History can you do the full assignment

The Jumonville Incident: Washington at Fort Necessity

Gamebook

Introduction

By the early 18th century, Britain and France had clearly become the dominant imperial powers in North America. New France extended in a great arc that stretched from New Orleans, at the mouth of the Mississippi River, north to the Great Lakes, and east, down the St. Lawrence, through Canada. This chain of forts, trading posts, and settlements threatened to hem in the more populous colonies of New England, which clustered along the Atlantic coast. Driven by ambitions to expand their overseas empires and improve their positions in Europe, the two imperial powers were often at war.

These struggles drew in colonists, indigenous populations, and other European powers. In May 1754, one such skirmish involved a young George Washington and his militia, a French officer Jumonville with a detachment of troops, and a group of Natives called the Mingos. When the dust settled, Jumonville lay dead. Despite many witnesses to the battle, who killed him—and why—remained unclear. The stakes could not be higher both for those involved and the growing Atlantic World as a whole. This incident could start a global war or could be one of countless unremarkable skirmishes. It could set Washington on a path to ascendancy or cost him his career. You will determine his fate.

YOU ARE A JUROR IN WASHINGTON’S UNOFFICIAL TRIAL AT FORT NECESSITY. YOU HAVE JUST ARRIVED AT THE FORT AND A MERELY SEEKING THE TRUTH. YOU WILL BE WRITING A BRIEF REPORT ON WHAT YOU BELIEVE HAPPENED.

*Before diving into this historical background, make sure that you watch the introduction that I posted. This is quite dense—the introduction can make it go MUCH faster.*

By the early 1750s, a new North American flashpoint developed for the rivalry between Britain and France: the Ohio Country. Control of the sources of the Ohio River, which lay on the western side of the Appalachian Mountains and south of the Great Lakes offered both sides significant strategic advantages. The French coveted the territory because control of the Ohio River would strengthen the connection between their tenuous string of posts. The British, on the other hand, wanted to sever this connection. Closer to the action, many colonies, particularly Virginia, were interested in the potential for future settlement. Stockholders in the Virginia-based Ohio Company hoped to stake claims in the area so they could grow wealthy on land speculation.

The most powerful natives in the area were the Delaware ( Lenape) and Shawnee ( Saawanooki), who had fled English settlement of their traditional homelands to the east. Members of the Seneca people ( Onondowahgah) also lived in the area. The Seneca were one of the nations of the Iroquois Confederation ( Haudenosaunee). Some, but not all, of these so-called “Mingo” rejected the authority of the Iroquois Grand Council.

Tanachariston was a Mingo who saw these tensions as an opportunity. He insisted that he could bring all the Ohio Indians (Delaware, Shawnee, and Mingo alike) into the English camp if the English put him in charge of the area. As viceroy, or “half king,” of the Ohio Country, he would rule in their stead. Whatever authority he possessed relied upon the willingness of the Grand Council of the Iroquois and the English to support him, but neither was enthusiastic about doing so.

The situation intensified in 1753, when the new Governor General of Canada, Michel-Ange Du Quesne de Menneville, the Marquis Duquesne, sent 1,000 men to secure French claims in the Ohio Country by building a chain of forts and driving English traders out of the region. Tanachariston failed in his attempts to convince the French to withdraw. Indeed, the contemptuous hostility of the crusty French commander, Captain Paul Marin de la Malgue, convinced him that the French intended to absorb the Ohio Country into their empire.

In response, on 31 October, 1753, Lt. Gov. Robert Dinwiddie of Virginia composed a letter accusing the French of trespassing on what he considered to be English territory. He appointed an officer of the Virginia militia, George Washington, then 21, to lead a small party to deliver an official letter and to order the French to withdraw.

Washington employed Christopher Gist, a frontier settler and Indian trader, as his guide through the backcountry. Gist knew the country well and acted interpreter and intermediary whenever Washington wanted to discuss the situation with local Indians. At a treaty council in the Indian settlement of Logstown, Washington attempted to persuade the Ohio Indians to support his mission, but they balked.

Frustrated, Washington pressed on to Venango, which had previously been the site of an English trading post. It was now commanded by Philippe Joincare, a French officer. On this occasion, Jacob Van Braam, a multi-lingual Dutch soldier in Virginia service, acted as Washington’s interpreter. When Washington presented Dinwiddie’s letter, Joincare referred him to his commanding officer, Jacques Legardeur de Saint Pierre, at Fort Le Boeuf, which lay further to the north.

Washington continued and was joined by Tanacharison and a few other Mingo who were interested to see what transpired. Captain Legardeur, a veteran officer with ample backcountry experience, received Washington with cordial hospitality, and assured him that he would pass the letter along to his superior, the Marquis Duquesne. Legardeur asked Washington to take the letter to Canada, but Washington demurred, so Legardeur wrote a letter for Washington to take back to Lt. Governor Dinwiddie. After promising to convey Washington’s letter, Legardeur wrote,

“As to the Summons you send me to retire, I do not think myself obliged to obey it. Whatever may be you Instructions, I am here by Virtue of the Orders of my General; and I entreat you, Sir, no to doubt one Moment, but that I am determin’d to conform myself to them with all the Exactness and Resolution which can be expected from the best Officer.

“I don’t know what in the Progress of this Campaign any Thing as passed which can be reputed an act of Hostility, or that is contrary to the Treaties which subsist between the two Crowns; the Continuation whereof as much interests, and is pleasing to us, as the English. Had you been pleased Sir, to have descended to particularize the Facts which occasioned you Complaint, I should have had the Honour of answering you in the fullest, and, I am persuaded, most satisfactory Manner.[footnoteRef:1] [1: Paul R. Misencik, George Washington and the Half-King Chief Tanacharison: An Alliance That Began the French and Indian War (Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Co., 2014), 73-74.]

On 16 December, 1753, Washington, having failed to budge the French, began the grueling two month return journey over the mountains to Virginia. Tanachariston, however, remained behind and continued discussions with the French.

Frustrated by his inability to turn back the French advance into the Ohio Country, Dinwiddie turned to a military solution. First, he encouraged Washington to write an account of his backcountry adventure. He also authorized the raising of additional troops and dispatched a larger detachment of Virginia volunteers, under the command of Captain William Trent, to the Ohio Country. To supplement these forces, he wrote to the governors of neighboring colonies requesting troops. Finally, with his plans already in motion, he asked the Virginia House of Burgesses to raise £10,000 to finance the whole operation. To heighten everyone’s alarm, he circulated a published copy of Washington’s account of his unsuccessful mission as evidence of the French determination to dominate the region.

On 17 February, 1754, Trent arrived at the Forks of the Ohio where his Virginia volunteers began constructing a small log fort. With the aid of Tanachariston and trader George Croghan, he distributed gifts to the local native peoples. Despite these efforts they remained unwilling to aid the English. So much so that they refused to sell Trent’s men any food. Falling short on supplies, he fell back, leaving Ensign Edward Ward in command of the site.

On 17 April, just as Ward’s men hung the gate on the completed fort, Legardeur’s successor, Capt. Claude-Pierre Pécaudy, seigneur de Contrecoeur, arrived with 500 troops and 18 cannon. Outnumbered and outgunned, Ward expeditiously surrendered. The victorious French treated him and his hungry men to dinner and sent them back to Virginia. Tanachariston was furious. According the Ward, he “stormed greatly at the French at the Time they were oblieged [sic] to march out of the Fort and told them it was he Order’d that Fort and laid the first Log of it himself.” It was to no avail. Ward added, “the French paid no Regard to what he said.”[footnoteRef:2] The French then knocked down the half-completed fort, and began constructing a much more impressive bastion, which they named Fort Duquesne to honor the Governor General of Canada. [2: William M. Darlington, ed. Christopher Gist’s Journals with Historical, Geographical and Ethnological Notes and Biographies of his Contemporaries (Pittsburgh: J.R. Weldin, 1893), 278. ]

Ignorant of these developments, 160 poorly-equipped, underpaid Virginia volunteers under Colonel Joshua Fry, with George Washington, now a lieutenant colonel, as second in command, marched toward the Ohio Country. Dinwiddie’s orders, which he had written in January before Ward’s surrender, were fairly clear,

“Having all Things in readiness, You are to use all Expedition in proceeding to the Fork of Ohio, with the Men under Yr Comd & there You are to finish & compleat in the best Manner, & as soon as You possibly can the Fort which I expect is there already begun by the Ohio Compa. You are to act on the Difensive, but in Case any Attempts are made to obstruct the Works or interrupt our Settlemts by any Persons whatsoever, You are to restrain all such Offenders, & in Case of resistance to make Prisoners of or kill & destroy them. For the rest You are to conduct Yrself as the Circumsts. of the Service shall require, & to act as You shall find best for the Furtherence of His M[ajest]y’s Service, & the Good of His Domn.

“Wishing You Health & Success I bid You Farewell.”[footnoteRef:3] [3: Washington Papers, National Archives. Downloaded from: http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/02-01-02-0031]

When news reached them of Ward’s surrender, they decided to press on and joined Trent at Wills Creek. Washington took command of an advance party, which was responsible for cutting a road across the mountains and through the forest. The road would enable a larger force – should one eventually arrive – to move against Fort Duquesne, which now blocked the way to the Ohio Country.

By 24 May, the road had advanced 50 miles and reached Great Meadows, a large, open, marshy glade. Washington decided that the fresh water and ample grass for the expedition’s horses made a good spot for an advance base. Some disagreed; six men took the opportunity to desert.

On 27 May, Christopher Gist arrived and informed Washington that a detachment of armed French and Indians had set out from Fort Duquesne to meet him at Great Meadows. In response, Washington ordered his men to improve their defenses. He then sent Capt. Peter Hogg, Lt. Mercer, and Ensign Peronie with 75 men to intercept the approaching French. This was about half of his force. He sent Dinwiddie an optimistic report that expressed his readiness for battle,

“We have, with Nature's assistance, made a good Intrenchment, and by clearing ye Bushes out of these Meadows, prepar'd a charming field for an Encounter.” [footnoteRef:4] [4: Letter to Robert Dinwiddie, May 27, 1754, in John C. Fitzpatrick, ed., The Writings of George Washington, (xxx) I, 54. ]

Later that evening, Tanachariston arrived and provided further information: the French were camped just seven miles away. More distressingly, Washington discovered that he had sent Captain Hogg in the wrong direction. In his journal, he wrote,

“About eight at Night, received an Express from the Half King, which informed me, that, as he was coming to join us, he had seen along the Road, the Tracts [tracks] of two Men, which he had followed, till he was brought thereby to a low obscure Place; that he was of Opinion the whole Party of the French was hidden there.”[footnoteRef:5] [5: National Archives, Founders online. http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/01-01-02-0004-0002 ]

Apparently, the French, commanded by Ensign Joseph Coulon de Villiers, Sieur de Jumonville, were now in a “low obscure place” just seven miles to the west of Great Meadows. Acting on this information, despite the late hour and heavy rain, Washington decided to strike. He left a strong guard to protect the fort and set out with about 40 men, including his old comrade, Capt. Thomas Waggoner.

The party frequently lost its way in a darkness so deep that the men bumped into each other, but by dawn on the 28th, they joined Tanacharison and some Mingo warriors near the French position. They decided to encircle the French and began moving into position. Tanacharison commanded the Mingo on one flank while Washington commanded the Virginians on the other. Discovered before they could complete the encirclement, the skirmish began.

This much is clear: The English won the battle handily and took many prisoners. At some point during the battle, the French commander, Jumonville, presented his “summons” – a diplomatic note from Contrecoeur ordering the English to vacate the area. It read,

“Word has reached me by way of the savages, that you have come with an armed force upon the lands of the King, my master; but I am hardly able to believe it. Since I ought to neglect nothing to be informed correctly about it, I am sending Sieur Dejomonville [Jumonville] to find out, and in case he finds you there, he is to summon you in the name of the king, in virtue of the orders I have received from my general, to retire peaceably with your troops. Otherwise, Monsieur, I shall be obliged to compel you in all the ways that I believe most efficacious for the honor of the arms of France. The sale of the Belle River territory [the Ohio Country] by the savages gives you such poor title that I could not be prevented from meeting force with force.

“I warn you that if any act of hostility occurs after this summons, which is the last I shall send you, you will have to answer for it, since our intention is to maintain the concord which now reigns between the two friendly princes [the kings of France and Britain]. Whatever your intention may be, I am convinced you will show M. Dejumonville all the consideration that he deserves and send him back at once to inform me of your intentions.”[footnoteRef:6] [6: Misencik, 110. He cites Sylvaster K. Stevens, Donald H. Kent, Emma E. Woods, H.R. Casgrain and J.-C. B., eds., Travels in New France by J.-C.B. (Harrisburg: Pennsylvania Historical Commission, 1941), 58.]

It is also clear that Jumonville was killed.

After the skirmish, Washington’s men returned to Great Meadows where he wrote a quick report to Dinwiddie. On 30 May, he entrusted it to two of his officers, Lt. West and Lt. Spiltdorph, who led 20 men and the French prisoners back toward Virginia.

Washington hastened his efforts to fortify his position and on 2 June, a log palisade was completed to help defend the English camp, which became known as “Fort Necessity.” Eleven days later, on 9 June, a detachment of 200 more Virginia volunteers and nine small cannons arrived under Washington’s second in command, Lt. Col. George Muse. A few French deserters from Fort Duquesne also trickled into camp. They report that about 400 French reinforcements are due at Fort Duquesne and that much of the garrison was ready to desert. Finally, and perhaps most alarmingly, they reported that large numbers of Ohio Indians, including Delaware and Shawnee arrived, expressing an eagerness to move against the British.[footnoteRef:7] A few days afterward, on 14 June, additional reinforcements arrived: an independent company from South Carolina commanded by Capt. James Mackay, a British officer. [7: Misencik, 128.]

Students must decide what happened on the morning of May 28. Ten questions are the basis of their inquiry.

1. Why did Washington decide to attack the French?

2. Who shot first?

3. Did Washington’s forces sustain any casualties?

4. What casualties were suffered by the French?

5. What was the contribution of the Mingos?

6. How did Jumonville, the French commander, die?

7. What happened to the French after the battle?

8. What did Washington think about the French diplomatic “summons” ordering him to leave the area?

9. What were the intentions of the French?

Everyone must attempt to make an overall judgment about Washington’s actions as a commander:

10. How responsible were Washington’s actions?

How on earth are you supposed to answer these questions? Below, you have different accounts from different people on what happened. In some ways, they clearly contradict. Read each account asking yourself what it is that they say, but also if they might have reasons to not be telling the truth.

You will need to assess the degree to which Washington was aggressive, foolish, or measured in his actions. In doing this, you will need to consider the agendas that lie behind each person who created each piece of evidence. For example, is Washington likely to write in his own report that his actions were foolish? No. Would the French admit that they were acting aggressively? Probably not. Look for the bias that shifts the interpretation. Finally, you will need to figure out how to assemble these ideas into a coherent narrative. Once you have answered all the questions to the best of your ability, use the “Handout 1” to turn your answers into a jury report.

For your Applied Assignment grade, turn in a completed version of Handout 1 and then a brief explanation of how you decided who was telling the truth, who might be lying, and why. Make sure to cite specific evidence in your explanation (with page numbers). Finally, how sure are you that you know what happened at the Battle of Jumonville Glenn.

These narratives offer different versions of the Jumonville incident. When reading them, think about the motives of the authors. Also consider the limitations imposed upon them by their point of view in the battle and the degree to which the texts depend upon hearsay evidence as well as eyewitness testimony.

George Washington sent the following report to Virginia’s Governor Dinwiddie on 29 May, 1754. He later crafted a more polished version for his diary. Pay close attention to the ways in which Washington describes the role that Indians played in the skirmish as well as his characterization of the French “summons.”

Abt 9 Oclock the same Night, I receivd an express from the Half King who was Incampd with several of His People abt 6 Miles of, that he had seen the Tract of two French Men xing the Road and believ’d the whole body were lying not far off, as he had an acct of that number passing Mr Gist—I set out with 40 Men before 10, and was from that time till near Sun rise before we reach’d the Indian’s Camp, havg Marched in small path, & heavy Rain, and a Night as Dark as it is possible to concieve—we were frequently tumbling one over another, and often so lost that 15 or 20 Minutes search would not find the path again.

When we came to the Half King I council’d with him, and got his assent to go hand in hand and strike the French. accordingly, himself, Monacatoocha, and a few other Indians set out with us, and when we came to the place where the Tracts were, the Half King sent Two Indians to follow their Tract and discover their lodgment which they did abt half a mile from the Road in a very obscure place surrounded with Rocks. I thereupon in conjuction with the Half King & Monacatoocha, formd a disposion to attack them on all sides, which we accordingly did and after an Engagement of abt 15 Minutes we killd 10, wounded one and took 21 Prisoner’s, amongst those that were killd was Monsieur De Jumonville the Commander, Principl Officers taken is Monsieur Druillong and Monsr Laforc [French officer Michel Pépin], who your Honour has often heard me speak of as a bold Enterprising Man, and a person of gt subtilty and cunning with these are two Cadets—These Officers pretend they were coming on an Embassy, but the absurdity of this pretext is too glaring as your Honour will see by the Instructions and summons inclos’d: There Instructions were to reconnoitre the Country, Roads, Creeks &ca to Potomack [northern Virginia]; which they were abt to do, These Enterpriseing Men were purposely choose out to get intelligence, which they were to send Back by some brisk dispatches with mention of the Day that they were to serve the Summon’s; which could be through no other view, than to get sufficient Reinforcements to fall upon us imediately after. This with several other Reasons induc’d all the Officers to beleive firmly that they were sent as spys rather than any thing else, and has occasiond my sending them as prisoners, tho they expected (or at least had some faint hope of being continued as ambassadors) They finding where we were Incamp’d, instead of coming up in a Publick manner sought out one of the most secret Retirements; fitter for a Deserter than an Ambassador to incamp in—s[t]ayd there two or 3 days sent Spies to Reconnoitre our Camp as we are told, tho they deny it—Their whole Body movd back near 2 Miles, sent off two runnors to acquaint Contracoeur with our Strength, and where we were Incamp’d &ca now 36 Men wd almost have been a Retinue for a Princely Ambassador, instead of Petit [small; from the French petit], why did they, if there design’s were open stay so long within 5 Miles of us witht delivering his Ambassy, or acquainting me with it; his waiting cd be with no other design than to get Detachts to enforce the Summons as soon as it was given, they had no occasion to send out Spy’s; for the Name of Ambassador is Sacred among all Nations; but it was by the Tract of these Spy’s they were discoverd, and we got Intilligence of them—They wd not have retird two Miles back witht delivering the Summons and sought a sculking place (which to do them justice was done with gt Judgment) but for some especial Reason: Besides The Summon’s is so insolent, & savour’s so much of Gascoigny that if two Men only had come openly to deliver it. It was too great Indulgence to have sent them back.

The Sense of the Half King on this Subject is, that they have bad Hearts, and that this is a mere pretence, they never designd to have come to us but in a hostile manner, and if we were so foolish as to let them go again, he never would assist us in taking another of them[.] Besides, looseing La Force I really think wd tend more to our disservice than 50 other Men, as he is a person whose active Spirit, leads him into all parlys [discussions; from the French parlez, to speak], and brought him acquainted with all parts, add to this a perfect use of the Indian Tongue, and gt influence with the Indian He Ingenuously enough confessd that as soon as he saw the commission & Instructions that he believd and then said he expected some such tendency tho he pretends to say he does not believe the Commander had any other but a good design.

In this Engagement we had only one Man killd, and two or three wounded, among which was Lieutt Waggener slightly—a most miraculous escape, as Our Right Wing was much exposd to their Fire and receivd it all. …

During a treaty council between Virginia and the Mingo, Delaware, and Shawnee, at Mount Pleasant (or Wills’s Creek) in October and November of 1754, a Mingo warrior related the following account of the skirmish to Col. James Innes, the presiding British officer. A companion of by Tanacharison, the Half-King, he described his efforts in the spring of 1754 to comply with a request issued by Washington to rendezvous with him at Great Meadows.

Accordingly in some little Time after, he [Tanacharison] set off, we and several young Men along with us, we was so narrowly watched by the French, that immediately upon our setting off with our Wives and Children being able only to travel slow, the French sent off that Party with La Force [French officer Michel Pépin] to bring us back or to put us to Death, & they travelling faster than we could, the French got before us, and when they went the Road to encamp we tracked them, when we came up to that place and [manuscript torn] to tell Coll Washington where they were: So they and our traveling all Night and coming close to the place where the French were encamped, we directed Coll Washington with his Men to go up the Hill, straight to the French where they were, not above fifty Yards off when they must come in Sight of the French Camp below them: The Half King with his Warriors went to the left to intercept them if they should go that Way, and Monacatootha [Scaroyady] with another young Warrior Cherokee Jack went to the Right, and left Coll Washington: When they came near the Top of the Hill, begun himself and fired and then his people, which the French returned, two or three Fires of as many Pieces as would go off, being rainy Weather, and then run off, one of Coll Washington’s people being more forward than the rest and before the Company, they unluckily shot their own Man, and wounded a Frenchman in the Cheek; So the French having taken to their Heels and running, happening to run the Way the Half King was with his Warriors, eight of them met with their Destiny by the Indian Tomayhawks, upon which the others remaining Survivors turned short and ran the other Way where Monacatootha was, and upon his calling to them, they observed they were surrounded, and Monacatootha knowing La Force he came up and surrendered himself with the others to Monacatootha who carried them to Coll Washington.

Immediately the Half King came up, and told the French, now I will let you see that the Six Nations [the Iroquois Confederation] can kill as well as the French, which you said we know nothing of, and as you came after me to take my Life and my Childrens, I now will let you see how I used to do with some of your People before in time of old, and that I am not afraid, so offering with his Tomayhawk to La Force, La Force got behind Coll Washington who interposed, otherwise we do believe they would have been all put to Death.

Source: The National Archives (UK), Colonial Office Papers, CO 5/15, ff. 194-195. Found in David L. Preston, Braddock’s Defeat: The Battle of the Monongahela and the Road to Revolution (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015), 351-352. I inserted breaks for ease of reading.

Contrecoeur obtained the following final account of the battle more than three weeks after his initial report to Duquesne. Contrecoeur’s informant was Denis Kaninguen, a deserter “from the English army camp” whose name suggests that he was a Catholic Iroquois and most likely a member of Tanaghrisson’s party.

Denis Kaninguen, who deserted from the English army camp yesterday morning, arrived at the camp of Fort Duquesne today, 30 June. He reports that the English army is composed of 430 men, in addition to whom there are about 30 savages. . . .

That Monsieur de Jumonville had been killed by an English detachment which surprised him[. T]hat that officer had gone out to communicate his orders to the English commander[. N]otwithstanding the discharge of musket fire that the latter had made upon him, he intended to read it and had withdrawn himself to his people, whom he had ordered to fire upon the French[. T]hat Monsieur de Jumonville having been wounded and having fallen Thaninhison [Tanaghrisson], a savage, came up to him and had said, Thou art not yet dead, my father, and struck several hatchet blows with which he killed him.

That Monsieur Druillon, ensign and second in command to Monsieur de Jumonville, had been taken with all of the detachment, which was thirty men[.] Messieurs de Boucherville and DuSable, cadets, and Laforce, commissary [Michel Pépin, a French officer], were among the number of prisoners[. T]hat there were between ten and twelve Canadians killed and that the prisoners had been carried to the city of Virginia.

That the English had little food with them.

That if the French do not come into the territory of the English, the latter will no longer want come into the land of the former.

That the said Denis Kaninguen had been pursued in leaving the English camp by a horseman, whose thigh he broke with a gun shot, had taken his horse, and had ridden at full speed to the French camp.

Source: Fred Anderson, Crucible of War (New York: Vintage, 2001), 57-58.

One of Jumonville’s soldiers, Monceau, managed to escape the skirmish. He returned to Fort Duquesne where he described the events to Contrecoeur, his commanding officer. Contrecoeur then included it in a letter to Duquesne on June 2.

One of that Party, Monceau by Name, a Canadian, made his Escape and tells us that they had built themselves Cabbins, in a low Bottom, where they sheltered themselves, as it rained hard. About seven o’Clock the next Morning, they saw themselves surrounded by the English on one Side and the Indians on the Other. The English gave them two Volleys, but the Indians did not fire. Mr. de Jumonville, by his Interpreter, told them to desist, that he had something to tell them. Upon which they ceased firing. Then Mr. de Jumonville ordered the Summons which I had sent them to retire, to be read. . . . The aforesaid Monceau, saw all our Frenchmen coming up close to Mr. de Jumonville, whilst they were reading the Summons, so that they were all in Platoons, between the English and the Indians, during which Time, said Monceau made the best of his Way to us, partly by Land through the Woods, and partly along the River Monaungahela, in a small Canoe. This is all, Sir, I could learn from said Monceau.

Source: Anderson, Crucible of War, 53-54.

This more polished version of the French perspective on the skirmish was published in Paris. It begins with Contrecoeur’s march into the Ohio country.

Having continued his March to the Ohio, he [Contrecoeur] found on its Banks the Traces of a Fort which the English intended to build, but which they had no doubt abandoned at the News of his Approach; these he settled and fortified himself. As they were working at the Entrenchments of that Fortification, which they called Fort du Quesne, M. de Contiecoeur was informed that a considerable Body of Forces was marching towards him. Hereupon he charged M. de Jumonville with a written Summons, in form of a Letter, directed to the first English Officer he should meet. It was dated the 23d of May, 1754, and was almost of the same Tenor with the Summons before sent to Captain Trent [it was received by Ensign Edward Ward because Trent had withdrawn due to lack of supplies] . He assured the English that no Violence would be offered them, and furthermore desired the English Commander to return him Answer by M. de Jumonville, and to treat that Officer with that Distinction and respect which he deserved.

That Deputy set out with an Escort of thirty Men, and the next Morning found himself surrounded by a Number of English and Indians: The English quickly fired two Vollies, which killed some Soldiers. M. Jumonville made a Sign that he had a Letter from his Commander, hereupon the Fire ceased, and they surrounded the French Officer, in order to hear it. He immediately ordered the Summons to be read, and, as it was reading the second Time, the English assassinated him. The rest of the French that escorted him were upon the Spot made Prisoners of War. The only one who escaped [presumably Monceau], and who gave M. de Contiecoeur a circumstantial Account of that Affair, assured him, that the Indians who were with the English had not fired a Gun, and that at the Instant M. de Jumonville was assassinated, they threw themselves in between the French and their Enemies.

That Murder produced an Effect in the Minds of the Indians, which Major Washington, who was at the Head of that English Detachments, did not in the least expect. Even those, who by the Suggestions of the English had been most animated against the French, came and offer’d to go themselves and revenge that Crime.

Source: Memorial, containing a summary View of Facts, with their Authorities, in Answer to the Observations sent by the English Ministry to the Courts of Europe (Philadelphia: James Chattin, 1757), 21-23. Chattin translated this from Jacob-Nicolas Moreau, Mémoire contenant le précis des faits, avec leurs pieces justificatives, pour servir de réponse aux Observations envoyées par les ministres d'Angleterre, dans les cours de l'Europe (Paris: l’Imprimerie Royale, 1756).

After the skirmish, John B. W. Shaw appeared before a committee headed by Governor James Glen of South Carolina. In the opening section, he identifies himself as an Irishman, briefly describes his time as a sailor, and states that he joined the Virginia volunteers, although his name does not appear on Washington’s muster roll. He then describes the march across the Alleghenies in which he accompanied the rear detachment under the command of Lt. Col. Muse. This meant that he was not present for the skirmish, but when he arrived at Fort Necessity, several of the participants apparently told him about their “Engagement with a party of French.”

That an Indian and a White man [presumably Tanacharison and Gist] having brought Col Washington Information that a party of French consisting of five and thirty men were out scouting and lay about Six Miles off, upon which Col Washington with about Forty Men and Captn. Hogg with a party of forty more, and the Half King [Tanacharison] with his Indians consisting of Thirteen, Immediately Sett out in Search of them, But having taken Different Roads Col:o Washington with his Men and the Indians came first up with them, and found them encamped between two Hills.

Being Early in the Morning Some were asleep, and some eating. But having heard a Noise they were Immediately in Great Confusion and Betook themselves to their Arms. And as he this Deponent has heard One of them fired a Gun upon which Col Washington Gave the Word for All his Men to Fire. Severall of them being Killed; the Rest Betook themselves to flight; But our Indians having gone round the French, When they Saw them Immediately fled Back to the English, and Delivered up their Arms desiring Quarter, which was accordingly promised them. Sometime after the Indians Came up, The Half King took his Tomahawk and Splitt the head of the French Captain [Jumonville], having first asked if he was an Englishman And having been told that he was a French Man, he then took out his Brains, and washed his hands with them, And then Scalped him —

All this he has heard and never heard it Contradicted, But knows nothing of it from his own Knowledge. Only he has Seen the Bones of the French Men who were killed in Number abt. 13 or 14, And the Head of one Stuck upon a Stick; for none of them were Buryed. And he has also heard that one of our Men was killed at that time. —

John Davison, an English trader who operated out of Logstown, offered the following brief account of the skirmish at a treaty council after the skirmish.

Davison said he was in the Action and that there were but Eight Indians who did most of the Execution that was done. Coll. Washington and the Half-King differed much in Judgment, and on the Collonel’s refusing to take his Advice the English and Indians separated. After which the Indians discovered the French in an Hollow and hid themselves, lying on their Bellies behind a Hill; afterwards they discovered Coll. Washington on the opposite Side of the Hollow in the Gray of the Morning, and when the English fired, which they did in great Confusion, the Indians came out of their Cover and closed with the French and killed them with their Tomhawks, on which the French surrendered.

Source: Minutes of the Provincial Council of Pennsylvania, from the organization to the termination of the proprietary government, vol. VI, (Harrisburg: Theo. Penn & Co., 1851), 195.

I submit the following report of what transpired on the morning of 28 May, 1754, near Fort Necessity, when Virginia troops under the command of George Washington encountered a French force commanded by Ensign Coulon de Jumonville.

Col. George Washington, joined by Mingos under Tanacharison, decided to attack a French encampment based upon ______________________________________ (1. Why did Washington attack?). Once all forces were in position, ______________________ initiated the battle (2. What group started the battle?). Upon cessation of hostilities, Washington ascertained our forces had sustained ________________________ casualties (3. Number and any other information). Washington’s forces inflicted ________________ casualties upon the French along with taking __________ prisoners of war (4. Numbers and any other details). Among the casualties sustained by our enemy included an officer, Ensign Coulon de Jumonville, who was killed by __________ (5. What group?), ______ (6. When? -- before, during, or after) the fighting. Overall, the role of our Mingo allies under Tanacharison in the conflict could be described as ___________________________________ (7. Assessment of their role). I must now address the commander of our forces in some detail. I have since learned that the French possessed a diplomatic summons—something that Washington does not deny—which may have granted them diplomatic protections. Faced with this summons, Washington _________________________________________ (8. What did Washington know of the summons and how did he respond). He believed that the French intended _______________. (9. How did Washington assess the threat?). Faced with all the facts, I conclude the following regarding Washington’s actions: ___________________________________________ (10. Assess Washington as a commander. Should he be praised or disciplined, etc. Is he criminal? Reckless? Genius?)

You obedient servant, Lt. Colonel, James Mackay