PRE-INVESTIGATION OF THE BURNING OF WASHINGTON, DC

The war of 1812 started closely after the revolutionary war had ended. Even though a treaty was signed stating that Britain recognized the United States of America, the British continued to interfere with them. British interfered with American International trade and committed impressments on American sailors. This angered America and led to a war between Great Britain and America. After several battles, Great Britain came up with a plan to sever Americas fighting spirit. They believed that by capturing and burning the United States capital, the Americans would lose their spirit to continue fighting and would believe that it was hopeless to win. However, this attack had the opposite effect on the Americans.

The primary source seems to be about the events that took place during the burning of the capital. It talks about how the British came to the town, which was basically deserted, for a truce and were ambushed. Then they went to the Presidents house and saw a feast on the table and after eating the feast they set the it on fire. They also set everything else in the town that was related to the government on fire. This included the Capitol, the Senate House, gun boats, and any other weapons that were found.

The primary source was written by a British soldier. The soldier’s motivation for writing this source was to tell people about Great Britain’s side of the story for the burning of the capital. I believe that he wanted to tell people about how America had ambushed them when they were only there for a truce. In the article “The British Burn Washington, DC, 1814”, the soldier describes the ambush as a “…conduct so unjustifiable, so direct a breach of the law of nations, roused the indignation of every individual, from the General himself down to the private soldier”. It seemed that the soldier believed it was only fair to burn the town for its unjustifiable conduct towards them. Also I believe that it was written to let people know what happened during the burning of the capitol since no one was there to witness it. From this source people know what was burned and the state the town was left in.

The context of the primary source was during the war of 1812. The British soldier was an eye witness because he was there during the burning of the capitol. I believe that the primary source was written to prove that the British had a valid reason for burning the capital. When America found out that the capital was burned, it was a huge humiliation for them. They were angry that the British even targeted the capitol because it held no significance during the War of 1812. Additionally, it seemed senseless to burn the capitol when they could have just captured it. I think the British was seen in a bad light because of this and maybe the British soldier wanted to prove to people that the British would not burn down a town unless they had a valid reason.