I'm reading through this 1859 biography of General Morgan, the one man who perhaps best personifies the concept of the American Rifleman, authored by James Graham. The author had access to a number of primary resources, as well as the bulk of surviving written correspondence. Some of you have probably already read it, and I'll wager V has an original copy... ;)
So far it's a worthy read. The author is leaning towards hagiography, and the profuse apologies for Morgan's period of immorality (e.g., drinking and gambling while in the Virginia Milita --
quelle horreur!!) are amusing... but there are plenty of details about the man that are coming clearer to me than in the more ordinary historical texts. Here's a few salient examples, and I'll add more as I finish:
- It still surprises me that Daniel Morgan had no real family to speak of -- it is remarkable how he was able to build himself up from literally nothing, leaving (fleeing?) his father at age 17 and changing states. Aside from a lone, discredited rumor of visiting a sister later on, he hardly ever mentioned them. Yet he seems to have started his own family from scratch, even choosing to educate himself in his mid-20's, going on nothing but hard work and charm. It is suggested that his wife, Abigail Bailey, was a stabilizing and enlightening influence, but I suspect he started down that path before meeting her.
- General Morgan comes across as a real hothead, and not just in his earlier years. Getting flayed within a stroke of his life is sometimes described as a turning point in his attitude, but afterward he's still willing to mix it up regardless of the chain of command, even challenging the authority of Benedict Arnold -- someone he respected. He does definitely get smarter as he ages, though.
Mind you, the Founders count a fair number who loved to fight, so I'm not sure this is actually a character flaw. ;D
- While he does seem to have struck up an acquaintance with Colonel Washington during the French and Indian War, about 1758, their relationship strikes me as more of a professional acknowledgment than a true friendship. I imagine Washington was reminded of Morgan when the latter was appointed Captain of the Fredrick County Militia, for instance. But in the invasion of Canada, when Morgan complains that he's an independent command and his orders can only come from the top, Washington's letter to Morgan (roughly summarized, "do what you're told, Captain") is cordial but blunt. I don't see evidence of any favoritism.
- Likewise, Morgan's insistence on following Washington -- and only Washington -- is interesting to me, given that they didn't have a deep relationship. While Morgan of course respected Washington (who didn't?) my thought is that Morgan really just wanted to follow a fellow Virginian.
- Lord Dunmore's War seems to be the period that really crystallized Morgan for the Patriot cause. Sure, he sought out the mountain men and liked to live among them, so no way was he going to wind up a Loyalist, but he did have a sense of duty and responsibility all the way back to the Braddock expedition. Still, there's no reason to think he wouldn't have been more of an independent, perhaps like Ethan Allen.
But Lord Dunmore's War doesn't seem to have sat well with the troops, not in the reasons it was started nor in the way it was ended, feeling like a political feint. Also he had past Indian fighting to compare to, and would have reason to think it was all being done wrong this time. Then to top it off, they received word of the Intolerable Acts and the public opposition to them while they were still in the field, the treaty just concluded. Timing like that would make any man stop and think.
- The Declaration of the Virginia House of Burgesses in support of the Massachusetts Bay Colony is an interestingly worded document. Of the Intolerable Acts they were the most concerned about the port closure, which is fair I suppose since that's an overt act of hostility.
But interestingly the resolution notes that they stand in defence :)) of the British Constitution. From this I read that the Colonies weren't so eager to separate from Great Britain, as they were opposed to an out-of-control monarch who was violating all written law. It's a subtle thing but it makes a great deal of sense.
- I've always wondered on the role of Canadian citizens during the invasion. The story makes mention of many Canadian partisans, mainly French-Canadian as you might expect, but there are others. On the other side, Lt. Governor Cramahe seems able only to raise volunteers from the recently immigrated, having to threaten the natural Canadians with expulsion before they'd take up arms in defense of Quebec.
More as I get through the book.
I loved reading about Morgan in the invasion of Canada... and how close he came to taking Quebec. Especially his answer to the Canadian officer who offered him a commission in the Regulars!
No but I know a man who does First edition signed by author (http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?an=james+graham&fe=on&sgnd=on&tn=The+life+of+general+daniel+morgan) for $57 plus $4 S&H