Lots of reasons most all ready covered:

1. British arrogance, particularly AT THE CABINET LEVEL. General Gage requested reinforcement to the tune of 20,000 troops in 1774. He was given 1100 marines and had issues dealing with the navy in their use. Additionally, 700 of those did not arrive until April 1775.

2. Logistics. Supplying a force across a 6 week (one way) weather dependent supply line is not easy. WHile you can scavenge food, powder ball and tents are an entirely different proposition in a country devoid of powder mills.

3. Decentralization. Their was no leader of the rebellion. A fact commanders on the ground understood but politicians in England could not. Arresting Sam Adams and John Hancock was pointless as neither was irreplacable.

4. Intelligence. Whiel the British had their coups (most notably Patriot leader and front man Dr. Church), the intelligence war was the one place Washington was able to out do the British.

5. Divided loyalties. Britian was not a monolithic culture focused on destroying the rebellion. The term sons of liberty was in common usage in England. It was adopted by the patriots after a member of parliment referred to them as true sons of liberty (IIRC it was after the outrage/protests over the stamp act). Additionally, Gage was a member of the Whig party and was very uncomfortable and periodically refused to carry out orders he thought were contrary to what he thoguht was legal. The final example was Genral Howell (I think might have been Clinton). As a member of parliament he was opposed to military invovement. However, when ordered to go he went.

6. Blind fucking luck. Washington made huge blunders that had the British capitilized on them would have ended the war long before it started.

7. Sorry, the tactics of rifleman while important at times were NOT the reason we won the war. That did not happen until the Continental Army was trained and equipped properly. All the sniping in the world will not hold a town against a concerted bayonet charge by trained men. That takes men willing to stand.

8. The colonists were largely on the defensive. In the first three years of the war, the majority of Colonial offenses failed miserably. Simply put the militia would not stand on open ground. Give them a wall and they would hold. Open field not so much.

8. Blind luck two. THe British failure to capitalize on Washingtons blunders. The best example being the near loss of the entire army at New York.

9. The dutch. They were the first country to recognize the United States(An Island Governor did it with out approval of the government). They were also the primary source of critical materials (most notably gun powder) until the French became involved. They also loaned us millions of pounds during the war.

10. French and to a lesser extent Spainish aid and participation. Without it we would have lost. You can not win a war with a trickle of smuggled gun powder.

11. Charity. The Congress borrowed tens of thousands of dollars from wealthy citizens. And failed to pay most of it back. Including members of Congress.

12. Terror. The cabinet in London believed loyalists would greatly aid their cause and serve under arms for the crown. While it happened some, it was no where near the level expected. Largely due to terror tactics of whig neighbors.

13. Communications. It is hard to manage a war from the cabinet on a 12 week turn about.

14. Money. The British Crown ran up major debt fighting the war.

Some books I would recommend:

Signing Their Lives Away, brief essays on the 55 men who signed the Declaration of Independence.
First Salute by Barbara Tuchman
Paul Reveeres Ride (IIRC Hackett-Fischer was the author)
Patriots, the men who started a revolution
Struggle for Power by Draper
Almost a Miracle. A well written, very detailed account of the Revolutionary war.

1776 was highly recommended. While their is some good anecdotal/personal information I did not find else where, I found it to be a tough read.

There are a ton of other books some sitting at home waiting for me to get to them but I won't recommended them if I haven't read them.

I didn't mean to imply it was why we won the war. It was, however, the reason we won the Battle of Cowpens.

Have you ever read an account of the battle?

Morgan had, at the most, 150 riflemen at Cowpens. The riflemen were part of a Morgan's winning team, but did not by themselves win the battle for him. Morgan's shrewd tactics and his taking of every disadvantage and turning it into an advantage had a huge part.

His force was composed largely of militia who were unreliable.

Riflemen were known to scatter when unsupported by light infantry (and he had no trained light infantry with him as he did when he had Maj. Dearborn's light infantry at Saratoga).

His fought with his back to a river, so if he was defeated, there was no retreat.

Banastre Tarleton, his opponent, was highly feared by the colonists and his British Legion had a fearsome reputation and seemed invincible (it had lost very few battles including Hanging Rock (Aug. 6, 1780), Williamson's Plantation (July 11, 1780) and Charlotte (Sept. 26, 1780).

Tarleton also had British regulars with him.

Morgan understood what Tarleton would do and how his men would respond. He picked his position because he knew that by allowing himself to be trapped, his men would be forced to stand and fight. He deployed his riflemen as his skirmish line to pick off officers so as to demoralize his opponent. They were to fall behind the militia who were to deliver two volleys that were to further demoralize the enemy. The militia was then to retire behind the (discharged) continentals.

God doesn't pick sides.

They were shoes, not boots, and they did have left and rights. The straight last and switching them daily is a Reenactorism that is not supported by any orderly book entry, and most importantly not by the huge Cashe of Brit Army shoes recovered from Fort Ligoner PA.

Ive got a good number of days living, working, marching ect in 18th Century kit, all 4 seasons, and it works just fine. In fact the more you get into this, any issues with clothing and equipment are more often than not self induced by folks reenacting reenactors who never saw anything other than a xerox of a xerox of a grainy BW photo in a book once..

Also Haversack is a food bag to keep the greasy salt pork off of your extra clothing and other gear that was carried in the knapsac. A haversack is not the catch all bag that it became in the Civil War, nor the combat Murse of many/most reenactors.

Paddy,

Im what some call a Progressive reenactor. I try my best to get all my gear, not just reasonable facsimile, but actually made of the proper materials, in the proper way. I fixiate on things like linings, threads and stiches per inch ect. Some shortcuts are made, the wool for uniforms comes from the same place in england that was making it for the army in the period, it matches their set patters from the time, for weight, feel ect but is woven with a machine, and dyed with modern dyes. But other than that....... My shoes, when I wear any come from a guy in Canada, Robert Land. Im more of a moccasin type guy, and they are made with mostly braintan deer, Veg tanned cowhide on occasions. My rifle barrel is steel vice iron, my linen is 60inch wide woven instead of 30 so I have a felled seam on my shirts that most folks didnt have in the period because it was a selvage on each side. I acknowledge these as farb, but right now some of those things just cant be fixed. You know the actual process to hot dip sheet iron has been lost, really no one knows how to do it, so we all use sheet steel that has been dipped in a tank of tin, but its a best guess.....

Yes if you shop at some of the "Reenactor Wal Mart's" your getting modern made gear, that looks olde tyme.... Cotton canvas ect. The oznibrig you buy at Joann's is not the Osnibrig of the 18th century.

As for books:

Archaeological Investigation of Fort Ligonier, 1960 – 1965 The best and at 8 bucks, worth 50 times that....

Now for the actual regimental orders for the 10th Regiment, the original orderly book is in the Clements Library. Im more NY Frontier and Kentucky oriented with my reenacting, so I dont have a transcription/copy, but I have requested one.......

Thanks for the info. I may have to check out a couple of the books but it will be a while as my reading back log is pretty long.

Come on now, Was it Von Stuben that was so crucial in our being able to do small unit tactics?

That battle at Wyoming, you know the one where the American forces formed up in ranks on the edge of a field and marched towards the Brits hiding behind trees, That worked out so well right?

One of the best quotes I've heard about the war was, "All that Washington had to do was not lose." England had to transport men and material across the Atlantic Ocean to prosecute the war. Communication between England and North America cost them very dearly.

what the british brought to the table.

do as we say,you will not have a say in matter of your life,proprty,taxs,life,and happines,no voice,no right,no weapons..a few people who know best will make all you choice for you..(sound familiar)


what we fought for

freedom to speak,vote,own what you please a right to proctect your rights, a right to have say in the matter the affect you...for surly death would be better then to live under the rule of a tyrant

A brit told me once that the US won because the war simply wasn't profitable for Britain and that they let the rebels win. They were more concerned with their plantation colonies in the Caribbean than the 13 colonies because they were worth more.

that voice is getting smaller and smaller...