In 1763 the end of the Seven Years’ War seemed like a guarantee of security for the British colonies of North America because, starting in that year, the French no longer had any territories on that part of the continent. In the same year, a royal proclamation reserved an area for the Indians that separated the Appalachians from the Mississippi and opened Florida and Quebec to colonization. This decision irritated the colonists settled in America as it striped them of prized land, particularly the Ohio Valley. Yet this measure favored the development of Florida where rich Britons invested. The Thirteen British Colonies established on the American territory were thus governed by the principles of the colonial pact and the all-encompassing regime that reserved the control and near-monopoly of the Thirteen Colonies’ external trading for the homeland. After the Seven Years’ War, the English government tried to make its territories across the Atlantic assume a portion of the expenses generated by the conflict that had just ended. New taxes were created there in 1764 and 1765 (on sugar, tea, stamps, etc.). This policy quickly provoked protests that quickly took on a political meaning. Beyond the rejection of fiscal policies, a new style of government was sought.

Bernard Cottret sees the 1763-1773 period as that of “the crisis of the Empire.”1 The colonists considered themselves to be English citizens and felt that no tax could be imposed upon them without their consent or that of their delegates. But the colonists did not participate in English elections and only the territory assemblies were authorized to express opinions in their name. The British government remained deaf to such arguments, which were directly inspired by the political culture of the European Enlightenment. In their eyes, the London Parliament represented all subjects of the crown. Very quickly, the British government took repressive measures that impaired the colonists’ freedom of expression or their freedom of assembly. The King of England and his Prime Minister North even sent military reinforcements to America. This sparked the first bloody incidents in Boston as early as March 1770. The English colonists responded with a boycott of English merchandise submitted to the new taxes that worked so well that the government was forced to do away with taxes that had become useless.

In December 1773 in Boston, the rebel colonists, who called themselves the “Sons of Liberty”, attacked the ships of the West Indies company, which had won the tea-selling monopoly; they threw all their cargo into the sea. In retaliation, London decided to close the Boston port, to forbid any trading, and to impose a heavy collective fine. United with their fellow Massachusetts citizens, the colonists responded by summoning a congress of twelve of the thirteen colonies which was held in Philadelphia in September 1774. They designated George Washington as general in chief of the Americans. The majority of the delegates did not intend to break with England. The men were content to solemnly recall the constitutional rights of all citizens and reinforce the boycott of British merchandise. True insurgency measures were however put in place: correspondence and watch committees were formed, armed militia were organized. Thus, progressively, the colonists moved from constitutional demands to the first signs of a force of opposition and insurgency.

On April 18, 1775 at Lexington, the English command sought to seize a stock of arms and ammunition set up in Concord by the patriotic committees. The soldiers were welcomed with gunshots and were forced to withdraw to Boston. On June 17th a true pitched battle took place at the entrance of the city, the English soldiers once again suffered heavy losses. Lord North, the English prime minister, tried to negotiate with Franklin who had travelled all the way to London, but the “American Congress”, which met in December, rejected the proposals and decided to raise a continental army placed under the order of George Washington. At the end of 1775, the first constitutions of the Thirteen Colonies were written. They represented the ultimate emancipation act for the Thirteen Colonies, now the newly-established states; these texts are based on the principle of strict separation of legislative, executive, and judiciary powers. All of these texts were preceded by a Declaration of Rights that guaranteed individual rights and placed limits that society cannot break. These texts gave the new principles value and universal significance. On July 4, 1776, Congress declared the union of the Thirteen Colonies and adopted the Declaration of Independence proposed by Jefferson. From then on the “United Colonies” had “the full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do”.

The gap between the beginning of the military confrontations (April 19, 1775) and the proclamation of independence (July 4, 1776) can be explained by the American elite’s resolute wish to reach a compromise with Great Britain. The turning point occurred following the fundamental debate provoked by Thomas Paine’s pamphlet Common Sense. In this text, the radical Englishman explained to the colonists that their breaking with England could only be beneficial; he saw it as a vector of liberty and prosperity. This success of this text led to the writing of numerous petitions that expressed the North Americans’ defiance to the British king, people, and Parliament. The Declaration of Independence therefore received strong public support.

At that date, the forces that were present were very unequal: on the one hand General Howe commanded 35,000 English soldiers and had an impressive flotilla; on the other hand the Insurgents did not have a settled army, nor any arsenal, and they did not have any industrial capacity to produce arms and ammunition. It was essential, therefore, that they find external aid and for that they turned to France. At the end of 1776, Franklin, a representative of the American Congress, who had been the center of a secret correspondence committee since 1775, traveled to Paris to ask for aid; there he received an enthusiastic welcome. Voltaire welcomed him to the Academy of Sciences (Franklin was the inventor of the lightning rod), Louis XVI granted him an audience in Versailles and, following his arrival, young noblemen — La Fayette, Ségur, Lauzun — set off with him to fight alongside the Insurgents. However, Vergennes, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, did not want France to intervene too early, so during that period France agreed to supply arms to its new allies, through the intermediary Beaumarchais under cover of the trading company Roderigue Hortalez and Company. This discreet aid lasted two years.

In October 1777, Washington’s troops won an important victory in Saratoga, forcing 6,000 English soldiers to surrender. This event contributed to making the conflict international. On December 17, 1777 Louis XVI officially recognized American independence and on February 6, 1778 he signed a goodwill and trade treaty between France and America as well as a treaty of alliance against England. For France, this war constituted revenge against England, victorious in 1763, as much as it expressed support of the American cause. In April 1779, with the Treaty of Aranjuez, Vergennes obtained Spain’s commitment against England by promising to recover Minorca, Gibraltar, and Florida. He then set to work building up the league of neutral countries: he grouped Russia, Denmark, Sweden, Prussia, Portugal, Austria, and the Kingdom of Two Siciliestogether in support of the demands for freedom of the seas. To combat contraband, English ships had a tendency to abuse rights of access on boats sailing on the Atlantic, the victims of this authoritative English attitude then came together to oppose what they considered to be an abuse of power.2

On the American continent, the natives also participated in the War of Independence. The English, like the Americans, struggled to win their allegiance without renouncing the violent methods used to occupy their lands. The French intervention led to a spark of hope for the Outaouais, Shawnees, and Cherokees who saw the French as potential allies in their effort to obstruct Anglo-American expansion.3 However, this issue sparked strong disagreement between Indian nations. Some feared that independence would promote the pioneers’ expansion toward the West and a large number of them fought on Great Britain’s side and received abundant equipment from that nation.

The French military intervention supplemented the diplomatic measures that expanded the dimensions of the conflict. Initially the French military intervention was essentially a naval one. The fight at sea remained undecided for a long time, then it allowed French admirals to gain some indisputable successes. While Suffren came to the fore on the coasts of India, d’Estaing and Guichen confronted the English in the Caribbean Sea, de Grasse succeeded in taking possession of Tobago, occupying former French colonies once again. In 1780 Washington received an infantry corps sent from France and commanded by Rochambeau. This decision amplified the scope of the French intervention. The 6,000 soldiers stationed in Rhode Island were supposed to join Washington’s troops and descend into the Hudson Valley to attack New York, where the majority of the English forces were concentrated. Once they learned that Admiral de Grasse’s fleet had succeeded in penetrating into the Chesapeake Bay, Washington and Rochambeau decided to use the back-up provided by these ships to attack Cornwallis’s men stationed at Yorktown along the Bay.4 They were able to carry out this 600-kilometer move south without the enemy noticing. Bringing together all their naval and land forces, they blocked Cornwallis and his men. The British general was forced to surrender on October 19, 1781 with 6,000 soldiers, 2,000 sailors, 160 canons, and 22 flags.

In England the situation became more and more difficult. The country had lost thirteen colonies and now only had New York, Savannah, Charlestown, and Halifax, as well as eastern Florida. While it had also lost Minorca and numerous islands in the Antilles, it was without a single ally and the war had already cost 100 million pounds sterling. In London on March 5, 1782, the House of Commons called for the beginning of negotiations with the rebellious colonies. Lord North had to resign and a new cabinet made up of Fox and Shelbourne set about negotiating. They managed to reach an agreement separately with the Insurgents who broke away from Spain’s demands. On November 30, 1782, during the preliminary peace agreements, England recognized the independence of the Thirteen Colonies and by setting the borders conceded all the territories located south of the Great Lakes and east of the Mississippi River. By making unexpected concessions, England succeeded in limiting the benefits it was supposed to grant to France and itsallies. The natives found themselves on the losing end when the Treaty of Versailles was signed on September 3, 1783. Like the black slaves, they were part of “The American Revolution’s forgotten ones.”5 The treaty contained three other agreements: an Anglo-Dutch convention to settle the mutual return of conquests and captures, an Anglo-Spanish convention according to which Spain was to recover Minorca and the largest part of Florida, an Anglo-French convention that only brought France a few territorial restitutions: the return of its establishments in Senegal, Tobago and Saint Lucia in the Antilles, Saint Pierre and Miquelon and the right to fortify Dunkirk and the trading posts in India. The American War of Independence gave a new geographical dimension to European relations. From 1778 to 1783 disputes took place in North America and in the Antilles between England, France, and Spain. The Insurgents triumphed in this extra-European war. For the first time, a nation was born of the will of its citizens and inscribed the fundamental principles of all political democracy in a founding charter.

The American Revolution and the War of Independence are two events that are difficult to separate. It is both the moment of the nation’s independence and the moment a republic was established.6 Once this is put in place, it is important to remember that the choice of one expression or the other is not without meaning.7 Historians have long used “American Independence” or “War of Independence” to evoke the events that occurred in America between 1770 and 1787, emphasizing the military events more than the political upheavals. On the other hand, American historians speak more in terms of an “American Revolution.”8 Let us not forget the importance of the case of John Richard Alden’s book entitled The American Revolution 1775-1783 and translated into French in 1965 as La guerre d’Indépendance9 (The War of Independence). These semantic differences touch on the meaning given to the word “revolution.”10 Marcel Dorigny provided an interesting and convincing interpretation on the topic in 2004: “If by a Revolution we mean a sudden transformation, violent or not, in a given society’s system of government, then the birth of the American Republic was without a doubt a Revolution, the first in a cycle that in less than half a century transformed a large portion of the political regimes in the New World and in western Europe. In rejecting British colonial domination, the Insurgents not only established a sovereign State from territories hitherto possessions of the British crown; they created a new style of government and declared universal principles; all that even if their initial ambitions were more modest.”11