On August 27, 1776, General William Howe won the largest battle of the American Revolutionary War. His forces routed Washington's army at Long Island, killed or captured a thousand Americans at a cost of roughly four hundred British casualties, and drove the remnants of the Continental Army back to Brooklyn Heights — with the East River at their backs, no viable means of escape, and no reason to expect relief.

Howe ordered his men to dig trenches.

Washington evacuated nine thousand men by boat overnight, under cover of fog, and the Revolutionary War continued for five more years.

Howe did it again. And again. At Kip's Bay in Manhattan. At the retreat across New Jersey. At the advance toward Philadelphia, when he took his army by sea instead of marching to reinforce Burgoyne at Saratoga — a decision that left Burgoyne exposed, produced the American victory that brought France into the war, and changed the outcome of everything.

The question historians have been asking for two hundred and fifty years: why? Three theories have serious scholarly support. The first: military caution after the catastrophic casualties at Bunker Hill made Howe reluctant to storm fortified positions. The second: Howe genuinely believed a negotiated settlement was possible and pulled his punches deliberately to preserve the conditions for peace. The third: he was a Whig politician who had publicly opposed the war, privately believed it was unwinnable, and fought it accordingly.

The parliamentary inquiry in 1779 produced no verdict. The historical debate has never closed.

This is Part 4 — the final episode — of "The Other Side of the Argument." It's the one where the file stays open at the end.

Subscribe wherever you get podcasts. Companion article on Medium, linked in show notes.