Www.waynesville.k12.mo.us



How did the smaller wars lead to the French and Indian War? Was there growing resentment already growing with the mother country?Skirmishes lead us to the French and Indian war ultimately because both the French and the British are competing to expand their north American colonies into the west of the Appalachian Mountains and the trading rights in North America. Both the French and the British felt it was vital to have claims on mainly the Ohio Valley to increase their own power and wealth and to limit the strength of their rival. The colonist of the new world were already showing signs of resentment to the mother country essential because of the taxation that was brought upon the colonist. This was caused because the Britain’s economy was suffering due to debt cause by the skirmishes. Also as the New England settlers fought alongside the British and claimed territory from the French the British won’t allow New England settler to settle in the new territory.How did the French and Indian War prepare the colonists for the American Revolution?The debt from the war was the reason the British began taxing the colonies. The war also weakened British so they couldn’t fight back against the colonists. Since France wasn’t happy with British after the war, they supported the colonists. Without the French/Indian War there probably wouldn’t have been a Revolutionary War. There would not have been taxations due to war debt. The French helped the colonist to have success. What were the land pressures that led to the French and Indian War?The biggest land pressure that led to the French and Indian War was the Ohio River Valley. Britain and France both had claims on this location and it led to feuds. France built several forts in the Ohio River Valley to try and improve their claims on the area, but in 1754, George Washington brought about 160 British militiamen to attempt to force out the French. The British forces were outnumbered and defeated by the French. This skirmish erupted into the French and Indian War when France heard of the Britain’s plans for the next strike.Discuss the importance of landscape in crafting battle strategy for both the French and the English.Landscape was important if crafting battle strategies for the French and the English, for example in the Battle of Quebec. Since Quebec was on a cliff all French had the uphill advantage. The English also could just starve them out, but there was too small for completely starving out. The French also had the river valley which helped a lot and the British took Fort Duquesne. They couldn’t communicate with troops. What was the significance of the Battle of Quebec, both in terms of securing victory for the British and for demoralizing the French forces?A combination of the strategic position of Quebec and the demoralization of the French losing their capital. Quebec’s position on the St. Lawrence made it a key trading post and military stronghold. Holding a position on the river, as well as being situated on a hill led to Quebec being a serious point of contest. Once the French were beaten on the Plains of Abraham, a disorderly general retreat was sounded. This was followed closely by British regulars. Days after the battle, Quebec capitulated allowing the 7,000 British and Colonial troops into garrison. How did the French and Indian War heighten the conflict between Britain and the American colonies? It created more tension between France and Britain and continued the solidification of their rivalry. It also made native Americans side more with France. Discuss the effects of "Pontiac's War" and its implications for further conflict between the British and the Indians.Pontiac’s War was the rebellion of the Ottawa chief in order to protect the Ohio Valley as the trade and commerce were decreasing after the French had left and the British settled in the area. It created a hostile relationship between the British and the Native Americans both vengeful of each other. This hostility caused the frustration of the British who fought back with small pox blankets in order to wipe the population of the Natives to halt further rebellions. The implications for further war gave way when the British started to wipe the Natives out, causing the Natives to side with the French and be recruited by the French as they were given the resources, such as armed weapons from them. Also, the British, fearing the out lash from the Natives once again, they heavily occupied the areas of the Natives with military in order to stabilize them. This gave the Natives frustration as they weren’t able to venture into their own land, meaning there weren’t resources provided for them. This, despite the British wanting peace, caused more implications of conflict between them.Why were the British unable to attract and retain Indian allies for much of the war?The British took retribution against the Native American tribes that fought on the French side by cutting off their supplies and then forcing them to obey their rules. The British were constantly trying to encroach on the Native Americans’ land as well. The Indians, specifically the Five Nations of the Iroquois, played the British against the French in order to maximize their own benefits and the French’s . At the beginning of the war, the French had much more land than the British did. This meant that more Natives populated the French territory. The French eventually learned to work and trade with the Natives which created a sense of loyalty to the French rather than the British.What was the significance of the "massacre" at Fort William Henry? How was this event used by the British and the American colonists to justify brutality against the Indians?The massacre at Fort William Henry was a significant event within the French and Indian War. With forts scattered about Lake George, the French and English were close in proximity with each other with forts scattered on the lake (The west of the lake was a disputed area where the British and French were striving to hold land in modern day NY, and PN. The massacre at Fort William Henry was taken on by the Indians, whom had sided with the French. With brutal massacring of the English, the French had come back, and released a few prisoners who were captured by the Indians. This event was used by the British and American colonists was used to Justify brutality against the Indians (The Indians were treated harsh under English rule; this was seen as revenge seeking massacre) … Discuss the elements of successful (and unsuccessful) policy among different English leaders: Braddock, Wolfe, the Earl of Loundoun, Pitt. What worked and what didn't work? BraddockBritish Gov sent Gen. Edward Braddock as commander in chief in N.A.Alienated potential Indian alliesColonial leaders failed to cooperate with himFocused on social standing Defeated July 9th, 1755 at Fort DuquesneWolfeSept. 3 1759 the British under Wolfe defeated the French at QuebecBattle of Abraham The capture of Quebec and Montreal ended French control in N.A.Earl of Loundoun1756-1758 military commander of all British troops in VALost all his regiment during the royalist uprising in 1745Did nothing to fortify the remaining western forts Benjamin Franklin declared his campaigns “expensive, and disgraceful”PittTurning point of the war when William Pitt took over wartime operationsBelived N.A. was critical for England’s global dominion ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download