The battle of Queenstown Heights

The battle of Queenstown Heights took place in the Niagara region in 1813. The casualties were only of the dozens  on both sides of the battle, the greatest loss being that of General Brock. Brock was a well-respected British General who had conquered in all of his previous battles.  Though Great Britain successfully stood their ground against the Americans on the battlefront, the death of General Brock was a major loss to the entire British Army. I personally believe that he was the most successful, organized and respected General out of all of the battles of 1812. His strategies of both defence and attack proved the enemies that Great Britain and Canada are a strong force, and are not some territory that will simply be given in good spirits. Though the battle of Queenstown Heights was won by Great Britain I do believe it was in some ways lost.

The American’s launched a surprise attack on the British army when they landed on the shores of Queenstown Heights. Due to that they were able to gain the advantage in numbers by having approximately five times more soldiers than Great-Britain.  Therefore GB was for the first time completely thrown off guard and had to act quickly. General Brock led his troops into town where they encountered heavy fire. One musket’s shot pierced a hole through General Brock’s chest, another through his wrist. These wounds resulted in an almost sudden death. I believe that General Brock should have stood his ground at Fort George and wait for more soldiers to arrive. There was no reason to go defend a small town when they had a clear disadvantage in numbers and in organization. Should Brock have stayed at Fort George he would have decreased the amount of casualties, including his own death. Was the battle of Queenstown Heights won by the Brittish even with the loss of the most important General implicated in the war? I believe it is a decisive win for GB, but also a decisive loss. Who knows what General Brock would have accomplished if he were to lead a battalion in the other wars. The very country we know now would be almost entirely different.

Below is an image of Sir Isaac Brock (General of the 49th batallion) ordering his small batallion to charge towards the 6000 American soldiers that stand before them.

Fort Amherstburg

In 1813, the town of Amherstburg, Ontario was the most largely populated area in all of Essex county. Being in the prime location to control the path of transportation, the British built Fort Amherstburg in order to stop the American ships that traveled along the river.
From the Fort the soldiers watched the American's attack various forts nearby, but they never attempted to take over for Amherstburg. General Proctor made the difficult decision to destroy Fort Amherstburg and move his army along the river front to the Thames river. Tecumseh (chief of the native soldiers) pleaded with General Proctor to stay in position and not march to the Thames river.
This decision came as a loss to the British army, as fatigue and positioning had played a big roll in their defeat. The question remains, was it in the interest of the British to stay and protect Fort Amherstburg as Tecumseh suggested? Or was it more strategic to re-locate to an area that was more likely to be taken?

I believe that it would have been more strategic to stay in Fort Amherstburg to protect the region of Essex county, and stop the American soldiers from invading Canada. Though General Proctor had good reason to re-locate to a more idea battleground he had too many faults in the plan.  In the various battles in the War of 1812 the Fort's played a big role in the success of an army. The moment General Proctor left the ideal location of Fort Amherstburg he lost that battle. The soldiers were tired from a long march and had no fort to protect them from an attack. The British army therefore had nowhere to seek shelter and that led to their defeat.

Above is a painting of  General Harrison's (American General) batallion taking the British soldiers by surprise with an attack on land at the Thames river.

The causes of the war of 1812

The War of 1812 has long been a subject for debate since it had began in 1812. History is always written by the conquerer, but the conquerer of this war is un-clear. Both Great Britain and the United States of America had different motives for being implicated in the war. In short, the US was interested in expansionism and waged war on Canada in several areas in order to turn Canada into an american territory. The reason for this was the oppresion commited by Great Britain on the seas. The US was implicated in commerce with France in order to support Napoleon's war, and therefore was not respected by Great Britain (who at the time was fighting Napoleon's war). James Madison (US president) urged congress to wage war against G-B and seize one of it's colonnies (Canada). On the other side Great Britain went to war with the US in order to protect Canada from expansionism.

Having said that now, there is a controvesy on who was right and wrong on going to war. In the defence of the US, Great Britain showed a lack of respect, a sense of superiority as well as kidnapping of american sailors to fight Napoleon's war.
However in my opinion Great Britain had good reasons behind every one of the arguments I previously stated. G-B was at war with Napoleon's army (the strongest at the time) and therefore needed to stop him by any means possible including the oppresion of US ships used for commerce. I believe it makes complete sense that G-B would stop American ships and make them pay taxes so that it became unaffordable for American's to support Napoleon. G-B needed to fight Napoleon in any way possible in order to defeat his army!

I now leave it up to my followers to defend any side they feel was right and had the best intentions behind their actions. The video bellow provides additional detail in the matters I have discussed. I look forward to your opinion!