Connecticut Unscathed 45

The conflict that historians have called King Philip’s War still ranks as one of the bloodiest per capita in American history. An Indian coalition ravaged much of New England, killing six hundred colonial fighting men (not including their Indian allies), obliterating seventeen white towns, and damaging more than fifty settlements. The version of these events that has come down to us focuses on Plymouth and Massachusetts Bay—the colonies whose commentators dominated the storytelling. But because Connecticut lacked a chronicler, its experience has gone largely untold. As Jason W. Warren makes clear in Connecticut Unscathed, this imbalance has generated an incomplete narrative of the war. Dubbed King Philip’s War after the Wampanoag architect of the hostilities, the conflict, Warren asserts, should more properly be called the Great Narragansett War, broadening its context in time and place and indicating the critical role of the Narragansetts, the largest tribe in southern New England. With this perspective, Warren revises a key chapter in colonial history. In contrast to its sister colonies, Connecticut emerged from the war relatively unharmed. The colony’s comparatively moderate Indian policies made possible an effective alliance with the Mohegans and Pequots. These Indian allies proved crucial to the colony’s war effort, Warren contends, and at the same time denied the enemy extra manpower and intelligence regarding the surrounding terrain and colonial troop movements. And when Connecticut became the primary target of hostile Indian forces—especially the powerful Narragansetts—the colony’s military prowess and its enlightened treatment of Indians allowed it to persevere. Connecticut’s experience, properly understood, affords a new perspective on the Great Narragansett War—and a reevaluation of its place in the conflict between the Narragansetts and the Mohegans and the Pequots of Connecticut, and in American history.

Excerpt from History of the Second Connecticut Volunteer Heavy Artillery: Originally the Nineteenth Connecticut Vols An effort has been made to procure the portraits of all the deceased officers of the regiment, (fourteen in number) for insertion; but without success. The four contained in the book are considered very correct likenesses, - especially those of Hosford, Berry and Knight. To mention the names of all to whom the author is indebted for assistance in the collection of materials for this work would swell it beyond its prescribed limits. He can only spare a line to thank them for favors which merit a thousand. He desires, however, to express his great obligations to General C. M. Ingersoll, Adjutant General of Connecticut, and Captain James B. Coit, A. A. G., for various courtesies; and to Chaplain Winthrop H. Phelps, Assistant Surgeon Judson B. Andrews, Lieutenant Homer S. Curtis, Lieu tenant Salmon A. Granger, and Quartermaster Sergeant Henry P. Milford for special acts of kindness appertaining to the work. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.

While traditionally, Americans view expensive military structure as a poor investment and a threat to liberty, they also require the employment of armed forces as a guarantee of that very freedom. Beginning with the wars of the English colonies, Americans typically increased their military capabilities at the beginning of conflicts only to decrease them at the apparent conclusion of hostilities. In [this book], a stellar team of military historians argue that the United States sometimes managed effective drawdowns, sowing the seeds of future victory. Yet at other times, the drawing down of military capabilities undermined our readiness and flexibility, leading to more costly wars and perhaps defeat. The political choice to reduce military capabilities is influenced by Anglo-American pecuniary deicions and traditional fears of government oppression, and it has been haphazard throughout American history. These two factors form the basic American "liberty dilemma," the vexed relationship between the nation and its military apparatuses from the founding of the first colonies through to present times. With the termination of large-scale operations in Iraq and the winnowing of forces in Afghanistan, the United states military once again faces a significant drawdown in standing force structure and capabilities. The political and military debate around how best to affect this force reduction lacks a proper historical perspective. This volume aspires to inform this dialogue. Not a traditional military history, Drawdown analyzes cultural attitudes, political decisions, and institutions surrounding the maintenance of armed forces. -- Back cover.