Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Patriots in Exile: Charleston Rebels in St. Augustine during the American Revolution by James Waring McCrady and C. L. Bragg

2021; Southern Historical Association; Volume: 87; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1353/soh.2021.0050

2325-6893

Aaron J. Palmer,

Colonialism, slavery, and trade

Reviewed by: Patriots in Exile: Charleston Rebels in St. Augustine during the American Revolution by James Waring McCrady and C. L. Bragg Aaron J. Palmer Patriots in Exile: Charleston Rebels in St. Augustine during the American Revolution. By James Waring McCrady and C. L. Bragg. (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2020. Pp. xvii, 230. $29.99, ISBN 978-1-64336-079-9.) There are relatively few subjects in the history of the War of American Independence that have not been extensively explored by modern historians. The southern theater of the war particularly has seen a good deal of new attention in recent years. Though most students of the war understand that the British took prisoners of war and held them on ships and in fortresses like St. Augustine, Florida, no one has produced a detailed study of the experience of these exiles until now. Patriots in Exile: Charleston Rebels in St. Augustine during the American Revolution provides an interesting narrative describing the exile of sixty-three rebels from Charleston to St. Augustine. Naturally, the book asks two central questions: who were these men, and why were they exiled? Though primarily a narrative without a clear, overall argument that drives it, this book certainly answers these questions and makes an important contribution to understanding British policy in the southern theater. The idea of exile began with South Carolina official James Simpson. The British occupation of Charleston began in 1780 with promises from Sir Henry Clinton of pardon and a restoration of civil government and English rights—promises that soon proved hollow. South Carolina proved much harder to control than Clinton had anticipated, and unrepentant rebels and parole breakers continued to be a problem. Simpson, a strong advocate of restoring the old royal government, hoped exiling leading rebels would bring most people to peaceably accept British rule. The first arrests took place on the morning of August 27, 1780, when British soldiers moved throughout Charleston and apprehended the targeted rebels at their homes without warning. The episode exemplifies the increasingly harsh nature of British military rule in Charleston, pushed by hard-war advocates like Nisbet Balfour, the commandant of Charleston. Balfour and British general Charles Cornwallis argued that these rebels had broken the terms of their paroles. Many objected fiercely, and the authors grant that there is no solid evidence one way or another about the truth of these charges. Whatever the case, the exiles soon found themselves confined in the British stronghold of St. Augustine. There, the exiles chose between accepting parole to have the freedom of moving within the town and being imprisoned. Most exiles faced varying levels of discomfort and decided to take parole. Some even had been allowed to bring a few slaves with them from Charleston, and there was a bit of a social life for parolees. All exiles still faced humiliation and increasing deprivation over the course of the exile, and the authors stress the Charlestonians' steadfast refusal to abandon their principles. About half the book details the lives of the rebels in St. Augustine, and the narratives become a bit thin and repetitive at times. The rebels' stories are surely interesting, but these narratives increasingly feel like a disconnected series of anecdotes, again not clearly moving toward any concluding argument. Rather, the book ends with the prisoners' release to [End Page 328] Philadelphia and their ultimate return home to Charleston, noting especially the general lack of vindictiveness among the exiles. The lack of a clearly developed argument is the book's main weakness. The research is strong and well documented, though there are some gaps, especially in British records from the National Archives Colonial Series and the Henry Clinton papers. Nevertheless, the book certainly highlights the failed British policy of military rule in South Carolina and, more particularly, the failure of harsh measures to cow the populace into submission. It is a good contribution to the literature on the southern theater of the war that will appeal to a broad variety of readers beyond academia. Aaron J. Palmer Wisconsin Lutheran College Copyright © 2021 The Southern Historical Association