I flinch a bit whenever anyone suggests that laws dictate behavior in war. There may have been codes of conduct that may or may not have been adhered to by officers and/or enlisted men, but the word "law" carries little meaning if it is not enforceable.

I'd have to disagree with the contention the Americans and British adhered to the "law", while the French did not. There were instances where the French behaved with great brutality, especially in the guerilla war. There were other instances in which they behaved with great restraint, especially when dealing with the British.

If any assumption can be made on such a slippery slope, I'd offer that the "laws" of war, written or not, were adhered to when convenient. But in instances of siege (Barrossa), deprivation (Spain, Russia), or in instances of rebellion (Ireland's Ballinamuck) those conventions of behavior were ignored by every army, their abandonment explained by tradition, necessity, or by reciprocity.

Best.......Mark