tonight on american history tv, a look into a supreme court landmark case, plessy versus ferguson, which solidified the separate but equal doctrine and segregation laws pasted by the states. scholars look at its impact on education and housing and how we live with the legacy of the decision and we'll also look at the life and legacy of the first african-american supreme court justice, thurgood marshal, and his impact on u.s. history. watch tonight, beginning at 8:00 p.m. eastern. the office of historic alexandria in partnership with the emerging revolutionary war hosted a symposium on the war. next four presenters take part in a final discussion and answer audience questions about misconceptions about the american revolution. the office provided the video.

>> since this is about misconceptions or hindsights of 2020ish, 2021, i'm going to throw this out to the package whoever wants to respond first, what is one misconception either that was not covered or covered by a different panelist in general topics. what's one misconception that she missed picking on my fellow park ranger there. >> i missed none. >> i'll talk about one huge misconception is the fact that the war ended after yorktown. there's so many people that think that especially when you go down to south carolina and georgia, it was not ended. it was the same thing in the north but it was really a hotbed in a small confined area in

south carolina and then there was wayne in georgia, before savannah. i found those operations really interesting because i don't -- i know enough about them to be interested and not enough about them to, you know, not have anything to learn. i want to get down there and go over the terrain. >> i know. but the moderator, i probably shouldn't jump in here, but i'm excited as well, one recent archaeological foundation from the river about where john larants was killed there in late in the war. i think it's still on private property but see that location as well. one of the tragic last deaths of the american rev hugs. >> that's another reason i like that one pension, he mentions

beings discharged right before laurents was killed. yes, it's a shout out even though he can't hear it. i would say another misconception, i think travis talked about it, but just like not how defined the lines of, you know, patriot loyalists or -- in how -- i talked a little bit about it with john, as far as trying to tease out which side people were on, but, you know, i think there was a good percentage of people throughout the war that were either trying to play both sides or, you know, looking out for themselves or their families, which i think anybody can, you know, admit would be, you know,

easy to hold up those who put country or service ahead of their own individual beliefs. a large percentage of people trying to get by, you know, and survive this war anyway they could. it's not always the most heroic or the most or nobling stories, but it'ses the truth for many people they were trying to just get by and if that was siding with the patriots it's that, fighting with the loyalists it's that, siding with both at different times they're doing that as well. it's something we tend to think of it, the blue coated americans versus the red coated british and it wasn't that simple throughout the whole war for sure. >> actually todd has done some nice work on the number of change sites. captured by the british or the loyalists and then basically so they didn't have to stay in

prison they changed sides. some of them deserted back to the americans and some of them stayed in those units and went over to the west indies and some of those guys applied for pensions after the war from the federal government and got them. so it's, you know, that's -- it was definitely not a cut and dry black and white war. it was really complicated. >> yeah. on that same point some of the research i'm doing for the charleston revolution, they had -- this is the case in new york too -- where they had these where they were putting a lot of american prisoners in and yeah, the british, you know, in charleston were actively trying to recruit from these prisoner populations to fight in the west indies and seems like a way out for a lot of guys to get off of what would have been the most horrible of conditions of the british prison ships and that's

where, you know, when you talk about things that are putting your country ahead, the fact that so many guys refused to do that, you know, is amazing to me that somebody would have an out of get out of starving to death or dying of malnutrition or disease on a prison ship, but refused to do that and instead stick it out and sometimes pay with their life. what motivates somebody to take that stand is pretty amazing to think about. >> i actually just read as nice article by larry on the deserter serving -- not desserters but guys who turned coat and decided to join the british looej. and whether they had an affect. that's, you know, that's -- there's still so much to be written about this period which makes it a great i think still an open period for a lot of historians. that's why i think it's so fun.

>> definitely second that, john. a whole lot. a whole lot to study and write, a whole lot -- i appreciate you mention something archaeological stuff that's been found because that's continual and ongoing and we can always learn more and i think that's something that's going to be fun to explore as more and more people start paying attention relating to the 50th coming up or happening. you're going to have people wanting to know this and more information. so we've got our work cut out for us. >> something you said about i actually teach, but i don't take any offense to what you said earlier. >> good. >> to follow-up on that, why there's so many misconceptions. being in the teaching world at the high school level, they're not being taught revolutionary -- i can only speak for pennsylvania, they're

not taught early american history in high school. we start in 1920 in high school. so why is that a problem? because in theory they should be getting it in middle school but they're not. basically until they get to high school nobody is forced to actually learn anything. so we have kids coming into high school that don't have basic skills let alone the base knowledge they should be coming in with because they're -- to ninth grade. even though they're taught american history in eighth grade in pennsylvania, they're not learning or remembering any of it, come to high school they're not taught it, getting to your point where we're producing high school graduates that don't know america's founding, there's the reason. >> in south carolina is fourth grade when they learn about basically a lot of [ inaudible ] almost and i think you're right, that we're -- we're trying to teach them some of the stuff slightly at a younger age but it

should be in high school when we start to dive into some of the universal meanings behind the american revolution. most fourth graders, sixth graders, they're going to get some of it, but once you hit high school and start to have want to go life experience or start to have a better understanding of the world around you because at that age and the way your brain has started to develop, that's the time to really instill some of these life lessons that you can learn from our american history. so it's unfortunate that we don't have that kind of more in depth curriculum. i get they're learning about a lot of world history, at least from my experience with studying any sort of high school curriculum, and thank you, mike, for being a wonderful teacher despite your limited resources,

but, yeah, i get they're trying to understand, but we miss a lot of opportunities for them to really take to heart some of what we can learn from the american revolution. you're right, i -- the best math class i ever took was in college and it was the quote/unquote dumb math class because i hate math even though i took like calculus in high school, i don't know how i passed, when i basically learned hows to balance a checkbook because i took the dumb math class and how to apply for a loan, so those are life skills. think of the life skills that we can learn from history that we're not teaching kids before they leave the regular school system. >> history -- you're right about the standardized test issue because we're not as tested subject we get pushed aside. and then they don't care if those kids pass that class because we're not important.

>> yeah. i have friends that teach in other districts and it's across the board. >> this is also not a new problem. i remember 20 years ago when i was in high school growing up in northern virginia, near alexandria, you know, one of my first exposure of the revolutionary and george washington, going to mount vernon and waiting in school, excitedly to get to the revolution in high school we did learn about the revolution and it was all of a half hour class and it was more about the causes and more about the effects and yeah, there was a battle at lexington and yorktown but if you want to learn more about that read on your own or whatever. it was like i've been waiting to find out about this in class and it was blown over in a couple

sentences. that's where, you know, personally that's where i think like the places, being able to go to the tavern, go to brandywine battlefield, go to the places where the actual history happened, is great because you actually go there and learn from the site and from people who are knowledgeable about the importance of these places and that history that often times is kind of blown through in school or classrooms, you know, teachers have all sorts of competing interests in lots of different subject matter and lots of different things. acknowledging. >> i'll tell you, i think in light of the time constraints and curriculum constraints and all that stuff, i think the best thing that a history teacher can do or an english teacher or whatever, but history teacher what we're talking about right now is to ignite an interest in a lot of kids, a couple kids,

you know, one kid, that's -- if you can do that, it means they go on and look at stuff on their own. that's phenomenal. i think at its best, history, again the best of all possible worlds, history will not only give you an idea of our history or world history, but like in america will make you familiar with the founding documents and our government and also like english class or literature class should teach you empathy. you know, when you get into the first person documents and see what people have experienced on a personal level, which is a way to build an understanding of like a larger event, that's where you're going to get empathy from and literature and all that. that's a huge thing for understanding history right there. >> i know i'm supposed to just be the moderator but i'm going

to inject here. i had a unique experience. i graduated from a high school in a military base in northern england. a department of defense school. from there, it was actually interesting because our history and classes were a little more in tune with what was exactly happened. i graduated in early 2000. right after 9/11, i was on a military school, so like we actually -- our teachers try to tune it in to what was actually happening with the military and the history as well. it was kind of interesting to see those lines on maps that we talk about and the routes they made it through to yorktown and so forth and having someone talk about how they used that in military practice and theories and so forth on the front line and actually having -- i thought it was cool being in fifth grade when like someone's father came in dressed in his battle dress uniform or something and they talked about how they're studying the same thing we were doing and so forth. that's probably why i got caught

up in history. you can blame the department of defense schools and everything. i want to get this question. it will be great for the panelist. it came in from one of our attendees. it goes, probably most americans picture of the red war will be some yet to be produced film or tv series. what would you pitch as the perfect story to tell americans one film about the red war at 250 fiction or nonfiction? finishes this question with saying like a "saving private ryan." if you have to pitch one to spielberg, what's it going to be? >> that's easy. the over mountain victory trail as they gather and march towards the battle of kings mountain because it's totally, you know, the -- what i was talking about before in my presentation that grassroots idea of, you know, you got to protect your home an

country literally, because you get this threat from ferguson saying if you don't fall in line i'm going to basically destroy your farms and kill all your family and, you know, just completely destroy you. and these mountain men, frontier men, back country men were like, i don't think so, and they marched over 300 miles to find ferguson and we know how that ended. >> before we move on, isn't that pretty much the patriot right there, what they do. >> oh, my god. i knew mentioning "the patriot" early was going to come back to haunt me. so i have a lot to say about hollywood and historical films. it all started when i first saw "the santa fe trail" on harper's ferry and what a disaster. it is so amazing that hollywood tries to do -- i'm going to get off my soap box from it -- that hollywood tries to turn history into this fanatical like fantasy

world when the actual history is just as crazy and exciting and thrilling and adventurous and sad and thrilling as what hollywood wants to make it. they need a proper telling of that story. tell the story of the individuals that participated in that and not fictionalize it. >> some of the mountain men would have had facial hair like me. >> definitely. >> me or michael right here. >> but the thing with facial hair if they did have it, it wouldn't have been cultivated. >> yeah. >> it wouldn't have been nicely cultivated. and then eventually they would have shaved it at some point. >> yeah. >> appreciate john, you think this is cultivated. i do appreciate that. >> i'm biased towards my own

campaign. i'm working on a new book to covers the river war and i think the story of what those guys went through, i think you have to tell the story from the average soldier, almost like a "band of brothers" but create a red war version of that. the stories of that siege and what those guys went through and that swamp, it wasn't an island, it was a swamp, you know, the accounts and the french officer -- do i have that right? >> yeah. >> yeah. his descriptions of the fighting on that island, i think that would make -- even just a one-hour documentary would make a compelling story. >> then you have the explosion of the augusta and then the battle of red bank. that's like through the roof. >> that's what i'm currently working on. >> that's cool. >> i ran cross country in high

school and for practice we used to have to run to fort mercer and back to the high school. >> that's awesome. >> i'm actually going to give a shout out to my northern compatriots because it's not within the past -- only within the past like 10 years really that i've really learned about the day of lexington and concord. not just the battles, but the day. and how people have evacuated their houses. women and children and old people and pregnant women and leaving their houses and going out in the country side. you have the concord minute men with other join in standing on a hill past concord bridge watching the british march past them, not firing on them, they marched past them to go to another house to look for artillery. it wasn't until the british came back and halted on the other side of the bridge that firing finally took place. you know, so there was a question about whether they actually wanted to fire on the

british. then towards the end of the battle you had the horrible bloody incidents closer into boston where the british were massacring people that they cornered. and if people saw that they would be horrified. if they saw the true story of that entire day, not only were they exhausted, but they would be horrified. and that's an event that everybody thinks they know everything about but there's so much that's not known about it. that's just a small microcosm of the entire war. there's so much -- you could bring in the experiences of women with the army, women at home trying to keep things together, blacks who joined lord dunmore. you know, you could have the story of colonel titus and colonel ti in new jersey who basically commanded an integrated group of whites and

black loyalists. there's so many cool stories. we could never trust anybody to do it justice because they would mess it up somehow. >> someone did say that you would have ken burns do it, we're good. >> yeah. >> there it is. it's in the chat right now. ken burns does it. >> well, like having people see something that they don't really -- i think that people view the american revolution like across the delaware and don't view it as messy, bloody, difficult as it actually was. that's actually one of the things i like about "the patriot" it focuses more on the military conflict because i think, you know, you watch a lot of things and, you know, the focus is on the causes, the ideals, the formation of our government and our country, which is all important, but, you know, there was a war that had to happen in order for all that

to happen. i do like the idea of like "a band of brothers" type mini series to show this. i think a great unit to follow through would be the third virginia regiment, which saw action in new york, trenton, princeton, brandywine, germantown, valley forge, does the march down to charleston. probably ends like braveheart where these guys all get captured or whatever. >> have you been talking to jim? >> i've been talking about this idea, yeah. >> i think any 250th film i would love to -- i'm sure there will be some -- i would love to get that dynamic of kind of harken back to travis' presentation of like that kind of where loyalties lie and how you figure that out. i think there's a lot that can

be said. we automatically are like the british, they were the bad guys and we won and that's fine, but there's so much more to it than that and that would be really interesting to explore a deep dive into like a band of brothers type series because you can really explore that. >> i was going to say, early on i read -- i got into reading kenneth roberts, rebel in arms, and then i stumbled on a book of oliver about a loyalist. what a great book. he takes him from boston down to the carolinas. and, you know, you get a view, for being written in the '30s or '40s, it's still a great book and he gives you a whole view of the whole loyalist side and brings it down to a human level. that's the kind of stuff that's yeah really amazing. >> i'm going to interject here because i think it would be awesome to do a social network

of the 1775, after lexington and concord and how they're able to pass this message on from down to the carolinas by april 28th and i mean everyone remembers plain as a kid the game of telephone in the classroom by the time you got around 12 kids the story is distorted. the story passed down the eastern seaboard and still had a semblance of truth. it would be cool to have the mark zuckerberg of the 18th century and do "the social network" communities of correspondence. but -- >> then the comedy version writ ends up at the end we're all screwed up. >> yeah. >> the people in georgia going, what's going on? we have this from billy coming in, washington is not known for being a tactical genius. in your opinion, who was the best battlefield commander in the american army? >> wow.

>> i've got to think about that. >> mark, you're excused since you're a george washington fanatic, we'll excuse you. >> i'll go first, and i'll say that washington, while yea tactically he made some mistakes as i mentioned in my talk earlier, his battlefield composure inspired his men and helped lead to some of the victories which was important. it melded into our last discussion too. there does need to be a good biopic on washington, although i will say that i think david morris' portrayal of washington and john adams is superb and i think that's the best version. i think jeff daniels does an all right job in "the crossing" but nobody beats david morris. >> all portray him too old. >> rob says he's too old, looks old, but he has the composure, the reserve, the dignity. he nailed it with that. >> rob is sitting off camera

here right now just shrugged his shoulders like i'm not even on the panel and i'm being name dropped. >> i'm trying to think, maybe daniel morgan. >> that's what i was going to say. >> even just based on -- it's just, you know, with a really tiny force at the end of his tether and basically his tactics inspired greene's at guilford courthouse where they basically, you know, beat the crack out of -- they lost the battle but decimated the british ranks. so, yeah, i mean -- >> that's what i was going to say. that's who i was going to say. you've got this gruff kind of soldier who's leading and inspiring the soldiers, but he's also taking advantage of as much information as he's got and using it and the way he's able

to -- like i just really love the fact that he took what was a misconception about militia and used it to his advantage successfully and it's kind of like -- i mean how can you not like daniel morgan. he was going to be who i would have picked. >> to defend washington, before he became a real bureaucrat, with the onset of 77 and especially 78 and the rest of the world, he was a bureaucrat before that, but he -- at the battles of trenton and princeton i think he let loose. he didn't have as many responsibilities. it was basically do or die. so his tactical in the two battles, his tactical, you know, verve was enough to keep him up top. like i said, i think after that his responsibility just really overwhelmed him and he tried to

keep an army together trying to direct, you know, the division commanders and -- but i think at trenton and princeton he was able to let loose and become basically a small unit commander to a certain extent. the only time during the war. >> i'm racking my brain trying to run through everybody i've worked with in terms of research and because i focus so much on the 77 campaign, he's got a bunch of lackluster people under him. >> answer billy was looking for is that what brian threw up in the chat and that's benedict arnold being the best battlefield commander in the sense of that's on the boot monument at saratoga saying he is the most brilliant of the american commanders and brian mentioned, yeah, he won on land

and sea and was known as a particularly, you know, enabling general, but, yeah, i think everybody's view of him has been obviously tarnished by his ultimate treason. but, yeah, tactically speaking, yeah, i think the argument could be made that arnold is one of the best tactical commanders on the american side. michael said he doesn't have much competition. >> yeah. >> so here's another question, now that billy is not allowed to ask any more questions, so he's already been disqualified, in the background on most of our screens here are multiple volumes of books. we have a question that came in, what is your pre-2000 or nonmodern favorite book on the american revolution? it can't be the emerging red war

series or ones that have been published by beatty or other publishers. >> mine is charles roysteres revolutionary people at war. the continental army is my focus, even though i do branch out a little bit, but that's a magnificent book, it really is, and it will really open your eyes as far as motivation and, you know, brings it down to a personal level. i mean there are others, but, you know, that's -- for me that stands at the top. >> a journal or diary that somebody publishd? >> sure. >> johan awald's diary. >> that's another one. >> that's a great one. >> i'm going to piggyback off mike and say joseph martin. that's what i was thinking. i don't know how much of his information is 100%, but it

really immerses you in the experience i think. >> i will give you another one that's not a diary or journal and won't say a specific one, the series of books for the bicentennial. >> yeah. >> great set of books for how old they are. >> there are a few which are like really simplified and they're okay, but there are some brandywine, long island, saratoga, they're phenomenal and then some of the off the wall books are still so good i'm trying to look across the room at my books. >> early pre-2000s but derek beck's series on uniting the american revolution. i don't know if you've had a chance to read. a two-volume series on the prelude into the american revolution. i'm trying to bring up the other title because it's missing. "the war before independence." two volume series almost read like fiction when you read it through and get to the footnotes

or end notes it's done. those are the type of books. >> what's the author's name? >> derek beck. >> great guy. uniting and work for independence, bringing it up to 1776. the question that's always baffled me is obviously that well, we just start a war, how did it become patriots and so forth, spending years at george washington's birth place monument where did he come from, british provincial officer to leading the american revolution. everyone wants that one moment where they switch, but it's not really that one moment that it switches. i know i'm struggling as moderator because i have to interject because i'm a history guy. mark, what is the one book? >> pre-2000, one of the best i think is freeman's washington biography and i think because of how he paced it as far as from

washington's point of view what information he's gathering at the time, you know, a great campaign study from his point of view. and the other one i would say is "devil of a whipping" about the battle. because babbitt, not only the accounts of the people who fought in the battle but using archeology and experiment, re-enacting and experimental archeology to judge distance and place and stuff like that trying to, you know, on the landscape, you know, being able to interpret that battle, i just think it -- by taking in all these aspects it really brings it to life. i would argue that. >> so we have someone asking, is anyone currently working on a new biography of daniel morgan? do you think he needs a new

biography out there? i'm sorry whoever asked that question, nobody on this panel is working on a daniel morgan biography book. >> wrote something about him, not too long ago. it was pretty good. >> so i'm pretty good. >> i was going to say i will recommend -- because mike was talking about hazing's regimen, holy mayer who did a book back in the '90s called "belonging to the army" just wrote a book on that regimen. knowing holly and everything i have heard of it sounds like it's really good. so that's -- you are getting more unit studies out of the revolution which used to be a civil war thing so you're finally getting more and more unit studies. >> also i'm going to add it's a question for blaine but i'm going to add to t he said a future symposium topic could be

the race to the da nnes river after the battle of cal pins. we've seen a lot of southern literature on this, southern gambit or to the ends of the earth or -- to the ends of the world. why do you think historians are focusing on this race to the da nnes? >> probably because green was -- he was a masterful -- not a tactician, but an operational commander. i mean, he -- he was amazing for what he did in the south, you know, basically leading corn wallace on a long run and let him basically just, you know, take his army on to the rocks in the carolinas even though the army survived. he ran one hell of a good race. he kept his army intact which is what washington did on a larger scale plus -- yourself in the carolinas is not easy as cornwall lass found out but as

the american commanders, as green found out, that's a huge -- the fact that he was quarter master for a period for a valley forge winner and afterwards that was a huge part of what enabled him to do that campaign so successfully really. so, yeah, it's a fascinating -- it's a fascinating campaign. and the fact that it's -- it was done with a minimum of bang bang shoot 'em ups. it was a lot of maneuvering. so, yeah, it's -- i second that. >> i think it's good for any, you know, focus on the southern campaigns during the revolution because i think until, you know, again, as much as you hate it the patriot, i feel like there really wasn't -- there's not much focus on how important these battles were and, you know, obviously you have the american civil war that, you know, most of the population has some sort of emotional or

intellectual attachment to and -- but, you know, the revolution played such an important role that it's often overlooked. so i think that it's great that, you know, as we start nearing the 250, i hope that there's, yeah, more interest in encouragement in research and learning more about the southern campaigns to the revolution because they are, yeah, pretty significant and, yeah -- so i think it's great, you know, if it's green's march to the da nnes or cal pins or charleston or any of into things, i think it's great. so keep it coming. >> all right. so green and morgan, best partnerships, strategic and tactical. is there a better partnership than those two gentlemen in the american revolution? >> washington and knox. >> yeah. >> oh.

>> yeah. >> are you kidding me? >> from late '75, '76 onwards, yeah, right. >> the only thing that really kills me is that after the revolution when washington is president -- or even after washington's presidency during the quasi war washington puts hamilton to lead the army in front of knox that i think really hurt knox's feelings, but i think they've always been -- >> [ inaudible ]. >> what? >> how can you say knox after what happened at germantown? everybody has a failing now and again, you know? >> that was a really bad day. >> a bad day. >> it's actually how knox died, i think someone goes what happened to germantown, it's when he choked on that chicken bone. >> he had a hiccup there. >> it's unmilitary to leave a

castle in your rear. >> you're going to get me fired up. >> do we need a therapy session on henry knox at germantown so michael can get it out of his system here? >> it's going to have to be electric shock, i think. >> it's like telling me that -- there's somebody else -- i one of these other -- i forget what round table it was and somebody was trying to say that sullivan was the blame for all of the army's problems throughout the war. >> what? >> poor guy. >> wow. >> i mean, the french may agree with you, but -- at newport there. >> talk about a scapegoat there. >> yeah. >> i mean, so, all right, let's test your expertise as historians here. we've talked a lot about myths and misconceptions of the war, most of them have been on the military side of things.

outside of the military sphere is there a myth or misconception that the general populous has become ingrained with that you would like to reverse? we're going to start right now and we're going to reverse the trend. so a myth outside the military of the american revolution? >> i think the most basic one would be all the colonists supported the war effort. i mean, we kind of hit on that with the loyalist discussion today, but i think there is a misconception out there from average americans that everybody was for independence. >> i would agree with that, yeah. >> yeah. >> that's my -- >> mike is claiming it. >> so i'm going to reverse, i'm going to throw it out there that, i mean, as it becomes a more world war with france, spain, everything going on we have this misconception that we

are the 13 colonies and the most important colonies in the british empire, but you actually notice that the british they evacuate philadelphia and where do troops go? they go down to the caribbean or the west indies, they go to the floridas and so forth because they are vastly more important. two years ago i will call it the bc time, before covid, i was able to go to barbados and the whole island has tunnels dug under where they could bring infantry and calvary, a guy could sit on a horse and go into the tunnels of bar way dose, go across the island and come out on the other side because that's how important the island of barbados was to the british. i think it's a misconception when the american colonies revolt it's the biggest issue in the british empire. i think we get that because obviously we are all americans so we think we're kind of a big deal, as they say -- the kids say today. throwing it out there. >> yeah, to piggyback off that, bill, you know, i think we all

could think that when we did win our independence that we were then this world player that was out there, you know, and what the reality was was they signed a treaty and every european country was kind of like a bunch of vultures standing around the colonies waiting to pick these people off because they didn't think we would be able to stand at our own country. up past the war of 1812 until we actually, you know, make ourselves a player on the world sphere you mentioned ewald's diary. they are up in canada basically waiting for this experiment in american liberty to collapse and then you have these colonies that are going to be up for the pickings and so, you know, i think we tend to think of ourselves, we -- you know, this all happened washington crossed the delaware, we won yorktown,

we became a country, we signed the constitution and we became the world power and it really didn't play out that way and there's all these kinds of constant -- you know, the whole idea of this being an experiment it couldn't be more true. that's a perfect word for it because -- and all the way up until the very day we're still experimenting this whole idea of, you know, some would argue the revolution that really hasn't even stopped. we constantly are redefining ourselves and, you know, how this whole idea of self-government, you know, was tested during the civil war, you know, and is constantly being tested. so it's kind of interesting to view ourselves not as a world power that was started in 1776, but really something that evolved from, you know, 13 independent states that declared their independence, bought this bloody war and, you know, continued to make it work over the years. >> well, england had the english

channel and the navy, we were lucky enough to have the atlantic ocean and no navy otherwise we might not have -- might not have survived. >> someone actually put in the chat a great comment. they say a huge misconception was that the declaration of independence was signed on july 4th. it was actually a month later than most i think -- august 2nd or august 4th i think a lot of the folks came in to sign t i'm getting some of the dates mixed up. yeah, just throwing it out there as one of the major misconceptions. >> well, and i think part of that also just to kind of piggyback on that part of that was also that it was this one thing and that was t okay, declaration of independence and now we are off and running, that it was really this big buildup an it wasn't just one single thing that we were like let's all get together and make this decision. i mean, you have two continental

congresses that happen and they're having these conversations and trying to figure out if this is the right thing to do and it's not just one time they all got into a room, signed this declaration and done. that it was really complicated and it ties into some of those thoughts and ideas that we've been talking about with some of the people who were experiencing this history where it's like, you know, which side do you pick? do you pick the comfort of british rule where, you know, you're protected, you've got, you know, troops that are going to be able to -- british troops that can help protect you against native-american attacks or do you, you know, rebel against the only government you've known? it's so complicated and so complex and it builds to, yes, july 4th, independence, whatever, but there's so much more even after that before we can really get to kind of the heart of, okay, here, we're doing this. >> you figure the autumn after

the declaration was signed it looked all over, it looked like it was -- that was going to be the end right there, you know? and then later on you had the economy was horrible, i mean, it was -- you know, the -- there was rampant inflation and they were having a hard time feeding the army and keeping it together. so it went in waves during the war. it really did. and, again, a lot of people just don't realize that. they really don't realize that at all, what a near run thing it was a number of times. >> our first september 11th, september 1776, john adams and ben franklin are meeting with the howl brothers to discuss the peace commission. you know, that's only a few months after they signed the declaration. >> yeah. >> yeah, i think a good word is the fragility of the whole thing. people don't realize how fragile everything was and that it was all -- you yeah, it could have

all gone away anytime, at numerous points throughout the war. so it's pretty amazing that it did fall into place the way it did. >> since we've got a little over ten minutes left i'm going to throw a hand grenade into this. >> knox? >> besides henry knox. of course obviously we are dealing with a mass pandemic, inoculations, vaccinations, washington introduces inoculation or veer lags to the continental army. so with that being said besides the small poks inoculation what is one thing on the periphery that -- actually, let me go back to that. let me ask is that a good idea? what do you view on the view of the epidemic, the belief that small pox would have been a

major player if washington does not inoculate. is that a myth? is that blown out of proportion? you hear a lot about this virus being so magnified. so is that just 21st century reading on to it, later on after the war you have the yellow fever epidemic so you hear about these two big viruses. are they blown out of proportion or are they pretty accurate on how detrimental they could have been if you didn't do mass efforts of vaccination. >> it would have decimated the army. i mean, you look at -- look at what it did not northern army right after the retreat out of canada. i mean, it even killed -- i forget his name, but i think it was john -- >> thomas. >> yeah, john thomas. even killed john thomas. on the islands up in st. lawrence or i think it was cerell, basically there was a smallpox camp in the middle of the island and it was just full

of bodies and diseased people. the fact that -- the fact that he began in spring of '77, maybe early winter '77 with the smallpox camps, i think that made a huge difference. just after your town, we had this huge victory at yorktown and then i think it was -- i think it was john hall's diary had a lot of other accounts. the army was being designated by some smallpox but also i think by other diseases, i think it was tie if you say and other things. as they headed north from yorktown to head back to the northern states they were being dropped off at different parts and, i mean, the philadelphia hospitals and barracks were full of these guys and, yeah, i think it really would have been a real mess. if you've ever read about -- if you've ever read about the effect that smallpox had on people, which i just did it for

an article not too long ago, it's freaking horrific. it's a horrific disease. if it doesn't -- at the very least it's probably going to leave you disfigured, you know, with pox scars all over your face and it's liable -- i forget what the percentage of deaths from smallpox was, but it was relatively high, but it was a horrible death, too. it reminds me of ebola. that's the kind of death it was. i think it was a huge thing that, you know, they got the smallpox vaccine for inoculation into the army at least. >> total disclaimer i just finished the book "pox" so it was on my head here. i finished it yesterday. wow, who is it literally went through the canadian army and the militia and so forth. it's killed three out of -- every soldier it killed on the

battlefield two or three would die from smallpox. i didn't know what you guys thought about it because i thought i'd bring it up. you can't escape current news about a virus today in our world. >> the fact that we've eradicated, knock wood, we've eradicated smallpox at this point which is another unbelievably huge thing. i think it's one of the few diseases we've actually been able to eradicate. >> i will say this to talk about misconceptions, i think that just how deadly all this stuff was -- first of all, how deadly the whole war was in the sense that, you know, about 25,000 americans die, about 25,000 ground forces die, i mean, you're talking 50,000 people deaths, a, you are talking about in the colonies at the time you have a little over 2.5 million people, that's 1% of the whole

population dies as a result of the war, which, you know, in today's population you're talking like 3 million people dying and you're also talking, you know, in the majority of these deaths aren't battlefield deaths, the majority are from disease and how terrible these diseases were. as you mentioned, what we're experiencing now with covid and that's with all the science and technology we have, you can't imagine how terrifying it would be not knowing how these different diseases are being spread. you know, i wrote a blog post about the 1793 yellow fever pandemic in philadelphia and just the total lack of understanding how that disease spread. i mean, they were wearing masks, lighting bonfires in the streets, you know, doing all these things not realizing that it was the mosquitos that were passing this disease around and so, you know, just the fear that

must be pervaded society at that time, you know, how they were able to deal with that kind of uncertainty, you know, it makes -- we should all be grateful we live in a time period we do because it would have been terrifying not knowing, yeah, how often death would be coming around everybody's door. i mean, you mentioned -- john mentioned yorktown, the camp fevers. george washington's own stepson catches camp fever and dies just a couple weeks after the surrender at yorktown. i mean, this did not -- yeah, did not choose between class or skin color or anything else like that. everybody was -- a lot of people were getting sick and people were dying left and right and it was a common thing that everybody had to deal with. so, yeah, like i said, we should just be grateful we live in the time period we do, actually. >> that's a great point. i mean, we always talk about that other war that happens and how big the population was and the deaths and so forth.

that's one of the misconceptions of the american revolution is how much death and dying and loss of life there was. 1% of the population is an astronomical figure at that time and i think that gets written off because of later wars and so forth. yeah, great point there. mark, we have about five minutes left. i'd like to conclude. let's go around to the top of my screen from michael all the way down, vanessa, you're last, no offense, but we have other meetings to attend together so that's why you're last. any last points, misconceptions, behind sights that weren't covered? michael? >> i mean, just because of the work that i do i think people either understand how much maneuvering these troops went through in between these battles. i think people see battles as set these things and don't realize what goes on in between them and how it affects -- and i

just know working on my germantown book the amount of maneuvering washington does between brandy wine and germantown and the miles those guys put on in that basically three-week period is insane. i don't know the number off the top of my head but it's probably close to 60, 70 miles that they are putting on just marching not mentioning the other skirmishes and minor engagements that takes place. i don't think people appreciate that aspect of soldier life when they -- you know, they can understand the conflict of battle and what people go through, but what about in between those battles and how does it affect their fighting ability going into the next battle? i just think that's something that needs to be appreciated a little bit more. >> that's a great point. thanks, mike. john? >> i will actually go back to african americans or americans of african descent. you had the number that actually

fought, you know, for the wig side, the cause of independence, but then you had all the africans who didn't necessarily fight for the british but they went over to the british side and that wasn't done because the british were against slavery that was done as a pragmatic -- pragmatic strike against the americans, about -- you know, against the rebels. they did promise them their freedom but when you look at how they were treated during the yorktown campaign especially when they caught smallpox which largely was then -- and they were left by the wayside or they were chased out of the british lines basically to fend for themselves. you know, they were basically pawns, they were pawns, you know, of the british and the situation at the time. you know, again, some people hear about "the book of negroes" at the end of the war and about all the black americans who were

who went to canada and gained their freedom, some went to west end december, some were enslaved. it wasn't because of this great idea that british wanted freedom for blacks, it was a pragmatic move. that the british stood by the african americans or blacks at the end of the war says a lot for them because washington wanted them returned. that's why "the book of negroes" was made. they wanted a list of the blacks that had been, quote/unquote, stolen from americans and wanted them returned. carlton refused to do that. that is a shining light but treatment post-war in canada was not always good. you know, again, it's a approximately tough and not a, you know -- and i don't mean this as a pawn, but, again, not a black and white situation. that's my two cents.

>> thank you. mark? >> yeah, you know, i will go back to, you know, the campaign i mentioned, trenton, princeton and, you know, we just talked about how fragile everything was, you know, i think nothing -- nothing shows that more than that campaign and although the myth is this painting of washington crossing the delaware confidently and going on to great victory in the founding of the country, that at the time it was how close we came to actual defeat and, you know, i love this quote, you know, from john adams to his wife when he says posterity, you will never know how much it costs the present generation to preserve your freedom. i hope you will make good use of it. if you do not i shall repent in heaven that i ever took half the pains to preserve it. i think that's a great quote to

realize how grateful we should be and that -- and that all of this, that this entire -- the country as we know it today would not have been possible without the sacrifices and the efforts of these people 250 years ago. you have to remember it's not this myth, this actually happened. >> thanks, mark, for sharing. ms. smiley. >> you're making me follow that? oh, man. no pressure. >> he is a fellow park ranger. >> i know. i've got to one up him, right? no, i think it kind of piggy backs a little bit on what mark was saying that, you know, there's a -- potentially that misconception of the fact that maybe this history doesn't matter or that it's not relevant to today, but it is, and i think that's our biggest challenge

going forward into the 250th is obviously we're commemorating a lot of these events but really finding those deeper connections and truly understanding why this history is important, connecting with these stories that are both unknown and untold and really just seeing how these stories are relevant to today's modern time. i think we've got a lot of work ahead of us, but events like this and continued programming are what's going to help us get there. so hopefully one day we can dispel the misconception that a 250-year-old history doesn't matter anymore because it does. >> well, thank you all. mike, john, clark and vanessa for being part of the panel. great questions and answering, thank you to all of those who put questions in the chat as well. for the conclusion i will pass it over to liz here to end our

day. >> thanks again, all. this was really amazing and we've got a lot of love in the chat for our full day of conversation and i've got to say my tavern heart is happy because these are the types of things that would have happened in our public dining room, these conversations and these debates and we kind of pick up at gatsby's tavern museum, we pick up from all of these stories we have heard over the course of today and we won, yay, what happens next? what do we do? what do we become? so i highly encourage you to visit us in alexandria because we explore that story of what happens next and it's -- it's just as complex and messy as the revolution and prior. so, again, thank you to our speakers, thank you to everyone at home and as we always say at gatsby's tavern museum a hazah to everyone.

weekends on c-span 2 are an intellectual feast. every saturday american history tv documents america's story. and on sundays book tv brings you the latest in nonfiction books and authors. funding for c-span 2 comes from these television companies and more. including charter communications. >> broadband is a force for empowerment. that's why charter has invested billions, building infrastructure, upgrading technology, empowering opportunity in communities big and small. charter is connecting us. >> charter communications, along with these television companies supports c-span 2 as a public service. tonight on american history tv a look into a supreme court landmark case, plessy versus ferguson which solidified the separate but equal doctrine and provided legal protection to segregation laws passed by the