Why, from a Historical Perspective, this isn't Good Art

Dear Reader,

I'm glad the clickbait title has drawn you in. Today, we are going to examine two pieces of historical art. Ambush!, by Dan Nance, shows a Native American warrior about to attack a senior British officer during the American War of Independence. The other, below, shows a specific incident from the Battle of Savannah during the American War of Independence. At the outset, I should say that both images are artistically appealing. Mr. Nance is a fine painter, who has painted many other historical pieces which I like.

So, why isn't the painting of the Native American warrior attacking a British officer, below, a helpful image from a historical perspective? First, this image trades on common stereotypes regarding both Native Americans and the British Army during the War of Independence. The Native Warrior is shown jumping (presumably from a tree?) with club raised and screaming. The British officer, presumably from the 7th (Royal Fuziliers) or 8th (King's) Regiment of Foot, given his uniform. His sword is drawn, and is he looking rather obliviously in the opposite direction. Even his horse has noticed the oncoming warrior.





















































Both of these ideas (that the Native Americans were masters of the ambush, and that the British were remarkably ill-suited for wilderness warfare) are stock images from American mythology, and give little information regarding the actual reality of the past. Native American warriors were impressive soldiers in certain conditions, but certainly fell prey to ambush by Euro-American warriors. A famous example of this is during the Siege of Fort Sackville by George Rogers Clark, when Clark's forces took a Native war party by surprise.[1] Likewise, British forces had learned much regarding wilderness warfare since the early days of the French and Indian War, and were capable of fighting in wilderness conditions.


Second, the above image deliberately obscures historical reality. Much more often than not, the specific regiment which is depicted above fought alongside native warriors. The King's Regiment fought alongside native Americans at engagements such as the Cedars, Fort Stanwix, Fort Laurens, Hannastown, Bird's Invasion of Kentucky, and perhaps most famously, at the Battle of Newtown in 1779.[2] By and large, for good or ill, the King's Regiment fought alongside Native Americans throughout the War of Independence, not against them. If the 7th Regiment was depicted, the image is also somewhat less egregious, but the 7th Regiment of Foot spent much of the war fighting in larger coastal armies, and to my knowledge, was never ambushed by the Catawba or any other Native group.

Third, there are liberties taken with the material culture of the image. The enlisted men and drummer wear gaitered trousers, which is possible for the 8th Regiment, but not confirmed by documentary evidence. Finally, it is perhaps unlikely that a drummer would have accompanied raids deep into the upper country, and certainly would not have been beating a march step during this type of movement. The British officer appears to be wearing a hat purchased from GG Godwin, Sutler. His uniform is immaculate, if a bit large for him. Speaking frankly, I am not qualified to evaluate the accuracy of the dress of the Native Warrior (it is possible that it is of a very high standard).

Fourth, and finally, the image does not depict a specific historical event. No senior officers of the Royal Fuziliers or King's Regiment were killed in ambush by Native American warriors during the years of the American War of Independence. Many of them died, often from illness or being drowned while on transport ships on the Great Lakes. A shipwreck on the Lakes, would be an incredibly interesting artistic project for the various excellent artists currently exploring the revolution.

So, in short, whatever the artistic value of the above image, it possesses a questionable historical value.

Artist Graham Turner's image of the Battle of Savannah, painted for Osprey

The above image, depicting Archibald Campbell at the capture of Savannah by artist Graham Turner, may not be equal artistic appeal, but possesses much more historical value than the ambush of the Native Warrior above. 

First of all, the image depicts a specific historical event, described by a primary source.[3] When preparing to attack the rebel held city of Savannah, Lt. Colonel Archibald Campbell climbed a tree in order to better observe the rebel defensive positions. He also spoke with an enslaved man regarding a flanking route for his army's march, which is perhaps a missed opportunity in the painting.

Second, in choosing a specific historical event, the image destroys mythology regarding the British Army in the War of Independence. The popular view of British officers in the United States is that they were hide-bound traditionalist fops with little real experience in the arena of war. By showing a British officer who was willing to think outside the box and get is hands dirty a bit, Graham Turner displays a class of generally competent senior officers such as Howe, Cornwallis, and Campbell who were not afraid to innovate in order to gain victory in America.

Third, the uniforms are generally accurate. Turner's artwork shows the 71st Regiment of Foot in short coats and linen gaiter trousers with highland bonnets, all fairly responsible choices for this era of war. Woolen donation-cloth trousers might have been a better choice for this time of year (although I am not familiar with the primary source documentation for this particular regiment, so I cannot say) but this is a relatively minor quibble. Likewise, the tree may not have been defoliated at this time of year in Savannah. It is difficult to tell whether Campbell is wearing his own hair or a wig, which pleased me greatly.

So, in closing, both images are very enjoyable and artistically sound. With that said, images which depict specific events from primary sources, coupled with a theme which explores the reality, rather than the mythology of historical eras, are an asset to historians, and to the public. Accurate, well-presented uniforms are icing on the cake.

If you enjoyed this post, or any of our other posts, please consider liking us on facebook, or following us on twitter. Consider checking out our exclusive content on Patreon. Finally, we are dedicated to keeping Kabinettskriege ad-free. In order to assist with this, please consider supporting us via the donate button in the upper right-hand corner of the page. As always:

Thanks for Reading, 

Alex Burns

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] Journal of Joseph Bowman, February 24th, 1779 https://www.in.gov/history/2964.htm
[2] Journal of Thomas Blake, 1st NH Regiment, August 29th, 1779, http://www.usgwarchives.net/pa/1pa/1picts/sullivan/nhjournals.html#norris
[3] See Matthew H. Spring, With Zeal and With Bayonets Only, 66 and Archibald Campbell, Journal of an Expedition, 25-26.