How did the smaller wars lead to the French and Indian War?

Was there growing

resentment already growing with the mother country?
Skirmishes lead us to the French and Indian war ultimately because both the French and
the British are competing to expand their north American colonies into the west of the
Appalachian Mountains and the trading rights in North America. Both the French and the British
felt it was vital to have claims on mainly the Ohio Valley to increase their own power and
wealth and to limit the strength of their rival. The colonist of the new world were already
showing signs of resentment to the mother country essential because of the taxation that was
brought upon the colonist. This was caused because the Britain’s economy was suffering due to
debt cause by the skirmishes. Also as the New England settlers fought alongside the British and
claimed territory from the French the British won’t allow New England settler to settle in the
new territory.

How did the French and Indian War prepare the colonists for the American
Revolution?
The debt from the war was the reason the British began taxing the colonies. The
war also weakened British so they couldn’t fight back against the colonists. Since
France wasn’t happy with British after the war, they supported the colonists.
Without the French/Indian War there probably wouldn’t have been a
Revolutionary War. There would not have been taxations due to war debt. The
French helped the colonist to have success.

What were the land pressures that led to the French and Indian War?
The biggest land pressure that led to the French and Indian War was the Ohio River Valley.
Britain and France both had claims on this location and it led to feuds. France built several forts
in the Ohio River Valley to try and improve their claims on the area, but in 1754, George
Washington brought about 160 British militiamen to attempt to force out the French. The
British forces were outnumbered and defeated by the French. This skirmish erupted into the
French and Indian War when France heard of the Britain’s plans for the next strike.

Discuss the importance of landscape in crafting battle strategy for both the French
and the English.
Landscape was important if crafting battle strategies for the French and the
English, for example in the Battle of Quebec. Since Quebec was on a cliff all
French had the uphill advantage. The English also could just starve them out, but
there was too small for completely starving out. The French also had the river
valley which helped a lot and the British took Fort Duquesne. They couldn’t
communicate with troops.
What was the significance of the Battle of Quebec, both in terms of securing
victory for the British and for demoralizing the French forces?
A combination of the strategic position of Quebec and the demoralization of the
French losing their capital. Quebec’s position on the St. Lawrence made it a key
trading post and military stronghold. Holding a position on the river, as well as
being situated on a hill led to Quebec being a serious point of contest. Once the
French were beaten on the Plains of Abraham, a disorderly general retreat was
sounded. This was followed closely by British regulars. Days after the battle,
Quebec capitulated allowing the 7,000 British and Colonial troops into garrison.

How did the French and Indian War heighten the conflict between Britain and the
American colonies? It created more tension between France and Britain and continued
the solidification of their rivalry. It also made native Americans side more with France.

Discuss the effects of "Pontiac's War" and its implications for further conflict
between the British and the Indians.

Pontiac’s War was the rebellion of the Ottawa chief in order to protect the Ohio Valley as the
trade and commerce were decreasing after the French had left and the British settled in the
area. It created a hostile relationship between the British and the Native Americans both
vengeful of each other. This hostility caused the frustration of the British who fought back with
small pox blankets in order to wipe the population of the Natives to halt further rebellions. The
implications for further war gave way when the British started to wipe the Natives out, causing
the Natives to side with the French and be recruited by the French as they were given the
resources, such as armed weapons from them. Also, the British, fearing the out lash from the
Natives once again, they heavily occupied the areas of the Natives with military in order to
stabilize them. This gave the Natives frustration as they weren’t able to venture into their own
land, meaning there weren’t resources provided for them. This, despite the British wanting
peace, caused more implications of conflict between them.

Why were the British unable to attract and retain Indian allies for much of the war?

The British took retribution against the Native American tribes that fought on the
French side by cutting off their supplies and then forcing them to obey their rules.
The British were constantly trying to encroach on the Native Americans’ land as
well. The Indians, specifically the Five Nations of the Iroquois, played the British
against the French in order to maximize their own benefits and the French’s . At
the beginning of the war, the French had much more land than the British did. This
meant that more Natives populated the French territory. The French eventually
learned to work and trade with the Natives which created a sense of loyalty to the
French rather than the British.

What was the significance of the "massacre" at Fort William Henry? How was this
event used by the British and the American colonists to justify brutality against the
Indians?

The massacre at Fort William Henry was a significant event within the French and
Indian War. With forts scattered about Lake George, the French and English were
close in proximity with each other with forts scattered on the lake (The west of the
lake was a disputed area where the British and French were striving to hold land in
modern day NY, and PN. The massacre at Fort William Henry was taken on by the
Indians, whom had sided with the French. With brutal massacring of the English,
the French had come back, and released a few prisoners who were captured by the
Indians. This event was used by the British and American colonists was used to
Justify brutality against the Indians (The Indians were treated harsh under English
rule; this was seen as revenge seeking massacre) …

Discuss the elements of successful (and unsuccessful) policy among different

English leaders: Braddock, Wolfe, the Earl of Loundoun, Pitt. What worked and
what didn't work?
Braddock
 British Gov sent Gen. Edward Braddock as commander in chief in N.A.
 Alienated potential Indian allies
 Colonial leaders failed to cooperate with him
 Focused on social standing
 Defeated July 9th, 1755 at Fort Duquesne

Wolfe
 Sept. 3 1759 the British under Wolfe defeated the French at Quebec
 Battle of Abraham
 The capture of Quebec and Montreal ended French control in N.A.
Earl of Loundoun
  1756-1758 military commander of all British troops in VA
 Lost all his regiment during the royalist uprising in 1745
 Did nothing to fortify the remaining western forts
 Benjamin Franklin declared his campaigns “expensive, and disgraceful”
Pitt
 Turning point of the war when William Pitt took over wartime operations
 Belived N.A. was critical for England’s global dominion