Between July 8 and July 10, 1776, battle raged once again in Virginia. Andrew Lewis and patriot soldiers from Virginia engaged John Murray, 4th Earl of Dunmore, naval squadron as well as British loyalist troops. Join friend of ERW and historian Patrick Hannum as he recounts the events that led up to this dramatic moment and explores the actions that took place during the battle in this ERW Revelry. Patrick will also share with us details about the upcoming 250th anniversary commemoration being held this July.
This Rev War Revelry will be pre-recorded and posted to our Facebook page at 7pm. Then reposted to our Spotify and You Tube Channels.
Thomas Jefferson’s Map of Gwynn’s Island, showing locations of Dunmore and Virginia forces. Courtesy of Library of Congress
As the Second Continental Congress in Philadelphia debated on next steps and the ultimate goal of the war with Great Britain, leaders in Virginia decided to push the needle. Virginia was the largest (population and economically wise) colony in the 13 rebellious colonies. Many of its leaders were seen as leaders in the Continental Congress and in revolutionary thought. Other colonial leaders, including John Adams, knew that for the war and independence to be successful, Virginia needed to be a leading participant in the effort.
The Fifth Virginia Convention, the extra-legal body running Virginia in the absence of Royal authority, met in the Virginia Capitol in Williamsburg on May 6, 1776. There was a lot to discuss among the members. The Convention consisted of more conservative planters from the eastern part of the colony. These members tended to favor reconciliation with the mother country. Other members of the convention, that supported a more radical response were from the western part of the colony (west of the fall line) and many of its legal and philosophical minds (George Mason, James Madison, George Wythe). These men, who held the majority of the Convention, favored independence and also held the hearts and minds of most Virginians.
The most significant action of the Fifth Convention came on May 15, 1776, adopting groundbreaking resolutions. First the Convention directed Virginia’s delegates to the Continental Congress to propose a formal declaration of independence, to “declare the United Colonies free and independent states…” This directive was the first official call from any colony for a complete break with Britain. It signaled that reconciliation was no longer the goal; independence had become both necessary and inevitable in the minds of Virginia’s revolutionary leaders.
The resolution went even further. It not only urged independence but also called for the establishment of foreign alliances and confederation among the colonies. These measures demonstrated a sophisticated understanding of what independence would require: diplomatic recognition, military support, and political unity. Virginia’s leadership recognized that separation from Britain would not be sustainable without these elements in place. Soon, on June 7, 1776 in Philadelphia, Virginian Richard Henry Lee took the direction from the Fifth Convention and proposed that the Continental Congress declare independence.
Secondly, the Convention called for constructing its own independent government, taking concrete steps to replace colonial rule with a republican system. This new constitution of the “Commonwealth of Virginia’ would set up the system for which Virginia would be governed. Finally, the convention appointed a committee to draft a declaration of rights. This effort reflected the belief that independence was not just about rejecting British authority but also about creating a new political order grounded in principles of liberty and self-government.
One of the most influential figures in this process was George Mason. Mason drafted the Virginia Declaration of Rights, a document that would become one of the most important statements of political philosophy in the revolutionary era. Adopted in June 1776, it asserted that all men are by nature equally free and possess inherent rights, including the enjoyment of life and liberty, the means of acquiring property, and the pursuit of happiness and safety. It also emphasized that government derives its power from the people and must be accountable to them.
Delegate James Madison wrote townspeople in Williamsburg took down the Union Jack and replaced it with the Continental Union flag.
Another key figure connected to Virginia’s revolutionary leadership was Thomas Jefferson, who was serving in the Continental Congress. Although he was not present at the Virginia Convention in May, the instructions sent by Virginia directly influenced his work. When Congress appointed a committee to draft a declaration of independence, Jefferson drew heavily on ideas similar to those expressed in Mason’s document. The resulting United States Declaration of Independence, adopted in July, echoed Virginia’s emphasis on natural rights and the legitimacy of revolution against unjust government. The Convention also created a committee to design a state seal, this committee (led by George Wythe) adopted the seal of Virginia that is the basis for the seal used today.
Virginia’s actions in May 1776 also reflected broader social and political changes within the colony. The authority of the royal governor, Lord Dunmore, had effectively collapsed, and revolutionary institutions had taken control. Local committees and militias enforced the decisions of the convention, demonstrating that power had shifted from imperial officials to colonial leaders. This transition was not without conflict, but by May 1776, the revolutionary cause had gained widespread support among Virginia’s population. In the mind of Virginians, as of May 1776, Virginia was independent of the King and Parliament of Great Britain.
On June 12th, a follow up article will commemorate the 250th anniversary of the Virginia Declaration of Rights.
Dr. Richard Bell, historian and professor of history at the University of Maryland, will discuss his new book, “The American Revolution and the Fate of the World.” Published by Penguin Random House, this “revelatory and enthralling book, award-winning historian Richard Bell reveals the full breadth and depth of America’s founding event. The American Revolution was not only the colonies’ triumphant liberation from the rule of an overbearing England; it was also a cataclysm that pulled in participants from around the globe and threw the entire world order into chaos.”
We look forward to you tuning in to this Sunday evening, 7 pm EDT on our Facebook page for this discussion with Dr. Bell!
Emerging Revolutionary War is pleased to partner with the Adams Memorial Foundation to share some reading about America’s “Founding Family.” The Foundation holds a monthly book club, hosted by Board President Jackie Cushman. In special arrangement with the Adams Memorial Foundation, ERW is sharing links to the first few conversations from that book club.
The next book highlighted in our series is Atlas of Independence: John Adams and the American Revolution by ERW’s own Chris Mackowski.
If you are looking for something to do this Friday, May 8, 2026, consider coming to the National Museum of the United States Army for their 2026 Revolutionary War Symposium! There year has great lineup of speakers, including a few Emerging Revolutionary War historians.
The focus of the symposium is on the years 1777-1779. Billy Griffith will speaking about the Battle of Monmouth and Mark Maloy will be speaking about the Southern Campaign during these years. Other speakers include Michael Harris, Kevin Weddle, Gary Ecelbarger, Steven Elliott, and Iris de Rode. The symposium is free. For more information and to register to attend visit their website.
If you have never been to the museum, it is a fantastic experience, and you will be able to see the new 250th exhibitCall to Arms: The Soldier and the Revolutionary War, an exhibit Emerging Revolutionary War historian Mark Maloy helped write. They also have a new augmented reality exhibit focused on the Revolutionary War.
Emerging Revolutionary War welcomes back guest historian Bjorn Bruckshaw
By the spring of 1776, the people of Rhode Island no longer needed to speculate about their relationship with Great Britain—they were already living in open resistance to it. War had begun the previous year, British naval power remained a constant threat along the coast, and the colony’s long history of defiance toward imperial authority had already brought confrontation to its shores. The destruction of His Majesty’s schooner Gaspee in 1772 had marked a decisive escalation, transforming protest into direct action against the Crown.¹ Now, as members of the Rhode Island General Assembly made their way to Providence in early May 1776, they did so with the reality of war firmly in mind. The question before them was no longer whether they opposed British authority, but whether that authority could continue to exist at all within their government.
Rhode Island Independence Document
Inside the Assembly chamber on May 4, 1776, that question was answered with clarity and finality. Without issuing a sweeping declaration or engaging in extended philosophical argument, the legislature passed an act that removed King George III from every function of governance within the colony. The law ordered that “in all commissions, writs, and other proceedings in the courts of law,” the name and authority of the king be omitted.² In their place stood the authority of the colony itself. The act further directed that royal authority was to be “totally suppressed.”³ Courts would continue to function, but under a new source of legitimacy. Officials would take new oaths. The government would proceed without reference to the Crown. Rhode Island did not simply declare independence—it enacted it.
This action did not emerge suddenly. For years, Rhode Island had been among the most resistant of the colonies to British imperial control, particularly in matters of trade and enforcement. British officials repeatedly complained of the colony’s defiance, noting the difficulty of imposing authority in a place where regulations were often ignored.⁴ That resistance became unmistakable with the Gaspee affair, and the Crown’s response—threatening to transport suspects to England for trial—provoked widespread alarm. Colonial critics warned that such measures would undermine “that great bulwark of English liberty,” the right to trial by a local jury.⁵ By the time hostilities began in 1775, many Rhode Islanders had already concluded that reconciliation with Britain was increasingly unlikely.
That understanding was reflected not only in legislative action, but in the colonial press. The Providence Gazette soon reported the Assembly’s proceedings, noting that the legislature had taken measures removing the authority of the Crown from government functions, a step consistent with the colony’s wartime posture and political condition.⁶ While not framed in celebratory or rhetorical language, the report treated the change as a matter of governance already in motion. Similarly, the Newport Mercury, writing amid growing military uncertainty, reflected a broader shift in tone, reporting colonial affairs in a way that assumed the imperial relationship was breaking down beyond repair.⁷
These accounts are significant not because they proclaim Rhode Island’s primacy, but because they demonstrate how independence was understood in real time—not as a single dramatic declaration, but as a series of actions already unfolding.
ST. BONAVENTURE, N.Y., April 22, 2026 — As America looks ahead to the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence this summer, St. Bonaventure University invites the public and campus community to come together to discuss what “independence” means.
Since mid-March, St. Bonaventure’s “America’s 250 Series” has explored various facets of the American Revolution. To conclude the series, university historians will gather for a final panel discussion and open Q&A with the audience.
The program, “The Revolution Today,” will be held at 7 p.m. Monday, April 27, in Walsh Auditorium. The event is free and open to the public, and light refreshments will be served.
Discussion topics will include:
What themes have emerged from our series?
What questions have the Founders raised for us?
What does the American Revolution mean to us today?
What is our own role in remembering America’s 250th birthday?
The university’s “America’s 250 Series” is sponsored by the History Department, the Jandoli School of Communication, and Emerging Revolutionary War.
Check out Emerging Revolutionary War’s latest project done in conjunction with Prager University. PragerU is a 501c3 non-profit that works with multiple school systems across the country. They have a series of history themed 5-minute videos geared towards younger audiences. These videos get hundreds of thousands of views and introduce many “emerging” viewers to many stories from American history. Emerging Revolutionary War historians were invited to narrate multiple videos and they have begun to roll out this week. Be sure to check out Rob Orrison’s video on the Battles of Lexington and Concord and stay tuned on Monday for Mark Maloy’s video on the Battle of Trenton. More will be coming out over the next few weeks as the nation approaches the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence in July. You can also access their videos on their YouTube page. To learn more about these battles be sure to check out the Emerging Revolutionary War book series!
Thomas Mitchell, Forcing a Passage on the Hudson. From left to right, Phoenix, Roebuck, and Tartar run forts on the Hudson River later in the war. The smaller vessel on the far left is a tender. Maria or the Lord Howe may have looked like that.
In the spring of 1776, the Sussex County Delaware Committee of Safety sent the schooner Farmer under the command of Nehemiah Field to St. Eustatius for gunpowder, always in short supply in the rebelling colonies. By then, the little Dutch island in the Caribbean was a well known haven for smugglers to sell and buy embargoed goods. Indeed, leaders of the rebellion in America had been cruising Caribbean waters for months, always looking to acquire armaments from neutral colonies from under the nose of the Royal Navy, which lacked a sufficient number of ships to stop the practice. Inevitably, the American smugglers found willing partners, some simply looking to earn a quick profit on high-value goods, others recognizing that islands throughout the area relied on the Americans for bulk foodstuffs. If the Americans could not trade, some Caribbean colonies might go hungry.
Field successfully acquired a cargo and evaded British patrols between the Caribbean and his destination in the Delaware Bay, but his greatest test would come as he sought to enter the bay and unload his cargo in the lee of Cape Henlopen, near the town of Lewes. The British fifth-rate Roebuck (44) under Captain Andrew Snape Hamond patrolled the lower bay with various attached small boats. His chief task was to prevent smuggling, particularly of the kind Field and Farmer represented. Delaware Bay is a large body of water shaped a bit like a rounded arrowhead. It narrows at the top where the Delaware River enters and has a wider bottom, closer to the Atlantic Ocean. But, that wide part starts to curve back on itself, and the mouth of the bay, between Cape Henlopen and Cape May, New Jersey is roughly 17 miles wide with shallows that constrain its navigability for deep-draft ships. Those shallows limited Roebuck’s mobility and increased the demands on its smaller supporting ships and boats. So, Captain Hamond relied heavily on his tender, Maria, and boats to intercept smugglers.
At daybreak on Sunday, April 7, on a clear day, Hamond spied a schooner coming into the bay and already close to the Henlopen light house. Roebuck set a course to the south in pursuit and dispatched the Maria and two armed boats to venture into the shallower waters. Hamond was accustomed to chasing ships, but he didn’t know how lucky he was to stumble across the Farmer, originally sent to obtain gunpowder from the Caribbean. When his prey seemingly ran aground, Hamond must have been delighted.
Ashore, guards at the lighthouse sent word to the village of Lewes that a schooner had arrived and was being chased into the bay. Men were needed to help unload it. Captain Charles Pope, of the Delaware Continental Battalion, quickly assembled his men and the local militia. He needed boats to cross a creek, which the townspeople soon produced. As Pope moved the town militia toward the beaches, the lighthouse guard descended on the Farmer, seven or eight miles south of the cape. They quickly began unloading cargo: coarse linens. If Pope was surprised or disappointed, he didn’t mention it.
As the militia arrived, they could see Roebuck’s tender bearing down on the schooner and hear the retort as it loosed a broadside of swivels and muskets at the Farmer and men unloading her. The Farmer’screw responded by running right up on shore. The guard returned the tender’s fire with muskets, which Pope’s men quickly augmented as they arrived on the scene. A gunfight ensued as the militia and crew aboard the tender exchanged shots without doing much damage. At one point, militiamen even began picking up many of the tender’s musket balls as they rolled on the ground, spent of all energy. But the distance was too great for small arms and eventually the militia laid off firing in order to expedite unloading. According to Pope, the tender, still standing offshore, dispatched a boat back to the Roebuck, presumably for assistance.
By the time the frigate rounded the cape, Pope and his men had managed to load two swivels on the Farmer and engage the Maria, which had moved closer and anchored. As he reported, the exchange of fire between Pope’s men and the tender lasted a solid two hours. The militia kept up a close fire on the tender to keep her from raising her anchor, probably because they thought they were getting the better of the fight. Pope thought he saw men fall, although Hamond didn’t note any casualties in his log. Eventually, the Mariasuccessfully hoisted her anchor out of the sand and mud, but then a swivel on the Farmer shot away her halyards and the sail came down, forcing the tender to drop anchor again. For her part, Roebuck remained in deeper water, visible, but largely out of the fight. Eventually, she sent over a boat to tow off the Maria. The boat drew militia fire and Pope thought they inflicted wounds on her crew too, but the boat and Maria eventually drew off, concluding the shoreline skirmish. There were no American casualties and Hamond did not report any from the affair.
Early in the afternoon, Hamond spied another schooner approaching the bay and hauled off to chase her. He fired one shot at her before identifying her as the Lord Howe, another of his tenders, just arriving from Virginia. Just another day for the Royal Navy on the American coast.
Abigail Adams was only 32 years old when she encouraged her h (NY Public Library)
“Remember the ladies.” Of all the words Abigail Adams wrote to her husband John over a correspondence than spanned 1,160 letters and nearly 40 years, those three stand as the most famous. They come from a letter written on March 31, 1776—250 years ago today.
At the time, events in the colonies were moving at a quickening pace. Common Sense in January 1776 had not only leveraged a major public shift toward American independence, it also sparked debate about what might come after. Sentiment in the Continental Congress lagged public opinion, despite John’s best efforts to spur that sentiment along, but conversation still bubbled among the delegates about that possible future.
It was in this context that Abigail, as astute a politician as any Congressional delegate, wrote to her husband. If independence loomed, and America had the chance to jump-start a new system of its own, then why not take advantage of the winds of change and establish independence not only from Great Britian but from the old social order altogether.
[I]n the new Code of Laws which I suppose it will be necessary for you to make I desire you would Remember the Ladies, and be more generous and favourable to them than your ancestors. Do not put such unlimited power into the hands of the Husbands. Remember all Men would be tyrants if they could. If perticuliar care and attention is not paid to the Laidies we are determined to foment a Rebelion, and will not hold ourselves bound by any Laws in which we have no voice, or Representation.
That your Sex are Naturally Tyrannical is a Truth so thoroughly established as to admit of no dispute, but such of you as wish to be happy willingly give up the harsh title of Master for the more tender and endearing one of Friend. Why then, not put it out of the power of the vicious and the Lawless to use us with cruelty and indignity with impunity. Men of Sense in all Ages abhor those customs which treat us only as the vassals of your Sex. Regard us then as Beings placed by providence under your protection and in immitation of the Supreem Being, make use of that power only for our happiness.[1]
Emerging Revolutionary War Era 