"Who won the War of 1812?" Topic

Glenn, you are too funny and obviously not American ;-)

U.S. Gains:
1. Elimination of press gangs by Britain

2. Elimination of privateering by Britain on U.S. vessels (yes, the U.S. stopped as well)

3. Britain out of the lower North America and U.S. gaining full control of the SE portion of what is now the U.S. (you can say these were gained from Spain but the facts remain Britain no longer contested Florida to Louisiana)

4. Alliance with Canada and Britain. I know this sounds strange as both sides benefit but essentially you have the U.S. being treated as a partner rather than a rival paving the way for full sovereignty for the U.S. and starting the U.S. on the path to equal status with other great countries in the world.

With regards to Canada, can you tell me what Canada gained that the U.S. didn't as well? I can think of a recognition of territory boundaries and eventual national sovereignty. But in actuality, the pride that Canadians have in holding their own really belongs to Britain as Canada didn't gain independence as a result of the war.

It is great to be proud of Canadian successes during the war but it is also easy to gloss over the losses in Ontario and on in the Great Lakes water conflicts. Land gains and wins were not sustainable without control of the Great Lakes shipping which was assuredly well in control of the U.S.

If the U.S. lost, I am waiting to hear what territory was ceded to Britain or Canada? In actuality, the U.S. gained in territory even though you could argue that it wasn't at the expense of Britain.

Here's a better topic:

Who Lost The Least From The American War of 1812-1815?

And remember the war doesn't end until American ratification of the Treaty of Ghent which comes in February 1815. Therefore the Battle of New Orleans was fought during the War of 1812.

Don't really matter, that war over! The US is safe and stays a country!

And this is probably the wisest statement yet (from HussarL).

The most important thing about ths whole point is : if the editor is making poll suggestions, does that mean that the polls will be coming back soon ??

Rather long, but here is just what happened in 1813….
There was a lot more to The War of 1812 than people might realize… also I apologize for not crediting the website… I forgot it.

order of victory…
Canada
US
Great briton

The war of 1812 in 1813:

Atlantic Coast
•Warren's Chesapeake Bay Campaign (March–September, 1813): A major naval initiative, commanded by Admiral Sir John Warren, with the goals of blockading Chesapeake Bay, gathering intelligence concerning American strength, destroying the USN Constitution, interrupting commercial traffic within Chesapeake Bay, capturing of American vessels and supplies useful to the British and eventually extending the blockade to include Delaware Bay and Long Island. Although Warren remained the senior commander, many of operations were conducted by ships under the command of Vice Admiral Sir Alexander Cochrane. Cochrane was much hated by the Americans because of his aggressive actions on-shore, such as destroying the private property of civilians in villages and towns that opposed his landings.

•Battle of the Rappahannock River, Virginia (April 3, 1813): A British foray up the Rappahannock River, which empties into Chesapeake Bay forty miles north of Hampton, Virginia, during which they captured or destroyed fourteen American ships.

•Raid at Frenchtown, Maryland (April 29, 1813): A raid conducted by a British landing party during Sir John Warren's harassing operations in Chesapeake Bay (March–September, 1813) on a small settlement about fifteen miles up the Elk River on the road between Baltimore and Philadelphia.

•Raid on Havre de Grace and Principio Foundry, Maryland (May 3, 1813): A raid conducted by a flotilla of boats under Rear Admiral George Cockburn's command. When Maryland militia resisted the landing at Havre de Grace, the Royal Marines burned and looted homes, burned a warehouse and appropriated or killed livestock. At the Principio Foundry they destroyed a number of guns and the works in which they had been manufactured.

•Raid at Georgetown and Fredericktown, Maryland (May 6, 1813): A raid conducted by a landing party from HMS Mohawk on two villages on the Sassafras River flowing into the northeast corner of Chesapeake Bay. The landing party destroyed uninhabited homes, four schooners and stores of sugar, lumber and leather.

•Assault on Craney Island, Virginia (June 22, 1813): An important victory for the United States fought on an island at the mouth of the Elizabeth River, in which a British landing party failed to overcome a much smaller force of Americans defending the island. This defensive victory thwarted a British attempt to occupy the port city of Norfolk.

•Capture and occupation of Hampton, Virginia (June 25–26, 1813): The successful British occupation of Hampton, Virginia, following their humiliating failure to secure Craney Island. During the one-day occupation of the town, the British took guns, ammunition, wagons, horses, livestock and other foodstuff, and in addition were reported to have participated in looting, vandalism, raping and killing.

•Raid at Ocracoke Inlet, North Carolina (July 12–16, 1813): A successful British naval operation in the Ocracoke Inlet, a channel through the Outer Banks off the coast of North Carolina into Pimlico Sound, a route used by American merchantmen during the British blockade of Chesapeake Bay. The raid captured a number of American vessels and confiscated stores and livestock from the villages of Ocracoke and Portsmouth.

American Northwest

•First Battle of Frenchtown, Michigan Territory (January 18, 1813): A skirmish in which an American detachment from Brigadier General William Henry Harrison's winter camp on the Maumee River (near present-day Toledo, Ohio) succeeded in driving a British force consisting of Canadian militia and Potawatomi and Wyandot warriors out of Frenchtown, a village at the mouth of the Raison River about twenty-five miles south of Detroit (near present-day Monroe, Michigan).

•Second Battle of Frenchtown, Michigan Territory (January 22, 1813): A British victory achieved when a force of regulars, militia and native warriors surprised the Americans in a pre-dawn attack, and after several hours of heavy fighting, accepted the surrender of the entire American command. The battle came to be known as the Raison River Massacre on account of the massacre the following morning of numerous American wounded waiting to be transported to Fort Malden. This defeat caused Brigadier General William Henry Harrison to end his winter campaign to recapture Detroit.

•Siege of Fort Meigs, Ohio (May 1–9, 1813): An unsuccessful attempt by a British force consisting of regulars, militia and over a thousand warriors commanded by Tecumseh to capture the recently construct fort at the rapids on the Maumee River about twelve miles from its mouth (near present-day Perrysburg, Ohio).

•Investment of Fort Meigs, Ohio (July 21–28, 1813): A second unsuccessful attempt by the British to capture the fort, this time by a force containing more than three thousand warriors from the Fox, Menominee, Ojibwa, Ottawa, Sac, Sioux and Winnebago Nations under the command of Tecumseh.

•Ball's Battle, Ohio (July 30, 1813): A battle that erupted between a party of Indians loyal to the British and an American force (including Pennsylvania volunteers under the command of Maj. James V. Ball) en route to Fort Stephenson. The action occurred near Fort Seneca located about eight miles south of Fort Sephenson and thirty-five miles southeast of Fort Meigs.

•Assault on Fort Stephenson, Ohio (August 2, 1813): An unsuccessful attempt by the British to capture Fort Stephenson, a fort on the Sandusky River near present-day Fremont, Ohio.

•Battle of Put-in-Bay, Ohio (September 10, 1813): The pivotal naval battle, also known as the Battle of Lake Erie, in which a squadron under the command of Captain Oliver Hazard Perry defeated the British squadron under Commander Robert Heriot Barclay, giving the United States complete control of Lake Erie. With their supply line cut, the British in southwestern Lower Canada were forced to abandon Detroit and Fort Amherstburg and retreat eastward toward the Niagara Peninsula.

•Battle of Moraviantown, Upper Canada (October 5, 1813): A decisive American victory at Moraviantown, a village on the Thames River close to the location of present-day Chatham, Ontario, over the British army retreating from Detroit and Fort Amherstburg. The battle is also referred to as the Battle of the Thames. Tecumseh and Roundhead, a Wyandot chief and a loyal member of Tecumseh's Confederation, were both killed during this battle.

•Skirmish at McCrea's Farm, Upper Canada (December 15, 1813): A British victory over a small contingent of American troops deployed on the Thames River about twenty-five miles southwest of Moraviantown.

Niagara Frontier

•Battle of York, Upper Canada (April 27, 1813): A relatively easy American capture of Fort York and the adjacent town of York (at the location of present-day Toronto), achieved by an amphibious assault of troops from Sackets Harbor. The entire American force withdrew by May 8, but only after vandalizing and looting much of the town and burning the buildings of the provincial legislature. The burning of the Capitol Building during the British raid on Washington was retribution for the American actions in York.

•Battle of Fort George, Upper Canada (May 27, 1813): An American victory in which Fort George, the western-most British fort on Lake Ontario, located at the mouth of the Niagara River, was captured during an amphibious attack across the river by troops from Fort Niagara on the American side of the river.

•Battle of Stoney Creek, Upper Canada (June 6, 1813): A British victory achieved by a night attack on American troops encamped at the mouth of Stoney Creek, a creek flowing north into the western end of Lake Ontario about forty miles west of Fort George. The defeat forced the American forces at Fort George to abandon plans to advance further into Upper Canada.

•Second raid at Charlotte, New York, at the mouth of the Genesee River (June 15, 1813): A raid by a landing party from Commodore Sir James Yeo's Squadron that was unopposed and succeeded in confiscating five hundred barrels of flour and a boat continuing twelve hundred bushels of corn.

•Battle of Beaver Dams, Upper Canada (June 24, 1813): A successful British ambush by warriors of the Six and Seven Nations, commanded by a British officer, of an American detachment from Fort George on its way to attack a British outpost near Beaver Dams.

•Blockade of Fort George, Upper Canada (July 1 – October 9, 1813): A British attempt to reoccupy Fort George following their victories at Stoney Creek (June 6, 1813) and Beaver Dams (June 24, 1813). There were frequent skirmishes (Ball Property) and raids (Black Rock) during this period. The blockade was lifted in order to redeploy troops in response to developments elsewhere along the American-Canadian border, especially Wilkinson's Campaign on the St. Lawrence, which began in October, and the British defeat at Moraviantown in Upper Canada, which occurred on October 5.

•Raid at Fort Schlosser, New York (July 5, 1813): A successful British raid across the Niagara River on Fort Schlosser, during which the raiders seized a field gun, arms and ammunition, a gunboat and two bateaux, food and entrenching tools, and sank a number of additional boats.

•Skirmishes at the Ball Property, Upper Canada (July 8 – September 6, 1813): A series of skirmishes that occurred just west of Niagara, Upper Canada, between the American and British lines during the blockade of Fort George (July 1 – October 9, 1813).

•Raid at Black Rock, New York (July 11, 1813): A British raid on Black Rock, New York, shortly after the British initiated their blockage of Fort George. The initial phase of the raid was very successful, but the British suffered heavy casualties during their withdrawal.

•Raid at York, Upper Canada (July 31 – August 1, 1813): A brief amphibious American incursion in which the Americans freed some prisoners, confiscated military baggage and supplies and a number of bateaux. Before leaving the Americans burned buildings on Gibraltar Point in retribution for the British raid on Sodus, New York, on June 19.

•Loss of the two American schooners Hamilton (1809) and Scourge (August 8, 1813): The loss, during a violent storm, of the schooners Hamilton (1809) and Scourge. The two schooners were part of Commodore Isaac Chauncey's squadron, which was about to go into action against Commodore Sir James Yeo's squadron in Lake Ontario just six miles north of Twelve Mile Creek near the Niagara River.

•Skirmish at Nanticoke Creek, Upper Canada (November 13, 1813): An expedition of Norfolk County militia to capture American loyalist marauders who had been active in the area around Nanticoke Creek, near Lake Erie about sixty miles west of Fort Erie.

•Burning of Niagara (Newark), Upper Canada (December 10–11, 1813): The unprovoked burning of Newark by a small force of American troops under the command of Brigadier General George McClure. McClure felt that his position at Fort George was untenable, and ordered that Newark be destroyed as he evacuated his command to Fort Niagara.

•Capture of Fort Niagara, New York (December 18–19, 1813): An unexpected night attack by British infantry on the under-strength American garrison at Fort Niagara at the mouth of the Niagara River, which resulted in the relatively easy capture of the fort. Fort Niagara remained under British control for the rest of the war.

•Raid at Black Rock and Buffalo, New York (December 30, 1813): A British raid launched following the capture of Fort Niagara by the British to retaliate for the burning of the town of Niagara, Upper Canada, by the Americans on December 10–11 and to annihilate all American forces on the Niagara Frontier. The raid achieved all of its objective, and, for the time being at least, the British were in complete control of the Niagara River region.

St. Lawrence River

•Raid on Brockville, Upper Canada (February 7, 1813): A raid conducted on Brockville by American troops garrisoned at Ogdensburg, New York, after a British party from Brockville crossed St. Lawrence River to enter New York to apprehend deserters.

•Second attack on Ogdensburg, New York (February 22, 1813): A successful British attack culminating in the capture of Ogdensburg, a town from which the Americans could interfere with the movement of supplies by the British along the St. Lawrence River.

•Second attack on Sackets Harbor, New York (May 29, 1813): An unsuccessful British naval and amphibious attack on Sackets Harbor, intended as a diversion while the Americans were bombarding Fort George.

•Capture of the Eagle (1812) and Growler (1812) (June 3, 1813): The capture by the British of two American sloops, Eagle (1812) and Growler (1812), in the Richelieu River on a patrol to prevent smuggling on Lake Champlain. The British renamed them Shannon (1813) and Broke and pressed them into service on Lake Champlain.

•British raid at Sodus, New York (June 19, 1813): A raid conducted by a landing party from Commodore Sir James Yeo's squadron off Sodus Bay about thirty miles southwest of Oswego, New York. During the raid the British confiscated supplies.

•Skirmish at Cranberry Creek, New York (July 1 9, 1813): The ambush of a British force advancing up Cranberry Creek to engage an American force that had conducted a successful attack on a British convoy of bateaux carrying supplies up the St. Lawrence River.

•Murray's Raid, New York and Vermont (July 29 – August 4, 1813): A successful British raid on American posts and towns (including Champlain and Plattsburgh) located along the Richelieu River and Lake Champlain. The British marine force included two former American sloops, the Eagle and Growler, that had been captured in June and renamed Shannon and Broke. The raid was largely unopposed and resulted in the capture of eight vessels, the destruction of a great deal of public property and the confiscation of useful supplies. It also asserted British control of Lake Champlain.

•Capture of the American schooners Julia and Growler (1809) (August 10, 1813): During a battle on Lake Ontario between Commodore Sir James Yeo's and Commodore Isaac Chauncey's squadrons, the two American schooners Julia and Growler (1809) became separated from the rest of the squadron and were capture by the British. Yeo renamed them Confiance (1813) and Hamilton (1813).

•First Skirmish at Odelltown, Lower Canada (September 30, 1813): A minor skirmish, following which Major General Wade Hampton abandoned his plan to invade Lower Canada along the Richelieu River and retreated to the village of Four Corners on the Upper Chateaguay River in New York.

•Wilkinson's Campaign on the St. Lawrence River (October–November, 1813): Part of a plan for a coordinated attack on Montreal by an American force from Sackets Harbor, under the command of Major General James Wilkinson, down the St. Lawrence River, combined with an attack northward along the Richelieu River from Lake Champlain, by troops commanded by Major General Wade Hampton. The offensive foundered when Hampton cancelled the advance of his command following the battle of Chateauguay and the defeat of Wilkinson's army at the Battle of Crysler's Farm.

•Raid at Missisquoi Bay, Lower Canada (October 12, 1813): A raid ordered by Major General Wade Hampton on Philipsburg. Lower Canada, located on Missisquoi Bay (the eastern basin in the northern part of Lake Champlain). The goal of the raid was to reduce smuggling between Vermont an Lower Canada and to divert British attention from his efforts to advance along the Richelieu River from Lake Champlain.

•Battle on the Chateauguay, Lower Canada (October 26, 1813): An unsuccessful American attack on the British defending the lower Chateauguay River, following which Major General Wade Hampton announced the end of his campaign to invade Canada along the Richelieu River and retreated to Plattsburg, New York.

•Skirmish at French Creek, New York (November 1–2, 1813): An inconclusive attempt by the British to disrupt and harass the advance guard of Major General James Wilkinson's army as it advanced from Sackets Harbor down the St. Lawrence River toward Montreal.

•Skirmish at Hoople's Creek, Upper Canada (November 10, 1813): A successful action by the British, which delayed the advance of Major General James Wilkinson's army on Cornwall, Upper Canada, a village at the base of the Long Sault rapids and a landing and storage point for British supplies.

•Battle of Crysler's Farm, Lower Canada (November 11, 1813): The decisive British victory over the rear guard of Major General James Wilkinson's Division near Cornwall, Lower Canada, convincing Wilkinson to abandon his campaign down the St. Lawrence River.

Naval Battles

•USS Viper (1806) versus HMS Narcissus (January 17, 1813): The pursuit and capture of the American brig Viper, while it was trying to return to New Orleans after it had become separated from its companion ship. After springing a serious leak, the Viper was captured by the British frigate Narcissus.

•USS Hornet versus HMS Peacock (1806) (February 24, 1813): An encounter that occurred off the Demerara River, Guyana, when the American sloop Hornet spotted the British sloop Espiegle at anchor in the river while another British warship, the sloop Peacock (1806) was sailing toward him. The Peacock initiated an engagement and was so badly damaged during the exchange that within half an hour it surrendered and subsequently sank during attempts to rescue the crew.

•USS Chesapeake (1799) versus HMS Shannon (1806) (June 1, 1813): An exchange of broadsides at close range after which Capt. Philip Broke led a British boarding party onto the American ship, which surrendered. The battle occurred off the New England coast between Cape Cod and Cape Ann.

•Attack on HMS Junon (June 20, 1813): An attack initiated by a flotilla of American gunboats in the Elizabeth River below Norfolk, Virginia, on the British frigate Junon, which was anchored in shallow water near Hampton Roads. The captain of the Junan managed to get his ship underway and fought off the Americans for an hour and a half before breaking off the action and withdrawing.

•Delaware flotilla versus HMS Martin (July 29, 1813): An attack by the Delaware flotilla, consisting of eight gunboats and two blockships, on the British sloop Martin, which ran aground on a shoal near Cape May while engaged in blockade duty off the mouth of the Delaware River. The Americans broke off the action after about two hours after losing one gunboat. The Martin sustained only minor damage and was subsequently refloated.

•USS Argus (1803) versus HMS Pelican (August 14, 1813): A battle between the British brig Pelican and the American sloop Argus in St. George's Channel between Wales and Ireland. The Argus had been attacking shipping off the west coast of England. The encounter caused so much damage to the Argus that it was forced to surrender.

•USS Enterprise versus HMS Boxer (September 5, 1813): An hour-long engagement off the coast of Maine, during which the American brig Enterprise caused such heavy damage on the British sloop Boxer that it was forced to surrender, after which it was towed to Portland. Both commanding officers were killed during the battle, and both were buried with full military honors in Portland.

•USS President (1800) versus HMS Highflyer (September 23, 1813): An action off the coast of New England during which the American frigate President encountered the British schooner Highflyer and surrendered after a short battle. Prior to its capture the President had been on a cruise that had begun in April, during which it had captured eleven British merchantships.

•USS Vixen (1813) versus HMS Belvidera (1809) (December 25, 1813): The capture of the American schooner Vixen (1813) off Delaware after a two-hour pursuit by the British frigate Belvidera. The Vixen (1813) had only recently been purchased by the US Navy, and was on its way to New Castle, Delaware, to be outfitted with guns, equipment and a crew.

"Tchaikovsky" was the correct answer to the question in the title.

This thread is a perfect example of how history can be manipulated to tell whatever story you want. Recent historical studies from all sides have concluded that no one "won" the War of 1812 but since the treaty both sides have since engaged in a longer war to justify their actions. The War of 1812 has proportionately more myths attached to it then probably any other conflict in history

Despite many clams to the contrary Britain was not interested in reconquering their lost colonies and at most wanted some border adjustments and perhaps fairer treatment for their Indian allies ( BTW thy got neither) . There is no documentation that even suggests that Britain was out to reconquer America, Their aim was to end the war as quickly and as painlessly as possible. These were the instructions given o their negotiators at the Treaty

The Americans entered into the War unprepared and ill equipped weighed down by a host of fossil generals dating back to 1776. Thy ended the war with a bankrupt Federal Government that had already defaulted once on its debt and was close to doing it again. By 1814 the Federal Government was basically irrelevant to most Americans and the States Britain had free access to land anywhere on the American coast. The US foreign trade was ruined as no American merchant ship was safe.Even with this Britain still had no idea of how they could hold on to what they could take

The facts do not support the myths, In the Naval War alone the USN took only 172 of the 1613 British merchant vessels taken by Americans the rest were by privateers. Also 30% of the captured vessels were retaken before they could reach an American port. The US ultimately lost 1407 merchant ships,and 34 US Warships and 278 privateers carrying 908 guns and manned by 8,974 men. By the end of the War over 20,000 US sailors had been captured. The Royal Navy lost 16 ships.

The War did give America a growing sense of pride and confidence in their ability to stand up to the world's greatest power and in most cases fighting them to a draw. Britain had respect for the growing American power and recognized it by the realization that conquering America was not worth the risk or costs and it would be better to ally herself with the US. In return British North America had the assurance that they would be preserved from any future American attack. The Indians got nothing.

This is clearly set out in the Opening clauses of the Treaty of Ghent I quote:

There shall be a firm and universal peace between His Britannic Majesty and the United states and between their respective countries territories, cities, towns and people, of every degree without exception of places or persons. All hostilities, both by sea and by land, shall cease as soon as this treaty shall have been ratified by both parties, as herin after mentioned. All territory, places and possessions whatsoever, taken by either party from the other, during the war, or which may be taken, after the signing of this treaty, excepting only the islands herein after mentioned, shall be restored without delay, and without causing any destruction or carrying away he artillery or other public property originally captured in the said forts or places, and which shall remain therein upon the exchange of the ratification of this treaty, or any slaves or other private property.

Okay, regardless of who won, let's lay the myth about the battle of New Orleans to rest once and for all.

The Treaty of Ghent was signed on Dec 24, 1814. This did not end the War of 1812. The second sentence in Article the First reads "All hostilities both by sea and land shall cease as soon as this Treaty shall have been ratified by both parties as hereinafter mentioned." The treaty was not ratified by the United States until February 16, 1815, one month and eight days after the Battle of New Orleans was fought. That ended the War of 1812.

Which was won, if it was won by anybody, by Canada.

LT

Here's a name rarely mentioned in connection with the War of 1812, but it's totally relevant:

Napoleon Bonaparte.

The mere fact of the war was to his advantage. By manipulating his trade policies he brought the British and Americans into conflict, in hopes of causing the British problems. And he succeeded (helped by ham-handed British diplomacy and hawks in the US who wanted Canada). The Anglo-American War of 1812 benefited him more than anyone else.

I'm an American, and I've been taught that it was the "2nd War of Independence" and that we successfully resisted the British attempt to return us to the fold, and therefore we won because we retained our independence. This is pure fantasy. In 1812, Great Britain had been at war with France for about 20 years. Napoleon dominated most of Europe and looked nigh-on invincible (the Retreat From Moscow not having happened yet). The Royal Navy was stretched to the limit maintaining the blockade of Europe, and Britain's only field army was occupied in Spain. What did they have to gain by starting another war, on the other side of the ocean, with their major trading partner, who happened to be feeding Wellington's army at the time (curiously, this didn't end during the war, proving once again that while war in all well and good, profits are better)? Add to this the fact that the war rather suspiciously began with two simultaneous American invasions of Canada, and I can't buy that the British were trying to re-conquer the U.S. So the US claiming victory because it retained its independence is specious, because that liberty was never at risk.

So who won? Not the Americans, because Canada is still a separate country. Not the British, because the war was just another problem for them at a time they didn't need another problem, so it's hard to imagine what "victory" would have looked like to them. The only victory for them would have been if the war hadn't happened in the first place. The Canadians successfully defended their turf, so they can claim to have won, but that's all they got. And Napoleon? As I said before, he won by getting the US and GB to fight in the first place, but little good it did him.

Obviously the Native Americans were the big losers, but their defeat had been assured hundreds of years earlier when the vast majority of their population perished with the introduction of European diseases to North America.

Personally, I think the greatest winner were us gamers, who got a whole new use for our British Napoleonic armies and something else to argue about on the internet!

Well said Mserafin.

Despite my earlier post I have little interest in the subject of who won or lost. Few wars are win lose situations, but all have consequences, lessons and outcomes.
We have done this thread before. Historians say no change in the map means no winners. That is what any generalizing History teacher will tell you about the War of 1812.
Those who look a little deeper will say the boastful Americans were stopped from taking Canada and the British sort of failed the Indians, so Canadians win, British and Americans draw, and Native Americans lose.
What about lessons?
Impressment – Many like to say this was a small issue of little real consequence, and that may be true to us 200 years later. To the officers and seaman of 1812, British arrogance was a huge issue. Men who had served in the U.S. Navy and the merchant marine had almost all encountered British bullying. Many were imprisoned for years on British warships. Several American officers had personally had to escape impressment on British ships or fight to prevent it. the practice was not officially ended by the Treaty of Ghent, but Rodgers, Hull, Decatur, Stewart, Porter, Bainbridge, etc. had ended the practice, forever, in fact.
Boastful Congressional rhetoric about defeating Canada proved to be a total disaster, due to poor army training and leadership. True. But people often forget to mention that Parliamentary arrogance led to three massive invasions of American territory, supported by crack British troops fresh from battle with Napoleon, and all three failed, New Orleans disastrously.
Then there is the war on the lakes. It was a contest of logistics, improvisation, shipbuilding, training and tactics. The Americans captured the entire British squadrons on Lake Erie and Lake Champlain and matched the British on Ontario.
So America did not win the war. I'll go along with that. But out of it came a well trained Army, which Winfield Scott used to advantage in two more wars. The navy was well served with officers, the Congress voted for a massive expansion, including battleships. U.S. shipbuilders became among the most sought after. The Tripolitan war of 1816 demonstrates the increased reputation of the Navy.
For the Canadians it was a source of pride. For the Native Americans it was a disaster. For the British it was an annoying and embarrasing sideshow to the Napoleonic Wars. Americans don't talk about it much in general History survey courses, but the Army, Navy and Marine Corps all owe their early reputations to the successes in the War of 1812.

Just my opinion and there are many good answers above.

In order from more winning to more losing:
Napoleon – cost him almost nothinig and he got the most benefit.

Canada – they had almost no prewar aims but came out ok.

Great Britan and the United States – neither ended up with their prewar aims but both can claim that they won because of "x" you can chose the "x". Really they both just didn't lose and that counts for something.

The Indian nations – well they got the short dirty end of the stick.

Canadians have absolutely no question as to who won the War of 1812.

"…instead we went to Washington and burned down all his stuff…"

YouTube link

The US got an early goal to go 1-0 up but the British came back and scored twice to get a 2-1 lead. Then in the dying minutes of the game the US got an equaliser. The draw meant that Britain stayed 2nd in the table with only the French to play in a must-win game to win the league. America then went on to win a vital game against Mexico.

QFT: Well said Mserafin.
Great thread.

I thank Poniatowski for completing my Masters thesis.

Canada didn't gain independence as a result of the war.

No, sir, we retained our freedom to live as British subjects free from the rule of the mob.

Nice list of battles by Poniatowski.

Sad that he does not list any battles along the Southwest frontier. No New Orleans camapign as it was a series of battles, No Pensacola, No Mobile and none of the First Creek War actions.

A good book on the actions in this area is Professor Owsley' book 'Stuggle for the Gulf Boareerlands'.
I was working in the adjacent office at Auburn University when he had just finished the book.

I like the name Gulf Boarderlands for this region rather than the Southwest Frontier.

Edit button does not work.

Hello ancientsgamer!

Glad to see you see the humor in my light hearted comments.
This period seems out of your domain, but well put.

To answer both of your questions, nothing.

I think the key here is the original question. It's not what were the causes, loses or gains of the war. It's simply who won the war.

I think that if my neighbor comes onto my property with the intention of taking it from me and causing me physical harm and leaves without taking the property and suffers physical harm, I won, he lost. How can I be the loser? How can it be a tie? How can he be the winner? If this case went to court I think my neighbor would do jail time. The Americans clearly started the war and invaded Canada with the intention of taking it over. That's it, they came, they lost, they left. What's confusing about that?

Poniatowski, I presume you game the War of 1812?

:^)

The British stopped impressing American seamen.

The United States gained a huge chunk of territory from the French and defended it against the British.

The Americans invaded Canada and then discovered that the bars closed at 8PM and left.

The British lost nearly every frigate battle and thereafter spent most of their national fortune building more and more naval vessels, while the Americans product goods.

For those wanting to read more on Poniatowski's list from Wikipedia see the attached link from Wikipedia It also includes the sections on the Southern US and Gulf Coast that he did not include

link

There has been a lot of new books on the Subject that downplay the "Nationalistic myths "of both sides and try to present a more balanced picture I would recommend the following:

The Civil War of 1812: American Citizens, British Subjects, Irish Rebels, & Indian Allies (Vintage) [Paperback]
Alan Taylor (Author)

Amazon Link: link

For Honour's Sake: The War of 1812 and the Brokering of an Uneasy Peace Mark Zuehlke (Author)

TMP link

The Weight of Vengeance: The United States, the British Empire, and the War of 1812 [Hardcover]
Troy Bickham (Author)

Link: link

A little older but still excellent

Don't Give Up the Ship!: Myths of the War of 1812 [Paperback]
Donald R. Hickey (Author)

Link: link

The Incredible War of 1812: A Military History [Paperback]
J. Mackay Hitsman (Author), Donald E. Graves (Author),

link

The British stopped impressing American seamen.

Which had already been done before the war started, so it was a moot casus belli.

The United States gained a huge chunk of territory from the French and defended it against the British.

The British attacked a tiny corner of said territory at the end of the war. After being rebuffed once, the war ended before they could make another attempt at said corner.

The Americans invaded Canada and then discovered that the bars closed at 8PM and left.

The Americans invaded Canada, discovered that the Canadians were tougher than they though, and got kicked out of the country.

The British lost nearly every frigate battle

Tell that to the crews of the Essex, Chesapeake and President.

and thereafter spent most of their national fortune building more and more naval vessels, while the Americans product goods.

This is total fiction.

First,

I would support a new British expedition to capture D.C. if it promised to burn it to the ground for good.

After all the strum and drang over battles and territory lost and/or won – FOLLOW THE MONEY! While every one else was counting coup and other such irrelevent stuff, the boys from Baltimore, Philadelphia, Boston and NYC counted British pounds gained from privateering. Of course most of the privateers, most especially the Baltimore Clippers, could outsail anything the British could build.

Indeed, so much money came to the US that the years immediately following were known as the Era of Good Feeling (or some such). Oh! Then the US destroyed the power of the Indian Tribes east of the Mississippi.

So what exactly did the British gain other than higher insurance rates, the loss of over a thousand merchant ships and millions of pounds in cargo not to mention the eventual destruction of its Indian allys or the shambles of its geopolitical aim to prevent the westward expansion of the US.

Remind me, Who won?

Bob Coggins

@ ratisbon;

You sir, have the right idea. Follow the money. Unfortunately the fortunes made by privateers, et al. were of little use to the U.S. economy. American currency was not accepted much of anywhere after the War of 1812 for twenty years. The most common currency in the U.S. until almost the Mexican-American war was the Spanish silver dollar.

Hello Ratisbon!

No problem, I'll remind you, the British!

The question was not which minority profited the most during or after the war.

The question was also not which cultural group suffered the most after the war.

The question was also not who lost the most ships or cargo during the war.

The question was also not a geopolitical one.

So let me remind you, the question was "Who won the WAR of 1812". The answer to that question is in my previous posts and of course my short answer above………..the British.

Best regards,

Glenn

Ratisbon: The British Canadian privateers actually captured more prizes then their American counterparts. See my earlier posting; 30% of American captures were recaptured before getting home US Total Captured 1613 less 30% recaptured equals 1129. British Canadians 1407. This does not include the 278 US privateer vessels captured. By 1815 most American ships were either captured or staying home. British trade continued as total losses were about 8% of British merchant ships. Yes thy paid higher insurance but the trade went on. Sorry to burst another 1812 myth.

I sometimes fantasize that were I were to write a history of this war, I would call it "The War or 1812: A Mutual Embarrassment."

Louisiana purchase 828,000 square miles

(Purchased from Great Britian's arch enemy and defended against English colonial grasping)

Great Britian 80,823 square miles

Selected quotes from the Duke of Wellington concerning the War of 1812:

"I do not know where you could carry on such an operation which would be so injurious to the Americans as to force them to sue for peace, which is what one would wish to see …"

"…the continuance of the American War will entail upon us a prodigious expense, much more than we have had any idea of, along with the other burdens it would bring."

"…that which appears to me to be wanting in America is not a General, or General officers and troops, but a naval superiority on the Lakes. Till that superiority is acquired, it is impossible, according to my notion, to maintain an army in such a situation as to keep the enemy out of the whole frontier …"

"I think you have no right, from the state of war, to demand any concession of territory from America … You have not been able to carry it into the enemy's territory, notwithstanding your military success and now undoubted military superiority, and have not even cleared your own territory on the point of attack. You cannot on any principle of equality in negotiation claim a cessation of territory except in exchange for other advantages which you have in your power … Then if this reasoning be true, why stipulate for the uti possidetis (Latin for "as you possess")? You can get no territory: indeed, the state of your military operations, however creditable, does not entitle you to demand any."

1968billsfan,

Can you explain to me where in the British (please, not English; that is like calling all Americans Californians) state papers there is a statement of an intention to take the land included in the Louisiana purchase.

Turning to the other posts concerning the successes of the US privateers, most of these occurred early in the war and, once the RN had swung into action properly, the successes dried up and the US navy was pretty much contained in its ports by the blockade.

Overall, a rather pointless war on all sides, which ended in a stalemate, with neither side able to inflict a decisive defeat on the other. If it had continued, I suspect that the blockade would have destroyed US trade to the extent where the economic survival of the nation became a major issue.

It does seem that some here have been brought up with a very distorted view of the cause and events of the war of 1812.

Invading America is akin to Napoleon invading Russia. Take the capital and burn it all you want, it doesn't matter. You can take the capital, territory etc. But you cannot control any territory except that which you are standing on.

This was not going to turn out good for Britain. It would bankrupt Britain and after many years of war with France, the British public and Parliament would have none of it. All they wanted to do was end this stupid war and get back to trading with the Americans.

As far as impressment of American sailors goes, when Napoleon was defeated there was no reason or need for Britain to continue the policy.

The other reason the U.S. went to war, British incitement of the Indians to attack American Western Settlements. The total defeat of the Britain's tribal allies ended that practice. So the two key causes of the war had been resolved. So why keep fighting?

Cockneys, Taffs, jocks, Maple boys, 2
sceptic tanks, 1

have it my son

British aim = protect Canada. 100% success!
Canadian aim = protect Canada. Ditto.

USA aim = take Canada. 100% fail.

Complete loss.
Baffled at so many desperate to twist and turn events into a draw. Britain had no desire to recapture the states.

We all lose wars now and again.
We lost to you in the AWI, we lost to the French in the 100 years war despite several notable successes, we lost to the Boers in 81…

The USA lost to Britain and Canada in 1812. Wars arnt measured in how much you stole, or killed but on whether you achieved your war aim and stopped your enemy achieving his. Britain and Canada did. USA failed. Happens to the best of us.

I think Canada and Australia/ NZ might be one of the few undefeated nations in the world.

Edwulf – Kind of :)

From my time here in the Great Big Brown Land, not even the most rampant patriotic Aussie mates of mine try and claim Gallipoli as a win. (although sometimes you think that only the Anzacs where there)

They also do claim (along with Tobruk and Kokoda) it proves that Aussies are the best / toughest soldiers ever! which thus makes it almost like a win.

Not quite sure how that works out – but that seems to be how for some the national psyche works :)

Hello 1968billsfan!

Sorry the question was never what was the size of the Louisiana Purchase or Great Britian and it was certainly not how did GB feel about it.

Hello Rallynow!

Interesting that you have chosen "select quotes" and yet not one of them says who he thought won the war. They appear to be nothing more then his point of view on the negotiations, not who won the war.

In your last post you seem to have skipped the part about America invading Canada.

The question was not what were the reasons for the war or why anybody would want to continue it.

Hello Edwulf!

If I were your history teacher I would give you an A+!!
Seems like a lot of others would get D-.

Hello Gustav!

Edwulf is talking about wars not individual battles.

Best regards,

Glenn

"Canada"lost as much as it won from the War of 1812. Because the war cost Britain so much and they knew that it would be better to have the US as any ally or at least neutral, Canada got the worst of every boundary negotiation or trade dispute until 1937. In the Oregon crisis, the Alaska crisis and others GB gave the US what they wanted – look at the map pf Alaska to see that.

Canada may have been preserved from the US but we inherited a150 years or more of Imperial domination both politically and social by the "mother" Country. For at least a 100years after 1815 any Canadian movement towards popular democracy or reform was labled as "Yankee" and suppressed. We fell under the leadership of super Imperialists who thought themselves more British then the British. Land reform, class distinctions and a certain feeling that a "better class" exists all from 1812; Canada's nascent nationalism that was evident in 1812 died and was replaced by imperialism

Sometimes a country loses a war by what happens after as a result of the war. Yes Canadian territory was preserved (although a lot was given away later) but Canada lost a chance to develop "itself " as a part of North America We also lost the chance of further territorial expansion south If Britain had had any true feeling for Canada and put her money whee the mouth should have been. the states of Maine, Vermont, Michigan, Minnesota Washington Oregon and good parts of some others would all be part of a greater Canada. The great British taxpayer spoke and Canada was not worth any more money then the bare minimal. If the 'price" had been right Britain would have sold most of Canada to the Yanks and that topic was raised a few times but only the strong protests from" Canadians" stopped it.

Glenn Pearce,

In 1812 Canada was a British Colony and one of the political aims of Britain was to preserve it's Colony, which it did. It did so at a large cost. The loss of over a thousand merchantment and thir cargo with a corresponding increase in insurance rates and the price of goods on the English market.

As essentially a defensive war Britain lost its abiity to protect its Indian Allies and lost whatever tenuous claim it had on the Northwest Territories and along with it its geopolitical desire to prevent the US from expnding into the NW.

The Battles Lake Erie and Plattsburgh broke the back of the British attempts to invade from Canada, the Battle of Horseshoe Bend, the Battle of Baltimore and New Orleans merely put a punctuation on the failure of British war aims.

As for D.C., it was an incomplete president's residence with some half completed government buildings that needed burning. Whatever happened to Ross and Packenham?

But Britain did keep Canada.

Bob Coggins

I think too much is being made of the conquering of Canada by America. The Americans would not be able to invade Britain but the next closest thing was Canada. Canada was an obvious invasion route for the British. It was only natural to try and close off that avenue of invasion. It was more of a defensive measure.

The "you did not conquer Canada, therefore we won" mantra is a product of a Canadian inferiority complex. It is a reaction to a few bellicose, over zealous American politicians trying to unite a divided country as it went to war. Nothing more.

Sure there were a few jingoistic Americans who propose the annexation of Canada, just as there were those in Britain who propose the reconquest of America for the Crown. More realistic Americans knew the real reason was to keep the British bottled up in Canada and for the most part it did. As the more realistic minded Brits (like Wellington) knew it was impossible to conquer such a vast an area as the United States with a large hostile population. That idea died at Yorktown.

One could say just as well, the British did not return the former colonies to the fold, therefore the U.S. won the war. The United States survived, the reconquest attempt by Britain failed. The permanence of the United States was established once and for all.

Bob Coggins,
That is a wonderfully one-sided view of the war.

Are you aware that the US lost more merchant ships than Britain, to the extent that the US merchant fleet stayed in port rather than sail, thus destroying US trade until the war ended.

Are you aware of the economic impact this had on the US? The impact on Britain was trivial in comparison.

You mention "British attempts to invade from Canada"; Britain had no intention of invading the US. Raids and plans to attack the US army certainly, but no invasion plans.

Yes, Britain failed in its aim of preventing westward US expansion but the US also failed in its rather poorly defined war aims.

A pointless war that neither the British nor the Americans could really hope to gain a decisive victory in; fortunately, both sides eventually saw sense.

Bob told me they won that war in the jungle.

Hmmmmm.

At the end of the war the US controlled all the Great Lakes and could strangle the western parts of Canada. Also, not much chance of another British invasion like the one that lead to Sarataga.

pas de charge wrote 09 Feb 2013 11:06 p.m. PST

1968billsfan,
"Can you explain to me where in the British (please, not English; that is like calling all Americans Californians) state papers there is a statement of an intention to take the land included in the Louisiana purchase."

pas de charge: what were
4th Foot (King's Own)
7th Foot (Royal Fusiliers)
21st Foot (Royal North British Fusiliers)
43rd Light Infantry (Monmouth)
44th Foot (East Essex)
85th Foot (Buck's Volunteers)
93rd Foot (Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders)
95th Rifle Corps
1st West Indian Infantry (Colored)
2nd West Indian Infantry (Colored)

doing in Louisiana?

1968billsfan,

They were fighting the Americans (and taking a bit of a hammering!). They were also trying to capture the city of New Orleans as a bargaining chip and to deny its use to the US.

British troops fought, and still fight, in many places that Britain had, and has, no intention of taking.

It looks like the answer to my question to you is "no". Having read the State Papers over many years, I can assure you that at no point did the British government plan to take the land covered by the Louisiana Purchase. In fact, Britain had no interest in taking any more of North America than it already owned, mainly because of the impossibility of defending and holding it.

Being holed up in port is not the same as being destroyed. Plus the fact that a good number turned privateer. After the war the US merchant marine staged a remarkable comeback.

I wouldn't say the economic impact was "trivial" for the British. Insurance rates climbed higher and stayed even after the French surrender. The British shipped a sizeable portion of units to Canada for the offensive so there was the expense for that. When you look at the drastic reduction in the British military after the final peace (after Waterloo and the final end of Nappy), the British treasury was still hemoraging money.

Hello ratisbon (Bob Coggins)!

Looks like pdc replied to all of your points (thanks pdc)
except for the last one which was correct, and that's why the British won the war.

Best regards,

Glenn

Hello rallynow!

I almost fell off my chair when I read your last post.

You want to down play the major acts of aggression made by the Americans. The multiple failed invasions of Canada. On the pretense that it was simply a defensive move. Defensive move from who? Oh yeah that party that they declared war on and attacked multiple times that failed miserably.

To suggest that the entire Canadian population is/was suffering from an inferiority complex is about as far out in left field as you can go. The war was between Great Britain and America, Canada was just the meat in the sandwich. I can assure you the mental health of the Canadian population had nothing to do with who won the war.

Don't you think it would have been a lot easier to keep the British bottled up in Canada if the Americans didn't declare war on them or attack their colony? It's been said over and over here that the British never had any invasion plans to conquer America. Where do you find this fiction?

The permanence of the United States was never in jeopardy, unless they destroyed themselves. Their foolish expansionist plans were the only thing that went down the toilet and that's why they lost the war.

Best regards,

Glenn

Vincent,

Two points:

1. The US lost more merchant ships than Britain. That is a matter of historical record. American losses were 1407 merchant ships plus 278 privateers, while the British lost 1129. Anyway, this is not a factor in deciding who won or lost the war.

2. The phrase I used was "trivial in comparison", which is different from trivial in absolute terms; The US was virtually bankrupted by the war, with the coastal states being particularly affected. For Britain, it was a relatively minor economic cost compared with the impact of the war in Europe.