As a preliminary matter, we posted our updated findings on the use of hatchets here.
Hatchets served a dual purpose of being a camp item and a weapon. With that said, from limited town resolutions, colonial militia laws, and period publications we reviewed, it appears hatchets were an edged weapon of “last resort” to be carried when a militia man could not acquire a bayonet or sword.
Of course, there is evidence Massachusetts militia and minute companies utilized hatchets as sidearms on the eve of the American Revolution. Following a company inspection on March 22, 1775, Sudbury militia captain Aaron Haynes reported, “To the gentlmen field officers of This Rijament these are in complyance to advise of Congress and your request a Return of the Numbr and aquiptnets of the Company of militia under my Care viz. men = 60 – well Provided with fire arms, most of them have either Sword Bajonets or hatchets. about one third with Catridge Boxes. &c.” When the town of Westborough mobilized in response to news of the Battle of Lexington on April 19, 1775, it first issued hatchets to those minute men who did not have a bayonet or sword.
The current confusion centers on how they were carried in the field. Understandably, many assert, perhaps correctly, that these weapons were carried in the same manner as swords and bayonets: suspended from some form of belting. The Nerds do not necessarily disagree.
British light infantrymen followed this method. Historian Rory Nolan of the 52nd Regiment Light Company shared documentation from the Public Record Office in London, England.
According to a “Report of a Committee of the Board of General Officers dated 4th March 1771, convened to consider the Cloathing & Accoutrements best adapted for the use of the Light Company belonging to each of the Marching Regiments of Foot on the British Establishment. It is agreed … That the accouterments be conformable to Col Howe’s pattern, with a small cartridge box to contain 9 rounds in one row, to be worn before with a belt of tanned leather round the waist – The Belt to be furnished with 2 frogs, one for the bayonet, the other for the hatchet occasionally, which at other times will be tyed upon the knapsack.”
But what about Massachusetts forces in 1774 and 1775? Did they follow the same method employed by the British military?
Unfortunately, no direct evidence exists for this practice on the American side. A review of town and legislative records from 1774 to 1776 reveals an ample supply of accounts where local Massachusetts men, many of them saddlers, were making “belting for bayonets” or “belting and scabbards for bayonets.” We have not encountered anyone making belting or frogs for “hatchets” or “tomahawks.”
For example, three men were hired and paid to make belts and scabbards for bayonets in Bradford, Massachusetts. “Voted, To Phineas Carlton, for 22 Bayonets fitted with Scabbards and Belts, 8l. 5s. 0d. Voted, To Phineas Carlton, for Scowering the old Bayonets, and fitting with Belts, 4l. 4s. 0d. For 2 Scabbards and Belts, 0l. 3s. 0d. Wm. Greenough, for fitting one Bayonet and one belt, 0l. 2s. 8d.” None of the men were hired to make belting for hatchets.
In October 1775, Dighton resident Jabez Pierce submitted claims for payment for “belts for bayonets” he had made before the Battles of Lexington and Concord. Absent is any request for payment for the production of belts or frogs for hatchets.
Inspectional returns of Chelmsford’s militia and alarm lists also suggest hatchets were not hung from belting. According to the June 15, 1775 inspection, “The whole number of Equipments in the Training Band and Alarm List Present... 83 Good Fire Arms...31 Steel Ram-rods...58 worms...74 Priming — wire and Brushes...74 Belt and Scabboard Bayonets...3043 Bulletts...63 Cartridge-Boxes of 15 Rounds...83 Blanket...5339 Buck-Shott...72 Canteen.” All but 9 men had bayonets. Of those without them, there is no reference to carrying hatchets via belting.
We can also look to the Israel Litchfield Diary for guidance, as that journal includes multiple references to equipment made on behalf of a minute-man company from Scituate, Massachusetts.
For example, throughout February and March 1775, Litchfield recorded his role in producing leather equipment for his minute company. “11[Feb] In the forenoon I went over to ISI' Willcuts Shop and he & I made a Centre bitt to bore a Cartridge box. I Bored off one Box 14 I made me a Cartridge-box, I Covered it with a Coltskin it will Carry 19 Rounds. 25th I wrought with Cap' Sam’ Stockhridge a makeing cartridge boxes … I wrought with Cap’ Stockbridge a Stamping Covers for Catoos boxes Iray Bryand was at work Leathering them.”
Unfortunately, no direct evidence exists for this practice on the American side. A review of town and legislative records from 1774 to 1776 reveals an ample supply of accounts where local Massachusetts men, many of them saddlers, were making “belting for bayonets” or “belting and scabbards for bayonets.” We have not encountered anyone making belting or frogs for “hatchets” or “tomahawks.”
For example, three men were hired and paid to make belts and scabbards for bayonets in Bradford, Massachusetts. “Voted, To Phineas Carlton, for 22 Bayonets fitted with Scabbards and Belts, 8l. 5s. 0d. Voted, To Phineas Carlton, for Scowering the old Bayonets, and fitting with Belts, 4l. 4s. 0d. For 2 Scabbards and Belts, 0l. 3s. 0d. Wm. Greenough, for fitting one Bayonet and one belt, 0l. 2s. 8d.” None of the men were hired to make belting for hatchets.
In October 1775, Dighton resident Jabez Pierce submitted claims for payment for “belts for bayonets” he had made before the Battles of Lexington and Concord. Absent is any request for payment for the production of belts or frogs for hatchets.
Inspectional returns of Chelmsford’s militia and alarm lists also suggest hatchets were not hung from belting. According to the June 15, 1775 inspection, “The whole number of Equipments in the Training Band and Alarm List Present... 83 Good Fire Arms...31 Steel Ram-rods...58 worms...74 Priming — wire and Brushes...74 Belt and Scabboard Bayonets...3043 Bulletts...63 Cartridge-Boxes of 15 Rounds...83 Blanket...5339 Buck-Shott...72 Canteen.” All but 9 men had bayonets. Of those without them, there is no reference to carrying hatchets via belting.
We can also look to the Israel Litchfield Diary for guidance, as that journal includes multiple references to equipment made on behalf of a minute-man company from Scituate, Massachusetts.
For example, throughout February and March 1775, Litchfield recorded his role in producing leather equipment for his minute company. “11[Feb] In the forenoon I went over to ISI' Willcuts Shop and he & I made a Centre bitt to bore a Cartridge box. I Bored off one Box 14 I made me a Cartridge-box, I Covered it with a Coltskin it will Carry 19 Rounds. 25th I wrought with Cap' Sam’ Stockhridge a makeing cartridge boxes … I wrought with Cap’ Stockbridge a Stamping Covers for Catoos boxes Iray Bryand was at work Leathering them.”
 |
| Photo used with permission of RB Bartgis |
On February 27th, he noted, “I bought me a Back Sword or Cutlefs [cutlass] it Coft me ten Shillings Lawfull money Cap' Stockbridge bought a hide and an half of Moose skin for Catoos box Straps it Cost him 16.10.0' old tennor.”
On March 13th, Litchfield recorded that he “made my Sword Belt and Bayonet belt. In the afternoon, We went to training We met at Lieutenant Cushings.”
Throughout his journal, Litchfield goes to great lengths to document the equipment made for himself or his minute company, including an effort to make matching leather caps. However, his journal is silent on making belts or frogs for hatchets.
On March 13th, Litchfield recorded that he “made my Sword Belt and Bayonet belt. In the afternoon, We went to training We met at Lieutenant Cushings.”
Throughout his journal, Litchfield goes to great lengths to document the equipment made for himself or his minute company, including an effort to make matching leather caps. However, his journal is silent on making belts or frogs for hatchets.
So, how were militiamen carrying hatchets if they did not have belting and frogs available?
The Nerds suspect they were likely either tying them to their packs or blankets or storing them inside packs. This would be consistent with the British recommendation that light infantrymen tie their hatchets “upon the knapsack.”
Understandably, there is much work to be done on this topic. We’ll keep researching the matter, and if we find anything new, we’ll update this post.
