, this tiny Dutch island inthe Caribbean was one of the mostimportant neutral entrepôts for trade withthe North American Continent. Rodney’sbooty was estimated at £3,000,000 or70,000,000livres, almost six times the12,000,000 livres the expédition particulièrecost the French crown.

H I S T O R I C U S E O F T H E R O U T E 5-1

The roads are historicallysignificant by themselves as thelifelines of the economies ofColonial America, but they takeon additional importance ascomponents of the Washington-Rochambeau route. The routeconsists of sections of variouslengths of these colonial roads,such as the Boston Post Road inConnecticut, the Albany PostRoad in New York, the AssunpinkTrail in New Jersey, and theKing’s Highway in Delaware.These roads are interspersed withmountainous passes such as theClove in Suffern, New York, and

the crossing over the Susque-hanna at Bald Friar Ferry and Fordin Maryland. When strungtogether, they formed the fastestand most convenient way toreach Williamsburg in thesummer of 1781.

The historic locations of the landroutes that form the Washington-Rochambeau route can beidentified with great accuracy.Based on original documents, theroads taken by the variouscomponents of the French andAmerican armies can be traced ona modern map with a high degree

of precision. The roads thatformed the French route weresurveyed shortly following themarch, in great detail, by LouisAlexandre de Berthier. His mapswere published by Anne S. K.Brown and Howard C. Rice, Jr., in 1972. On the American side,George Washington’s cartogra-pher Robert Erskine surveyed theroads in New York and NewJersey during the 1770s. The

roads south from Philadelphia toYorktown were surveyed in thesummer of 1781, by Erskine'ssuccessor Simeon DeWitt at theexpress order of Washington forthe purpose of facilitating themarch to Yorktown. These mapshave not been published in theirentirety but are preserved in thecollections of the New-YorkHistorical Society.

Except for the routes of the Con-tinental Army from Newburgh toPhilipsburg in July 1781, of theFrench army from Crompond/Yorktown Heights to Boston afterSeptember 1782, and for a veryfew short sections such as themarch from Christiana, Delaware,to Head of Elk, Maryland, theWashington-Rochambeau routethroughout consists of multiple

routes. Military needs ofproviding flank cover fromBritish attacks determined theroute taken by Lauzun’s Legion inConnecticut in June 1781 andthat of Continental Army unitsthrough New Jersey in August ofthat year. The logistics of provid-ing thousands of men with food,firewood and shelter made itnecessary for the units to followseparate routes as well. EvenPhiladelphia—at 28,000 inhabi-tants, America’s largest city—could not long feed and house thearmies, now 7,000 strong, andtheir thousands of animals.Smaller towns along the route,such as Baltimore with 10,000inhabitants and Wilmingtonwith 1,200 people, were in noposition to handle the multitudesat their gates.

The roads that constitute the Washington-Rochambeau routepredate the American Revolutionary War by decades, someeven by centuries. The Eastern Seaboard of Colonial America

was traversed by a network of roads, some of which had been used byNative Americans for centuries prior to the American RevolutionaryWar. These roads, known variably as “Post Road” or “King’s Highway”or the “Old Trail” in Colonial America, were used for travel, trade, andmilitary campaigns. After the outbreak of the revolution, the armies ofboth sides followed these roads on many occasions during theiroperations. Their use as conduits for the deployment of the opposingforces was well-established before the French and American armiestook them in 1781 and 1782 during and after the Yorktown Campaign.

5 Historic Use of the Route

The Christiana Tavern in Christiana,Delaware, where Washington,Rochambeau, and Lafayette all stayedat various times: an example of a sig-nificant resource in need ofpreservation.

5-2 H I S T O R I C U S E O F T H E R O U T E

After the arrival at Head of Elk,the slow-moving artillery and thewagon train took the land-route toWilliamsburg, while the soldiersboarded ships at Head of Elk, inBaltimore and in Annapolis.French officers used every oppor-tunity to visit battlefields,natural sites, and famousAmericans along the way.Washington took theopportunity to deviate from themost direct route to Williams-burg, hosting Rochambeau andsenior French officers at hisestate at Mount Vernon.

Though the route is of greatdiversity, it is clearly discerniblein a multitude of manifestations.Many, if not all, of these roadsstill exist today under differentnames and in differentconditions, ranging from six-laneinterstate highways toabandoned road segments listedon the National Register of

Historic Places. Driving throughsections of eastern Connecticutalong country roads flanked byeighteenth-century stone walls, orthrough rural Virginia toGloucester, one is aware oftraveling along a historic route.On other sections of the route (e.g.,through Philadelphia or Hartford),200 years of economicdevelopment have all but obliter-ated the original routes. But eventhere, memorials and annualcelebrations keep alive theknowledge of being on a historictrail and on historic ground. Insome states, such as Virginia, themarking is consistent and highlyvisible. Other states, such asConnecticut, are engaged in re-marking the trail.

But the trail also compriseshundreds of miles of water lanesand river crossings, some of themost scenic components of theWashington-Rochambeau route.Water routes were as wellestablished in 1781 as were landroutes, with interconnectingportage routes, five between thenorthern Chesapeake and theDelaware River alone. The mostdirect of these water routes, andthe one taken by the French andAmerican armies in 1781 and1782, was that from Christiana,Delaware (or Christeen, as it wascalled in the eighteenth century),past Cooch's Bridge to Head of Elkin Maryland. Economic historianRichard Buel, Jr., found traffic onthat route “sufficiently heavy tojustify the maintenance of aregular shallop service betweenChristian Bridge andPhiladelphia.”

At the beginning of their march,French forces used watercraft tocross Narragansett Bay fromNewport to Providence. Thecrossing of rivers such as theHudson from King’s Ferry toStony Point as well as theConnecticut, Housatonic,Delaware, and Schuylkill riverswere major logisticalachievements.

But rivers and waterways did notonly pose obstacles. Despite thedangers inherent in coastal tradeafter the outbreak of the war, theyprovided opportunities as well.Water transportation, especiallyof heavy or bulky goods was fasterand cheaper than transportinggoods on land. In a military cam-paign this meant primarily artil-lery, foodstuffs, and baggage, andwherever possible Washingtonused the waterways along theroute in 1781 to his advantage.From Trenton onward, ColonelJohn Lamb's Second continentalArtillery, except for a short, ten-mile portage through Delaware,traveled to Virginia by water.

By 29 August 1781, DeputyQuartermaster Samuel Miles had31 craft capable of carrying morethan 3,200 men waiting for thearmies at Philadelphia. Once the

head of the Chesapeake had beenreached, Washington triedeverything to get enoughwatercraft to ship his troops toWilliamsburg. At least 12 sloopsand eighteen schooners werewaiting at Head of Elk, and dozensmore were hired before the yearwas out. An Estimate of Money dueon Contract made for the passage ofthe Army stores, Baggage &c. …fromChristiana Bridge to Virginia, andfrom thence to the NorthwardCommencing 28 August 1781 bringsthe total of watercraft employedin the campaign to at least 22sloops, 60 schooners, as well asshallops and a myriad of smallervessels. And though the buildingpatterns on the shore havechanged since 1781, the waterroutes on the Chesapeake inparticular recall the anxiousweeks of September 1781 leadingup to the siege.

King’s Ferry was a key Hudson Rivercrossing, linking Stony Point

(foreground) and Peekskill along theWashington-Rochambeau route.

A plaque in Virginia marks the route of the march, one of a series given bythe French government and installedduring the American bicentennial.

Rochambeau, Washington and theAllied Army crossed the SusquehannaRiver at a ferry near Rogers Tavern inPerryville, Maryland.

R E S O U R C E S 6-1

1 Campsites and bivouacs2 Historic road segments3 Water routes and river

crossings4 Archeological and underwater

sites5 Buildings and building sites6 Tombstones and/or grave

markers and other emblems7 Natural landscape features8 National parks9 State parks10 Historic districts11 Plaques, tablets, and markers12 Paintings and murals

Many or most of these resourcesare already protected as NationalHistoric Register sites or NationalHistoric Landmarks; others haveor will receive this status as aresult of state efforts carried out inconnection with the Washington-Rochambeau route. Some arefederally owned, some are state

parks, some are owned by com-munities or private organizations.A few are already well-establisheddestinations; others are beingrestored and readied for historicalinterpretation.

Numerous plaques, tablets andmarkers attest to the commemo-ration of the route since the 1781march. They were placed byfederal, state and local authorities;by patriotic organizations such asthe Daughters of the AmericanRevolution, the Sons of theAmerican Revolution, the Societyof the Cincinnati; by historicalsocieties; and by organizationssuch as Rotary Clubs.

Except for those of the Saratogacampaign in New York, all majorbattlefields of the RevolutionaryWar in New England, the MiddleColonies, and in Maryland and

Virginia lie along or near theroute. So do many of the nation'smost cherished historical treasures,such as Newport, IndependenceHall, Mount Vernon, ColonialWilliamsburg, and ColonialNational Historical Park inYorktown. The Washington-Rochambeau route therefore

functions as an overarchingtheme that binds togethergeographically many AmericanRevolutionary War sites along theeast coast. Both a land- and water-based trail, it passes through mostmajor population centers alongAmerica's east coast. Its multitudeof resources provides a wealth ofdiverse historical, educational,and recreational experiences formore people than any other scenicor historic trail within theNational Park System.

Numerous resource clusters alongthe Washington-Rochambeauroute combine within a concen-trated area historical, educational,and recreational opportunities.This is most obviously the case inNewport, Rhode Island, and

Boston, Massachusetts, the route’stwo anchors in New England. Thesame holds true for Williamsburgand Yorktown, the route’ssouthern ends in Virginia, whererich historical and educationalopportunities are coupled withprimarily water-based recreationalpossibilities. Other land-basedroute segments, such as Washing-ton’s Mount Vernon, Washington,DC, or the city of Philadelphia,offer a “whole trail experience” aswell. Water-based segments fromthe northern tip of the Chesa-peake, from Baltimore, and fromAnnapolis, to Cornwallis’s sunkenfleet off Yorktown and Gloucester,offer multiple trail experiences aswell. Linking the resources alongthese trails, the Washington-Rochambeau route offers a unique context and potential for historical interpretation, foreducational and recreationalprograms, and for commemo-rating the Franco-Americanalliance and the national effort for independence in 1781.

The Washington-Rochambeau Route offers numerous and variedresources. Based on statewide studies in Connecticut, NewYork, and Delaware, and preliminary overviews in the other

states, an estimated 750 resources are directly associated with theroute, with an indeterminate number of resources on side-trails. The resources of the Washington-Rochambeau route can be dividedinto twelve categories:

6 Resources

Hallock’s Mill Pond at YorktownHeights, New York. Looking to keephis troops occupied while he andWashington determined a militarystrategy, Rochambeau ordered them to dig a canal that rerouted a streamthrough their camp (and reversed itsflow into this pond).


Ordonnance de Police, 26November 1781.

To celebrate Admiral de Grasse’svictories in the Caribbean and in the

Battle of the Capes as well as thevictory at Yorktown, the inhabitants

of Paris and its suburbs wereordered to illuminate their houses

on 27 November 1781, during thetime that a Te Deum was celebrated

at the Cathedral of Notre Dame.

B I B L I O G R A P H I C E S S A Y 7-1

Scholarly as well as popularhistory studies of the Franco-American campaign of 1781

have traditionally focused on threethemes: 1 the marquis de Lafayette’s

Virginia campaign in the springand summer of 1781;

2 the role of the French fleet underthe comte de Grasse; and

3 the siege of Yorktown and thesurrender of Lord Cornwallis.

The march of the French armyfrom Newport, Rhode Island, and ofthe Continental Army fromNewburgh, New York, is usuallycovered in a transitional chapternecessary to lead the combinedarmies to the plains outside York-town. No in-depth study of themarch proper—its planning,logistics, the interaction betweenthe troops and the civilian popul-ation, and the impact of the marchon the local economies, to namebut a few topics—has ever beenundertaken, either at a state ornational level. With its focus on themarch proper, a study andassessment of the Washington-Rochambeau Revolutionary Route,for possible designation as aNational Historic Trail, could fillthat void.

The historical research necessaryfor such a study presents numerous

challenges, not so much from alack of French and Americanprimary sources as from theirnature and location. The geo-graphic extent of the route meansthat the sources are widely dis-tributed among dozens of collec-tions in state libraries and archivesin at least nine states, and in federalrepositories in Washington, DC.Primary sources used in this studyare extraordinarily diverse. Theyare written in three languages:English, French, and German. Theyencompass traditional resources,such as diaries, letters, and maps, aswell as less traditional resourcessuch as orderly books, enlistmentrecords and pensions applications,mill ledgers and account books,National Register and NationalHistoric Landmark files.

Telling the story of the marchrequires giving equal attention tothe grand strategy and to the micro-history of the hundreds of localitiesand sites that make up the route. Itrequires familiarity with localhistories, state histories, and inter-national relations. It requires usingthe papers and writings of the keydecision makers such as GeorgeWashington and the comte deRochambeau, as well as those of themill-owners and tavern-keepersalong the way. Frequently theevents occur within a very tightly

focused time frame, often just a fewdays in 1781 and in 1782, but covera vast geographic area. Alternately,in the case of winter quarters thefocus is a small area but a six- toeight-month time frame. Thenature of the sources—which flowmore amply for one aspect in onestate or locality and less so in otherareas or regions—as well as the factthat no Continental Army troopsmarched through Rhode Island,Connecticut, or Massachusetts in1781 and 1782, shifts the focus ofthe project from year to year, fromstate to state, and from region toregion.

The following bibliographicaloverview provides a completeinventory of French primarysources, but is not meant to becomplete or exhaustive withrespect to American sources. Nordoes it list available secondarysource materials, except where theyrelate to the primary sourcesmentioned. As in the moreextensive bibliography included ina seperate Appendix to theHistorical Narrative, it is arrangedtopically and is meant to give anidea of the range of resourcesavailable and the many-facetedpossibilities for interpretationarising from them.

1) CARTOGRAPHYAny study of the march of thecombined Franco-Americanarmies to Virginia has to beginwith the identification of theroutes and their location on theground today. On the French side,the indispensable collection ofprimary source materials is thecompilation of maps and routespublished by Howard C. Rice, Jr.and Anne S. K. Brown in The American Campaigns ofRochambeau’s Army 1780, 1781,1782, 1782.1 Volume 2 reproducesmaps of the routes and camp siteslocated in the Rochambeau Papersand the Rochambeau FamilyCartographic Archive (GEN MSS146) at the Beinecke Rare Bookand Manuscript Library at YaleUniversity and in other reposito-ries worldwide. These maps weredrawn mostly by Louis Alexandrede Berthier and, though notalways to scale, provide the exactlocation of the camp sites. Thissuperbly edited volume isindispensable for anyone

interested in the march ofRochambeau’s troops fromNewport to Yorktown in 1781 andback to Boston in 1782. There arevery few sites and routes that Riceand Brown either could not locateor that lay outside theirimmediate research interest.These include the route ofLauzun’s Legion throughConnecticut in June 1781,2 thecamp of Rochambeau’s SecondBrigade near Newport, Delaware,in September 1781,3 and the1782-83 winter quarters ofLauzun’s Legion in Wilmington4.Using sources either not availableto Rice and Brown or not used bythem, this study attempts to fill inthese gaps in our knowledge ofthe marches of the French forces.5

On the American side there alsoexists a complete body of carto-graphic work for the marches of1781 from Philadelphia to andfrom Yorktown. Once the decisionto march to Virginia was made inAugust 1781, George Washingtonordered his cartographer, Simeon

7 Bibliographic Essay—A Note on Resources

1 2 volumes (Providence and New Haven, 1972)2 See Robert A. Selig, Rochambeau's Cavalry: Lauzun's Legion in Connecticut 1780-1781.

The Winter Quarters of Lauzun's Legion in Lebanon and its March Through the State in 1781.Rochambeau's Conferences in Hartford and Wethersfield. Historical And Architectural Survey(Hartford, 2000).

3 There is a map of that campsite in the journal of an unidentified officer of theSoissonnais regiment in the Huntington Library. The journal is listed in Rice andBrown, but the authors did not inspect it for their work.

4 Robert A. Selig, The Washington-Rochambeau Revolutionary Route in the State of Delaware,1781–1782. An Historical and Architectural Survey (Dover, 2002)

5 For a list of these sources see below: 3) Personal Accounts

7-2 B I B L I O G R A P H I C E S S A Y

DeWitt, to draw up maps of theroutes to be taken by theContinental Army to Yorktown.These maps are preserved asErskine-DeWitt Maps in the New-York Historical Society (NYHS)under the call numbers 124 A-U for the march from Philadelphia toYorktown in August andSeptember 1781, and 125 A-K plushalf-sheet C 125 for the marchfrom Yorktown to ElkridgeLanding in November andDecember 1781. There are nomaps for the routes of the Con-tinental Army from Philipsburg,New York, through New Jersey toPhiladelphia, but there are manycontemporary maps of New Jerseyon which the route can be tracedwith the help of orderly books,diaries, and other primary sourcematerials. Unlike the French maps,DeWitt’s maps are drawn to scale,with mile markers indicated onthe maps where available. They donot show the campsites but pointout numerous landmarks, such asinns, churches, fords, ironworks,etc., which makes these, in themajority unpublished maps,important resources not only forthe Washington-Rochambeauproject but for state and localhistory as well.

2) LOGISTICS AND ARRANGEMENT OF THE MARCH

On the French side, orders andarrangements for the march as

well as supply issues are addressedin itineraries and official ordersfor the march published inVolume 2 of Rice and Brown.These official road descriptionsare supplemented by the accountof Louis Alexandre de Berthier,published in Volume 1 of Rice andBrown. Berthier, an assistantquartermaster general, provides a very detailed description of theorder and organization of eachcolumn of the march until lateAugust 1781, when his accountends abruptly in mid-sentence.Another invaluable source forFrench troop movements is theLivre d’ordre of Rochambeau’scorps which allows a minutereconstruction of the daily life ofthe soldiers in America. The livre,equivalent of an Orderly Book inthe Continental Army, ispreserved in the ArchivesGénérales du Département deMeurthe-et-Moselle in Nancy,France, under the call number E235. Unfortunately it ends on 17August 1781 just as the troops gotready to break camp and set outfor the march to Yorktown.

A continuation of sorts of theLivre d’Ordre is the “Journal desopérations du corps Français,Depuis le 15 Août,” a 14-pagemanuscript narrative of the marchof the French army to Virginia, the siege of Yorktown, and the sur-render of Cornwallis. From theappearance of the handwritingthroughout this volume, it seemsthat it is the original day-to-day

record dictated by Rochambeau.For the return march of 1782,there exists a 191/2 pagemanuscript, partly autograph,with heading on first page, “1782,”and heading on page 16, “1783,”giving Rochambeau’s narrative ofthe military and other events ofthat year and early 1783. Both ofthese manuscripts are in theRochambeau Papers at YaleUniversity. A major source forFrench army logistics are theJeremiah Wadsworth Papers in theConnecticut Historical Society.Wadsworth was the chief agentfor the French forces in America,and his agents supplied Rocham-beau’s troops throughout theirstay on the American mainland.

Reconstructing the logisticsbehind the American march isboth easier and more difficultthan for the French side. It iseasier because the Americans—unlike the French, who paid incash for their purchases—left atrail of IOUs along the way. Butthese IOUs, which cover every-thing from purchases to ship rentfor the passage to Yorktown totavern bills to bridge tolls andcompensation for pasturage, arepreserved in many public andprivate repositories and in manyrecord groups. In the NationalArchives and Records Administra-tion (NARA), many recordspertaining to this time period canbe found among a 126-microfilmreel record group entitledMiscellaneous Numbered Documents

and on the microfilms of RecordGroup M 926, Letters, Accounts, andEstimates of the QuartermasterGeneral’s Department 1776–1783,which occasionally covers Frenchpurchases as well, or in the wellover 100 microfilm reels of RecordGroup 93, Revolutionary WarRolls. Many more records arelocated in state archives in recordgroups that are named variouslyExecutive Papers, Auditor ofAccount Papers, or RevolutionaryWar Claims Papers, which veryoften yield the most completeinformation in the volumescovering the years 1789–1791,rather than in those for1781–1782. Beyond that, state andprivate historical societies such asthe Connecticut Historical Societyin Hartford, Connecticut, (JeremiahWadsworth Papers), the DelawareHistorical Society, or the Rocke-feller Library at the ColonialWilliamsburg Foundation inWilliamsburg, Virginia, and thelocal history collections in thepublic libraries along the routepreserve valuable materials forthe reconstruction of the march.

A second, more immediate if veryuneven source for the reconstruc-tion of the march, is the orderlybooks of the regiments involved.Orderly books record the dailyorders for each regiment, includ-ing the place where the regiment

is at the time and where it was tomarch that day and set up camp.Of the five infantry regiments thatmade the march to Yorktown in1781—1st New Jersey, 2nd NewJersey, Canadian (Congress’ Own),1st Rhode Island, 1st New York,and 2nd New York—one copy ofthe orderly book of the 2nd NewYork (from 9/24-10/10/81) hassurvived in the New York StateLibrary #10464, vol. 10, part 1;another copy (from9/26–10/30/81) is available atNYHS microfilm #149, reel 15. In addition, the orderly book ofColonel Lamb’s 2nd ContinentalArtillery has survived in twoversions (6/20–10/21/81 and8/4–10/27/81) in NYHS microfilm#143, reel 14, and NYHS microfilm#118.1, reel 12. Lastly, the orderlybook of the LTC Gimat’s LightInfantry Regiment (Muhlenberg’sLI Brigade, 5/18–10/30/81), isavailable in the ConnecticutHistorical Society (CTHS) micro-film Reel 3, frames 939 to end andReel 4, frames 4-10, as well as atNARA, M853, reel 8, vol. 52(6/7–10/2/81).6

Except for a small group of about85 Delaware recruits, the sameregiments/units—1st New Jersey,2nd New Jersey, 1st New York, 2ndNew York, 1st Rhode Island, Hazen’sCanadians, Lamb’s Artillery, theLight Infantry as well as the

6 The most exhaustive list of orderly books can be found at www.RevWar75.com, a Website maintained by John K. Robertson and Robert McDonald.


Commander in Chief’s Guard,Joseph Plumb Martin’s Corps ofSappers and Miners, and theCorps of Artificers—made thereturn march in November-December 1781. Unlike for themarch to Yorktown, not a singleOrderly Book has survived; thefirst orderly book that we have isfor Col. Lamb’s Artillery Regi-ment, which wintered in Burling-ton, New Jersey, from 7 December1781 to 4 February 1782, andmarched to the Highlands inAugust 1782, preserved in theNYHS, microfilm: #152; reel 15.Moses Hazen’s regiment escortedBritish POWs to Lancaster,Pennsylvania, and wintered there.

3) PERSONAL ACCOUNTSWhile sources such as the orderlybooks or the Livre d’ordre haverarely been used in historicalanalyses of the 1781-82 campaigns,personal accounts by Americanand French military personnel—letters, diaries, and memoirs—have provided a wealth of sourcematerial for the history of the war.Nevertheless, much new groundremains to be broken in this area,historians having traditionallyfocused on a few well-known andeasily accessible sources ratherthan the treasure trove of lesser-known material available in out-of-the-way places.

In an appendix to Volume 1 (pp. 285-348) of their American

Campaigns, Rice and Brownprovide a list of journals, diaries,memoirs, letters, and otherprimary sources available at thetime of publication of their book.Since then, almost two dozenprimary sources have appeared inEuropean and American archivesthat can be added to the 45sources (i.e., accounts of events inAmerica written by officers inRochambeau’s army) listed byRice and Brown.

Most surprising is the fact thatthree journals/diaries/memoirs ofenlisted men have come to lightsince 1972. The most important ofthese three is the journal of GeorgDaniel Flohr, an enlisted man inthe Royal Deux-Ponts, in theBibliothèque Municipale ofStrasbourg, France.7 Among theMilton S. Latham Papers in theLibrary of Congress was found theJournal Militaire kept by anunidentified grenadier in theBourbonnais regiment.8 Finallythere is the Histoire des campagnesde l’Armée de Rochambaud (sic) enAmérique written by AndréAmblard of the Soissonnaisinfantry.9

Also added now is a most valuablenew source, the papers of AntoineCharles du Houx baron deVioménil, Rochambeau’s secondin command. Comprising some300 items and about 1,000 pages,the Fonds Vioménil is preservedin the Académie François Bourdon

in Le Creusot, France. Thismaterial has never been usedbefore and sheds much new lighton the decision-making process atthe top of the French militaryhierarchy. For Lauzun’s Legion,long the only component ofRochambeau’s army without acontemporary eyewitnessaccount, a manuscript journalkept by Lieutenant-ColonelEtienne Hugau entitled Détailsintéressants sur les événementsarrivés dans la guerre d’Amérique.Hyver 1781 à 1782. Hampton,Charlotte et suitte has come to lightin the Bibliothèque municipale inthe town of Evreux, France.10

Among new sources are also the correspondence of CaptainCharles Malo François comte deLameth, aide-de-camp toRochambeau and aide-maréchalgénéral des logis (May 1781), and ofhis brother Captain AlexandreThéodor Victor chevalier deLameth, who replaced CharlesMalo François in the summer of1782.11 Also unavailable in 1972was the Journal de l’Armée auxordres de Monsieur le Comte deRochambeau pendant les campagnesde 1780, 1781, 1782, 1783 dansl’Amérique septentrionale kept bycomte de Rochambeau’s 21-year-old nephew, Louis FrançoisBertrand Dupont d’Aubevoye,comte de Lauberdière, a captain inthe Saintonge infantry and one ofhis aides-de-camp.12

The largest body of materials notlisted in Rice and Brown concernthe Royal Deux-Ponts, regiment ofinfantry: a letter by Jean-Françoisde Thuillière, a captain in theRoyal Deux-Ponts preserved in theArchives Nationales,13 two lettersby Louis Eberhard von Esebeck,lieutenant-colonel in the RoyalDeux-Ponts, dated JamestownIsland, 12 and 16 December1781,14 and the papers and lettersof Colonel Christian de DeuxPonts, which have been in partdeposited in and in part acquiredby German archives.15 Copies of

four letters written from Americaby her ancestor Wilhelm de Deux-Ponts are in the possession of Ms.Nancy Bayer.16 Journals kept byDupleix de Cadignan of theAgenois,17 and Xavier de Bertrand,a lieutenant in the Royal Deux-Ponts, have not been located.18

Indispensable for biographicalresearch on the 1,034 Frenchofficers serving in d’Estaing’s,Rochambeau’s, and Saint-Simon’sforces, as well as on the Frenchofficers serving in the ContinentalArmy is Gilbert Bodinier’s Diction-

7 Reisen Beschreibung von America welche das Hochlöbliche Regiment von Zweybrücken hatgemacht zu Wasser und zu Land vom Jahr 1780 bis 84. Robert A. Selig is currentlypreparing an English translation and edition.

8 Milton Latham Papers MMC 1907.9 Amblard, who enlisted at age 19 in 1773, was discharged as a captain in 1793. His

manuscript is located in the Archives Départementales de l'Ardèche in Privas, France.For unknown reasons, numerous passages from his journal can be found verbatim in a journal kept by an unidentified officer of the Soissonnais regiment that is listed inRice and Brown. See Robert A. Selig’s “A New View of Old Williamsburg. A Huntington Library Manuscript provides another glimpse of the city in 1781.”Colonial Williamsburg. The Journal of the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation Vol. 22 No. 1(Spring 2000), pp. 30-34.

10 See Gérard-Antoine Massoni, Détails intéressants sur les événements arrivés dans la guerred’Amérique. Hyver 1781 à 1782. Hampton, Charlotte et suitte. Manuscrit de Claude Hugau,lieutenant-colonel de la Légion des Volontaires Etrangers de Lauzun (Besançon: Université deFranche-Comté, 1996)

11 The letters are in the Archives du Département Val d’Oise in Cergy-Pontoise, No. 1J191 and 1J 337/338.

12 Lauberdière's Journal is in the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris, France. See Robert A.Selig’s “America the Ungrateful: The Not-So-Fond Remembrances of Louis FrançoisDupont d’Aubevoye, Comte de Lauberdière” American Heritage Vol. 48, No. 1 (February1997), pp. 101-106, and “Lauberdière's Journal. The Revolutionary War Journal of LouisFrançois Bertrand d’Aubevoye, Comte de Lauberdière” Colonial Williamsburg. TheJournal of the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation Vol. 18, No. 1 (Autumn 1995), pp. 33-37.

13 The letter is catalogued under B4 172, Marine.14 John M. Lenhart, “Letter of an Officer of the Zweibrücken Regiment,” Central-Blatt

and Social Justice, Vol. 28 (January 1936), pp. 321-322, and Vol. 28 (February 1936), pp.350-360.

15 The papers of Christian von Zweibrücken deposited in the BayerischesHauptstaatsarchiv-Geheimes Hausarchiv in Munich are owned by Marian Freiherrvon Gravenreuth; those deposited in the Pfälzische Landesbibliothek in Speyer wereacquired at auction and are owned by the library.

16 The letters are owned by Anton Freiherr von Cetto in Oberlauterbach, Germany.17 The last known owner of this manuscript was Bernard Zublena, domaine de lagarde,

32 250 Montreal, Canada. 18 The journal is quoted in Régis d’Oléon, “L’Esprit de Corps dans l’Ancienne Armée”

Carnet de la Sabretache 5th series (1958), pp. 488-496. Régis d’Oléon is a descendant ofBertrand.


naire des officiers de l’armée royalequi ont combattu aux États-Unispendant la guerre d’Indépendance1776-1783 3rd edition (Chailland,2001). Enlistment records orcontrôles of enlisted personnel inRochambeau’s corps, indipensablefor statistical data on his troops,are preserved by the ServiceHistorique de l’Armée de Terre inthe Chateau de Vincennes; onlythose of Lauzun’s Legion are inthe Archives Nationales in Paris.

While the correspondence ofofficers such as Rochambeau is ofthe greatest importance for theidentification of the route and thegrand strategy behind the cam-paign, it is in the papers, letters,and accounts of its participantsthat one finds the details, thepersonal encounters, and thestories that bring the route to life.The same, of course, holds true forthe American side, but the body ofresources is infinitely larger. In hisRevolutionary America 1763-1789.A Bibliography (2 vols., Washing-ton DC, 1984), the last majorbibliography published on theRevolutionary War, Ronald M.Gephart lists more than 20,000items just in the holdings of theLibrary of Congress. Since then,thousands of titles have beenadded to those listed in Gephart’sbibliography. Other valuableresources include Stetson Connand Robert W. Coakley, An ArmyChronology of the American Revolu-tion (revised) (Washington, D.C.,1974); Joyce L. Eakin, Colonial

America and the War for Indepen-dence Special Bibliography 14.(Carlisle Barracks, 1976); Terry M.Mays, Historical Dictionary of theAmerican Revolution (Lanham,1999); J. Todd White and CharlesH. Lesser, eds. Fighters ForIndependence: A Guide to Sources ofGeographical Information on Soldiersand Sailors of the AmericanRevolution (Chicago, 1977); RobertK. Wright, Jr., Continental Army.Army Lineage Series (Washington,D.C., 1983); Charles H. Lesser, ed.Sinews of Independence: MonthlyStrength Reports of the ContinentalArmy (Chicago, 1976); andHoward H. Peckham, ed., Toll of Independence: Engagements &Battle Casualties of the AmericanRevolution (Chicago, 1974).

If less than half of the accounts byofficers in Rochambeau’s littlearmy have been published in theirentirety, the situation is similarfor accounts by Americanparticipants. The papers of majorparticipants such as GeorgeWashington, Henry Knox, andBenjamin Lincoln are availableeither in print or on microfilm; acomplete list of diaries kept byenlisted men and NCOs, many ofthem unpublished, can be foundat http://www.RevWar75.com, thoughthe best-known source is theaccount penned by Joseph PlumbMartin, Private Yankee Doodle(Hallowell, ME, 1830; repr. Boston,1962). Martin’s account containsmuch information on th̀e cam-paign of 1781/82, as does the un-

published diary of Sergeant-MajorHawkins of the Canadian Regi-ment in the Pennsylvania Histori-cal Society and numerous otherjournals and diaries listed inGephart’s and other bibliographies.A unique source on individualsoldiers and the war that can beeasily overlooked is the pensionapplications of Revolutionary Warveterans in the National Archives.The autobiographies attached tothese applications are lengthy attimes and full of information notfound anywhere else. On numerousoccasions soldiers who deserted orwere discharged from Rocham-beau’s regiments applied for pen-sions as well, and their biographi-cal essays shed much light on theintegration of immigrants into post-revolutionary American society.

4) PRIMARY SOURCES DESCRIBING FRANCO-AMERICAN ENCOUNTERS

Another often-neglected resourceof paramount importance for the Washington-RochambeauRevolutionary Route study arediaries, letters, or memoirs bycivilian Americans describingencounters with their Frenchguests. Some of these sources,such as the diaries of Ezra Stiles,president of Yale, are publishedand easily available. Many werepublished locally in small, privateeditions or in county historicalmagazines and newsletters thatare not usually indexed or accessi-ble through computerized searches.

The majority of these sources,however, are not yet publishedand need to be researched on site.

A unique resource for Washington-Rochambeau study is theMcDonald Papers in the West-chester County Historical Societyin Elmsford, New York. JohnMcLeod McDonald (1790-1863)had been trained as a lawyer. Aftera stroke in 1835, he could nolonger practice law and becameinterested in the history of theRevolutionary War. Accompaniedby Andrew Corsa, Washington’sand Rochambeau’s guide duringthe Grand Reconnaissance of21–23 July, 1781, he traveledthrough Westchester Countyinterviewing eyewitnesses inpreparation for a history of theRevolutionary War. His interviewswith 241 men and women, whiteand black, free and slave, fill morethan 1,100 pages of handwriting.McDonald never wrote his history,but his interviews form a uniqueoral history resource for events inthe "neutral ground" betweenBritish and American lines.

5) ECONOMIC IMPACTThe presence of French forces—and their bullion—had anenormous economic andemotional impact on the cash-starved colonies, but research onthis economic impact is still in itsinfancy. Even a brief look into theledgers and account books oftavern keepers, mill-owners,

trading firms, and merchantsoperating along the route confirmsthe enormous impact Frenchforces had wherever they went. On24 August 1781, “7 French guines”show up for the first time in theLea Mills Account Book ofBrandywine Village. By earlySeptember, 1/2 Joes, pistols,doubloons, and guineas havecompletely replaced Continentaldollars, so that on 11 November1781, Thomas Lea’s neighborSamuel Canby expressed in hisdiary the hope that: “as I appre-hend from the present prospect ofthings in our Country that peoplegenerally will rather beencouraged to go into Businessmore than there has beenopportunity for these several Yearspast as there is nothing but Specienow Circulating as a currency.”

When French forces returned toWilmington the following yearthey commented with surprise onthe number of houses builtbetween 1781 and 1782, andattributed their construction toFrench silver. Lee Kennett hasestimated that between public andprivate funds, “French forces maywell have disbursed 20 millionlivres in coin,” possibly doublingthe amount of specie circulating inthe thirteen colonies. Even if theamount of specie was closer to theestimate of Timothy R. Walton—who writes in The Spanish TreasureFleets (Sarasota, 1994), p. 183, “Onthe eve of the American Revolu-tion, about half the coins used in


the British North AmericanColonies, some 4 million pesos (24million livres) worth, were piecesof eight from New Spain andPeru”—an infusion of 20 millionlivres was bound to have had amajor impact on the Americaneconomy. But Kennett may still beright. In his “Las Damas de laHavana, el precursor, and Franciscode Saavedra: A Note on SpanishParticipation in the Battle ofYorktown,” The Americas Vol. 37,(July 1980), pp. 83-99, James A.Lewis estimates intergovernmentalloans, such as that for de Grasse inAugust 1781, at about 2 millionpesos and loans arranged by privatelenders at 3 million, possibly 4million pesos, for a minimum of 30million livres (at an exchange rateof 6 livres per peso).

6) INTERNET RESOURCES This listing eliminates thestandard prefix http:// from webaddresses, but many browserprograms will add it automaticallywhen the web address is typed.

American RevolutionBibliographies at the US ArmyCenter of Military History: www.army.mil/cmh-pg/

American Revolution documents:www.americanrevolution.org

Archiving Early America:www.earlyamerica.com/

There is a section of advice on howto read 18th-century documents.

Battle Road site and useful links toother sites: www.ziplink.net/~mrkmcc/resources.htm89

Battles and skirmishes–more than2,600 sites with references plustranscripts of primary sources:www.281.com/robertson/battles/battlemenu.htm

Brigade of the American Revolu-tion (reenactment organization):www.brigade.org

Chronology of major events inliterature, theater, politics, science,religion, music, and art:www.english.upenn.edu/~jlynch/Chron/

Continental Congress: www.memory.loc.gov/ammem/bdsds/bdsdhome.html

Eighteenth-century bibliographies:www.personal.psu.edu/special/C18/engrave.htm

Eighteenth-century clothingresources: www.costumes.org

Eighteenth-century maps:www.libs.uga.edu/darchive/hargrett/maps/maps.html

Expédition Particulière:www.xenophongroup.com/mcjoynt/epA series of web pages that cover allaspects of the French expedi-tionary army and its activities onthe American continent from 1780to 1782, such as a list of the datesand places of encampments fromProvidence to Yorktown at

www.xenophongroup.com/mcjoynt/march, an extended chronologicaldescription of strategy and move-ments from July 1780 to September1781 at www.xenophongroup.com/mcjoynt/campaign, or the route of theFrench wagon train fromAnnapolis, Maryland, to Yorktown,Virginia, in 1781 atwww.xenophongroup.com/mcjoynt/wagon.htm

George Washington Diaries:www.memory.loc.gov/ammem/gwhtml/

George Washington Papers at theLibrary of Congress:www.memory.loc.gov/ammem/gwhtml/gwhome.htmlThe 147,000 photographic imagesare organized into eight series thatcan be searched by keyword orbrowsed with a hyper-linked serieslist. Successive pages are linked,allowing one to read completedocuments and journals.

George Washington Papers at theUniversity Press of Virginia:www.virginia.edu/gwpaper/

Interdisciplinary resources for18th-century studies:www.personal.psu.eduspecial/C18srsr.htm

John D. Rockefeller, Jr. Library’scatalog at the Colonial Williams-burg Foundation in Virginia. Thelibrary has some popular findingaids on the web—choose Library toget to the Library’s offerings:www.history.org

Johnson, Samuel, Dictionary of theEnglish language. This site has asearch engine that allows manytypes of searches.www.hti.umich.edu/english/johnson/main.html

Lauzun’s Legion:www.lauzunslegion.com

Military actions of the AmericanRevolution:www.sar.org/history/ docsbatt.htm

Military documents, includingextracts from diaries and journalswritten during the AmericanRevolution:www.hillsdale.edu/dept/history/documents/war/index.htm

Military history, AmericanRevolution:www.cfcsc.dnd.ca/links/milhist/usrev.html

Northwest Territory Alliance (areenactment group):www.nwta.com/main.html

Orderly books of units can befound at www.revwar75.com/There is also a list of major andminor repositories, archives, andlibraries (with links) whereprimary-source materials arelocated.

Primary-source documentspertaining to early Americanhistory—formation of Americanpolitics, culture, and ideas.www.universitylake.org/primarysources.html

Primary sources: culture, politics,military, etc.:www2.pitnet.net/primarysources/

Revolutionary War web site,including documents:www.grandrepublican.com

Rochambeau Revolutionary Road:www.ctssar.org/revroad/index.htm

Royal Deux-Ponts Regiment ofInfantry:http://bluepost.tcimet.net/deuxponts/

Saintonge Regiment of Infantry:www.ai.mit.edu/people/sfelshin/saintonge/85hist.html

Sons of the American Revolution:www.sar.org. See alsowww.sar.org/history/rochambo.htm, a site on the Washington-Rochambeau route efforts

The Washington-RochambeauRevolutionary Route Historic TrailAssociation:www.AmRevandFrance.comThis is the regularly updatedwebsite of the “Washington-Rochambeau Revolutionary RouteHistoric Trail Association” withinformation on upcoming events,links to state and local studies, andto websites of sponsors andstakeholders in the project.

Yale Law School Avalon Project—documents bearing principally ondiplomatic history:www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/diplomacy/br1814m.htm


NATIONAL PARK SERVICENORTHEAST REGION• Boston Support Office

> Larry Gall, Team Manager forStewardship & Partnership

> Brian Aviles, Project Manager> Vicki Sandstead, Historian> Paul Weinbaum, Historian

• Philadelphia Support Office> Terry Moore, acting Chief of

Planning> Deirdre Gibson, former Chief

of Planning• National Capital Region

> Gary Scott, Chief Historian

CONSULTANTS• Goody, Clancy & Associates

> Christine Cousineau, ProjectManager

> David Spillane, SeniorProject Associate

> Steve Wolf, Graphic Designerand Editor

> Paul Santos, Graphic Designer• Dr. Robert A. Selig, Project

Historian

SYMPOSIUM SCHOLARS ANDCONTRIBUTORS• René Chartrand, author and

former senior curator, NationalHistoric Sites, Canada

• Dr. Harry Dickinson, RobertLodge Professor of BritishHistory, University ofEdinburgh, Scotland

• General Gilbert Forray, retiredChief of the Army Staff, FrenchArmy, and recipient of theGrande Croix de la Légiond’Honneur, France

• Jean-René Géhan, Counselor forCultural Affairs to the FrenchEmbassy, Washington

• Dr. Sarah Purcell, AssistantProfessor, Department ofHistory, Grinnell College, Iowa

• Dr. Ray Raymond, MBE, FRFA,Political Officer, BritishConsulate General, New York

NPS REVOLUTIONARY WARPARKS CONTRIBUTORS• Karen Rehm, Colonial National

Historical Park• Diane Depew, Colonial NHP• Frances Delmar, Independence

NHP

Special acknowledgements to theConnecticut Historical Commission

S T U D Y T E A M & I L L U S T R A T I O N S O U R C E S 8-1

8 Study Team and Illustration Sources

2—STUDY LEGISLATION,PURPOSE AND TASKSPage 2-1Both photographs: study team

3—HISTORICAL NARRATIVEPage 3-1Siège d’Yorcktown by Louis-Charles-Auguste Couder, 1836. Galerie desBatailles, Château de Versailles,FrancePage 3-2Map: Anne S.K. Brown MilitaryCollection, Brown University,Providence, Rhode IslandDrawing: Art Division, New YorkPublic LibraryPage 3-3• All photos: study team• Map: Berthier Papers, No. 21-25,

Princeton University LibraryPage 3-4• Top photos: study team• Portrait: The Quarterly Bulletin

of the Westchester CountyHistorical Society, April 1932

Page 3-5All: Anne S.K. Brown MilitaryCollection, Brown University,ProvidencePage 3-7Map: National Park ServicePhoto: study team

Page 3-8Portrait of Washington: painted byRobert Edge Pine, 1785-87, Indepen-dence National Historical ParkPage 3-9Collection of Robert A. SeligPage 3-12• Robert Erskine maps 124B,

New York Historical Society• “The Battle of Paoli”,

John U. Rees• French tents, André Gousse,

Parks CanadaPage 3-13—3-16Maps produced by Impact LLC, RedHook, New York, edited by studyteam

4—SIGNIFICANCE THEMES Page 4-1Henry Knox Papers, MassachusettsHistorical SocietyPage 4-2• Top: Henry Knox Papers,

Massachusetts Historical Society• Bottom: Delaware Historical

SocietyPage 4-3Library of CongressPage 4-4• Left: study team• Right: New-York Historical

Society

Page 4-6• Top: Musée Historique,

Strasbourg, France • Bottom: Collection of

Robert A. SeligPage 4-7• Right: Anne S. K. Brown Military

Collection, Brown University,Providence

• Left: Robert A. SeligPage 4-8DAR Magazine, November 1984Page 4-9The Metropolitan Museum of Art,New York; bequest of Charles AllenMunn, 1924Page 4-11• Upper right: www.geocities/

kdw72696/tour-peq.htm• DeGrasse: www.photogallery.com/

places/virginiabeach/vb17• Lower left photograph:

Alicia N. Wayland• All other photos: study teamPage 4-14Coins: Robert A. SeligPage 4-15• Right photo (marker):

www.xenophongroup.com/mcjoynt/vawrrmrk.htm

• Left photo (tavern): RobertReyes, National Parks Mid-Atlantic Council, Inc.

Illustration SourcesStudy Team

Page 4-17U.S. Naval Academy Museum,AnnapolisPage 4-18The French Navy and the AmericanWar of Independence, InformationOffice, French Embassy (NewYork)

page 4-19Anne S. K. Brown and H.C. Rice Jr.The American Campaigns ofRochambeau’s Army, 1780, 1781,1782, 1783Volume II The Itineraries, Maps,and Views.Princeton University Press, 1972.illustration 143Page 4-20• Top: Tate Gallery, London• Bottom: National Maritime

Museum, London

5—HISTORIC USE OF THEROUTEPage 5-1Study teamPage 5-2• Lower left: Robert Reyes,

National Parks Mid-AtlanticCouncil, Inc.

• Top: www.xenophongroup.com/mcjoynt/vawrrmrk.htm

• Lower right: study team

6—RESOURCESPage 6-1Study teamPage 6-2Bibliothèque Nationale de France,Paris


DR A F T STAT E M E N T O F NAT I O N A L S I G N I F I C A N C E

RevolutionaryRouteWashington-Rochambeau

THE

History

Documents

historic route

e n t o f n

s i g n

t h e n

c e n o r t h e

s s o c i

washingtonrochambeau

route variations