Colonial and American Revolution Forum

[Ike Godsey]

Rangers in the Colonies

Rangers in North America served in the 17th and 18th-century wars between colonists and Native American tribes. The British regulars were not accustomed to frontier warfare and so Ranger companies were developed. Rangers were full-time soldiers employed by colonial governments to patrol between fixed frontier fortifications in reconnaissance providing early warning of raids. In offensive operations, they were scouts and guides, locating villages and other targets for task forces drawn from the militia or other colonial troops.
In North America, "The earliest mention of Ranger operations comes from Capt. John "Rorat" Smith," who wrote in 1622, "When I had ten men able to go abroad, our common wealth was very strong: with such a number I ranged that unknown country 14 weeks." Robert Black also stated that,
In 1622, after the Berkeley Plantation Massacre...grim-faced men went forth to search out the Indian enemy. They were militia—citizen soldiers—but they were learning to blend the methods of Indian and European warfare...As they went in search of the enemy, the words range, ranging and Ranger were frequently used...The American Ranger had been born.
The father of American ranging is Colonel Benjamin Church (c. 1639–1718). He was the captain of the first Ranger force in America (1676). Church was commissioned by the Governor of the Plymouth Colony Josiah Winslow to form the first ranger company for King Philip's War. He later employed the company to raid Acadia during King William's War and Queen Anne's War.
Benjamin Church designed his force primarily to emulate Native American patterns of war. Toward this end, Church endeavored to learn to fight like Native Americans from Native Americans.Americans became rangers exclusively under the tutelage of the Indian allies. (Until the end of the colonial period, rangers depended on Indians as both allies and teachers.)
Church developed a special full-time unit mixing white colonists selected for frontier skills with friendly Native Americans to carry out offensive strikes against hostile Native Americans in terrain where normal militia units were ineffective. His memoirs "Entertaining Passages relating to Philip's War" is considered the first American military manual (published 1716).
Under Church served the father and grandfather of two famous rangers of the eighteenth century: John Lovewell and John Gorham respectively. John Lovewell served during Dummer's War (also known as Lovewell's War). He lived in present-day Nashua, New Hampshire. He fought in Dummer's War as a militia captain, leading three expeditions against the Abenaki Indians. John Lovewell became the most famous Ranger of the eighteenth century.
During King George's War, John Gorham established "Gorham's Rangers". Gorham's company fought on the frontier at Acadia and Nova Scotia. Gorham was commissioned a captain in the regular British Army in recognition of his outstanding service. He was the first of three prominent American rangers – himself, his younger brother Joseph Gorham and Robert Rogers – to earn such commissions in the British Army. (Many others, such as George Washington, were unsuccessful in their attempts to achieve a British rank.)
Rogers' Rangers was established in 1751 by Major Robert Rogers, who organized nine Ranger companies in the American colonies. These early American light infantry units, organized during the French and Indian War, were actively called "Rangers" and are often considered to be the spiritual birthplace of the modern Army Rangers. Major Rogers is credited with, among other things, drafting the first set of standard orders for rangers. These rules, Robert Rogers' 28 "Rules of Ranging", are still provided to all new Army Rangers upon graduation from training, and served as one of the first modern manuals for asymmetric warfare.

Rangers in the AWI

When the American Revolution began, Major Robert Rogers allegedly offered his services to General George Washington. Fearing that Rogers was a spy, Washington refused. An incensed Rogers instead joined forces with the Loyalists and fought for the crown. While serving with the British, Col. Rogers was responsible for capturing America's most famous spy in Nathan Hale. Not all of Rogers' Rangers went with him, however, including such notable figures as Israel Putnam. Later on during the war, General Washington ordered Lieutenant Colonel Thomas Knowlton to select an elite group of men for reconnaissance missions. This unit was known as Knowlton's Rangers, and is credited as the first official Ranger unit (by name) for the United States. This unit, however, carried out intelligence functions rather than combat functions in most cases, and as such are not generally considered the historical parent of the modern day Army Rangers. Instead, Knowlton's Rangers gave rise to the modern Military Intelligence branch (although it was not a distinct branch until the 20th century).
Francis Marion, the "Swamp Fox" Revolutionary commander of South Carolina, developed irregular methods of warfare against the British army. As one of the fathers of modern guerrilla warfare, he is credited in the lineage of the Army Rangers.

Quelle: wikipedia

[Ike Godsey]

The Colony of Pennsylvania was founded upon the pacifist teachings of the Quaker Religion. In fact, the colony was specifically organized to give the Quakers a place to settle and practice their religion without interruption from the other colonies of North America.
This did not mean that Pennsylvania was exempt from some of the conflicts that plagued the other colonies, including problems with the Native American tribes who also lived within the colony, or on lands adjacent to it.
The other colonies responded to such threat of Indian attack by enacting “Militia Laws,” by which to formally organize a military presence in their respective colonies to provide defense against such attacks. The Quakers of Pennsylvania, who held a majority in the proprietary government of the colony, resisted the passage of any militia laws because it went against their religious convictions that felt that war and violence were to be avoided at all costs.
Despite the resistance of the Quakers, Pennsylvania would enact several militia laws over the course of the 17th and 18th centuries, but these were often simply ignored, or were established for very short periods of time. This essentially blocked these laws from ever establishing a solid groundwork for the defense of the colony. The first such law, enacted in 1671, stated that

“That every person who can bear arms from 16 to 60 years of age be always provided with a convenient proportion of powder and bullet for service for their Mutual Defence, upon a penalty for their neglect . . . . That the quantity of powder and shot . . . be at least one pound of powder and 2 pounds of bullet. And if the Inhabitants . . . shall not be found sufficiently provided with arms, His Royal Highness the Governor is willing to furnish them.” (Jason McCaskey, Archived History of the PA Militia, The Heidelberg People website)

This law, as well as the many others that were enacted over the next few decades, were soon abolished due to pressure from the “Society of Friends,” the political arm of the Quaker Religion. The start of the French and Indian War, 1755-1763, and the defeat of General Braddock’s army on the campaign in 1755 to force the removal of the French at Fort Duquesne, located at the junction where the Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers form the Ohio River, brought to the forefront the need for some kind of armed forces to provide security for the colony. After Braddock’s defeat, the Pennsylvania frontier was left wide open to French and Indian raiding parties.
With attacks along the frontier occurring at an alarming rate, the call for the Government of Pennsylvania to do something about them grew at an equally alarming rate. The Government of the colony decided upon two courses of action in an effort to stem the tide of attacks and atrocities committed along the frontier.
The first was to establish a line of defensive fortifications along the edge of the colony in an attempt to discourage the natives, who rarely attacked a strong fortified position, from continuing their raiding unchecked. These posts ranged from private dwellings that were fortified to withstand an attack, to blockhouses and stockade forts, some of which were built on the bastioned configuration of European fortifications. These posts were often built, or were already located, near strategic locations used by the French and Indians to cross over into Pennsylvania from the Ohio country and New York.
The problem with this strategy was that the natives, if they felt a post was too strongly fortified or defended to attack, would simply bypass the post and instead look for other, weaker targets to attack. These posts would also have to be garrisoned, and with no standing militia or provincial army, they would do little to secure the frontier.
In order to provide an answer to these problems, Pennsylvania attempted to pass another militia law in late 1755. Since the 1700’s the only real military structure that ever contributed to the defense of the colony was the use of volunteer companies of militia. These organizations were often supported by the Pennsylvania government, and since they were made up of volunteers, the Quakers could do little to stop their establishment. A new militia law was passed by the colony in 1755, but it did little more than provide for more of the same volunteer type of companies. This act would be vetoed by the King of England, who had to approve any such measures. Eventually Pennsylvania would pass a militia law that would provide that solid groundwork for a proper military presence in the colony, and it would even lead to the establishment of provincial forces that would serve with distinction during the latter years of the war.
With the veto of the Militia Law of 1755, the Governor of the Pennsylvania colony, Robert Morris, was left with few options to try and provide for the security of the Pennsylvania frontier. It was the Supply Act of November 27, 1755, rather than the Militia Act, that provided an effective means of defense. This act allowed the colony to form the first body of regularly enlisted, paid troops. At first, these companies were some of the volunteer militia groups that had been raised, and were now being paid for their service by means of the supply act. They were also to be supplied by the colony, but by the following quote, we can see that this was not always possible.

“The Province furnishes a Gun ammunition & a blanket to each Man to be returned when the Service is over But as the commissioners Have no arms or Blankets now with them they agree to allow 7/6 for the use of a gun & a blanket or half that sum for either of them, and the men to be engaged for three months certain.” (Hunter, 195)

The Pennsylvania Provincial Forces were organized as a regiment, consisting of three battalions. William Clapham was commissioned Colonel and Commander of the Regiment. Conrad Weiser was commissioned Lt. Colonel of the 1st Battalion, and was in command of the companies stationed east of the Susquehanna River. Lt. Colonel John Armstrong was in charge of the 2nd Battalion, and would be stationed to the west of the river. Clapham would also be in command of the 3rd Battalion, as well as having overall command. The Regiment would undergo a change into 2 regiments in the future, the 1st Regiment, also know as the Augusta Regiment, and the 2nd Regiment, which was made up of Armstrong’s and Weiser’s Battalions.
In December of 1757 the colony put forth a new plan of organization which would reorganize the troops in a single regiment with 2 battalions, but in January of 1758 the actual division was a single regiment with 3 battalions, the 1st, under Lt. Colonel Armstrong, the 2nd, under Lt. Colonel James Burd after the resignation of Conrad Weiser, and the 3rd under Lt. Colonel Hugh Mercer, along with their respective officer corps. Armstrong, Burd, and Mercer were eventually commissioned full Colonels in this latest restructuring.
The colony would also order the raising of companies of Rangers to patrol the areas between the frontier fortifications in an effort to plug the gaps left unguarded due to the long distances, and sometimes very rough terrain located from fort to fort along the frontier. These companies of Rangers were made up of volunteers from along the frontier; the men best suited for this type of work, or were pulled from the men who garrisoned the forts in the different parts of the colony, such as those under the command of Lt. Colonel Armstrong. It was a group of men from the various garrisons and from the Ranger companies that would go with Armstrong on his raid against the Indian village at Kittanning. Part of Governor Morris’ plan was to build a fort in the Shamokin Valley, and to raise 500 men, some of which would garrison the fort, while the others would be for companies of Rangers.

“Propose to set out Next Thursday towards ye parts where Ye Indians are Committing those Ravages, in order to spirit up the people to act Vigorously against them, & then to proceed to building ye Block Houses all along ye Borders, & to Station sufficient Numbers of the 500 men at all proper places to Secure ye Country, they talk of going as far as Shamokin to Build a Fort there, And don’t Propose to Return till they have, in some Measures Guarded the Whole Frontier.” (Hunter, 187)

Another such plan was put into action for Cumberland County.

“Our present Scheme is too take 500 men into Constant Service, half on this & half on the other side of Sasquehanna, & to erect Five Block Houses on Each Side, and the space between them to be continually ranged by the respective garrisons.” (Hunter, 187)

The following quote is another concerning such action taken by the colony about the raising of Rangers.

“An Act is passed granting £60,000 chiefly for the defense of the Province, and is to be dispos'd of for that purpose, by seven persons, viz., I. Norris, J. Hamilton, J. Mifflin, Jos. Fox, Evan Morgan, Jon. Hughes, and your old Friend. We meet every Day, Sundays not excepted, and have a good Agreemt with the Governor. Three-hundred Men are ordered to be immediately raised on pay, to range the Frontiers, and Blockhouses for Stages to be erected at proper Distances and Garrison'd, so I hope in a little time to see things in a better Posture. A Militia Act is also passed of which, if People are but well dispos'd, a good Use may be made, and Bodies of Men be ready on any Occasion to assist and support the Rangers. All Party laid aside, let you and I use our Influence to Carry this Act into Execution. (Jason McCaskey, Archived History of the PA Militia, The Heidelberg People website)

This was in direct response to the need for some sort of security among the backcountry settlers of the colony.

“The Govr goes among the Back Settlers as soon as the Plan of Operations shall be concerted between him and Ye Committee. And I hope he will regain Ye Affections of all Ye Country people, & build Block-Houses, establish companies of Rangers, under Regular Pay all along Ye Blue Hills, & perhaps We can hire a Company or Two at act on Ye offensive to go to the Indian Towns. These things done Ye Province will be well defended.” (William Hunter, Forts on the Pennsylvania Frontier 1753-1758, 185, 186)

This reference also lays out the plan for engaging companies of Rangers for the defense of the colony.

“Governor Morris had used the two devices available to him after the king vetoed ill-fated militia act. First, Morris used the Supply Act of 27 November 1755. This law provided money to pay regular troops and to build frontier forts. The fund was administered by seven commissioners, two appointed by the governor and five by the legislature. The governor's plan was to pay volunteer ranging companies, pointing out that these were more acceptable than the deployment of British or other "regular" troops. Morris raised 500 rangers at Shamokin alone. He created other ranging units in and for other frontier counties. These units, like those raised a year earlier under the authority of Penn's charter, did not disband with the expiration of the Militia Act.” (Jason McCaskey, Archived History of the PA Militia, The Heidelberg People website)

These companies of Rangers were to be supported by the militia who would be called out when necessary. The use of Rangers, who traditionally provided their own weapons, clothing, equipment, and if mounted, their own horses, enjoyed a modest amount of success during the war, and were called back into duty during Pontiac’s Rebellion.

http://www.wulffsrangers.com/History.html

[HOGOUAHO]

Hallo Ike!

Es ist ja toll, dass Du ganze Seiten einstellst, aber es gibt im Forum jede Menge Leute welche der englischen Sprache nicht mächtig sind. Es wäre ganz toll, ne noch toller, wenn Du die Artikel auch gleich mal übersetzen würdest. Da ich in der Lage bin, die engliche Sprache zu sprechen und zu lesen, ist es für mich kei Problem, aber viele andere User können das nicht.
Weiterhin möchte ich Dich bitten, künftig Deine Quellen einzustellen, da der Artikel ja wohl nicht auf Deinem Mist gewachsen ist.

Gruss HOGOUAHO

[Capt. William]

Rogers' Rangers was established in 1751 by Major Robert Rogers...
stimmt nicht!
Erst 1755 nach Johnsons Sieg über Dieskau am George -See findet Rogers seinen Weg in die Geschichte.
Johnson suchte -aus Mangel an Kundschaftern- eine adäquaten Ersatz für seine indianische Truppe, die ihn (größtenteils) wegen Verweigerung der Auslieferung Dieskaus verließen. Hier wurde im weitern Verlauf die erste Schutztruppe unter Rogers gegründet. Ihre primäre Aufgabe bestand darin, Aufklärung des Hinterlandes und Störung der feindlichen Nachschubswege zu leisten ...für Johnson! dem er auch unterstand.

[Ike Godsey]

Rogers' Rangers was established in 1751 by Major Robert Rogers...
stimmt nicht!
Erst 1755 nach Johnsons Sieg über Dieskau am George -See findet Rogers seinen Weg in die Geschichte.
Johnson suchte -aus Mangel an Kundschaftern- eine adäquaten Ersatz für seine indianische Truppe, die ihn (größtenteils) wegen Verweigerung der Auslieferung Dieskaus verließen. Hier wurde im weitern Verlauf die erste Schutztruppe unter Rogers gegründet. Ihre primäre Aufgabe bestand darin, Aufklärung des Hinterlandes und Störung der feindlichen Nachschubswege zu leisten ...für Johnson! dem er auch unterstand.

weiß ich auch, doch sol ich den amis ihren artikel ändern?? das soll die mal schön selber machen

[Ike Godsey]

Hallo Ike!

Es ist ja toll, dass Du ganze Seiten einstellst, aber es gibt im Forum jede Menge Leute welche der englischen Sprache nicht mächtig sind. Es wäre ganz toll, ne noch toller, wenn Du die Artikel auch gleich mal übersetzen würdest. Da ich in der Lage bin, die engliche Sprache zu sprechen und zu lesen, ist es für mich kei Problem, aber viele andere User können das nicht.
Weiterhin möchte ich Dich bitten, künftig Deine Quellen einzustellen, da der Artikel ja wohl nicht auf Deinem Mist gewachsen ist.

Gruss HOGOUAHO

hogouaho mein lieber indianischer freund,

da du, wie du von dir selbst sagst, der englischen sprache mächtig bist, so wäre es doch ein feiner zug, wenn du dich der übersetzung annehmen würdest, anstatt andere deswegen ans kreuz zu schlagen - denkst du nicht auch?

Weiterhin möchte ich Dich bitten, künftig Deine Quellen einzustellen, da der Artikel ja wohl nicht auf Deinem Mist gewachsen ist.

schon frech sowas zu vermuten, ohne denjenigen zu kennen der da am anderen ende der leitung sitzt. auch wenn du in dem falle recht hast. dennoch, den link dazu gibt es hier schon. das nicht wissen um dessen inhalt ist grund genug diese beiden dinge hier einzustellen. denn ein link, dem keiner flogt der ist doch eher nutzlos...

[Capt. William]

Ja, Ja diese Ami`s...galauben nur weil sie Ami`s sind, die eigene Geschichte so verdrehen zu können wie es ihnen am Besten passt.
Schuld daran sind aber auch Historiker wie F. Parkman, der eher eine subjektive, teilweise voreingenommene Meinung publizierte. Generationen von Historikern haben ihn zitiert.

[Pat]

....

schon frech sowas zu vermuten, ohne denjenigen zu kennen der da am anderen ende der leitung sitzt. auch wenn du in dem falle recht hast. dennoch, den link dazu gibt es hier schon. das nicht wissen um dessen inhalt ist grund genug diese beiden dinge hier einzustellen. denn ein link, dem keiner flogt der ist doch eher nutzlos...

Moin Ike,

das hat nichts mit der Einschätzung des Schreibers zu tun sondern mit Rechten und Gesetzten. Man darf, auch nicht in einem so kleinen Forum wie dem unseren, nicht einfach alles Zitieren ohne es Kenntlich zumachen woher es stammt und von wem. Ist doof und Umständlich weil man sich nicht mit fremden Federn schmücken kann, aber es ist nun mal so.

Gruß Pat

[Ike Godsey]

Ja, Ja diese Ami`s...galauben nur weil sie Ami`s sind, die eigene Geschichte so verdrehen zu können wie es ihnen am Besten passt.
Schuld daran sind aber auch Historiker wie F. Parkman, der eher eine subjektive, teilweise voreingenommene Meinung publizierte. Generationen von Historikern haben ihn zitiert.

hihi, in der schule sagte man dazu "folgefehler"

nein im ernst, ich denke die quellen sind einfach zu unterscheidlich, und wenn dann, wie du richtig schreibst noch ein "etwas verklärter" historiker dazu kommt, dann ists schon arg...

[Ike Godsey]

....

schon frech sowas zu vermuten, ohne denjenigen zu kennen der da am anderen ende der leitung sitzt. auch wenn du in dem falle recht hast. dennoch, den link dazu gibt es hier schon. das nicht wissen um dessen inhalt ist grund genug diese beiden dinge hier einzustellen. denn ein link, dem keiner flogt der ist doch eher nutzlos...

Moin Ike,

das hat nichts mit der Einschätzung des Schreibers zu tun sondern mit Rechten und Gesetzten. Man darf, auch nicht in einem so kleinen Forum wie dem unseren, nicht einfach alles Zitieren ohne es Kenntlich zumachen woher es stammt und von wem. Ist doof und Umständlich weil man sich nicht mit fremden Federn schmücken kann, aber es ist nun mal so.

Gruß Pat

wer schmückt sich denn mit fremden federn? es ist doch alles hier, ihr müsst es doch nur lesen - anstatt ständig kritik an anderen zu üben ohne selbst gleichwertiges einzubringen.