Recent decades have welcomed scholarly and political interest in the impact of the Seven Years’ War (1756-1763). The war dramatically changed socioeconomic, political, and governmental relations between Span, Britain, and France as a consequence of European ambition. Britain and France experienced a long-term financial strain as a consequence of the war. For instance, the Seven Years’ War further doubled the Crown’s national debt. However, Britain’s attempt to impose taxes to pay off the debt was met by stiff resistance, forcing the Crown to call upon troops to ensure government representatives performed their duties without interference, contributing to the advents of the American Revolution. For France, the economic burden of the Seven Years’ War and the military defeat ushered in the French Revolution, weakening the monarch. Consequently, France and North America established the Franco-American alliance in an effort to defeat Great Britain during the American War of Independence.
The Seven Years’ War required total commitment of state resources for survival, thus, any gains became essentially secondary. Additionally, the war was met by fierce Anglo-French fighting in West Africa, North America, the Caribbean, and South Asia that set off complex cultural and political conflicts. The first battle between the English and the French happened in 1754 at Fort Necessity in the Ohio Valley. George Washington led the English troops to the battle and was soundly defeated; one of many victories of the French forces in the early stages of the war. In the following years, the English took advantage of their military strength and superior numbers, gradually gaining the upper hand in the war, invading French strongholds in Canada.
Moreover, the British doubled the size of their empire in North America, which gave them control of the land east of the Mississippi river as per the Treaty of Paris. Thus, the Seven Years’ War was a continuation of the preceding war that ended with the Aix-la-Chapelle treaty in 1749. However, there is insufficient appreciation of the enormous impact and burden imposed upon the countries at war. Drawing upon comparative and international perspectives within which the war’s consequences are assessed, the Seven Years’ War was particularly decisive for the chain of events that later ensued. Due to the global theaters of conflict and the sheer importance of its aftermath in ushering in the Age of Revolution, it can be argued that the Seven Years’ War was, in fact, the first real World War in history.
The Early Battles
The Seven Years War transformed the power structure of North America and Europe, which set the stage for the American Revolution. In North America, the war was between English and French settlers; the European powers with great military reach. The two European powers focused on gaining political dominance over the other without regard for the rights of the native tribes that already inhabited North America. Trade competition between Britain and France resulted in armed conflict when both nations built their naval fleet to put their rulers in power. In 1753, the French built Forts in Ohio territory along the Allegheny River, encroaching land claimed by Virginia in the 1609 charter. Virginia’s Lieutenant Governor, Robert Dinwiddie, sent George Washington to warn Legareur de Saint-Pierre of the trespass. Despite his efforts, Washington failed to successfully enlist help from Ohio Indians. Upon delivering Dinwiddie’s message, the French ignored it and refused to acknowledge the Virginia charter. Despite returning with nothing to show, Washington got promoted to Lieutenant Colonel with the mission to remove the French from Ohio.
Given the French’s powerful presence and completion of building forts in Ohio region, Washington found it challenging to build a port in Pittsburgh. In 1754, the Indians, showed Washington how to attack the French and the French commander Jumonville was killed during battle. Washington’s militiamen retreated to Great Meadows after the French’s retaliation, which was against the Indian’s advice. The Indians, disappointed, abandoned Washington’s cause, making it imminent for the French to outnumber Washington and took Fort Necessity. The battle catalyzed the deteriorating relationship between the French and the British, and further precipitated physical battles along with political propaganda that ensued. Although the expeditions sent by the Britain between 1753 and 1754 to eject the French from Ohio Valley were unsuccessful, Washington’s early failures took on a heroic cast in the Revolutionary War and American history.
After the French yielded Fort Necessity, the Crown discovered that the French had deployed troops to attack fort Oswego. In response, the colonies got allocated more funds to expand and plan military actions with great precision: British regiments were deployed to the colonies. In 1755, Edward Braddock arrived in Virginia as the first British General to be sent to the colonies. Virginia was a crowded territory and natural obstacles made it difficult for it to expand. Upon his arrival, Braddock developed a three-step strategy to defeat the French. Colonel Willian Johnson and the Massachusetts regiments were sent to capture Fort Fredrick and Fort Niagara, respectively, while Braddock was to take Fort Duquesne. Braddock was well-acquainted with European warfare but ignored the necessities and possibilities of the New World War.
However, the first battle after Braddock’s arrival was almost uncontested since the region was sparsely occupied and had minimal strategic value. Thus, some of the forts got captured without direct conflict between the French and Braddock’s troops. In the battle to capture Fort Duquesne, the French won despite being outnumbered by the British. Braddock arranged for his militiamen to approach the fort by crossing the Monongahela River, giving the French an upper hand in ambushing the British forces. In all, the British lost more men than the French and wounded Braddock at the Monongahela battle. Braddock’s ordered and open attacks left him vulnerable to the French and guerilla attacks. In the wake of the French’s victory, they retained control over the Ohio Valley. The defeat at Fort Duquesne left the troops with the prospect of attacking Fort Niagara and reinforcing Oswego by facing a more-experienced army.
Despite Braddock’s unsuccessful attack coupled with the regiments’ unrest at Fort Oswego, a surprising victory followed under the leadership of William Johnson. Johnson took Fort Frederick at Crown Point, a point of historical significance to the British. While Washington failed to procure help from the Indians, Johnson negotiated and recruited allies from Iroquois and Mohawk; Johnson’s troops surrounded the French, attacking them from behind. However, the British colonial army received minimal support and funding from the Crown and colonies. The Crown was reluctant to fund the colonial forces when generals such as Braddock continued to lose at every battle. Likewise, the French were reluctant to financially support their colonies, and the French’s attention revolved around Europe during which Prussia was on the verge of invading Saxony, which could set off the Seven Years’ War.
The years 1756 and 1757 ushered a series of events: war declaration and victories for the French crown. With the arrival of Louis-Joseph de Montcalm, a talented strategist, the French gained more professionalism in their war approach. On the other hand, the British fought among themselves and were disorganized. The battles between France and England culminated in the declaration of war in 1756, which saw an influx of British troops and funding colonies. Some of the war defeats the British suffered were under the command of the Earl of Loundoun. Among the devastating defeats was the loss of Fort Oswego. The fort had little resistance since the surrounding tribes were hostile to the British. The port became of strategic importance to the French since it gave them access to the provision transported through Lake Ontario. Another British failure was the Crown Point mutiny. Loundoun placed ceilings upon the ranks of colonial officers such that regular captains could outrank high-ranking colonials. Further, Loundoun ordered the troops to function as a single body to fortify them with British men. The assumption of inferiority was met by resistance from the colonial men, and Loundoun denounced them as mutinous, sending most colonials home.
The major political engagement in North America happened in 1756. The British and French governments had appointed new commanders-in-chief for their campaigns in North America. In December 1756, the Crown appointed William Pitt to lead the British ministry and employed aggressive policies that had a significant impact on the Seven Years’ War. Among these policies was recalling the Earl of Loundoun as commander-in-chief. While waging war in North America, it became apparent that traditional tactics, as used by Loundoun and Braddock, were unsuitable for winning the battles in the frontier’s terrain. Instead, soldiers needed to be mobile, move in small groups and be lightly armed. The British army further learned from early defeats to apply more effective tactics to their strategies and reinforced their colonial force that outnumbered the French. The British counted losses in the 1758 battle because of poor leadership, but Pitt’s tactics gradually took hold and the British captured Louisbourg after several failed attempts. The victory gave the British access to Canada and soon after, captured more forts, cutting off communication between the French and their troops at Ohio.
With Pitt’s leadership, the Crown took advantage of manpower and supplies, turning the war in their favor. The victory of capturing Duquesne was followed by the seizure of Guadeloupe, Fort Niagara, and Ticonderoga. Further, the British gained control over the western frontier when the French abandoned Crown Point. However, the French strongholds were in Quebec, which was well protected, funded, and heavily supplied. For this reason, Pitt emphasized gaining Quebec to guarantee British victory. Quebec was heavily fortified but was eventually captured by the British, and the rest of Canada fell. The French attempted to take back Quebec, but failed and the French Marquise de Vaudreuil and British General Amherst signed letters of surrender. The lack of discipline, poor leadership, and delays in reform implementation significantly contributed to the defeat of the French army.
The strength of the British army during the war was its adaptability to various conditions. While the war in North America effectively ended after Canada’s surrender in 1760, the fight continued for the next two years in other parts of the world with occasional Indian raids in the colonies. The French and Indian War eventually ended the French’s political influence in North America, which was highlighted in the Treaty of Paris in 1963.33 Part of the treaty was letting France regain the Caribbean, which was lost to the British. Despite winning the war with the French, the British faced colonial problems heightened by the Treaty of Paris. In particular, the provisions of the treaty angered the Indians since it failed to address their concerns. The Indians agreed to fight in the war to retain the right to their lands.
However, the Indians faced immediate intrusion by British settlers and traders. A host of native nations allied and laid siege to Fort Detroit and those in Presque Isle, Venango, Niagara, Pittsburgh, and LeBoeuf. The British responded by using brutal tactics, which weakened the Indians, though small battles continued. The British had spent resources, time, men, and money to sustain the colonies. Thus, the Crown was determined to make the colonies profitable and in line, and thus, instituted high taxation and harsh policies in place of salutary neglect for the colonials. The approach had the opposite effect since it made the colonies increasingly angry and less profitable, eventually leading to the Revolutionary War that took hold thirteen years later.
The Seven Years’ War and American Revolution
The important result of the Seven Years’ War based on the colonial and metropolitan relationship was the enhanced awareness of the role of the colonies both strategically and economically. Although this awareness was scarcely new, it powerfully manifested during the war; but the decision to protect Britain’s interests in America and the Seven Years’ War that followed contributed to the emphasis on the importance of America for the British Crown. After the war, Britain’s population, power, and wealth vastly increased. For example, the number of colonies, ports, and fleets after the Seven Years’ War was attributed to Britain’s rise in power, and thus, sufficient to conclude that to a significant degree, the war made Britain prosperous. American colonies offered great support for commerce, trade, and defense for Britain, and trade was particularly of essence for Britain’s liberty and greatness.
Moreover, the war heightened the realization of the structural weakness of metropolitan authority. Foremost, the war revealed the difficulty in mobilizing colonial militaries. The Crown’s system of supplementing the colonies with supplies and men during the war yielded minimal returns. Most colonies encountered resistance from unsettling restrictions while others failed to support the cause. A similar conclusion could be drawn from the colonial disregard for economic regulations. Illicit trade prevailed throughout the colonies despite all the regulations were self-serving and that brought an increase in colonial violations during peacetime. Additionally, British traders and settlers lied to the Indians without regarding the safety or fairness of the existing settlements, creating an unfavorable disposition between the Indians and the British interests. In this regard, colonial assemblies took advantage of metropolitan needs to gain military dominance and finance their war. Increasingly evident is that the colonists acted in conformity with their interests with disregard for the good of the whole.
Colonial attitude during the Seven Years’ War coupled with the manifestations of independence provided growing evidence of the empire’s dissolution at any given opportunity. The results and experience of the war enhanced fears of colonial independence. The French’s apprehension and dependence upon the British for protection prevented the colonies from connecting with their mother counties. Britain’s move to drive the French out of North America amplified their need for independence. Central to the American decision for independence was the colonies’ strength and the situation brought about by removing the French from North America. The economic and strategic importance of the colonies to the Crown sustained the predictions for colonial independence. In this regard, America’s settlement was perceived more as solving the immediate issues arising from the need to organize and secure new territories, finance military establishments, and pay off the debt that accumulated during the war.
More fundamental importance was the dissatisfaction of the authority imposed by the British in the colonies. An effective way to secure the colonies’ independence was establishing how to reform imperial administration after the Seven Years’ War. Measures focused on strengthening collaboration would have a lasting and positive impact on both countries. The Treaty of Paris prioritized the need of imposing stricter controls to bring colonies into order in a manner that benefitted Britain. Metropolitan measures including trade regulations and taxation, undertaken during the war were calculated to restrict the French’s political and economic activity. In addition to trade regulations, custom establishments were designed to eliminate commerce between American colonies and Europe, impeding their commercial independence.
Metropolitan officials were more tentative than systematic since they revealed minimal disposition to remove British authority in the colonies. In part, they entertained numerous proposals for the government’s amendment in the colonies to create an independent and respectable footing for the Crown and correct unconstitutional practices and regulations that took place during the Seven Years’ War. Additionally, the war brought the Parliament directly into contact with the colonies. The finances needed for American defense and the new colonies fixed parliamentary attention on restructuring the imperial system and increasing attention on the colonies after the war. Before the war, the administration involved the Parliament in the colonies’ internal affairs in exceptional circumstances. Moreover, proposals within and outside the government called for Britain’s legislative power to make inquiries that could put the colonies and the government in a sound state in terms of civil affairs and commerce.
The structural change brought about by the Seven Years’ War gave the Crown confidence that opposition could be overcome. The coercive use of royal troops against the colonies in the early 1750s was considered, but the troops were not readily unavailable. Subsequently, the Crown deployed significant resources to the colonies with the rapid buildup of American armies. In addition, a military force was central to reinforcing civil authority and rendering the laws effective, and due deference to the Crown’s equitable and just demands, with the colonies surrounded by hostile Indian tribes. Stationing a large contingent of troops in America after the war further secured the dependence of the colonies, guarded against negative relations amongst the natives plus suppressed potential opposition or united resistance.
Effects of the War
The victory of the British Crown in the French and Indian War, the Seven Years’ War, profoundly impacted the British Empire. Foremost, the war necessitated a great expansion of territorial claims for access to adequate resources in the New World. For the most part, France lost its North American colonies to the British with their major loss being Canada, their largest territory. Britain’s allies in the Seven Years’ War came out as European powers, but the war enlarged the Crown’s debt. Furthermore, the war contributed to the growing resentment between the colonists and the English settlers, who were primarily dissatisfied with the military and financial help that needed reorganization. Thus, the Crown planned to give London more authority and control over the colonial governments, which lead to increased resentment toward British policies that set motion the American Revolution. Further, no statute recognized the relationship of the Crown to the colonies, leaving the colonies to govern themselves.
Compared to its effect on the British, the Seven Years’ War profoundly, but differently affected American colonists. For instance, the colonists created an alliance against a common threat. Before the French and Indian War, the colonies coexisted on mutual grounds of distrust, but acknowledged that an alliance could potentially defeats Britain. When the British defeated France, removing their authority from North America, the continent lay open for American colonization. However, the British issued a Royal Proclamation to control population movement and increase taxes to prohibit settlement. With the Proclamation, the British solved two major problems caused by the North American colonies. For one, it could potentially end the conflict between the Native tribes and the colonists over land encroachment. As such, the need to send more troops to solve the Native American problems would be unnecessary, saving the British Government resources and time.
Secondly, the Proclamation would assist the British in effectively controlling the colonies. Nonetheless, the British victory was unfavorable to the Native American tribes living in the Ohio Valley. The Indians had allied with the French, heightening the enmity from the British. Five Nations of the Iroquois become a powerful political and diplomatic force by the eighteenth century. The alliance included the Mohawks, the Onondagas, the Senecas, the Oneidas, and the Cauygas. Despite the alliance gradually unraveling and crumbling from within, the Native American tribes continued to content the British for the Ohio Valley. The British victory gave the natives limited opportunity in claiming their land in terms of political, military, and economic status.
Ramifications for the American Revolution
The destruction of French power from North America made the colonies less dependent upon the British military and allowed the Crown to proceed with colonial reform. Following contemporaries, there was no fear of colonial resistance from the Americans. For example, the war heightened their awareness of the fragility of English authority and the value of colonies in meeting the Crown’s objectives; Britain took advantage of the structural change that resulted from the war. The British believed that the Seven Years’ War made the Americans of their lack of strong military strength engage in a fight. While the British struggled to drive the French from North America, Americans experienced the use of arbitrary power. Restrictive policies implemented by the British following the conquest of North America elicited colonial discontent. Colonial merchants in the northern colonies were particularly discontent with the metropolitan efforts to enforce trade laws that suppressed commerce.
However, the concerns that the colonists raised from the Seven Years’ War were less important than the levels of expectations. The war had been for the British a positive experience. For one, the war brought more resources into the colonies through naval and military spending for most people, especially in the northern colonies. Moreover, the colonists took pride in contributing to the war, and thus, the psychological benefits derived from the war were more significant than the political or economic impact. The British government made significant efforts in reinforcing military support to defend the colonies giving rise to an increased sense of colonial self-esteem and self-importance. The nature, state, climate, and abundance of resources in the American continent provided the colonists with high prospects in favor of authority and power. Through the Anglo-American partnership, the British could maintain their supremacy.
The consequences of the Seven Years’ War sent postwar expectations of Americans in opposite directions. In essence, the Americans became more aware of the value of independence and the fragility of the metropolitan power over them and made evident by their self-serving nature during the war. While the British Government was determined to bring the under strict regulations after the war, the colonists looked forward to a more secure and equal future. The restrictive measures and new tax policies did not particularly offend the colonists, but the reproach and injustice imposed by the measures. In its contribution to the creation of a structural situation and intellectual climate that produced mixed reactions, the Seven Years’ War, thus, had a profound and complex bearing on the emerging confrontation between north American colonies and the British that ushered the American Revolution and causal patterns as the first real World War.
The Seven Years’ War brough with it rippling effects among European powers and ushered the American Revolution, and thus, the war can be considered as the first real World War. In the beginning of the war, the French empire in North America stretched along the Mississippi River and Canada. With the influx of English settlers and traders, the pressure of expanding the British territory west increased, but standing in the way were Indian allies and the French. American colonists shared the view but the British conceived it as a defense of its liberties. The English presumed that the French threatened their security, and thus, made efforts to limit their authority in North America. The Native American tribes allied with armies on both ends that heightened the war between the French and Indian tribes. In contrast to earlier wars that confirmed the status quo, the Seven Years’ War produced one victorious nation, Great Britain. Still, the triumph came after staggering defeat and humiliation. Some of the war generals, including the Earl of Loundoun and Edward Braddock, were criticized as inept and poor strategists. Braddock’s forces were defeated by a smaller French army while attempting to take Fort Duquesne; the defeat left British colonists defenseless. With Fort Oswego falling apart and incomplete fortification, the French took back the fort.
In France, the Seven Years’ War got billed as having saved the world from the British whose barbarian, chaotic, and rebellious nature would tarnish the foundation of European civilization. Moreover, traditional allies to the Crown declared neutrality, leaving the British with few Indians to assist in the war. Thus, the war continued to serve as a vindication of the Revolution. Britain’s defeats highlighted the disorganized nature of the British Crown and the troops’ incompetence, plus the French and Indians as cruel and deceitful. The Seven Years’ war profoundly affected the balance of power between European nations. Regardless, the war launched the leadership and military careers of key figures who made their name during the American Revolution.
Most notably, William Pitt oversaw the successful conduct of the war as a brilliant and popular leader. Likewise, George Washington fought alongside the Virginia Militia throughout the war. Another prominent figure was William Johnson, who, unlike Washington, effectively and successfully negotiate with the Native nations. After the war, the Crown established laws and imposed taxes to pay off the war debt. According to the English, it was unquestionable that the colonists pay off the debt because the British military actively fought to protect them from France and Indian allies. Disputes over taxation ensued in most colonial ports, including violence against English officials. The war ended with the Paris Treaty and the Peace of Hubertusburg. With the Treaty of Paris, the British gained Canada, and the French lost territorial and political dominance in North America. The French needed control over the Ohio Valley to connect the colonies in North America. However, the British used military prowess to prevent the French from gaining a string Foothold in Ohio Territory. A few years after the war, the colonists and the British waged war to settle their differences, which culminated in the American Revolutionary War.
Blackburn, Carole. “The Treaty Relationship and Settler Colonialism in Canada.” In Shifting Forms of Continental Colonialism, pp. 415-435. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore, 2019.
Bordo, Michael D., and Mickey D. Levy. “Do Enlarged Fiscal Deficits Cause Inflation? The Historical Record.” Economic Affairs 41, no. 1 (2021): 59-83.
Bukowski, Kevin. “The True Advantage of Experience: Anglo-American Military Leadership on the Pennsylvania Frontier from 1750-1765.” PhD diss., 2022.
Cook, Captain James. “Journal of Geek Studies.” Journal of Geek Studies, 6(1), pp.19-27, 2019.
Finnan, Joseph, Lee P. Gray, John H. Perry, and Brian Lust. “Wolfe, Montcalm, and the Principles of Joint Operations in the Quebec Campaign of 1759.”
Gould, Eliga. “An Activist History of the American Founding.” Reviews in American History 46, no. 1 (2018): 27-31.
Rick Halpern. Empire and Others: British Encounters with Indigenous Peoples, 1600-1850. University of Pennsylvania Press, 2020.
Hillinger, Alexandra. “The Status of the French Language in British North America: From the Conquest to the Confederation.” Translation & Interpreting, The 11, no. 2 (2019): 18-31.
Krieger, Gerald. “The Battle of Lake George (The Historical Miniatures Gaming Society Pacific Southwest Essay Contest Tim Keenon Grand Prize Winner).” Saber & Scroll Historical Journal 10, no. 2 (2021): 31277.
Martin, N., 2021. Lord Loudoun, the Highlands and Imperial Subjecthood in North America. Scottish Historical Review, 100(2), pp.249-276.
Misencik, Paul R., and Sally E. Misencik. With George Washington in the Wilderness: The Frontier Life of Christopher Gist. McFarland, 2022.
Myers, Kathy. Historic Tales of the Pennsylvania Wilds. Arcadia Publishing, 2021.
Owens, Robert M. ‘Indian Wars’ and the Struggle for Eastern North America, 1763–1842. Routledge, 2020.
Paquette, Gabriel. The European Seaborne Empires: From the Thirty Years’ War to the Age of Revolutions. Yale University Press, 2019.
Pawlikowski, Melissah J. “Braddock’s Defeat: The Battle of the Monogahela and the Road to Revolution.” (2020): 517-518.
Perry, Peg. “The War of 1812: European Traces in a British-American Conflict.” (2020).
Richardson, Robbie. The savage and modern self: North American Indians in eighteenth-century British literature and culture. University of Toronto Press, 2018.
Sahay, Miss Alisha. British War Against Major Indian Powers and Consolidation of its Stronghold in India. Editorial Board, 9(11), p.88, 2020.
Schwager, Brandon. “Pounds, Police, and Patriots: How Colonial Reactions to British Quartering Transformed from 1756-1774.” Fairmount Folio: Journal of History 18 (2018).
Sexton, J.F. “The coming of the French Revolution.” ORU History & Humanities Modern World-Reader I 1600-1850, p.176, 2019.
Smock, Douglas. Forgotten Battles and American Memory. Page Publishing Inc, 2022.
Stiles, E. “George Washington, His Ambition, and the Jumonville Incident.” Academia Letters (2021): 2.
Van Sang, Nguyen. “The British-American Diplomacy in Searching for the Northeast Boundary in Maine and New Brunswick, 1820-1846.” Studies and Articles (2018).