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 |
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!
