Partisans and Redcoats: The Southern Conflict That Turned the Tide of the American Revolution

by Walter Edgar

From one of the South′s foremost historians, this is the dramatic story of the conflict in South Carolina that was one of the most pivotal contributions to the American Revolution.

In 1779, Britain strategised a war to finally subdue the rebellious American colonies with a minimum of additional time, effort, and blood. Setting sail from New York harbour with 8,500 ground troops, a powerful British fleet swung south towards South Carolina. One year later, Charleston fell. And as King George′s forces pushed inland and upward, it appeared the six-year-old colonial rebellion was doomed to defeat. In a stunning work on forgotten history, acclaimed historian Walter Edgar takes the American Revolution far beyond Lexington and Concord to re-create the pivotal months in a nation′s savage struggle for freedom. It is a story of military brilliance and devastating human blunders - and the courage of an impossibly outnumbered force of demoralised patriots who suffered terribly at the hands of a merciless enemy, yet slowly gained confidence through a series of small triumphs that convinced them their war could be won. Alive with incident and colour.

Genres: History, American Revolution, Nonfiction, American History, American Revolutionary War, War, 18th Century

224 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2001

About the author

Dr. Walter B. Edgar was born in Mobile, Alabama in 1943. He received his undergraduate education from Davidson College in 1965 and his M.A. and Ph.D. in History from the University of South Carolina in 1967 and 1969, respectively. Dr. Edgar served in the U.S. Army from 1969-71, including a year as an advisor in Vietnam. He has been a professor of history at the University of South Carolina since 1972, has served as graduate director of the Department of History, and has directed many graduate students in their studies for the M.A. and the Ph.D. Dr. Edgar was the founder and first director of the Applied History Program (now the Public History Program), offering graduate training in historic preservation, museum studies, and archival theory. He has also been the director of the Institute of Southern Studies since 1990, and has been the Claude Henry Neuffer Professor of Southern Studies since 1995.

Chief among Dr. Edgar’s many publications is his acclaimed South Carolina: A History, the first comprehensive history of the state published in the last fifty years, described as “a bold and sweeping reassessment and the history of South Carolina for this generation.” He is also the editor of several books, such as A Southern Renascence Man: Views of Robert Penn Warren and South Carolina: The WPA Guide to the Palmetto State. Dr. Edgar’s most recent major work was a multi-year project planning, supervising, and editing the South Carolina Encyclopedia, with articles by almost 600 contributors, published by the University of South Carolina Press in 2006. An enthusiastic interpreter of South Carolina and Southern history, culture, and life, he does so in a public forum in his weekly radio series on South Carolina ETV Radio: Walter Edgar's Journal, and as a frequent speaker to many historical, civic, and other organizations in South Carolina, across the United States, and abroad.

(from SC Hall of Fame: http://www.scetv.org/index.php/sc_hal...)

Reviews

[Brett C · Rating 4 out of 5]

I thought this a good look into South Carolina's role in the American Revolution. Walter Edgar did a great job of discussing the colonial history of South Carolina and its uniqueness as one of the original colonies. He explained the tensions of sectarian violence motivated by religious (Presbyterian and Baptist) and ethnic (Scotch Irish) that fueled successful war against British rule. Furthermore tensions in families occurred because Loyalists to the Crown and supporters of the American Patriot cause divided families, brothers and fathers, and communities as a whole.

Edgar did a great of explaining the insurgency, guerrilla warfare, and war crimes launched throughout the South Carolina backcountry. This paralleled the 2000 movie The Patriot that was filmed throughout South Carolina. Many were veterans of the French & Indian War and learned ambush/guerrilla warfare tactics among the Cherokee and used these against British forces.

Overall a great book and quick read on introducing the involvement of South Carolina during the American Revolution. Recommended to Southern history and Revolution readers. Thanks!

[Jason · Rating 3 out of 5]

Few South Carolinians understand the importance of their state in the Revolutionary War. Walter Edgar, a history professor at the University of South Carolina, has attempted to place the war, and South Carolina's role in it, in context and make it accessible to the present day, but with mixed results.

This book is strongest in its non military sections, as Edgar is not a military historian. The description of the South Carolina backcountry, and the growth in immigrants who did not pass through Charleston, in the mid 1700's, specifically the Scotch Irish coming southward down the Catawba valley, is particularly well done. Yet significant military engagements in the new state, such as Kings Mountain, Cowpens and Ninety Six are barely covered. Instead, minor insurgent engagements, like Huck's defeat are covered in much greater detail.

King George III was quoted to call the war in its later half, "that damned Presbyterian War", echoing English conflicts in Scotland that had only been recently settled during the King's grandfather's reign. And Edgar does a fine job of showing some similarities between English conflicts with Scotland and the British Army's conflict with backcountry Carolina settlers.

Yet this book has its weaknesses, mostly from a lack of direction. It would have been better to have written a history of the effect of the war from a social perspective, with the material here, rather than a hybrid military history. A book such as the Road to Guilford Courthouse would be much better for a military history. This is a short and at times uneven book, which does not go into as much depth as needed to explain the strain between the South Carolina backcountry and the Coastal establishment near Charleston. It is a decent overview of the conflict in the South Carolina backcountry, but there are better sources of the social and military conflict.

[Fredrick Danysh · Rating 4 out of 5]

Most of what is written about the American Revolution covers Virginia northward. Partisans & Redcoats looks at political and religious factors of the Carolinas and Georgia, but mostly South Carolina. This is a good rendering of the American Revolution in the Southern colonies.

[Sarah W. · Rating 4 out of 5]

This brief history nevertheless manages to add significant insights to the American Revolution and the war which accompanied it. Most histories of the Revolutionary War focus on the northern colonies, as this is where Washington and his army spent much of the war. Yet, conflict was also unfolding in the southern colonies, conflict that could be characterized as both disorganized and brutal. I was struck by many of the stories recounted in this book - of a disabled man who could not fight and so instead became an American spy, of women who passed messages to men who were eluding British soldiers, and others. In addition, this book was also a local history, grounded in a particular place and the people who considered that place home, making for fascinating connections between the local and national aspects of history. Overall, a readable account of a significant part of the American Revolution which deserves more attention.

[Thomas · Rating 4 out of 5]

I visited Cowpens National Battlefield Park, site of a Revolutionary War battle (1-17-1780) between US soldiers under Gen. Daniel Morgan and British cavalry/dragoons under Colonel Banastre Tarleton, model for the chief bad guy in the Mel Gibson movie "Patriot."
In the movie, Gibson kills the bad guy. In real life, Tarleton went back to Britain, served in Parliament, became a member of Wellington's card playing group, and died a peaceful death of old age. More info can be found in this excellent book.
Mr. Edgar spoke about his book on C-SPAN. He commented that some British newspapers protested about the brutality in the movie "Patriot." He said that, in fact, the movie toned down the British ruthless behavior. He further stated if the combatants were judged by today's laws, Tarleton would be considered a war criminal. However, he went to say that there was cruelty on both sides, with Loyalists/Tories and US soldiers burning each others homes. Tarleton is notorious for the battle of Waxhaws, SC (5-29-1780), where his dragoons attacked and overwhelmed about 400 Virginia patriots. They attempted to surrender. Tarleton's men, following their leader's example, killed every last one.
US soldiers under Morgan defeated Tarleton's dragoons at Cowpens. Tarleton escaped. Some US soldiers wanted to kill all the British soldiers, crying "Tarleton's Quarters!" but US officers managed to stop this.

[Lissa · Rating 2 out of 5]

I started this back in January and never got past the first forty pages. Picking it back up, I quickly remembered why. This time, however, I did manage to finish it, at least!

There is some good information in here, to be sure. I've not read much about the southern conflict during the American Revolution, except a bit about the "major" battles (such as Charleston, Cowpens, etc), so I definitely learned some things. I think the strongest part of the book was the social aspect of the groups that made up the backcountry of South Carolina (predominately Scots-Irish, as well as German and Welsh and people who were native to other colonies but had come to South Carolina at some point) and how they did (or, mostly, did NOT) get along with one another (coastal elite vs backcountry settlers, Baptists vs Presbyterians, Regulators vs Modulators, etc). They were at each others' throats numerous times before Loyalist vs Patriot (or Tory vs Rebel) was even a thing. And they were super adept at slaughtering one another, considering the numbers given towards the end of the book.

Otherwise, this book reads as something that is way too short to cover all of the necessary topics that a book about the southern conflict in the American Revolution would need to include. The actual "meat" of the book is less than 150 pages, and even that is a big stretch because the font in my copy, at least, was HUGE with liberal line spacing.

The battles described, for the most part, are poorly summarized and glossed over (an exception being made for King's Mountain and a couple of the "fort" skirmishes). A lot of names are thrown around, but if you aren't super familiar with this era of history, you probably won't know many of them. It's some work to keep them separated from one another in the mind, especially since the given names in this era are rather repetitive (where at least three-quarters of the men are named John, James, William, Henry, Thomas, Richard, or Robert, it seems - kudos to Tarleton's parents, at least, for giving him a memorable first name).

I got rather tired of the author's not-so-subtle editorializing in the book (calling his particular favorites "brave," for example, and he is a HUGE fanboy of the Regulators...which I mean, yeah, they are really interesting and accomplished some things, but they could literally do no wrong in the author's eyes). And I cannot even describe how weak the constant "well the British started it" and "well the British are ultimately responsible" justifications for the mass murders were. Yeah, okay, the British did some messed up shit. So did the militias on both sides. Murdering unarmed people asking for quarter is a universal wrong. See? Not hard to say it.

Also, the lack of mention of slaves in this book except in a few places is...surprising. And when they were mentioned, unless they were helping the Patriot cause in some way (Watt), they were treated more as property than as people. Yeah, yeah, I know, that is "historically correct," but it's still gross, especially in modern scholarship. I present examples:

There is no estimate on the value of the property confiscated by the army of occupation...Nearly 25 percent of the state's slave labor force (much of it located in the lowcountry) disappeared. Given the average price of a slave in eighteenth-century South Carolina, a conservative estimate of their worth would be $67.5 million in today's dollars. But there is no way to estimate the value of lost livestock, furniture, houses, and barns. p. 137

So the slaves were "confiscated" and "disappeared," much like the "furniture." This is such a passive approach to something that was often NOT. Slaves were actively running away and actively joining British camps and actively working for the British. Some actually took up arms against the Patriots. How is this not incredible and not a huge topic in this book, which purports to focus on the "civil war" aspect of the conflicts in South Carolina?

This isn't just a one-off; although I didn't mark the page, there is another passage when the British soldiers "carry off" (or a similar phrase) slaves and a good portion of them "follow the army." Once again, not a good choice of words here, because this was an active self-liberation process, not merely "following" along.

I don't think this book will be sticking around in my personal library. There have to be better written and more thorough books about the southern conflict during the American Revolution than this one.

[JoséMaría BlancoWhite · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a nice and short little book about the American Revolution in the South. A fast read, as much as it seems to have been written: in a hurry (it ends quite abruptly too). The social environment is well described, from the personal accounts of many protagonists on both sides, to the battles and skirmishes that took place along the broad map of South Carolina. It was as crude as all civil wars: Fathers against sons in some cases. A very visual account, and fast paced.

If only it were a little more organized, geographical and chronological-wise. The action takes place as soon in the Piedmont as in the low-country, and we move from one family or protagonist to another at lightening speed. Easy to get a little confused. But it does convey the general picture well. Yes, you can get the general idea of what the Revolution meant for South Carolina in this little book. What a tough people the Scots-Irish are. God bless them and the South.

[Lee · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting book that details how the British helped lose the Revolutionary War by their actions in South Carolina. It details the lead up to the war and then the actions by the British and the Loyalists and the various Patriot guerrilla commanders who battled against them. Good read.

[Tom Darrow · Rating 2 out of 5]

I was very underwhelmed by this book. I have visited South Carolina several times and heard about the civil war that took place there during the American Revolution, so I was looking forward to reading this book and learning more about that conflict.

What I got was essentially a glorified Master's thesis. The book, in large font, numbers 145 pages. There is an additional 15 pages of chronology, short biographies, and a glossary, which are all included to pad the page count.

The topic in important and interesting, but the author approaches it in a very amateurish way, (which is surprising, considering the author's credentials as a leading scholar in SC).

The first chapter contains a lot of information about the people of the area. While important to establish context, it is, again, amateurish in it's execution. Each paragraph is list of things people in the area had. For example, in one paragraph, it talks about utensils people in the backcountry used to eat their food. In the next paragraph, it talked about the typed of animals they raised. Probably 12 pages of lists of things. This information is important, but could have been worked into the story more seamlessly by a better writer.

Through the bulk of the central portion of the book, the author makes reference to multiple participants in the fighting. Obviously, a historian should do this. But the way he brings these people up is sort of like "hey, I found the name of a person involved in te fighting!" They aren't woven into the narrative very well. When I said this was like a master's thesis, this is what made me think of that.

The last two chapters are basically useless. The second to last chapter, especially so. This "book" basically has two conclusions/summaries. The second to last chapter just sums up points about the barbarity of the conflict and importance in the greater war. The last chapter summed up things, again, but included some additional context, taking the narrative to Yorktown.

Which leads me to my final issue with the "book". If this was supposed to be a "book" about the fighting in South Carolina, why did it end without a decent coverage of the battle of Cowpens? Tarleton was a significant figure in the book. The SC militia made up a bit portion of the US army at Cowpens. That seems like a logical place to end the "book," but the author missed the point.

Overall, I would say that I wrote better grad thesis books in my grad school days.

The only reason I don't give this one star is because I did learn some new things.

[Charles · Rating 5 out of 5]

When the history of the American revolution against Great Britain is taught in schools, the emphasis is on Lexington, Concord, Bunker Hill, Valley Forge and Yorktown. Very rarely is there any mention of anything south of Virginia. That is unfortunate, for some of the greatest battles of the war took place in South Carolina.
One fact that is rarely mentioned in the history books is that the American Revolutionary War was more than a battle with British troops. It was very much a civil war and like all civil wars, it was bitterly fought. For when such a war breaks out, many people simply use it to settle old scores and grievances. Some just use it to rob and destroy their neighbor’s possessions.
At the time of the American Revolutionary War, South Carolina was fundamentally two different cultures. There was the wealthier coastal region and the backcountry made up of settlers that broke the land and worked hard trying to make a living. Neither side really had much time for the other. When the war took place, the British sent an army to the coastal region and tried to recruit armies from the citizens that proclaimed their continued loyalty to the British crown.
As is described in detail, this was a brutal war where both sides pillaged and engaged in scorched Earth policies, carrying off the livestock and burning the homes of people suspected of being sympathetic to the other side. The number of battles that took place in South Carolina is surprising. Thousands of men were engaged on both sides as the American forces wore down the British and their Loyalist allies. Many of the Loyalists are portrayed as scheming thugs rather than honorable men fighting for what they thought was their legitimate leader.
This is a book that should be read by everyone interested in how the American Revolutionary War was fought and won. It can be strongly argued that the American victory was won in South Carolina rather than the more well-known fighting in the northern states.

[Kristy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent narrative history of SC partisans and the battles in SC after the British occupied Charleston in the American Revolution. The author provides tales of intentional brutality made by both British and American troops. He appears to argue that had Cornwallis stopped the British brutality and never asked for an oath, there wouldn’t have been any partisan bands. But since Cornwallis allowed British troops and Tories to treat neighbors, families and communities inhumanely to point of death, it lead men to defend their homes and country. Tories and British soldiers killed prisoners of war and burned houses, barns, and animals. Even locked a woman and child in their burning house. They were able to escape. He also mentioned that whigs and partisans would wreck retribution on the British and Tories and do exactly as the British and Tories had done to them….they would also kill prisoners of war. It shows that brothers in laws, fathers & sons, and neighbors fought against one another even turning them over in Andrew Jackson’s case - they were in a relative’s house hiding and a Tory neighbor told the British of their location. This book is specific to the SC backcountry warfare of the American revolution, and it rarely mentions the Swamp Fox. This is a fascinating book published in 2001 most likely around the time of Mel Gibson’s movie The Patriot. I recalled many scenes from the movie while reading this book and remembering how I felt when I watched it as I didn’t believe people could do this to each other, but unfortunately, it did happened. Ironically, the author calls the American revolution the first American civil war, and his defense of his argument in the book leaves no question that this part of the revolution in SC was a civil war pitting more so families and neighbors against each more than the 1860’s Civil War as this was more regionally based north vs south.

[Ryan · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is probably a 3.5. There's a lot missing that I wanted to read in this, but there's a lot of interesting detail, as well. The author does a great job of discussing the immigration and societies that formed in the South Carolina backcountry, and how they differed from the planter class and the more prosperous crowd in the Lowcountry. I really enjoyed the more sociological aspects of the book versus the military sections of the book, and I think that's because that's what the author enjoyed (without knowing much of the author). There is little focus on the actual major battles in South Carolina, but rather the skirmishes that kind of led to the big battles that pushed Cornwallis north chasing Greene. I think the author did a great job though explaining the mentality of the tories versus the patriots and what drew people into the conflict. Overall, I just think the book would have been better with either the author focusing on the people, or an author focusing on the actual war, but this seemed kind of lacking. And it was super short, only about 140-150 pages of actual book, so to fit what he did, I'd recommend this for a quick hit on SC Revolutionary War history. But for someone who's read a bit more about the War, I could use a little more of all of it.

[Jeff · Rating 4 out of 5]

Last week I visited all the National Parks in the SC. This included four Revolutionary War sites: Fort Moultrie, Ninety Six, Cowpens, and King's Mountain. After my quest, my father-in-law lent me this book.

I had hoped to read more about the places I saw. However, that's not quite what this book is about. The purpose of this book is two fold: first, Edgar tries to highlight all of the small skirmishes (such as Huck's Defeat) that led to King's Mountain rather than start the narrative at King's mountain. Second, Edgar attempts to show how the Revolutionary War in SC was more like a Civil War. The majority of these skirmishes were not Continental Army vs British regulars but Whigs/Patriots/American militia vs Tories/Loyalists/Americans loyal to the crown. As such, the war in SC was particularly brutal. Actions of both sides would be considered war crimes today.

On a personal note, it was very neat to see mention of my father-in-law's namesake, Joseph Gaston.

[Anson Cassel Mills · Rating 3 out of 5]

There are longer and more detailed works about the American Revolution in the Carolina backcountry, notably John Buchanan, The Road to Guilford Courthouse (1997); but Edgar’s well-written book will probably satisfy all but the most avid Revolutionary War buffs. Edgar is lucid, succinct, and judicious in his judgments even when his occasional attempts to draw relevance from the 1990s seems a bit strained.

Edgar has two major themes, both sound in my view: first, that the British (and specifically Sir Henry Clinton) inadvertently revitalized the Revolution in the backcountry by issuing the provocative proclamation of June 3, 1780, and by permitting “atrocities” (xv) that led to “the most brutal warfare ever fought in what is now the United States.” (140) Edgar’s second theme is that the turning point for the Patriot victory came earlier than is usually credited, at Huck’s Defeat on July 12, 1780, rather than at the Battle of Kings Mountain in October.

[William Guerrant · Rating 5 out of 5]

A well written and interesting little book (145 pages of text) although it often lacks the detachment that Professor Edgar presumably demanded of his students. The descriptions of backcountry life and residents was especially interesting.

Readers should be forewarned that this book only covers events up to the end of 1780--the author's primary purpose seeming to be making the case for the historical importance of Huck's Defeat.

[Cara · Rating 4 out of 5]

To refer to Revolutionary War actions in South Carolina as "the country's first civil war" is not inaccurate. To refer to said actions as "continued depredations by the British against the Scots-Irish" is also not inaccurate.

A short read that is remarkably in depth into backcountry SC involvement in the Revolutionary War, with names well known to most American children and plenty of incidents that don't end up in history books for whatever reason.

[Celia · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good, but a little repetitive, especially in the last couple of chapters. I would have liked to follow more of the battles after King's Mountain. I'm not sure why that was used as the end-cap when there were so many more actions in South Carolina in 1781–82 before the British abandoned Charleston. I guess it was because the Continentals took over after that, but a review of that hand-off would have been interesting and relevant.

[Joe Vonnegut · Rating 4 out of 5]

A short introduction to the partisan actions in SC following the fall of Charleston in 1780. Edgar provides a really good introduction that sets the stage for a more in depth study of the events in SC and NC during the Revolution. I recommend it, especially if you're getting ready to embark on a study of Marion, Sumter, and Pickens.

[John · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book was a good read for the student of Colonial America and the revolution. I will say that at times I wish I would have had a map to understand the places and the proximity to other events mentioned in the book. If you choose to read the book, I would suggest that you get a map of the region as you will have a greater understanding of the places.

[Paul Meyer · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting read with enough details and specific people and incidents that give you a real feel for the backcountry people, their situations, loyalties and eventual commitment to each of the causes they believed in. It is also a good description of the British overconfidence as well as misunderstanding basic human nature.

[Francis X DuFour · Rating 5 out of 5]

A good history of the British occupation of South Carolina 1780-1781. Explains the nature of the civil war fought between patriots and loyalists, with details of the many battles fought in the north and western parts of state.

[Steve · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book focuses on a specific portion of the American Revolution, the British occupation of South Carolina in 1780. The battles that take place in the Backcountry, such as Huck’s Defeat and King’s Mountain, are covered in great detail. Very good and informative.

[Gregory Jones · Rating 4 out of 5]

I had no idea how brutal the southern theater of the American Revolution was until I read this book. It's succinct, detailed, and moving.

It would be great for a course on the Revolution and is widely accessible. I would easily recommend this for an undergraduate level course.

[Sarah · Rating 1 out of 5]

While the author has a good grasp of historical events his writing skills are passable and his storytelling skills are abysmal.

[Maddy Martin · Rating 2 out of 5]

I pretty much forgot things in this book as soon as a read them. If that's not dry I don't know what is. But it gets 2 stars because if I'm being honest, I've read much worse.

[Peter Bringe · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great short book on the American Revolution in the South Carolina backcountry.

[Jim Blevins · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent book detailing South Carolina’s role in the Revolutionary War. The fighting in the South does not get enough attention but played a key role in American independence.

[Stephen Tuck · Rating 1 out of 5]

American scholarship has produced may fine books about the Revolutionary War.

This isn't one of them.

If I recall correctly, the reviews that came out when it was released wrote this book off as a quickie designed to capitalise on the release of the movie "The Patriot". I don't know if it's true, but it sounds like it. This book, frankly, reads like a desperate attempt to raise the importance of the southern conflict: the turning point of the entire war, it appears, was not the retreat from Philadelphia, or the surrender at Saratoga, or the intervention by France, but an obscure skirmish grandly retitled "The Battle of Huck's Defeat". As an aside, the attempt to assess the tactics of Banastre Tarleton using the statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia would be unworthy of an undergraduate.

The strongest criticism of this book, though, is its relentless avoiding of the presence of slaves in the southern colonies. There is one single reference to a single slave, who delivered a message for his owner (with the revolutionary forces). he detail that in the south the slaves fled toward British lines, and formed a significant auxiliary to British forces, and rated their chances of freedom rather higher with the anti-revolutionary forces, is all fairly significant for understanding this period. Leaving it out was intellectually dishonest.

[Mike Petty · Rating 3 out of 5]

My knowledge of this subject was hazy, and the book was short (less than 150 pages) so i read it in an afternoon and I actually feel rather enlightened. Basically, while the Northern States created an army from ragtag militia, the South, or South Carolina in this case, kept their militia and fought guerilla style for almost every engagement. Despite their lack of discipline, heroes such as Francis Marion 'The Swamp Fox' continually confused confounded and harrassed the British and kept them from being more effective elsewhere.
This book also aptly illustrates the brutality of the war and the literal war crimes perpetrated by both sides.
My only complaint is that the story never left South Carolina. Perhaps this is where the majority of the fighting was in the Southern Colonies, which justifies the magnifying glass on this state, but I'm sure other states contributed to the southern war.

[Jay Perkins · Rating 5 out of 5]

Partisans & Redcoats is a small, but an extremely enjoyable read covering the guerrilla warfare that erupted in the Carolina backcountry during the American Revolution. Instead of delving into major battles that most Revolutionary War historians explore, Edgar tells vivid, heroic tales of brave men and women who fought for their lives against the British, and even their own Tory neighbors. One also walks away with a taste of what everyday life was like for these regular people living in the colonial frontier. This is a must read for anyone studying the American Revolution.