Category: Personalities

“They are, after all, so very much like us:” Jeff Shaara’s John Adams

On By erwguestIn Memory, Personalities6 Comments

Emerging Revolutionary War is pleased to welcome guest author Marianne Holdzkom, author of Remembering John Adams: The Second President in History, Memory and Popular Culture.

Several years ago, I set out to write a comprehensive history and memory study of John Adams. I did not want to write a straight biography of him.  Other scholars have done this, and I could not add anything to their work. What I wanted to do instead is examine how historians and creative artists have represented him. I also wanted to discuss how he has been memorialized—or not as in the case of Washington, D.C.

The result of my efforts was Remembering John Adams: The Second President in History, Memory and Popular Culture (McFarland, 2023). I finished the manuscript knowing that I had covered all my bases, proud of what I had accomplished. I had even done my best to wade through the difficult poetry of Ezra Pound for the project!

Yet, I missed something. I believed I had found all the literature references to John Adams, but one book escaped my attention. I am not sure how that happened because I am familiar with the author and his other works. Still, Jeff Shaara’s Rise to Rebellion (2001) in which John Adams plays a significant role, escaped my attention.  This is an oversight that I regret, and I would like to rectify it now.

Rise to Rebellion isa novel about the beginning of the American Revolution.  In it, Shaara followed a formula designed to humanize the history he covered by focusing on key players and centering the narrative around their perspectives. Understanding that the Revolution was not just the war, Shaara traced developments on both sides of the Atlantic through the eyes of Benjamin Franklin, General Thomas Gage, George Washington, and John Adams. In reflecting on his character choices for this novel, Shaara made a keen observation about the world of 2001:

It has become fashionable in our modern, more cynical time to reexamine our history, to throw a supposedly new light on those who are famous for their accomplishments, to instead expose their faults, to topple the statue of the hero, to replace the honor and respect with the sensational and the shameful, as though it were the only meaningful way these characters can be relevant to today’s world. I most adamantly disagree.[1]

Shaara continued by arguing that these people are “so very much like us.” [2]   It is this understanding that leads Shaara to the humanity of all his characters, including John Adams.  While the writer does not put Adams on a pedestal, he also avoids the more popular portrayals of the founder.  The “obnoxious and disliked” trope so often attached to John Adams robs him of his three-dimensionality. In this novel, as in other works of literature, Adams is more than the impatient, shrill annoyance that the public often sees in popular culture. In Shaara’s book, the reader sees his journey from successful lawyer to reluctant yet passionate revolutionary.  This is, in part, because of the period the book covers.

Shaara focused this novel on a timeframe from March 1770 through the summer of 1776. The so-called Boston Massacre of 1770 marked a turning point in the relationship between England and Massachusetts, but it also brought John Adams to the forefront of the conflict.  Adams played a key role in the Boston Massacre trials, not as an advocate for the five victims of the shootings, but as the defense attorney for the soldiers accused of murder. Shaara began his narrative by recreating the events of March 5, 1770, through the eyes of these soldiers. We first meet John Adams as he is responding to the shooting. In these early scenes, Shaara revealed several layers of Adams’s personality.  We see the citizen of Boston, confused over what has happened and desperately seeking answers, but we also see the husband and father, concerned for the safety of his family. We meet his remarkable wife, Abigail, for the first time, pregnant and amazingly calm given the circumstances. Shaara took this opportunity to recount the grief John and Abigail were still feeling over the death of their baby daughter, Suzanna. This is part of their storyline that is rarely covered in popular culture.[3] Adding this to his narrative adds a dimension to Adams that is refreshing.

One of Shaara’s talents as a writer is to depict introspection. To know the characters of this novel, the reader must see their thought processes. For John Adams, Shaara placed him where he was most happy: his farm in Braintree.  In a remarkable section of chapter five, we see Adams enjoying a summer day, walking his land and thinking about how the crisis with England had evolved. We witness John’s perspective, his struggle to understand what had changed and why the English were reacting in the way they were. At the same time, Shaara provided the reader with needed exposition. As Adams traces the events since 1765 to the moment of the Boston Massacre, the reader is led through the history to that point. Yet this is also personal for Adams. We see him understand the English perspective, but we also witness his anger at them and his dark thoughts about where the crisis would end both for the colonies and for him. This brooding is quintessential John Adams and Shaara captured it brilliantly. Yet Shaara also examines why John’s introspection did not consume him. That was thanks to Abigail.

As with other artists and historians, Shaara could not ignore the relationship between John and Abigail. We have a keen understanding of the bond between them thanks to their correspondence. Some 1100 letters between them exist. Using this source, Shaara gives his reader a glimpse into their marriage. As a result, he further humanizes John.

John confides to Abigail his concerns about his own ambition but also predicts to her that unless things change in London, there will be a revolution in America. He laments not being present for his children, but vows to be a father of whom they can be proud. She reassures him every step of the way, but she also shares her own concerns.

In one scene, Shaara creates a moment between John and Abigail, the conversation born from Abigail’s most famous letter to John. John is home in December 1775 and lamenting all that she has to do while he is away. She, in turn, is telling him about all that she has learned to do out of necessity. As she is wondering about independence and government, she asks, “when you speak of the people just whom are you referring to? In your new code of laws can it be hoped that you will perhaps remember the ladies? Can it be within your male spirit to allow some authority to flow our way?”[4] Recreating this exchange in this way, we witness Abigail making John squirm. He responds awkwardly, explaining the complexities of suffrage. She does not let him off the hook, but laughs and says, “All those fancy words and they may as well fall in a jumble over a cliff.”[5] This is one of my favorite scenes in the entire novel for in it, we see the remarkable relationship between these two complicated people.

As events move toward the vote for independence in the congress, John, once again in Philadelphia, has embraced his leadership role. Like other creative artists, Shaara, out of necessity, invents the speech that John gives in favor of independence. We don’t know exactly what Adams said during the final debate on July 1st; his words were not recorded. Adams never recollected what he said. Perhaps this is because he had said it all before. In a letter to fellow delegate, Samual Chase, he lamented, “That Debate took up the most of the day, but it was an idle Mispence of Time for nothing was Said, but what had been repeated and hackneyed in that Room before an hundred Times for Six Months past.”[6] 

At the end of the created speech Adams gives in the novel, Shaara set up a wonderful moment between Adams and Franklin. “We are a people who have shown the world we can help ourselves, that we have the God-given strength to stand for our liberty.  God help us? No, sir.  May God bless us.” After the vote for independence, Adams then asks Benjamin Franklin, “Was I right, Doctor?  Will God bless us?” Franklin responds, “He already has, Mr. Adams.”[7]

Throughout Rise to Rebellion, John Adams emerges as a man centered in the law and his farm but conflicted about the changing world around him. We see a warm relationship with Abigail and his children while, at the same time, we witness the leader he became. Jeff Shaara has presented his readers with a three-dimensional human being, not perfect by any means. He is driven by passion, his love for his family, and the law, yet he is not always secure in his own abilities. The historical John Adams would approve.

Marianne Holdzkom, Professor of History at Kennesaw State University, is the author of Remembering John Adams: The Second President in History, Memory and Popular Culture. She is also an Adams Memorial Foundation Scholar.

[1] Jeff Shaara, Rise to Rebellion: A Novel of the American Revolution (New York: The Random House Publishing Group, 2001;2002), x.

[2] Ibid.

[3] One of the few exceptions is the PBS series The Adams Chronicles. 

[4] Shaara, 448.

[5] Shaara, 449.

[6] John Adams to Samuel Chase, 1 July 1776,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/06-04-02-0142. 

[7] Shaara, 523; 527.

Sea Shanties: A Record of Thought of Oppressed People During the Age of Revolution

On By erwguestIn America 250, Civilian, Emerging Revolutionary War, Navy, Personalities, Revolutionary War1 Comment

EDITOR’S NOTE: Emerging Revolutionary War has been pleased to co-sponsor a series of Monday-evening programs to commemorate the America 250th at St. Bonaventure University, where contributor Chris Mackowski teaches. In March, the line-up of programs featured a student research panel. We are pleased to present today the work of one of the “emerging scholars” from that panel, Alex Payne.

Alex is a junior Theology and Franciscan Studies and History double-major from Shinglehouse, PA, with a minor in classics.

———

Sailor’s ballads in the late 17th and early 18th centuries communicated revolutionary sentiment that influenced the ideological origins of the American Revolution. Sailors’ ballads from revolutionary Atlantic history show how labor culture intersected with protest, emerging revolutionary sentiment, and identity formation. These protest and revolutionary ballads are what I refer to as “records of thought” of oppressed people. By “records of thought,” I mean oral traditions in the form of songs sung by people who were religiously and civilly oppressed that have been written down and transmitted through centuries.

The starting point of the record of thought of oppressed people is with the “Diggers’ Song” attributed to Gerard Winstanley. Winstanley was the leader of the Diggers, similar to but separate from the Leveller movement that emerged during the English Civil Wars between 1641–1659. The Diggers, known to history as radical land reformists, were led by Winstanley. They believed in an agrarian socialism and would “dig up” the land that was unjustly and inhumanly taken from the English commoners. The oppression they endured is found in the record of thought appropriately named “The Diggers’ Song.” This ballad was sung on St. George’s Hill in Surrey around 1649 by 20–30 men. It reads:

Continue reading “Sea Shanties: A Record of Thought of Oppressed People During the Age of Revolution” →

Review: “The Wandering Army: The Campaigns That Transformed the British Way of War” by Huw J. Davies

On By erwguestIn Book Review, British Leadership, Emerging Revolutionary War, Memory, Militia (Loyalist) Leadership, Personalities, Revolutionary WarLeave a comment

Emerging Revolutionary War welcomes back guest historian Ben Powers

Huw Davies’s work The Wandering Army: The Campaigns That Transformed the British Way of War posits that the British Army underwent a period of enlightenment during the late eighteenth century, inspired by its poor showing in the War of the Austrian Succession. Officers turned to continental Europe to study military art in the same spirit that enlightenment scholars studied moral philosophy. This period of military change, innovation, and adaptation encompassed what Davies refers to as “the interconnected relationship of these three areas: military thought, experience, and knowledge exchange, which together drove Britain’s accidental military enlightenment.”

Davies documents that the British Army in the 1700s entered a doldrums of intellectual and tactical stagnation in the early decades of the century, following its successful participation in the War of the Spanish Succession. Victory bred complacency, leading to a poor showing at Fontenoy in 1745. He goes on to demonstrate that defeat galvanized officers to undertake self-directed study of military theory and share lessons learned with other officers, forming a community of practice. Officers later combined these efforts with practical experience gained through active campaigns and peacetime training, resulting in cycles of learning throughout the latter half of the eighteenth century. Davies’s work contributes to the historiography of the British Army by demonstrating that officers actively sought to synthesize the latest military theories, their own combat experiences, and the ideas of their peers into innovative systems to address challenges across multiple theatres of war.

Davies uses a variety of evidence, including historical analysis, accounts of officer practices, and descriptions of training reforms. The bibliography of The Wandering Army contains almost 600 entries, ranging from period treatises, manuals, and official correspondence such as orderly books and military returns, to contemporary newspapers, to historical manuscripts. Davies traces a paper trail of British study of military art from 1745 to 1815, showing that officers studied war, applied what they learned, and discussed war in public forums and personal correspondence.  He cites examples of General Henry Clinton walking and studying old battlefields in 1774 to prepare himself for future challenges (Davies, 82–83); Lord Charles Cornwallis’ establishment of a standardized system of drill and equipage for his troops in India, based on lessons he had learned during the War for American Independence (Davies, 204); and the establishment of a camp for the training of light troops at Shorncliffe, England, to teach innovative tactics to light infantry, developed by Sir John Moore (Davies, 287–315).  

Continue reading “Review: “The Wandering Army: The Campaigns That Transformed the British Way of War” by Huw J. Davies” →

The Adams Book Club: An Introduction

On By erwpostIn America 250, Emerging Revolutionary War, Personalities, Revolutionary War2 Comments

Emerging Revolutionary War is pleased to partner with the Adams Memorial Foundation to share some reading about America’s “Founding Family.”

The Adams Memorial Commission is the Congressionally approved organization tasked with supporting the creation of a memorial in Washington, D.C., to John Adams and his family. The Adams Memorial Foundation is tasked with assisting with the fund-raising and public education aspects of that effort. As part of the Foundation’s work to raise awareness about the project—and about the Adams family—Board President Jackie Cushman hosts a monthly book club.

As we prepare to kick off our book club series with the Foundation, I spent a few minutes chatting with Jackie about the book club and about the Adams Memorial Foundation in general:

Over the next few days, ERW will share links to the first few conversations from Adams Memorial Foundation’s book club. We hope you’ll enjoy the excellent reading as much as we do!

“Rev War Revelry” A Discussion with Revolutionary Maryland historian Drew Palmer

On By Phill GreenwaltIn 1776, Battlefields & Historic Places, Battles, Continental Leadership, Emerging Revolutionary War, Memory, Militia (Patriot) Leadership, Personalities, Rev War Revelry, Revolutionary WarLeave a comment

When you think of Maryland in the American Revolutionary War, what are the first connections that come to mind? Taking a stab at it, probably the Maryland 400 during the Battle of Brooklyn in 1776? Or possibly the 1st Maryland at the Battle of Guilford Court House in 1781? If you are a national park junkie, potentially Thomas Stone National Historic Site, home of one of Maryland’s four Signers of the Declaration of Independence, may come to mind. If you are not familiar with that NPS unit, click here.

To fill in those gaps, Emerging Revolutionary War welcomes historian Drew Palmer. He is the creator of Revolutionary Maryland, which is an online public history blog that is “dedicated to uncovering and sharing all things related to the state’s experience during this transformative period.”

Palmer is a Revolutionary War historian, a U.S. high school history teacher, and the creator of Revolutionary Maryland. Palmer has worked as a public historian at numerous historic sites over the years, including Appomattox Courthouse, Fort Ticonderoga, Adams National Historical Park, and Fort McHenry National Monument and Shrine. Palmer’s research primarily focuses on the Revolutionary War in Maryland and the South. Most recently, he published his research on Fort Whetstone and the Maryland Matrosses during the Revolutionary War. He also worked with Fort McHenry to direct a short documentary on Fort McHenry’s 250 years of history. Palmer earned his B.A. in history from DeSales University in 2023 and his M.A. in applied history from Shippensburg University in 2024. He currently lives outside of Baltimore and is working on multiple research topics involving the Revolutionary War.

Emerging Revolutionary War is proud to welcome a great emerging historian of the Revolutionary War Era to the “Revelry.” We hope you can join us, live, on Sunday, April 19, at 7 p.m. EDT on our Facebook page.

“The Jeffersons & Alexandria”

On By erwguestIn Battlefields & Historic Places, Civilian, Emerging Revolutionary War, Memory, Personalities, Revolutionary WarLeave a comment

On the anniversary of Thomas Jefferson’s birthday, Emerging Revolutionary War welcomes back guest historian Madeline Feierstein.

Alexandria, Virginia, is famous for its presidential native son: George Washington. The Old Town has maintained its colonial charm, in spite of raging warfare and demolition waves since its founding in 1749. This port city, however, has hosted numerous other American presidents – especially Thomas Jefferson. Our third president visited and stayed in Alexandria on several occasions, and his connections to this Northern Virginia locale extended past his death in 1826.

While enroute to Philadelphia, Jefferson typically went north of Alexandria to cross the Potomac into Maryland. It was not until after the Revolution, and with his emergent friendship with George Washington, that his visits to Alexandria became regular and expected. But as an Alexandrian, I’ve heard more “town lore” about Washington’s longstanding affiliation with the city than any other president. The following accounts are not exhaustive, but they aim to spotlight the reasons for Jefferson’s presence and his impact on the city itself.

1790 was a critical year for the region. The National Capital Act was hotly debated. Where would America’s main city be located? Mayor William Hunter extended an invitation to Jefferson in March 1790 for dinner in his honor at the Fountain Tavern, which no longer stands, and where he had previously stayed.[1] At this time, his passage through Alexandria coincided with his trip to New York to assume the role of Secretary of State.

Jefferson understood Alexandria’s importance as a thriving commercial and political center, especially since the next nearest urban hubs were days away in Richmond and Baltimore. Mayor Hunter hoped that Alexandria would be in the running for capital selection, and that this dinner would confirm the statesman’s opinion: “You have returned to your native Country [from France]. Permit us the inhabitants of Alexandria to join with the rest of our fellow citizens in the warmest congratulations to you on that happy event. As a commercial town, we feel ourselves particularly indebted to you for the indulgencies which your enlightened representations to the Court of France have secured to our trade. You have freed commerce from its shackles…”[2]

In September of that year, Jefferson met with George Washington back in Alexandria to continue the discussion of where to assign the new capital. He and James Madison, along with notable figures in the Georgetown and Great Falls neighborhoods, negotiated the boundaries of the new federal city. Jefferson and Madison stayed overnight in Alexandria on September 14 before turning homeward bound.[3]

Gadsby’s Tavern is one of the most famous spots in Old Town. Famous for being the site of Washington’s farewell (to the presidency in New York), and a general meeting spot for the city’s elites, it’s no wonder that Jefferson also frequented this establishment! In January 1801, he stayed at the Tavern before his first inauguration. Ten days later, the ceremony, a banquet was held for him at Gadsby’s – and it apparently had the honor of being the “largest event ever given in the city.”[4]

There is no evidence that Jefferson came back to Alexandria after this 1801 visit. Additionally, no business interests here are documented, which is odd considering Alexandria’s reputation for commerce and industry. He appeared to prefer to travel north of the city to and from Monticello at this point, once again taking the ferry across the Potomac from Georgetown and continuing through what is now Loudon County southward. But the Jefferson connection did not end with the President’s change of scenery.

Granddaughter Virginia Jefferson Randolph Trist (1801-1882) and her husband moved to Alexandria in 1874. Her own daughter, Martha Burke, Jefferson’s great-granddaughter, resided in the city with her family. After Virginia’s husband died, she moved in with Martha until her own death.[5] Another granddaughter, Virginia’s sister, Cornelia Jefferson Randolph (1799–1871) joined niece Martha’s home, where she also died.[6]

Extensive family members of Thomas Jefferson are buried in Alexandria’s Ivy Hill Cemetery. Martha Burke’s daughter, Ellen Coolidge Burke, was quite active in the city’s civic causes. A reference and catalogue librarian, she is notable for expanding library services and opening branches in the surrounding neighborhoods.[7] A few miles away from where her great-great-grandfather wined and dined, a library was named in her honor before she died in 1975.

[1] “Washington, D.C.,” Thomas Jefferson Encyclopedia, Thomas Jefferson’s Monticello, n.d., https://www.monticello.org/encyclopedia/washington-dc.

[2] “Address of Welcome from the Mayor of Alexandria, 11 March 1790,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/01-16-02-0129.

[3] “Memorandum from Thomas Jefferson, 14 September 1790,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/05-06-02-0209.

 

[4] “George Taylor to Thomas Jefferson, 9 March 1801,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/01-33-02-0191.

 

[5] “Virginia Jefferson Randolph Trist,” Thomas Jefferson Encyclopedia, Thomas Jefferson’s Monticello, n.d., https://www.monticello.org/encyclopedia/virginia-jefferson-randolph-trist.

 

[6] “Cornelia Jefferson Randolph,” Thomas Jefferson Encyclopedia, Thomas Jefferson’s Monticello, n.d., https://www.monticello.org/encyclopedia/cornelia-jefferson-randolph.

 

[7] “Women’s History in Alexandria,” Office of Historic Alexandria, 19 November 2025, https://www.alexandriava.gov/historic-alexandria/womens-history-in-alexandria.

Bio:

Madeline Feierstein is an Alexandria, VA historian and founder of the educational and historical consulting company Rooted in Place, LLC. A native of Washington, D.C., her work has been showcased across the Capital Region. Madeline is a writer for Emerging Civil War and the National Museum of Civil War Medicine. She leads significant projects to document the sick, injured, and imprisoned soldiers that passed through Alexandria and Washington, D.C. Madeline holds a Bachelor of Science in Criminology from George Mason University and a Master’s in American History from Southern New Hampshire University. Explore her research at www.madelinefeierstein.com.

Postal Service Unveils Stamp Honoring Rev War-Era Poet Phillis Wheatley

On By Chris MackowskiIn African-American, America 250, Civilian, Emerging Revolutionary War, Memory, Personalities, Rev War Revelry1 Comment

The United States Postal Service has issued a new postage stamp honoring Phillis Wheatley, a Revolution-era poet who was the first author of African descent in the American Colonies to publish a book.

Unveiled at the Old South Meeting House in Boston on Thursday, Jan. 29, 2026, the Wheatley stamps was the 49th stamp in the Black Heritage series.

For more on Wheatley, I reached out the Boston Tea Party Ships and Museum. Cathryn Philippe is a living historian at the museum who portrays Wheatley—who, as it turned out, had an interesting connection to the Boston Tea Party. Cathryn was kind enough to spend some time chatting with me about Wheatley’s story:

(I first met Cathryn several years ago, while doing a virtual field trip in Boston for the American Battlefield Trust. I had the chance to visit the Boston Tea Party Ships and Museum and see Cathryn’s portrayal for myself. Take a look here.)

For more on the Phillis Wheatley stamp, we quote part of the Postal Service’s press release:

Continue reading “Postal Service Unveils Stamp Honoring Rev War-Era Poet Phillis Wheatley” →

“Brave, Meritorious, Unrewarded Kirkwood”: Unrecognized Valor in the Continental Army

On By erwguestIn 1777, Common Soldier, Emerging Revolutionary War, Memory, Personalities, Revolutionary War2 Comments

Emerging Revolutionary War welcomes back guest historian Ben Powers

If the Medal of Honor had existed during the American Revolution, which American soldiers might have received it? This is the kind of counterfactual question some of my history professors might eschew, but exactly the kind of thing I’ll debate endlessly with my pals over a burger after a day roaming a battlefield. As today is Medal of Honor Day, it’s appropriate that I share why I believe that, had the Medal of Honor existed at the time of the Revolution, there is no finer candidate for the honor than Delaware’s Robert Kirkwood.

Introduction

     I recently found myself on a Zoom call with two colleagues, discussing various aspects of the American Revolution, and the conversation turned to a trip one of them planned to take to Delaware to do some research. I immediately responded with “The Blue Hens!”, thinking of the First Delaware Regiment, and followed up by asking if he had heard of Kirkwood. My friend said he had not, thus launching me into a rundown of Captain Kirkwood’s impressive combat record. I concluded with my assessment that Kirkwood was the Continental Army’s answer to World War Two Medal of Honor recipient Audie Murphy.

     The Kirkwood/Murphy comparison is the kind of shorthand line that comes up in casual conversations about the War for Independence, a hyperbolic way of saying that a man was an excellent combat leader. But even after our call ended, the comparison stayed with me. Kirkwood had been in the fight from nearly the beginning, starting with the battles around New York City in 1776, and he had fought through to Eutaw Springs, SC, in 1781. Murphy likewise had seen hard campaigning from North Africa to Germany. Murphy had earned nine battle stars on his campaign ribbon. Had a similar honor been available to Kirkwood, he would have received six campaign stars, as the US Army classifies Revolutionary War campaigns, and he deserved at least three more. The more I thought about it, the more convinced I became that Kirkwood deserved a Medal of Honor.

The Medal of Honor

     The Medal of Honor is the United States’ highest award for valor, reserved for acts of conspicuous gallantry in armed conflict performed at the risk of life above and beyond the call of duty. In other words, if a recipient had not performed the act, their conduct would not have been considered dereliction of duty. The decoration has been awarded fewer than 3,600 times since its inception in 1861, during the American Civil War. Conservatively, 41 million people have served in the United States military since the American Revolution, making Medal of Honor recipients 0.01% of all American veterans. To say the Medal of Honor is awarded sparingly is an understatement. Approval for the award of the medal requires extensive corroboration from witnesses and multiple levels of review to meet a standard of proof “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Audie Murphy received his Medal of Honor for single-handedly holding off an enemy infantry company in an action near Holtzwihr, France, in 1945. Did Kirkwood meet a similar standard of bravery during the American Revolution?

Historiography

     The most distinctive element of Kirkwood’s service is the fact that he was in it for the duration. Name a major engagement, and there is a good chance he was there. Long Island and White Plains in 1776? He’s there. The Philadelphia Campaign in ’77? Check. Likewise with Monmouth in ’78. When the Delaware Continentals moved to the southern theater in 1780, Kirkwood marched with them. From Camden to Eutaw Springs, he is in every major fight in South Carolina from 1780 to 1781. For all that service, Kirkwood was not a self-promoter. He participated in decisive fighting under Daniel Morgan at Cowpens on January 17, 1781, fighting with the Continentals against Banestre Tarleton. His journal entry recording the day’s events simply reads, “Defeated Tarleton”. Descriptions of Kirkwood’s combat exploits are sparse. So, how to go about determining his eligibility for the nation’s highest valor award?

Continue reading ““Brave, Meritorious, Unrewarded Kirkwood”: Unrecognized Valor in the Continental Army” →

A Fleet Against One: The Continental Navy’s Embarrassing Clash off Block Island, April 6, 1776

On By erwguestIn 1776, Battles, British Leadership, Continental Leadership, Emerging Revolutionary War, Memory, Navy, Personalities, Revolutionary War2 Comments

Emerging Revolutionary War welcomes guest historian Bjorn Bruckshaw, a bio follows the post.

British nautical chart of the eastern portion of Long Island Sound showing the location of Block Island and the surrounding waters where the Continental Navy squadron encountered HMS Glasgow on April 6, 1776. Courtesy of the Library of Congress, Geography and Map Division. Public domain.

In the early morning hours of April 6, 1776, a lone British warship slipped through the moonlit waters southeast of Block Island. The twenty-gun frigate HMS Glasgow was carrying dispatches from Newport, Rhode Island, to the British fleet assembling off Charleston, South Carolina. Suddenly the ship’s lookout sighted sails on the horizon—then more sails behind them. Within minutes Captain Tyringham Howe realized the alarming truth: his single ship had encountered nearly the entire fleet of the newly created Continental Navy.¹

What followed should have been a decisive American victory. Commodore Esek Hopkins commanded a squadron of seven armed vessels, including the flagship Alfred, the brigs Cabot and Andrew Doria, and several additional ships. Against them stood only one British frigate. Yet by dawn the British ship had fought its way free and escaped. The encounter became one of the earliest—and most embarrassing—naval engagements of the American Revolution.²

The clash southeast of Block Island revealed the weaknesses of the young American navy: inexperienced crews, poor coordination between ships, and ineffective gunnery. Despite overwhelming numerical superiority, the Continental squadron failed to capture a single enemy warship. As one frustrated American officer later remarked, “A more imprudent, ill-conducted affair never happened.”³

The British vessel at the center of the encounter was HMS Glasgow, a sixth-rate twenty-gun frigate of the Royal Navy. In early April 1776 the ship had been tasked with delivering dispatches from Newport to the British fleet gathering off Charleston for an upcoming campaign against the southern colonies. That expedition would ultimately culminate in the failed British assault during the Battle of Sullivan’s Island in June 1776.⁴

Meanwhile the American rebellion had begun extending onto the seas. The Second Continental Congress had authorized the creation of a navy in late 1775 to challenge British control of American waters. By February 1776 the first ships of the fleet were ready for service, and Congress appointed Hopkins as commander-in-chief of the new force.⁵

Hopkins’s squadron consisted largely of converted merchant vessels hastily adapted for war. The fleet included the flagship Alfred, along with Columbus, Cabot, Andrew Doria, Providence, Wasp, and Fly. Among the officers serving aboard the fleet was a young lieutenant named John Paul Jones, who served aboard the Alfred and would later gain fame as one of the most celebrated naval commanders of the Revolution.⁶

Continue reading “A Fleet Against One: The Continental Navy’s Embarrassing Clash off Block Island, April 6, 1776” →

“…to the Liberty Peace and Safety of America: Cut the Gordian knot…”

On By Phill GreenwaltIn 1776, America 250, Battlefields & Historic Places, Battles, Continental Leadership, Emerging Revolutionary War, Memory, Personalities, Politics, Revolutionary War, UncategorizedLeave a comment

On this date in 1776, Major Joseph Ward, serving as a staff officer for Major General Artemas Ward, second in command of the Continental Army that had just evicted the British from Boston, sat down at his desk to pen the following letter. The recipient was John Adams, a fellow Massachusettsan then serving in the Second Continental Congress in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Ward continued his correspondence of keeping Adams apprised of military affairs around Boston. In this letter, however, he makes the case for the colonies to “cut the Gordian knot” and declare independence, months before Richard Henry Lee’s proposal to call for independence in late June 1776.

Boston 23 March 1776

Sir,

The 17th Instant the Pirates all abandoned their Works in Boston and Charlestown and went on board their Ships, and on the 20th they burnt and destroyed the works on Castle Island. They now lye in Nantasket Road waiting for a fair wind; we keep a vigilant eye over them lest they should make an attack on some unexpected quarter. The particulars with regard to the Seige, the Stores taken, &c. you will receive from better authority, therefore it is unnecessary for me to mention them. Our Troops behaved well, and I think the flight of the British Fleet and Army before the American Arms, must have a happy and very important effect upon the great Cause we engaged in, and greatly facilitate our future operations. I wish it may stimulate the Congress to form an American Government immediately. If, after all our exertions and successes, while Providence offers us Freedom and Independence, we should receive the gloven cloven foot of George to rule here again what will posterity, what will the wise and virtuous through the World say of us? Will they not say, (and jusly) that we were fools who had an inestimable prize put into our hands but had no heart to improve it! Heaven seems now to offer us the glorious privilege, the bright preeminence above all other people, of being the Guardians of the Rights of Mankind and the Patrons of the World. It is the fault of the United Colonies (a rare fault among men) they do not sufficiently know and feel their own strength and importance. Independence would have a great effect upon the Army, some now begin to fear that after all their fatigue and hazards in the Cause of Freedom, a compromise will take place whereby Britain may still exercise a power injurious to the Liberty Peace and Safety of America: Cut the Gordian knot, and the timid and wavering will have new feelings, trimming will be at an end, and the determined faithful friends of their Country will kindle with new ardour, and the United Colonies increase in strength and glory every hour.

Yesterday I saw your Brother, who informed that Mrs. Adams and your Children were well.

General Ward, on account of his declining health, has wrote his Resignation to the President of the Congress. I expect the greatest part of the Army will march for New York, or the Southern Colonies as soon as the Fleet is gone to Sea; and the Troops that remain here will be employed in fortifying the most advantageous Posts to defend the Town and harbour. I do not much expect the Enemy will make any attempts to regain possession of Boston, for I think they are sufficiently convinced that they cannot penetrate the Country in this part of America; ’tis probable they will try their fortune to the Southward and if they fail there the game will be up with them. We hear many accounts about Commissioners coming from Britain to treat with the Colonies separately, or with the Congress. Many fear we shall be duped by them, but I trust the congress is too wise to be awed by the splendor or deceived by the cunning of British Courtiers.

I know not of one discouraging circumstance attending either our civil or military affairs in this part of the Continent. I have lately heard with pleasure that the Farmer is become an advocate for Independence.Wishing the Congress that Wisdom which is from above, I am Sir with much Respect Your most Humble Servant,Joseph Ward

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

To learn more background about the letter, click here. Courtesy of the Massachusetts Historical Society.