Wars are usually fought along very defined lines which encompass the military and civilian participants. Judith Van Buskirk’s Generous Enemies belies this traditional view of the real situations of the American Revolution. As the war was fought in and around New York City, the various forces and actors within, and around, the boundaries found themselves living in a world with very porous borders. The British military could not hold a strict border around the city due to many factors. Many Americans crossed the border between New York City and the surrounding area for familial visits and aid. Military officers were accorded certain rights and privileges amongst the enemy due to their status as gentleman. The African American population found this area to be particularly porous as they moved through the lines for a variety of reasons. As always, business and profit trump all political and ideological boundaries as the almighty “dollar” sways men’s actions. Ms. Van Buskirk utilizes a variety of vignettes to tell the stories of the American Revolution in and around New York City and the people who were ideological enemies but were disinclined to end all relationships due to a variety of factors.
As Governor of New Jersey, William Livingston 
was uniquely involved with these issues as he attempted to conduct the affairs of office. He dealt with the movement of both British and American troops through his region, but also the civilian requests for passes into the city of New York. His state was uniquely affected when the British occupied the city in 1776. A flood of sympathizers to the American cause flooded across the river and into New Jersey. However, this is where Van Buskirk’s story truly finds its theme: the ties that still bound these people to those that stayed. Governor Livingston dealt with requests from citizens wanting to enter the city to visit and help relatives who had stayed in the British zone. Connecticut’s civilian government faced many of the same dilemmas as the war drug on. Citizens on both sides dealt with deprivation. Van Buskirk relates the realities as “New York City residents worried about the availability of foodstuffs, (and) the refugees on the periphery found few available manufactured goods.” (Van Buskirk, 36) Livingston, as an example of civilian governmental leadership, dealt with the same issues as did the British Army leadership: trying to strengthen lines of delineation between groups who meant to deal with one another. The people of the war torn area saw “political and military issues (as) subordinate to concerns about family, earning a living and basic survival.” (Van Buskirk, 43) Many personal issues would trump the ideology of war.
The ties of family and friendship endured and were flaunted at times in Revolutionary New York. Sarah and Catherine Alexander were allowed to cross the lines and visit friend in the city for over three weeks. Van Buskirk characterizes this behavior as “friends in disagreement.” (Van Buskirk, 44) This visit was but one example of many between Whigs coming into the city to visit Tory sympathizer friends and relatives. Many people conducted their personal business through letters that were allowed through military lines as well as more risky ventures. Women were often allowed the greatest ease of movement, which also allowed them to report on military logistics that were seen in enemy territory. The women of the higher echelon, as well as working women, were important lines of communication for both sides. They brought news across the line of family, business and commerce, prisoners, and military information. These lines served as the means for survival. As basic necessities became scarce, provisions moved to supply the populace of the items they needed and thus solidified these networks during the war.
The relationship of the warring factions and the warriors who were fighting the war was a unique juxtaposition for the Revolutionary ideologies, as well as, the cultural mores that were being changed. The concept of the “generous enemy” was particularly in reference to the treatment of the officer class once imprisoned. As illustrated by Van Buskirk, imprisoned officers were accorded special lodging and even passes to roam the area. Many of these officers led a very busy social life with members of his own army as well s the enemy. As an example, after the Battle of Saratoga, General John Burgoyne, British Army, was held at the home of General Philip Schuyler, American Army. As recounted by Van Buskirk,
” One week after the battle, some American officers attended dinner at General Burgoyne’s table in the Schuyler house. Amid much mirth and laughter, a British Major commented on the irony of their situation. It was “an odd world” they lived in, mused the Englishman, that they now were “the best of friends, drinking your (American) wine and the day before trying to put one another to death.” (Van Buskirk, 82)
This scene is indicative of the treatment that was accorded to members of the enemy officer rank. Due to their status as “gentlemen” they were accorded certain freedoms of movement and recreation. This distinction was not prevalent however for the enlisted ranks. Infamous jails and prison ships held the lower ranks of the army in putrid and horrific conditions. These lines of the pre-Revolutionary society status structure had not been torn down yet, and these prisoners did not receive the same treatment as did the officers. Succor and care were not found; and families were unable to give aid. Many of these mores were tested during the Arnold/Andre spy episode. Benedict Arnold placed hundreds of American soldiers in danger while defecting to the British side. Major Andre, upon capture by American forces was expected to receive the generous treatment that would befit his rank as an officer and a gentleman. However, General Washington was faced with certain realities of the New World. How could he justify generous treatment of Andre, when not long before “a soldier had been hung for plundering.” (Van Buskirk, 100) Van Buskirk shows that , “the military command could afford no ambiguity in the stance it adopted at this critical juncture.” (Van Buskirk, 101) General Washington found himself on a course to the new world order where the status of birth would not necessarily give special privileges. The traditions and acceptance of military movement amongst officers created a situation of complexity in the New York City area; one where enemies on the battlefield were friends in the parlor.
African Americans, both slave and freeman, found the porous lines of the war zone a place of great mobility. One of the great movements of the black population was across to the British side, as the British were seen “as the most likely liberators of America’s enslaved population.” (Van Buskirk, 130) The African American population in New York City exploded, and blacks were seen working in virtually every area of commerce. Many utilized the porous lines to do the bidding of their masters, while others utilized it to run to freedom. Many blacks acted as spies or purveyors of information and greatly enhanced their status. As the war dragged on, and African Americans were utilized more by the British, a unique symbiosis was created where “the most powerful found common cause with the most vulnerable.” (Van Buskirk, 154) As many blacks utilized this new relationship with the British Army, many stayed with masters, and many others sought freedom. In the end, these displaced person’s were no different then any others, they “put their own priorities before adherence to either cause.” (Van Buskirk, 154)
The needs of the citizens on both sides became one of the keystone to the movement between the opposing sides. A primary logistic move of both sides was to prohibit trade with the enemy, however, in times of demand, where the military lines had already been blurred, there were individuals who were willing to supply commodities. Many saw the economic movement between the sides as those of necessity. Clothing and food were the necessities that many sought; while luxury items made fortunes for those brave enough to trade. When discussing business ethics, Van Buskirk states, “New Yorkers were especially prone to link liberty and free trade, even using business language to talk about freedom.” (Van Buskirk, 107) The blurred lines surrounding New York allowed business men justify sales to citizens in the zone due to friendship. Much of the trade was legal, however, the black market thrived. It was through this black market that men made fortunes and generals ran a war. “Washington trod carefully regarding this issue because he and his generals did use spies whose cover was black market trading with New York.” (Van Buskirk, 119) Traders in this arena rationalized their position in the following ways: 1. “He was simply acting like everyone else”, 2. The “penal laws …(were) ….more suitable to the Nature of Monarchy than a Republic”, and 3. They “pointed to the sacrifices they had made…(and)…found the legislative demands to be unreasonable.” (Van Buskirk, 127). The self-interest of the businessman and entrepreneur trumped the higher ideals of revolution.
At every turn in New York City during the American Revolution, scores of people were traversing the lines of the enemy. Tories, Whigs, British and American Armies, and scores of displaced citizens were in flux and on the move. Communication, trade, beliefs, and friendship were all the components of the needs of the people. However, as much as each individual story was unique, it becomes apparent that the common thread was self-interest. This self-interest was served by a culture that allowed for the idea of the “generous enemy”. Many realized that their best hope of survival lay in the familiar relationships that had been forged before the war, even if those people lived on the opposing side. The people of New York City after the war were unique in that “they did not have to begin building bridges to one another; those bridges had never been destroyed during the war.” (Van Buskirk, 195). Physical bridges can be easily replaced; but the generous enemies of the Revolution in New York City retained and strengthened those that already existed.
Sounds very interesting. I’ll have to add this to my “summer” reading list.