The Journal of Military History

Abstract

Since the 1860 discovery of a plan written by Charles Lee during his captivity in the American War of Independence, historians have asserted that he was a traitor or pursued self-serving motivations. A detailed analysis of the plan from the perspective of its intended audience of British commanders, however, reveals that Lee sought to persuade readers that the British could not win the war and should pursue a negotiation strategy. While the plan might represent a technical violation of the articles of war, British contemporary correspondence indicates that British generals considered Lee a dangerous adversary, loyal to the rebel cause.

Read the full article

Members: read on EBSCO

Use the access code from this quarter's member email. Every issue since 1937 is online, with no embargo.

Open on EBSCO

Lost your code? Email jmhsmh@vmi.edu or sign in at the EBSCOhost member login.

Not a member? Buy this article

A PDF sent by email from the Journal office during business hours, $10.

Order the PDF

Through a library: sign in with your institution

Full text is in EBSCO's America: History and Life with Full Text and Historical Abstracts with Full Text, and through EBSCO Discovery.

Institutional sign-in

Join: read everything, every year

Membership includes the printed journal and full online access to the archive.

Join the Society

Cite this article

Eugene A. Procknow, “Treason Refuted: Why Major General Charles Lee’s Plan for the British to “Win” the Revolution was an Act of Patriotism,” The Journal of Military History 88, no. 2 (April 2024): 301–329.

RISBibTeX

Also in Vol. 88, No. 2

  1. and

  2. Vandervort Prize 2025

  3. Historiographical essay