Baron Friedrich Von Steuben in the American Revolution

Friedrich Wilhelm August Heinrich Ferdinand von Steuben was born September 17, 1730, at Magdeburg. The son of Lieutenant Wilhelm von Steuben, a military engineer, and Elizabeth von Jagvodin, he spent some of his early years in Russia after his father was assigned to assist Czarina Anna. During this period he spent time in the Crimea as well as Kronstadt. Returning to Prussia in 1740, he received his education at the Lower Silesian towns of Neisse and Breslau (Wroclaw) before serving as a volunteer with his father for a year (1744) during the War of the Austrian Succession. Two years later, he officially entered the Prussian Army after turning 17. Baron von Steuben - Seven Years War: Initially assigned to the infantry, von Steuben sustained a wound at the Battle of Prague in 1757.   Proving an adept organizer, he received an appointment as battalion adjutant and earned a promotion to first lieutenant two years later. Wounded a the defeat at Kunersdorf in 1759, von Steuben again returned to action. Elevated to captain by 1761, von Steuben continued to see extensive service in the Prussian campaigns of the Seven Years War (1756-1763). Recognizing the young officers skill, Frederick the Great placed von Steuben on his personal staff as an aide-de-camp and in 1762 admitted him to the special class on warfare that he taught. Despite his impressive record, von Steuben found himself unemployed at the end of the war in 1763 when the Prussian Army was reduced to peacetime levels. Baron von Steuben - Hohenzollern-Hechingen: After several months of seeking employment, von Steuben received an appointment as hofmarschall (chancellor) to Josef Friedrich Wilhelm of Hohenzollern-Hechingen. Enjoying the comfortable lifestyle provided by this position, he was made a knight of the aristocratic Order of Fidelity by the Margrave of Baden in 1769. This was largely the result of a falsified lineage prepared by von Steubens father. Shortly thereafter, von Steuben began using the title baron. With the prince short on funds, he accompanied him to France in 1771 with the hope of securing a loan. Unsuccessful, they returned to Germany where through the early 1770s von Steuben remained in Hodenzollern-Hechingen despite the princes increasing decaying financial position. Baron von Steuben - Seeking Employment: In 1776, von Steuben was forced to leave due to rumors of alleged homosexuality and accusations of his having taken improper liberties with boys. Though no proof exists regarding von Steubens sexual orientation, the stories proved sufficiently powerful to compel him to seek new employment. Initial efforts to obtain a military commission in Austria and Baden failed, and he traveled to Paris to try his luck with the French. Seeking out the French Minister of War, Claude Louis, Comte de Saint-Germain, who had met previously in 1763, von Steuben again was unable to obtain a position. Though he had no use for von Steuben, Saint-Germain recommended him to Benjamin Franklin, citing von Steubens extensive staff experience with the Prussian Army. Though impressed with von Steubens credentials, Franklin and fellow American representative Silas Deane initially turned him down as they were under instructions from the Continental Congress to refuse foreign officers who could not speak English. Additionally, Congress had grown wearisome of dealing with foreign officers who often demanded high rank and exorbitant pay. Returning to Germany, von Steuben was again confronted with allegations of homosexuality and was ultimately lured back to Paris by an offer of free passage to America. Baron von Steuben - Coming to America: Again meeting with the Americans, he received letters of introduction from Franklin and Deane on the understanding that he would be a volunteer without rank and pay. Sailing from France with his Italian greyhound, Azor, and four companions, von Steuben arrived at Portsmouth, NH in December 1777. After almost being arrested due to their red uniforms, von Steuben and his party were lavishly entertained in Boston before departing Massachusetts. Traveling south, he presented himself to the Continental Congress at York, PA on February 5. Accepting his services, Congress directed him to join General George Washingtons Continental Army at Valley Forge. It also stated that payment for his service would be determined after the war and based upon his contributions during his tenure with the army. Arriving at Washingtons headquarters on February 23, he quickly impressed Washington though communication proved difficult as a translator was required. Baron von Steuben - Training an Army: In early March, Washington, seeking to take advantage of von Steubens Prussian experience, asked him to serve as inspector general and oversee the training and discipline of the army. He immediately commenced designing a training program for the army. Though he spoke no English, von Steuben began his program in March with the aid of interpreters. Beginning with a model company of 100 chosen men, von Steuben instructed them in drill, maneuver, and a simplified manual of arms. These 100 men were in turn sent out to other units to repeat the process and so on until the entire army was trained. In addition, von Steuben introduced a system of progressive training for recruits which educated them in the basics of soldiering. Surveying the encampment, von Steuben greatly improved sanitation by reorganizing the camp and repositioning kitchens and latrines. He also endeavored to improve the armys record keeping to minimize graft and profiteering. Highly impressed with von Steubens work, Washington successfully petitioned Congress to permanently appoint von Steuben inspector general with the rank and pay of a major general. This request was granted on May 5, 1778. The results of von Steubens training regimen immediately showed in the American performances at Barren Hill (May 20) and Monmouth (June 28). Baron von Steuben - Later War: Attached to Washingtons headquarters, von Steuben continued to work to improve the army. In the winter of 1778-1779, he wrote Regulations for the Order and Discipline of the Troops of the United States which outlined training courses as well as general administrative procedures. Moving through numerous editions, this work remained in use up to the War of 1812. In September 1780, von Steuben served on the court-martial for British spy Major  John Andrà ©. Accused of espionage in relation to the defection of Major General Benedict Arnold, the court-martial found him guilty and sentenced him to death. Two months later, in November, von Steuben was sent south to Virginia to mobilize forces to support Major General Nathanael Greenes army in the Carolinas. Hampered by state officials and British raids, von Steuben struggled in this post and was defeated by Arnold at Blandford in April 1781. Replaced by the Marquis de Lafayette later that month, he moved south with a Continental force to join Greene despite the arrival of Major General Lord Charles Cornwallis army in the state. Criticized by the public, he halted on June 11 and moved to join Lafayette in opposing Cornwallis. Suffering from ill health, he elected to take sick leave later that summer. Recovering he rejoined Washingtons army on September 13 as it moved against Cornwallis at Yorktown. In the resulting Battle of Yorktown, he commanded a division. On October 17, his men were in the trenches when the British offer of surrender was received. Invoking European military etiquette, he ensured that his men had the honor of remaining in the lines until the final surrender was received. Baron von Steuben - Later Life: Though the fighting in North America was largely concluded, von Steuben spent the remaining years of the war working to improve the army as well as began designing plans for the postwar American military. With the end of the conflict, he resigned his commission in March 1784, and lacking potential employment in Europe decided to settle in New York City. Though he hoped to live a genteel life of retirement, Congress failed to give him a pension and granted only a small amount of his expense claims. Suffering from financial hardships, he was aided by friends such as Alexander Hamilton and Benjamin Walker. In 1790, Congress granted von Steuben a pension of $2,500. Though less than he had hoped, it allowed Hamilton and Walker to stabilize his finances. For the next four years, he split his time between New York City and a cabin near Utica, NY which he built on land given to him for his wartime service. In 1794, he permanently moved to the cabin and died there on November 28. Buried locally, his grave is now the site of Steuben Memorial State Historic Site. Sources National Park Service: Baron von SteubenFriedrich Wilhelm Von Steuben

Women s Conflict And Epidemic Crisis - 2356 Words

In this essay, I will be discussing how women in Nigeria are vulnerable in conflict and epidemic crisis because religion and customs encourage male dominance limiting women’s rights. As a result, male groups believe they have power over women, as noticed in the kidnapping of student girls in Nigeria. Furthermore, women are entitled to follow customs and culture even if it endangers their health, as discussed in the Ebola crisis in Nigeria. However, if women disobey customs and culture they are abused and punished, resulting in gender based violence. Hence, women in Nigeria are vulnerable due to many factors, but education is a safeguard that is necessary to protect them. Therefore, in this essay, I will be arguing how women are vulnerable†¦show more content†¦The religions and customs in Nigeria support women as the â€Å"weaker sex† as it â€Å"attributes superiority to one sex [males] over the other [female’s]† (Ekhator 262-263). Furthermore, t he society supports this discriminatory attitude as there â€Å"are customs all over which discriminate against the womenfolk† (Ekhator 263). These discriminatory customs are evident in the â€Å"Mojekwu v. Ejikeme† case, which was about women not being able to receive their inheritance because they were women. However, Nigeria has some laws like Article eighteen which supports â€Å"the elimination of discrimination against women† (Ekhator 263). There are laws similar to article eighteen which support the end of gender inequality, even though there are laws that promote gender inequality. Furthermore, the government in Nigeria is promoting the end of gender inequality by â€Å"adopt[ing] the National Gender Policy† in order to change discriminatory laws (Ekhator 265). Finally, this article states how Nigeria is trying to become a gender equal society, but old customs and laws are still accepted by many promoting discrimination towards women, and thus mak ing them more vulnerable. As mentioned, women in Nigeria are

Sociological Perspectives of Violence Free Essays

string(101) " different schools of thoughts about violence, view any violent act as a precursor of other factors\." The focus of this paper is an overview of different research articles on racism and structural violence against the aboriginal. Violence will be looked at from three schools of thoughts namely the structural, conflict and process theories. The views of these different approaches to violence will be critically analyzed, but no value judgments will be placed on any of their perceptions of violence. We will write a custom essay sample on Sociological Perspectives of Violence or any similar topic only for you Order Now Racism According to Headley (2000), racism is â€Å"the infliction of unequal consideration, motivated by the desire to dominate, based on race alone (p. 23). Headley further explains that this definition accommodates the distinction between â€Å"true racism† which is the desire to harm or dominate others solely on the basis of race, and â€Å"ordinary racism† which he sees as universal features of human biology (p. 224). Headley further maintained that a racist is not merely someone who wishes to put down another’s    race, but also suppress and assert his/her own superiority through a violent act (p. 224). Naiman (2006) defines racism as hostility, aggression, and antagonism toward non-members of a particular group based on their physical characteristics, notably skin colour (p. 265). Similarly, Spencer (1998) sees racism as â€Å"the transformation of race prejudice and / or ethnocentrism through the exercise of power against a racial group defined as inferior, by individual and institution† (p. 1). To infer from the foregoing definitions, a common attribute of racism is the belief that one’s own race is superior to another. This belief is based on the erroneous assumption that physical attributes of members of a racial group determine their social behaviour as well as their psychological and intellectual characteristics (Spencer, 1998, p. 5). Historical Roots of Racism. The term racism became popularized in the late 1960’s during the civil rights movement (Headley, 2000, p. 235). Prior to this time according to Headley, the term ethnic prejudice was used (p. 236). Naiman (2006) posits that racism is a relatively recent phenomenon, and its emergence as a systematic world-view developed concurrently with the rise of capitalist and its global expansion (p. 66) Naiman further explains    that some scholars define forms of    social intolerance prior to this capitalist era as racism, but he however argues that such social intolerance is more precisely seen as ethnocentrism (preference for one’s own cultural traditions) or ethnic chauvinism (antagonism towards a particular group) (p. 267). Racism in Canada According to Naiman (2006), some Canadians like to believe that racism is a relatively recent phenomenon linked to modern immigration patterns or compared to United States, Canada has little history of overt racism (p. 69). Naiman, however, argues that racism in Canada has a long and sordid past, which in reality as described by him â€Å" is an unsightly history swept under the threadbare rug of its national myths† (p. 269). Naiman further maintained that the history of racism in Canada begins with the subjugation of Canada’s aboriginal people. Violence Anglin (1998), states that an uncontroversial, exhaustive and precise definition of violence is difficult to find. â€Å"Violence is understood as an incident in which an acting individual intentionally injures another† (p. 146). Anglin further explains that the action of the perpetrator can be physical, or psychological. In same vein, Steinmetz (1989) defines violent as â€Å"an act carried out with the intension of, or perceived as having the intension of physically hurting another person†. Strasburg (1978) defines violence as â€Å"illegal use or threat of force against a person†. From the foregoing, it can be infer that violent behavior means physical force exerted for the purpose of violating or abusing. There are three key terms which are likely to be present for any action to be classified as a violent act. The action must be intentional, force may be applied and the action must result in harm (physical, psychological and emotional). Human behaviour does not occur in isolation or in vacuum but it is influenced by the interplay of many other factors. Consequently, different schools of thoughts about violence, view any violent act as a precursor of other factors. You read "Sociological Perspectives of Violence" in category "Papers" For example, the Conflict, Structural, and Process theories. Conflict theory Conflict theory is better understood as the Marxist theory. According to the theory, â€Å"Crime is perceived as a function of competition for limited resources†. That is, a social status in which an individual is perceived evaluated and treated accordingly by legal authorities. The Marxist view is that conflict between these class-based social hierarchies, the haves (bourgeoisie), and has not (proletariat) that produces violent behavior. According to Holmes (1988), the difference between these two classes is a matter of relative power . Holmes further explains that the ruling class have sufficient power hence, they are able to label some proletariat’s behavior as criminal Structural theory The structural theory on the other hand, sees violence from the perception of cultural forces or neighborhood conditions. That is, our behavior is a product of our environment. The world we live in, shapes our lives. Since our environment is not static, our behavior revolves around this dynamism. The structural approach holds the view that the way certain things are structured by the society creates violent acts. For example, consider the film Elephant; the structural theory will argue that it is because of the way society is structured, that people are able to acquire weapons to perpetuate violence. Similarly, heterogeneity of society inherently creates violence. This is because according to the theory, there is bound to be such issues as cultural or religious conflicts due to these differences. Process theory According to the proponent of this theory, crime is a function of socialization and upbringing. Delinquent behaviour is learned like every other behavior through association with significant others and reference groups, especially parents and peers. It is through observation and interaction with these significant others; we learn techniques for engaging in delinquent acts. According to Process theory, all forms of violent acts are learned through imitation and observation. For example in the movie Elephant, the Process theory argues that the two serial killers learned such violent acts through the use of violent computer games and imitation of the Nazi’s leader, Hitler. The argument advanced by these different schools of thought appears convincing, because violence in society can be explained through each of these approaches. When these schools of thought are viewed critically, there appears to be a probing question that needs to be answered. Among each of these theories which contributes more to violence in society? Considering the importance of each of these schools of thought, it will be difficult if not impossible to adequately explain violence from the perception of one of these approaches. This is true because each of these approaches interplay to influence one’s behaviour depending on the situation. For example, using the movie Elephant, the Process Theory will argue that the serial killers learned their dastardly act through watching    violent video games (observation) their attempt to imitate Nazi’s leader Hitler was the precursor of their actions. On the other hand, the Structural Theory will argue that it is because of the way society is structured that the serial killers were able acquired guns to perpetuate their acts. Similarly, if society is structured in such a way that getting violent computer games are almost impossible to get, perhaps the killers might not be able to procure such weaponry or learn violent behaviour. In same vein, the Conflict Approach says the power struggle between the ruling class and the working class creates imbalance family structure, which they claim resulted in poor parental upbringing. This results in violent acts because the children are not properly catered for. The Role and Effect of the mass media on Violence Research on media influence in violence has been concerned with possible negative effects of exposure to violent films. What messages, for example do children take away from their exposure to various violent movies? According to the Observational Learning Theory Bandura, et al, in their Bobo doll study cited in Holmes (1988), explains that the media encourages children to solve their problems by violent means; they further maintain that constant exposure to violence normalizes violence (p. 100). Critics of the Bobo doll experiment have pointed out that the doll was the type of toy that invited aggression, and also since the filmstrip used in the experiment lacked a plot, it contained no justification for the violence of children. .Other scholars like Alfred Hitchcock’s as cited in Holmes (1988) argues that tracing the direct effects of the media is a very difficult task. The reason for this according to him is that when the media operates in the natural environment, their influence is only one factor among many other factors; this is because what they see and hear is most likely monitored by their parents (p. 8). Hitchcock further explains that even when children are exposed to violent movies through the media, this violent act is further reinforced if the parent’s, themselves also engages in any forms of violence. The media reflects nearly every aspect of a society; these reflections are not necessarily accurate. This is because violence is not accurately repr esented by the media. The news media in particular, provides an important forum in which violent acts are selectively gathered up, invested with a broader meaning, and made available to public consumption (Ksenych, 2003, p. 35). The media has the power to shape the issue and to shape the consciousness of viewers by sensationalizing and trivializing cases of abuse. A good example of this is the misleading representation of    the percentage of violence as reported by the media and the one reported by statistics Canada (Ksenych, 2003 p. 35). Structural Violence Structural Violence according to Anglin (1998) â€Å"is violence produced by structures of domination, form of expropriation of vital economic and non-material resources and operations of systems of social stratification or categorization that subvert people’s chances of survival† (p. 46). Through structural forms of violence, persons are socially and culturally marginalized in ways that deny them the opportunity for emotional and physical wellbeing. Walker (2003) sees Structural Violence as â€Å"the constraints on human potential caused by economic and political structures† (p. 1). Similarly, Fiske (2006) contrasts â€Å"Structural Violence† and â€Å"Direct Violence†. Fiske argues that structural violence is manifested in social inequalities, and almost always invisible, embedded in social structures. Direct violent on the other hand, is overt and has a perpetrator of the harmful actions (p. 47). Thus, structural violence occurs whenever people are at disadvantaged by political, economic and cultural traditions. Structural Violence on the Aboriginal People The â€Å"stolen generation† is the name generally given to the Aboriginal families adopted into non Aboriginal families as a result of government policies on assimilation (Mellor, 2006, p. 82). According to Holmes (1998) the first British and French colonist made contact with the Aborigines primarily to exploit their labour power in the fur trade (p. 270). Holmes further explains that the Aborigines were under paid in exchange of their labour. Furthermore, as the fur trade declined and agriculture expanded the colonists forcefully took over the valuable lands inhabited by the Aboriginal people. Fiske (2006) sees structural violence against the Aboriginal from the perception of cultural marginalization. Fiske explains after confederation, the Canadian government used assimilation to gain control over the Aborigines. The tool used to promote this end was the Indian act of 1876 (p. 248). This act not only controls every aspect of the lives of the native people, but it also laid out who would be bound or not bound by the act. For example, the â€Å"Status Indians† were those bound by the act, and were prohibited by the act from owning lands, from voting, and from purchasing or consuming alcohol. By same token, the groups not included in the act are â€Å"Non-Status Indian†. Fiske further explains that prior to 1985, the Aborigines women were excluded from Indian register when they married non-Indians. Similarly, these women were not only forced out of their community, but were also stripped of their rights to property inheritance. The children born in this marriage were also denied Indian status. By same token, Walker, (2003) explains that there was also forms of structural violence against indigenous knowledge production (p. 37). This is evidence in Eurocentric research paradigms which distort indigenous experience as expressed in the following quote    â€Å"To assume that phenomena from another world view can be adequately explained from a totally foreign world view is the essence of psychological and philosophical imperialism†. Consequently, forcing indigenous researchers to fit their approach within western paradigms ignores the premise that all research paradigms have a pecific cultural foundation. Walker further explains that this cultural bias of the dominant western society is based on the assumptions that the western methodology was universal (p. 38). From the foregoing, it can be seen that the indigenous people of Canada were not only subjected to forms of inhuman condition, they saw the theft of their resources and       culture,    marginalization, and discrimination (Naiman, 2006, p. 272). How to cite Sociological Perspectives of Violence, Papers