"A Tangible Link to the Past" - Jess Bruce's Journey to Recreate the Obadiah Mead Jacket

Last Fall, the Nerds posted an image of the Obadiah Mead jacket on our Facebook page. This 18th-century jacket is in the Greenwich, Connecticut Historical Society collection. The striped linen jacket survives with the provenance that it was worn by a man or older teen named Obadiah Mead on the day he was killed by British soldiers who raided Greenwich during the Revolutionary War.

Shortly after our post went live, Jess Bruce, a talented reenactor and all-around fantastic person, contacted us. Jess informed us that they had been working closely with a historical tailor and 18th-century historian to reproduce the coat and wanted to share their research on the coat and the story of Obadiah Mead with us. 

The Nerds are HUGE fans of Jess’ work so naturally, we said, “Heck yes!” We invited Jess to participate in a Q&A to discuss recreating the Obadiah Mead jacket.

So, without further delay, let’s take a deep dive with Jess to learn about the jacket and the efforts to reproduce this vital piece of American history.

Tell the Nerds a little about yourself and your activities within the Living History and Historical Research communities.

I have been fascinated with history, particularly its darker, more unsettling aspects, for my whole life. I am drawn to the macabre, disturbing stories often overlooked in traditional historical narratives. The 17th and 18th centuries, with their blend of religious fervor, social upheaval, and burgeoning scientific inquiry, offer a vibrant tapestry for exploration.

My research has taken me down some unusual paths. I've delved deep into the anxieties surrounding Onanism (self-pollution) during this period, exploring how religious and social pressures shaped individual behavior. I've investigated the brutal persecution of homosexuality, a time when sodomy was punishable by death, and sought to understand the societal and legal frameworks that underpinned such harsh punishments.

But my interests extend beyond the morbid. I'm deeply fascinated by the everyday lives of ordinary people during the American Revolution. I've spent countless hours researching epidemics, the realities of slavery in colonies like Massachusetts and New Hampshire, and the experiences of civilians caught in the upheaval of a war that wasn't always fought on grand battlefields. I'm particularly drawn to the civilian experience, the stories of those caught in the crossfire of a war that wasn't always fought on grand stages, and the narratives of individuals whose lives were irrevocably altered by the events of the Revolution.

The Obadiah Mead Jacket. Photo Credit - Greenwich (CT) Historical Society

 

I strive to bring these historical figures and experiences to life within the living history community. You might find me portraying a Canadian corvée during Burgoyne's Campaign, struggling to survive in the harsh winter conditions, or perhaps I'll be a sailor, navigating the treacherous seas and facing the perils of life at sea. I've also enjoyed portraying a print seller, sharing news and gossip from the bustling streets of colonial towns, and even a refugee, fleeing the turmoil of the war and seeking safety in uncertain times.

One of my most cherished experiences was participating in the 250th Anniversary of the Devil and the Crown re-enactment. Witnessing a ten-foot-tall devil parade through the streets of Boston was a truly unique and unforgettable spectacle. It was a powerful reminder of the fierce resistance to British authority, a testament to the spirit of defiance that fueled the American Revolution. With its vibrant energy and immersive atmosphere, this event truly brought the past to life and left an indelible mark on my understanding of this pivotal period in American history.

Who is Obadiah Mead? Could you explain the circumstances that led to his demise?

Obadiah Mead was a young boy who unfortunately became a casualty of the American Revolution. His family, the Meads, were staunch Patriots residing in North Greenwich, Connecticut, a region that experienced significant Royalist activity. The Meads were frequent targets of raids by British soldiers and their Loyalist allies.

During one such raid, Obadiah, driven by a youthful sense of defiance, refused to surrender when cornered by the enemy. His refusal to comply cost him his life. The soldiers, enraged by his resistance, shot him dead. This tragic incident serves as a stark reminder of the war's human cost, highlighting the devastating impact on civilians caught in the crossfire of the conflict.

The Meads' story is poignant and reminds us that the American Revolution was not merely a series of battles fought on grand stages. It was a conflict that deeply impacted the lives of ordinary people, tearing families apart and leaving lasting scars on the communities where it was waged.

The events that unfolded serve as a microcosm of the more significant conflict. Like many other families throughout the colonies, the Meads were caught between opposing forces, their lives disrupted, and their safety threatened by the ongoing struggle for independence. Obadiah's tragic fate powerfully reminds us that war starkly contrasts the sanitized narratives often dominating historical accounts.

What can you tell us about the Obadiah Mead jacket? Where is it located? Can it be viewed publicly? Why is it so essential to preserve this artifact?

Obadiah Mead's jacket, with its visible bullet holes, stands as a poignant testament to the brutality of the war. This artifact, now housed at the Greenwich Historical Museum in Connecticut, offers a tangible connection to the past, a chilling reminder of the violence experienced by ordinary families during the American Revolution.

Preserving this jacket is crucial for several reasons:

• Historical Significance: It provides irrefutable evidence of the war's impact on civilians, offering a glimpse into the terrifying realities faced by families like the Meads. It allows us to connect with the past on a visceral level, to understand that this wasn't merely a series of battles fought on distant fields but a conflict that had profound and often tragic consequences for ordinary people.
  
  

• Research Value: A detailed examination of the jacket, including its materials, construction, and bullet holes, can yield invaluable insights into 18th-century clothing, the realities of wartime violence, and the daily lives of those who wore these garments. Textile analysis can provide clues about the fabric's origins, the techniques used to construct the jacket, and the social and economic status of the wearer.
  
  

• Educational Potential: The jacket can serve as a powerful teaching tool, helping to bring the history of the American Revolution to life for audiences of all ages. It can spark conversations about the human cost of war, encourage critical thinking about historical narratives, and foster a deeper understanding of the past.

We are not merely preserving a piece of cloth by preserving this artifact. We are preserving a piece of history, a tangible link to the past that allows us to connect with the experiences of those who came before us. It is a responsibility we owe to future generations, a chance to ensure that the lessons of the past are not forgotten.

 

Jess Bruce. Photo Credit - Elizabeth Sullock

 

You decided to recreate this jacket. Why? Is there any personal reason?

The jacket's unique design, with its striking blue and white stripes, captivated me from the moment I first encountered it. It was more than just a piece of clothing; it was a tangible link to a specific person, a young boy whose life was tragically snuffed out by the war.

I felt deeply connected to the project and wanted to recreate this jacket. I felt a responsibility to honor Obadiah Mead's memory and bring this piece of his past back to life. It was a way of paying tribute to him, his family, and all those who suffered during the American Revolution.

The project also resonated with a deeper personal level. As a historian and living historian, it's crucial to connect with the past on a visceral level. By engaging in this hands-on project, I hoped to gain a deeper understanding of 18th-century clothing and textile production and to develop a stronger connection to the people and events of that era.

The process of recreating this jacket has been a profoundly enriching experience. It has forced me to think critically about the materials used in 18th-century clothing, the techniques employed by 18th-century tailors, and the social and economic context in which these garments were created. It has been a journey of discovery, a chance to delve deeper into the details of the past and appreciate our ancestors' craftsmanship and ingenuity.

How did you go about creating a pattern for the jacket? Did you consult any historians or historical tailors while crafting the pattern? Any sage advice they offered to you?

I knew that recreating this jacket would require expertise beyond my own. I was fortunate to have the support and guidance of master tailor Henry Cooke.

With the gracious permission of the Greenwich Historical Museum, Henry meticulously examined the original jacket, noting every detail of its construction. He measured the fabric, analyzed the stitching, and carefully documented the intricate details of the garment's design.

Henry's expertise was invaluable. He brought a wealth of knowledge about 18th-century tailoring techniques, historical fabrics, and the nuances of garment construction to the project. He patiently explained the intricacies of the pattern-making process, sharing his insights and answering my countless questions.

One of Henry's most valuable pieces of advice was to pay close attention to the details. He emphasized the importance of understanding the purpose of each seam, stitch, andeach design element. "Every detail tells a story," he would often say. "By understanding the 'why' behind each design decision, we can gain a deeper appreciation for the craftsmanship and ingenuity of the past."

I also consulted with historian Tyler Putnam, who provided invaluable insights into the jacket's history and offered valuable observations about its construction and details. Tyler's meticulous research and insightful analysis provided crucial context for the project, helping me understand this remarkable artifact's historical significance.

Describe the process you used for selecting the fabric and any difficulties you encountered in obtaining the fabric.

I was determined to recreate the fabric as authentically as possible, eschewing modern synthetics in favor of traditional methods. This led me to collaborate with master weaver Justin Squizzero. Justin, a true artisan, meticulously hand-wove the striped linen using techniques that would have been familiar to weavers in the 18th century.

Have you started making the jacket? If so, describe your process so far to the readers of Historical Nerdery. Will the jacket be hand-sewn or machine-sewn?

The jacket's creation is a collaborative effort. With his unparalleled skill and expertise, Henry Cooke will hand-sew it. He will painstakingly bring this historical garment back to life using the meticulously crafted pattern and authentically reproduced fabric.

Hand-sewing is essential for this project. It ensures the highest level of authenticity, mirroring the techniques that would have been employed during the 18th century.

Once completed, will you use it for any interpretive program? 

While I haven't finalized any specific plans, the completed jacket can be a valuable tool for education and interpretation. It could be incorporated into presentations and living history demonstrations, helping to bring the story of Obadiah Mead and the American Revolution to life for audiences of all ages.

I envision using the jacket to spark conversations about the human cost of war, to highlight the experiences of civilians trapped in the crossfire, and to foster a deeper understanding of this pivotal period in American history.

Fabric and Supplies. Photo Credit - Jess Bruce

Tell us about your blog and where my readers can follow you as you document this project.

I've created a blog titled "Obadiah Mead's Coat" to document the progress of this project. I'll share updates, insights, and photographs as the project unfolds. You can also follow along with updates on the Facebook page "Progressive Re-enactors."

After this project is complete, what project is next in Jess's world?

Completing the jacket will undoubtedly be a significant milestone. However, my passion for history and living history will lead me to exciting new projects.

I'm particularly interested in delving deeper into my family's Revolutionary War history. My ancestors played a role in Lexington's Alarm, and I'm eager to learn more about their experiences and contributions to the fight for independence.

While I may not actively participate in the 250th-anniversary celebrations at Minute Man National Historical Park, I plan to attend as an observer and immerse myself in this momentous occasion.

This project has been a profoundly enriching experience, a journey of discovery that has profoundly connected me to the past. By sharing this story, I hope to inspire others to explore their historical connections and appreciate the rich tapestry of our shared past.

The Nerds would like to express our profound appreciation to Jess for sharing their journey of honoring Obadiah Mead and recreating his jacket. Jess put a tremendous amount of work into this blog post, and the notes and documentation they shared with us in preparation for this interview are a master class in progressive interpretative activities. 

Please click the link here to access her full interview. It’s a fantastic educational journey!!

Jess is a valued member of this hobby, and we are fortunate to have the opportunity to share their amazing adventures with our followers! Stay tuned as we suspect we’ll be collaborating with Jess very soon!!

"They Marched Quite Fast to the Music of a Fife and Drum" - April 19, 1775 Child Witness Charles Handley

It is no secret that the Nerds are fascinated by research studies and reports exploring the civilian experience of the American Revolution. Retelling essential and mundane events from the perspective of child witnesses is of particular growing interest.

Admittedly, the Nerds are unaware of any primary accounts from children documenting the Battles of Lexington, Concord, or Bunker Hill. Instead, most, if not all, of the accounts from children first surfaced in the early to mid-19th Century. Similarly, by the middle to late 19th Century, grandchildren and great-grandchildren of eyewitnesses began to share the stories of their elders.

Many historians rightfully argue that these 19th-century accounts may be tainted by either fading memories or a desire to exaggerate or sensationalize one’s role during the early months of the American Revolution. As 19th Century Massachusetts historian George E. Ellis noted, many veterans and witnesses who claimed to have participated in the Battle of Bunker Hill, "Their contents were most extraordinary; many of the testimonies extravagant, boastful, inconsistent, and utterly untrue; mixtures of old men's broken memories and fond imaginings with the love of the marvellous. Some of those who gave in affidavits about the battle could not have been in it, nor even in its neighborhood. They had got so used to telling the story for the wonderment of village listeners as grandfathers' tales, and as petted representatives of 'the spirit of '76’, that they did not distinguish between what they had seen and done, and what they had read, heard, or dreamed. The decision of the committee was that much of the contents of the volumes was wholly worthless for history, and some of it discreditable, as misleading and false."

Photo Credit Rory Nolan

Considering that context, the Nerds would still like to highlight a third child witness account we came across about a month ago. 

Previously, we discussed the observations of Lexington child witnesses Lucy Clarke and Anna Munroe. Both women described in some detail the aftermath of the Battle of Lexington and the arrival of British relief forces in the town. In 1850, attorney Josiah Adams of Framingham published a letter to Lemuel Shattuck of Boston. Shattuck was a politician and publisher of several books, including The History of Concord, which minimized the role of Captain Isaac Davis of Acton and his minute company during the Battle of Concord. In response, in 1850, Adams wrote a letter to the publisher defending Davis and his men's role at the engagement.

Entitled Letter to Lemuel Shattuck, of Boston, from Josiah Adams, of Framingham in Vindication of the Claims of Capt. Issac Davis, of Acton, to His Just Share in the Honors of the Concord Fight. Also Depositions of Witnesses, Stating the Facts on which the Claims are Founded and Other Interesting Papers, the work staunchly defends Davis’ role. Several eyewitness depositions and hearsay accounts support it, including one from an eyewitness witness named Charles Handley, who was thirteen years old at the Battle of Concord.

On April 19, 1775, Handley “lived at the tavern kept by Mrs. Brown, nearly a mile northwest of the North Bridge.” As historian J. L. Bell noted that the teen had likely been put out to work and was employed as a servant at the Concord establishment, located on the same side of the Concord River and en route to the target of the British expedition - Barrett’s Farm.

 After a detachment crossed the North Bridge and searched Barrett’s Farm, the officers and soldiers marched back to rejoin the main body of troops but halted outside Brown’s tavern. Handley later testified, “At the time of the fight, the British, consisting of about one hundred, had returned from Col. Barrett's as far as the tavern, and three or four officers were in the house, taking some drink. The soldiers were sitting by the roadside, and some drink was carried out to them. The officers offered to pay, and Mrs. Brown declined; they told her not to be afraid, for they should do her no harm, and paid for their drink.”

While the officers and soldiers were relaxing on the tavern’s lawn, fighting at the bridge erupted. Surprisingly, Handley heard the exchange of fire, but the regulars he was tending to did not. “I heard the guns at the bridge, but the British did not appear to hear them. They marched on very soon but were in no haste. It was always said that they had no knowledge of the fight till they passed the bridge, and saw the men that had been killed.”

The teen also recounted allegations that a Massachusetts militiaman had committed a war crime by scalping a wounded regular. According to his testimony, Handley later spoke with the alleged perpetrator of the attack. “I heard, at the time, and many times since, that one of the two British, who were killed at the bridge, was killed, with a hatchet, after he was left wounded. The young man who killed him told me, in 1807, that it had worried him very much, but that he thought he was doing right at the time.”

Handley’s deposition appears in Adams’ work because of his statement on Issac Davis’s Company entering the field before the Battle of Concord. The teen testified under oath, “I saw Captain Davis's company, as they came from Acton. I first saw them coming through the fields north of Barrett's mill, and they kept the fields till they came to the road at Mrs. Brown's tavern. They there took the back road leading to the bridge. They marched quite fast to the music of a fife and drum. I remember the tune, but am not sure of its name; think it was called the “White Cockade.”

 

Photo Credit Acton Minute Men

 

The statement describing Davis’ Company is interesting for two reasons. First, it is one of many accounts from the early 19th century of towns claiming their men played “The White Cockade” as they marched to intercept the British column. (Local tradition suggests that John Parker’s Company also played the “White Cockade” as it reentered the fight in the aftermath of the Battle of Lexington.) In 2013, J.L. Bell examined the song and its ties to April 19, 1775. The article can be found here.

More critical is Handley’s description of Davis’ Company moving quickly as it advanced toward the North Bridge. A growing collection of evidence, including a pair of period newspaper articles and a commentary at the end of a “Boston Edition” copy of the 1764 Crown Manual, encouraged Massachusetts militia to adopt rapid movements on the field. Handley’s observations may corroborate the recommendation.

Of course, if this was the case, the Acton fifer and drummer should both be praised for being able to belt out a tune while moving at a run!

The Nerds Went and Did Something - The Battles of Lexington and Concord Eyewitness Database

Whelp, the Nerds did it.

Several months ago, in anticipation of the 250th Anniversary of the American Revolution, we announced our intention to create an online database of eyewitness accounts of the Battles of Lexington and Concord.

We are pleased to announce that we have just completed the first round of this project and have formally launched The Battles of Lexington and Concord Eyewitness Database.

 

This database contains over 100 period accounts regarding April 19, 1775. This database includes journal entries, depositions, newspaper and military reports, letters, legislative records, and more.

We have placed in one location accounts from British soldiers and officers, militia and minute men, civilians caught in the storm of war, loyalists, and child eyewitnesses. 

Each account is accessible by clicking on the link embedded in the database. We suspect there may be a few down links due to the recent hack of the Internet Archives, and we are working to resolve the issue.

Why are the Nerds doing this? It's really simple: We want the stories of April 19, 1775, to be shared far and wide.

This database serves as a central repository for students, teachers, historians, and researchers who wish to access primary and secondary accounts detailing the events of April 19, 1775. The Nerds intend to offer all visitors free of charge access to this database. 

Of course, we always look for additional historical primary accounts of the Battles of Lexington and Concord. If we overlooked a historical record or document, please let us know! We would love to add it to this database.

To access The Battles of Lexington and Concord Eyewitness Database, click this link.

Enjoy!

"Consisting of the Aged and Others Exempted From Turning Out" - Massachusetts Alarm Lists Revisited

Last year, the Nerds discussed the role of alarm lists within the Massachusetts militia system.

As you may recall, we noted that Massachusetts colonial laws required men between the ages of sixteen and sixty to serve in their local militia company. Every town maintained at least one militia company, and the units were organized into county-level regiments based on location within the geographic jurisdiction.

Within this militia system were the alarm lists. Alarm lists were essentially the "home guard" or the last line of defense for a community. Generally speaking, most alarm list members were over sixty. However, we have seen hints that some Middlesex and Essex County communities transferred men as young as fifty-five into the alarm list.

In addition to “older” males, alarm lists often included male residents between the ages of sixteen and sixty who did not serve in the town’s militia system. Most likely, these would have included males who were temporarily infirm or disabled or men ordered by the selectmen to serve in the alarm lists.

As we previously mentioned, by 1776, Massachusetts had revised its militia laws. It reduced the age of those men eligible to serve within the alarm list from sixty to fifty and capped service at sixty-five. Those over sixty-five were excused from any form of service.

Photo Credit: Tommy Tringale

However, this wasn’t the first time the age of alarm list men was reduced. In conjunction with Minute Man National Park, the Nerds have been researching the role of alarm lists during the Battles of Lexington and Concord. We recently came across evidence of several towns in 1775 reducing the requisite age for a militiaman to be transferred to an alarm list. From the documentation we’ve reviewed, the typical age was decreased to at least fifty-five, although we have seen a reduction as low as fifty.

For example, at a town meeting in March 1775, Billerica approved a resolution to form a committee to “perfect the alarm List; the Rule to go by is, all above the age of fifty-five." Newton reorganized its alarm list in April 1775. Several thirty-seven men in the reserve unit were between fifty-five and fifty-nine. Five were between the ages of fifty and fifty-four. Chelsea, Methuen, and Medfield reduced their alarm list ages to fifty in 1775.

This brings us to Lexington’s Alarm List. Based on surviving records, there is some evidence that its alarm list age had also been reduced to at least fifty-five. Minute Man National Park and the Nerds have examined the role of alarm lists and artillery. There is evidence that in 1775, several communities, including Westborough and Concord, were turning recently acquired iron guns over to alarm lists to be used by them in the event hostilities broke out with England. In short, the alarm lists were being converted into artillery units, at least on paper.

Lexington was no exception. When it acquired a pair of iron cannons in 1774, it formed a committee charged with repairing the gun and mounting it onto a carriage. The entire committee comprised men between fifty-five and seventy, implying that Lexington’s alarm list would serve as an artillery unit if an armed conflict began.

Of course, Lexington’s cannons never saw action on April 19, 1775. This is likely due to the guns not being fully repaired or lacking ammunition. Instead, elements of the alarm list joined Parker’s Company on the town common immediately before the Battle of Lexington.

So, what do we know about Lexington’s alarm list? According to the Reverend William Gordon, the alarm list mustered in full force with Parker’s Company shortly after midnight.

According to the minister, “Before Major Pitcairn arrived at Lexington signal guns had been fired, and the bells had been rung to give the alarm: Lexington being alarmed, the train band or militia, and the alarm men (consisting of the aged and others exempted from turning out, excepting upon an alarm) repaired in general to the common, close in with the Meeting house, the usual place of parade; and these were present when the roll was called over, about one hundred and thirty of both, as I was told by Mr. Daniel Harrington, Clerk to the company, who further said, that the night being chilly, so as to make it uncomfortable being upon the parade, they having received no certain intelligence of the regulars being upon the march, and being waiting for the same, the men were dismissed to appear again at the beat of drum. Some who lived near went home, others to the public house at the corner of the common.”

The Nerds suspect that upon Parker dismissing his men, many of the alarm list men rushed home to assist their families in evacuating from the British line of march. While there may have been an intention to return, some may have elected to watch over their families, while others were incapable of returning due to familial commitments. 

 

List of some of the alarm list me from Newton, Massachusetts c. 1775

According to statistical research by historian David Hackett Fischer, when Parker mustered his men for a second time shortly before the Battle of Lexington, almost a dozen of the seventy-seven men were from the alarm list. Ensign Robert Munroe, who was sixty-three years old, was the senior-most alarm list officer present. He was also one of three alarm list men who were killed that day, the other two being Jonas Parker, who was shot and bayonetted on the green, and Jedediah Munroe, who was wounded at the morning engagement and killed at Parker’s Revenge that afternoon.

Parker regrouped his battered company and the alarm list in the aftermath of the Battle of Lexington and successfully motivated them to re-enter the fight with over one hundred men. It is likely that a significant portion of the alarm list joined the fight at “Parker’s Revenge” and continued to pursue the British regulars as they retreated toward Boston.

The Nerds are still compiling a running list of men who qualified for Lexington’s alarm list. We will keep you posted with what we find!

"Said Companies Into Battalions, To Consist of Nine Companies Each" - A Snapshot of the Minute and Militia Regiments on the Eve of Lexington and Concord

Recently, members of Captain David Brown’s Company of Concord Minute Men and Captain Edward Farmer’s Billerica Company approached the Nerds about the organizational structure of minute and militia companies on the eve of the Battles of Lexington and Concord.

Before we delve into the regimental makeup of the Massachusetts forces, we want to acknowledge the invaluable contribution of the members from Brown’s and Farmer’s Companies. These veteran reenactors, who faithfully represent the local men who saw combat on April 19, 1775, are a wealth of knowledge. If you encounter either organization at Minute Man National Historical Park, take the opportunity to learn from them. They are passionate about their subject and eager to share their expertise.

So, back to the question. The Nerds were asked whether Massachusetts minute or militia companies had any structural hierarchy above the company level or if the various town units acted independently and were not organized into regiments until the Siege of Boston.

The answer is yes. Minute and militia companies were organized into regiments, typically on the county level, before Lexington and Concord.

The origins of the Massachusetts militia can be traced back to the reign of Edward I when Parliament enacted legislation decreeing that every freeman between the ages of fifteen and sixty was to be available to preserve the peace within his county or shire. In the towns where the freemen were located, they were organized into military units known, by their periodic training, as “trained bands.”

Photo Credit - Sean O'Brien

Under Charles II's rule, when Parliament revised membership requirements, established payment protocols, and appointed officers, the 'trained bands' transitioned into what we now know as 'militias. ' By the 17th century, militias had become one of the cornerstones of English society. Thus, when Plymouth and Massachusetts Bay Colonies were founded, the establishment of the militia followed naturally. In both colonies, every man over sixteen automatically became a member. The governor maintained the sole authority to activate the militia during a crisis.

Each time a new town sprung up, a militia company was formed. As a town grew or its population grew, additional militia companies were created. When new counties were formed, the various town militias within each county's borders were organized into regiments.

In the early to mid-17th Century, Massachusetts and Plymouth Counties had one militia regiment per county. However, by the eve of the American Revolution, the various counties of the colony had multiple county-level militia regiments organized along territorial districts.

For example, Essex County had four militia regiments. The 4th Essex Regiment of Foot consisted of militia units from towns within the Merrimack Valley region of the county - Andover, Bradford, Boxford, Methuen, Haverhill, Amesbury, and Salisbury. By comparison, the 1st Essex consisted of towns from the southern part of the county, including Salem, Massachusetts, Beverly, Lynn, and Saugus. The 2nd and 3rd Essex Regiments of Foot were composed of towns in the county's interior or between Newburyport and Ipswich.

Thus, by 1774, all Massachusetts counties had at least two militia regiments, but it was more common for each county to have between four and eight regiments within its respective borders.

Like militia companies, regimental field officers were elected by their men. However, the more common practice was for militia officers to meet annually to elect field officers rather than have the rank and file choose. This practice was followed when, on October 26, 1774, the Massachusetts Provincial Congress moved to wrest control of the Massachusetts militia system away from loyalist officers who commanded it. To achieve this, the Provincial Congress ordered the militias to “meet forthwith and elect officers to command their respective companies; and that the officers so chosen assemble as soon as may be . . . and proceed to elect field officers.”

That same day, the Massachusetts Provincial Congress formally called for creating minute companies by drawing a quarter of men from each town militia company. The men were to be organized into town-level minute companies and regiments. According to the order, “ [The] field officers, so elected, forthwith [shall] endeavor to enlist one quarter, at the least, of the number of the respective companies, and form them into companies of fifty privates . . . who shall equip and hold themselves in readiness, on the shortest notice from the said Committee of Safety, to march to the place of rendezvous . . . said companies into battalions, to consist of nine companies each.”

Photo Credit - John Jasewicz

Like their militia counterparts, minute battalions were organized along county regimental districts.

Returning to the example of the 4th Essex Regiment of Foot, Andover’s Samuel Johnson, the newly elected colonel, appeared before each of his town militia companies to recruit and organize companies of minutemen. On February 2, 1775, he spoke to the four militia companies from Andover's North and South Parishes. According to the Essex Gazette, “Last Tuesday at 2 o'clock p. M. the town foot-companies of the 4th regiment of Militia in the County of Essex, Inhabitants of the North Parish in Andover, being mustered (after attending prayers for the direction of the God of armies), Col. Samuel Johnson, lately chosen first officer of said regiment, addressed himself to the companie and with great zeal recommended to them the necessity of enlisting themselves into the service of the province and in a short time fifty able-bodied effective men, being one quarter part of said companies — more than a third part of whom are heads of families and men of substance and Probity, willingly offered themselves: they were then escorted to an Inn, where they made choice of Capt. Thomas Poor, junr, for their captain, Ensign Benjamin Farnum first lieutenant, and Samuel Johnson junr. for second lieutenant. They then subscribed a covenant obliging them to conform to the Resolves of the former or any future Congress or General Assembly of the Province that hath or may have Relation to their Duty, and by said Covenant subjected themselves to martial discipline for the term of one year from the time of their enlisting. And this day the two companies in the South Parish in this town were mustered at two o'clock afternoon, when after attending prayers for direction, Col. Johnson enlisted forty-five able-bodied men as aforesaid and of the like condition and probity, being one quarter part of said companies last mentioned, who immediately proceeded to make choice of Capt. Benjamin Ames for their captain, Lieut. David Chandler first lieutenant and Isaac Abbot for second lieutenant, and subscribed the covenant aforesaid. All being performed with great unanimity, seriousness and decorum, and the soldiers seeming rather to be animated than disheartened by the late disagreeable news contained in the king's speech.”

On February 22, 1775, Johnson visited Boxford. According to the same newspaper, the colonel “addressed himself with great zeal to the two foot-companies of the Fourth Regiment, recommending to them the necessity of enlisting themselves into the service of the Province, and in a short space of time fifty-three able-bodied and effective men willingly offered themselves to serve their Province in defence of their liberties.”

After most towns under Johnson’s command formed minute companies, they elected their field officers, including Andover’s James Frye, as colonel. Thus, the minute companies, raised from the 4th Essex, were organized into Colonel James Frye’s Minute Battalion.

Like the companies under their command, militia and minute regiments assembled in the months and weeks before April 19th to drill and exercise. 

In early 1775, the 4th Bristol Regiment of Militia assembled most of its companies in Mansfield to inspect arms and drill. In March 1775, Middlesex minute and militia battalions assembled for arms inspections and battalion-level drills. On April 11, 1775, Israel Litchfield noted, "three Companies Drew up in Battallion and were Excersised by Major Jacobs.” A little less than a week before the Battles of Lexington and Concord, on April 13, 1775, James Frye’s Minute Battalion held a day-long drill in Andover.

Admittedly, in the aftermath of the Battle of Lexington, most militia and minute companies from Essex, Middlesex, and Norfolk Counties did not wait for regimental orders and immediately mobilized for combat. This is understandable, given that the fighting was either “in their backyard” or a small distance away. By comparison, units from Plymouth, Barnstable, Bristol, and western Massachusetts counties, all generally removed from the fighting, generally assembled on the regimental level and then marched to war together.

 

 Most Massachusetts militia and minute companies that responded to the “Lexington Alarm” submitted mileage requests seeking compensation for their service. These documents are a treasure trove for identifying regimental designations, including:

Danvers - “Capt. Saml. Flints of ye Militia in the Regiment whereof Timothy Pick’ring Jun Esqr was Colo.”

Acton - “Captain John Hayward’s [Company] in Colonel Abijah Pierce’s Regiment,”

Billerica - “Capt. Edwd. Farmer, of Billerica, in Colo. green’s Regt of Melitia”

Boxford - “Cap William Perly in Colo. James Frye’s Regiment”

Chelmsford - “Capt. Oliver Barron, of Chelmsford … belonging to the Regiment of Militia whereof Colo. David Green Esqr. is Colonel”

Reading - “Capt John Bachellers Company of Minute Men, In Colo Ebenizer’s Bridge’s Regiment”

Sudbury - “Capt. Joseph Smith, in Colo James Barrett’s Regiment”

Woburn - “Capt. Joshua Walker’s Company under the Command of Colonel David Greene of the 2d Middlesex Regiment of Foot”

Dracut - “Capt. Peter Coburn’s Company of minute men under the command of Colo. Bridge”

Cambridge - “Capt. Samuel Thatcher’s Company in Colo Gardner’s Regiment of Militia.”

Brookline - “Under ye command of Capn. Thos. White in Col Wm Heaths Regiment”

Roxbury - “Company under the command of Capt. Moses Whiting, in Colo. John Greaton’s Minut Regiment”

Of course, on a final note, it should be noted that not all provincial military companies in Massachusetts were attached to regiments. In early 1775, Bristol County officials complained there were four minute man companies “not yet incorporated into a regiment.” Similarly, many “independent military companies,” paramilitary units composed of a town’s elite that acted independently of the Colony’s militia system, do not appear to have been organized on the regimental level on the eve of Lexington and Concord.

In the days after Lexington and Concord, the militia and minute regiments outside of Boston manned the siege lines to keep His Majesty’s forces in check. In late April, the Massachusetts Provincial Congress moved to re-organize the army into a “Grand Army.” Preliminary research suggests that many of the minute battalions remained to support the siege and were formally adopted into the Massachusetts Grand Army. In contrast, many of the militia regiments returned home. However, by May 1775, recruiters called on militia regiments to assist in raising additional regiments to support the siege.

An overview of the raising of the Massachusetts Grand Army can be viewed here.

"Countenancing, Aiding, and Assisting Them in the Robberies and Murders Then Committed" - A Theory on the Arms and Equipment of the Loyalist Guides of April 19, 1775

The April 19, 1775 events involved many participants, including militia and minute men, British soldiers, civilians caught in the storm of war, the clergy, children, and yes ... loyalist guides.

Last week, Neil Sorenson of the loyalist reenactment organization King’s Rangers contacted the Nerds to discuss the role of “Tory Pilots” on April 19, 1775. Specifically, Neil wanted to know what equipment loyalist guides carried as they marched with Smith Column to Concord or Percy’s relief force dispatched to Lexington. He also wanted to know if the guides were armed with firelocks or other weapons during the mission.

The Nerds have written several blog posts and published two research articles on the role of loyalist guides during the Battles of Lexington and Concord. The most commonly accessed research article, published by the Journal of the American Revolution, can be viewed here.

When Lt. Colonel Smith and his troops marched to Concord, the expedition had approximately six guides, including Daniel Bliss, Daniel Leonard, and William Warden. The guides were interspersed amongst the column and were responsible for guiding the troops to Concord and identifying any persons of interest they encountered en route to their destination. In addition to leading the column to Concord, the guides were responsible for assisting search parties in locating military stores. “The troops renewed their march to Concord, where, when they arrived, they divided into parties and went directly to several places where the province stores were deposited. Each party was supposed to have a Tory pilot.”

Colonel Percy’s relief column is believed to have eight loyalist guides accompanying it as it marched from Boston to Lexington. These guides included George Leonard, Abijah Willard, and John Emerson. Of the eight, at least half were mounted. Emerson was tasked with delivering “despatches from the British headquarters in Boston to Earl Percy, then covering the retreat of the troops from Concord.” Willard, a veteran of the Siege of Louisbourg and French and Indian War, was positioned before the column to identify any “ambush laid for the troops.”

Not all of the guides returned from their mission. Two, Samuel Murray and John Bowen, were captured by provincial forces.

Photo Credit: Jonathan R. Beckerman

So, with that background, let’s dive into Niel’s questions. First, were the guides armed? The answer is yes, but to what extent do we know? We have not encountered any hard evidence besides a newspaper account from May 3, 1775, suggesting that at least one of the guides was armed with a firelock. According to the Massachusetts Spy, “A young man, unarmed, who was taken prisoner by the enemy, and made to assist in carrying off their wounded, says, that he saw a barber who lives in Boston, thought to be one Warden, with the troops . . . he likewise saw the said barber fire twice upon our people.”

A pair of period accounts also implies some guides may have been armed.

When loyalist guide Walter Barrell volunteered to assist Percy’s relief column, he noted, “when the Lexington affair of the Rebells firing on His Majesty’s troops occurred, he voluntarily associated with a number of friends to Government who offered their services to General Gage in any capacity to oppose the rebels.” The Nerds suspect Barrell’s use of the term “in any capacity” included the proposition of offering armed resistance against the Massachusetts minute and militia companies that engaged the retiring column that day.

Similarly, a Massachusetts Provincial Congress resolution implies that the guides actively participated in the fight against minute and militia companies along the Bay Road. Specifically, on June 16, 1775, the Congress proposed to pardon all enemies who surrendered, except General Gage, Admiral Graves, “and all the natives of America, not belonging to the navy or army, who went out with the regular troops on the nineteenth of April last, and were countenancing, aiding, and assisting them in the robberies and murders then committed.” That phrase implies that many guides were armed and firing at their opponents during the retreat back toward Boston.

Unfortunately, without more evidence, the Nerds can only speculate that some, but likely not all, of the “Tory Pilots” were armed that day.

 

If they were armed, what equipment were they carrying? 

 

In addition to personally owned muskets and fowlers, the Nerds theorize that the guides who were armed likely only carried shot pouches and powder horns as there is no evidence that these individuals were supplied with King’s arms, cartridge boxes, bayonets, and belting when they departed Boston for the Middlesex County countryside.

We suspect mounted guides, if armed, were only equipped with a sidearm in the form of a sword or cutlass. We highly doubt they carried any other weapon as their role, particularly in the afternoon of April 19th, was highly mobile - scouting ahead of the retreating column and maintaining open lines of communication with Boston. It seems improbable that these guides had the time, let alone the inclination, to halt, dismount, fire a musket, reload, remount their horse and continue with their assigned tasks.

What about packs and blankets? The Nerds suspect that unlike their minute and militia counterparts, the guides fielded without packs or blankets. 

 

Why? It comes down to an operational mindset.

When Massachusetts provincial forces mobilized on April 18, 1775, they were responding to what they believed were acts of war and marched for what they believed would be an extended campaign. As a result, Massachusetts men fielded with full campaign gear, including packs and blankets.

By comparison, Gage’s forces saw themselves, at least on paper, as a rapid strike force whose mission was to march to Concord, destroy identified rebel supplies, and quickly return to Boston. Percy’s relief force had similar operational parameters.

As a result, British soldiers who saw action on April 19, 1775, were not burdened by packs, blankets, and other equipment that typically would have been carried or worn on a long-term campaign.

The same operational principles apply to the guides. It makes no sense that Smith and Percy’s guides were heavily equipped for a short-term military operation, especially considering their assigned duties on April 19th. Thus, if the loyalist guides carried any provisions, they likely utilized market wallets or similar bags.

Of course, issuing provisions and supplies to the Loyalist guides on April 18, 1775, is a separate topic that will warrant a future analysis. In short, we have uncovered no evidence that British military authorities issued rations, ammunition, or other supplies to Loyalist guides on April 18-19, 1775.