Join us Sunday, June 23, at 7:00 p.m. on our YouTube page (https://www.youtube.com/@emergingrevolutionarywar8217), for a chat with Doug Cubbison, Board President of the Braddock Road Preservation Association. We will discuss all things involving the group’s work to preserve and educate the public about the story of the French and Indian War in Western Pennsylvania.
The Braddock Road Preservation Association is an advisory organization that seeks to research, develop, interpret and promote the French and Indian War history of Jumonville, Dunbar Camp, and the Braddock Road. A secondary purpose is to research, develop, interpret and promote the history of the Pennsylvania Soldiers’ Orphans School. The Association functions in an advisory capacity to the Board of Directors of Jumonville, Inc.
Emerging Revolutionary War welcomes guest author Jim Bish as he describes the important events that happened in Williamsburg in May of 1774:
News of the Boston Tea Party reached London in January 1774 and Parliament reacted decisively passing the Boston Port Act on March 31, 1774, calling for the closing the port of Boston on June 1, 1774. News of the Boston Port Act reached Virginia before May 19th severely disrupting Virginia’s House of Burgesses planned business. After hearing the news about Boston, the Burgesses primary focus and action was a response to the Boston Port Act. Virginia Burgess Richard Henry Lee described his response to the news of the Port Bill to his brother, Arthur Lee, who resided in London, “We had been sitting in Assembly near three weeks, when a quick arrival from London brought us the Tyrannic Boston Port Bill, no shock of Electricity could more suddenly and universally move— Astonishment, indignation, and concern seized on all. The shallow Ministerial device was seen thro instantly, and every one declared it the commencement of a most wicked System for destroying the liberty of America, and that it demanded a firm and determined union of all the Colonies to repel the common danger.”
The Virginia capitol building as it appeared in 1774. (Wikipedia)
By May 24th the burgesses had drafted their response. According to Thomas Jefferson, “We were under conviction of the necessity of arousing our people from the lethargy into which they had fallen as to passing events; and thought that the appointment of a day of general fasting and prayer would be most likely to call up and alarm their attention . . . we cooked up a resolution, somewhat modernizing their phrases, for appointing the 1st day of June, on which the Port bill was to commence, for a day of fasting, humiliation and prayer, to implore heaven to avert from us the evils of civil war, to inspire us with firmness in support of our rights, and to turn the hearts of the King and parliament to moderation and justice.”
On May 26th, Purdie and Dixon’s Virginia Gazette published the House of Burgesses resolution and as ordered. Broadsides of the resolution were also published and probably preceded the newspapers printing. Governor Dunmore referred to the broadside printing when, on 26 May, he summoned the burgesses to the council room and thus addressed them: “I have in my hand a Paper published by Order of your House, conceived in such Terms as reflect highly upon his Majesty and the Parliament of Great Britain; which makes it necessary for me to dissolve you; and you are dissolved accordingly.”
Royal Governor Lord Dunmore. While politically at odds with many of the Burgesses, they remained personally cordial. The morning of the 26th, he ate breakfast with George Washington. On the evening of May 27th, the Burgesses attended a ball at the Governor’s Palace for Lady Dunmore.
Having been dissolved by the royal governor had certainly occurred before when there were grievances by Virginia’s House of Burgesses to either Parliament or the Crown. In 1765, Governor Fauquier dissolved the House of Burgesses when it passed a resolution against the Stamp Act. In May 1769 the Virginia House of Burgesses passed several resolutions condemning Britain’s stationing troops in Boston following the Massachusetts Circular Letter of the previous year. As a result, Governor Botetourt abruptly dissolved the General Assembly after the House of Burgesses adopted those measures. This time, the dissolution of the House seemed more worrisome. When the House of Burgesses were dissolved in 1769 much of the disagreement was about sending royal troops to Massachusetts. By 1774, troops had been in the Boston area for five years and now there was the deeper threat of using those troops to cease the livelihood of all Bostonians by closing down their means of trade, the harbor. It became clearly evident to the Virginia burgesses that if the Crown could take actions like this against Bostonians, they could also be used against Virginians.
To many of the burgesses, the dissolution of the House was surprising. This sentiment is revealed in a letter by George Washington to George William Fairfax on June 10, 1774 in which Washington states, “this Dissolution was as sudden as unexpected for there were other resolves of a much more spirited nature ready to be offered to the House wch. would have been unanimously adopted respecting the Boston Port Bill as it is calld but were withheld till the Important business of the Country could be gone through” Like earlier burgesses had done after being dissolved, most of the then, former-burgesses, agreed to meet at Raleigh Tavern. At least 89 of the previously assembled 120 Burgesses reconvened their extra-legal session in the Apollo Room at Raleigh Tavern a few blocks away as it was the largest facility to hold such a group.
The reconstructed Raleigh Tavern. The original burned in 1859. (Colonial Williamsburg)
On the following day of May 27, those “former burgesses” agreed to an association. They condemned Great Britain in that it had taken away their just, antient, and constitutional rights stating that the Boston Harbor bill is a most dangerous attempt to destroy the constitutional liberty and rights of all North Americans. The former burgesses charged that parliament was at fault for the purpose of raising a revenue, without the consent of the people and particular blamed the East India Company of attempting to ruin of America, by setting a precedent in favor of arbitrary taxation and as a result Virginia called for a boycott of the East India Company. They concluded by instructing the committee of correspondence to propose to the corresponding committees of the other colonies to appoint deputies to meet in Congress at such place, annually, as should be convenient to direct, from time to time, the measures required by the general interest. They declared that an attack on one colony should be considered as an attack on the whole. This “Former Burgesses Association” document was signed by the 89 former burgesses and printed in Williamsburg for all Virginians to read. There was rarely a more unified effort by deprived lawmakers in colonial Virginia. Before heading home to their respective counties, Virginia’s former burgesses were moving in a singular direction ignited by the Boston Port Act and now brought to a strong flame by the actions of Governor Dunmore.
On May 30th, three days after issuing the Association document, Peyton Randolph received correspondence from three different committees, Boston, New York, and Annapolis concerning their request for action. Randolph decided to locate former Burgess members who had not yet returned to their home counties and he located twenty-five. Out of necessity, those twenty-five former burgesses served as members of the Committee of Correspondence for Virginia.
The Peyton Randolph House
The following day, those 25 former burgesses were much more detailed and stronger in their messaging from that which appeared in the 89 former-burgesses association document. After hearing the sentiments from Boston, Philadelphia, and Maryland the 25 former burgesses thought that “we ought to adopt the scheme of Nonimportation to a very large extent.” They also defined a date and place, August 1, 1774 in Williamsburg, for the former burgesses to meet as a legislative body. They stated, “We fixed this distant Day in Hopes of accommodating the Meeting to every Gentleman’s private Affairs, and that they might, in the mean Time, have an Opportunity of collecting the Sense of their respective Counties.”
Virginia was headed quickly towards Revolution . . .
Follow our Facebook page this Sunday and Monday as Emerging Revolutionary War historians and guests will be in Colonial Williamsburg on the 250th anniversary of the dissolution of the House of Burgesses and the gathering of the former Burgesses at the Apollo Room in the Raleigh Tavern.
Join Emerging Revolutionary War this Sunday evening at 7 p.m. ET on our Facebook page as we sit down for a pre-recorded discussion with historian and author Mike Cecere and his daughter, Jennifer Cecere to discuss their new historical fiction books centered on the Revolutionary War. “Witness to Revolution” focuses on the lives of children growing up in Williamsburg, Virginia during the beginning part of the Revolution. Their recently released second book, “Witness to War” follows the characters through the tumultuous war.
We discuss the importance of historical fiction, the differences between writing non fiction and historical fiction, and the challenges and opportunities getting the next generation interested in the Revolutionary War. Grab a drink and join us for a great discussion!
As the word of the “Intolerable Acts” spread throughout the colonies in response to the Boston Tea Party, colonial governments began to show support for Boston. Then in May 1774, the Virginia House of Burgesses voted for a day of “prayer” on June 1, 1774 in support of Boston and Massachusetts. In response to this, Virginia Governor Lord Dunmore dissolved the assembly. Soon after, the men of the Burgesses met at the Raleigh Tavern in Williamsburg to set up the “First Virginia Convention.” This extra legal body set the path towards revolution.
Join us this Sunday, May 12th at 7pm for this will be a pre-recorded discussion with historians J. Michael Moore and Maureen Wiese to commemorate the 250th anniversary of the First Virginia Convention. We will cover this early movement by an American colony to revolution and how it impacted other movements across the colonies.
On September 20, 1777 an American force under General Anthony “Mad Anthony” Wayne was surprised and routed by British forces under General Charles Grey. Wayne’s entire division was put to flight losing nearly 300 men (with the British losing just a dozen). Called by many the “Massacre at Paoli”, the fight was one of many that was part of the 1777 Philadelphia Campaign.
Join ERW on Sunday, April 14th at 7pm on our Facebook page as we welcome back historian and author Michael C. Harris, expert on the Philadelphia Campaign, we will discuss the battle, its role in the campaign, the personalities and the myths around Paoli. Harris is now working on his third volume in his much acclaimed Philadelphia Campaign trilogy, that will include the Battle of Paoli. If you can not make the livestream, the Revelry will be posted to our You Tube and Spotify channels.
Many of our readers love seeing the rifle and cannon demonstrations held in National Parks. Have you ever wondered about how park rangers manage this program? Recently I attended Historic Weapons Certification, an intense, two-week training held every few years for Park Rangers.
The program began in the 1970s with the coming of the nation’s Bicentennial, and has evolved over the years. Held at a National Guard base in Anniston, Alabama, the course teaches participants how to load and fire historic weapons, care and maintenance of equipment, historic manuals for loading and drill, storage and handling of black powder (a Class A Explosive), and Park Service policies for historic weapons programs. There are only about 152 certified Historic Weapons Supervisors in the entire National Park Service.
In March, 1776 Commodore Esek Hopkins led the bulk of the Continental Navy on a raid to the Bahamas, where it occupied the town of New Providence on Nassau Island for two weeks. Hopkins and his captains were drawn by a report of gunpowder stored in the town, which the patriot cause desperately needed.[1] Unfortunately for Hopkins, the colony’s governor had spirited away some 150 barrels the night before the American flotilla’s arrival. Not all was lost as the Marines quickly demanded and received the surrender of two small forts defending the town and its harbor. With those in hand, Hopkins and his men quickly got to work removing artillery, military stores, and other useful supplies.
While the American Marines and sailors managed to recover just 24 casks of powder, their haul in sizeable artillery pieces and mortars was impressive: 88 cannon ranging from 9- to 36-pounders; 15 mortars from 4-11 inches; 5,458 shells; 11,071 roundshot; 165 chain & double shot, plus fuses, rams, sponges, carriage trucks, mortar beds, copper hoops, and various stores not required for artillery.[2] It was a boon to be sure. The curious part of Hopkins’ inventory of captured war material, however, is that he sent it to Connecticut Governor Jonathan Trumbull, not a representative of the Naval Committee that had issued his orders. To John Hancock, president of the Continental Congress, he sent a report of his mission, but only mentioned “I have taken all the Stores onboard the fleet.”[3] Indeed, his report of the armaments aboard the British schooner Hawke, which the fleet captured on its return to American waters, was more complete. It took another day, until April 9, for Hopkins to forward the inventory of seized cannon. Congress merely resolved that an extract of his letter should be published for delegates to peruse.[4] Perhaps inadvertently, Hopkins exacerbated regional political conflicts and undermined his own command.
The American Revolutionary history world lost a legend recently with the passing of Charles Baxley of Lugoff, South Carolina.
Professionally, Charles was a retired attorney with Baxley, Wells & Benson in Lugoff, SC. Charles attended the University of South Carolina where he received his J.D. in 1976. He served as a judge for fifteen years, served as a Captain in United States Airforce Reserves and was involved in many community and professional organizations. But Charles’ real passion was history, especially the American Revolution. Charles worked with many local historians and organizations to preserve and then interpret the Camden battlefield. Few knew the Camden story as much as Charles. Charles He was the editor and publisher of the on-line magazine, Southern Campaigns of the American Revolution and worked hard to tell the story of South Carolina in the American Revolution.
Charles Baxley with Rick Wise and Mark Wilcox on the Camden Battlefield.
Most recently, Charles served as the Chair of the South Carolina 250th Commission and was deeply involved with the Liberty Trail and the South Carolina Battleground Preservation Trust. Charles welcomed anyone who was researching South Carolina in the Revolution and that is where we met him nearly 15 years ago. Charles expected accuracy and great research and was not one to “suffer fools.” But his southern charm endeared him to many and we are honored to have called Charles a friend. He was instrumental in assisting us in our book about Camden “All That Can Be Expected” and used a fine tooth comb over our manuscript, especially the maps. His passion for this chapter in South Carolina’s Revolutionary War history truly inspired us, as authors, to get the Camden story right. There will never be another Charles and the loss is a big one for preservation and history, but it is our job to make sure his work continues and be sure we do it based in research and most of all, passion.
Join Emerging Revolutionary War historians Mark Maloy, Rob Orrison, and Mark Wilcox on this Sunday, March 17 at 7 p.m. on our Facebook page for a pre-recorded revelry as we discuss the Irish in the American Revolution. We’ll talk about the Irish who fought with Washington’s army (such as Colonel John Fitzgerald), those who fought with the British, and how the events in American ultimately spilled over into Ireland (the Irish Rebellion of 1798) and how we have come to remember the role of the Irish in the Revolution. Happy St. Patrick’s Day (and Evacuation Day)!
Can’t make it on St. Patrick’s Day because you’ll be celebrating? No problem, the episode will be up on our YouTube page later this week and available on our audio podcast. While there, check out our hundreds of Rev War Revelries and other videos!
Growing up in central Pennsylvania, the history of the Revolution seemed far away. There were no major battles here, and the big armies did not pass through here. The area produced no famous leaders or generals.
My hometown, Lewisburg, sits on the banks of the Susquehanna River. In the 1770s the area was the frontier, and Revolutionary connections here are few and far between. The militia served far away during the Brandywine and Germantown campaigns. There were some Indian raids through the region as well.
One thing I was always curious about, but never acted on, was the headstone of a Revolutionary soldier, literally next to Route 192. It is in the middle of nowhere, far from any towns or forts. I had moved away but on a recent visit I had the chance to pull over, look at the marker, research the name, and find out who the soldier by the road was.
The grave sits literally feet from the road. Author photo.
Christian Hettick was born in 1750 in Rheinland-Pfalz, modern Germany. He moved to Pennsylvania and settled with many other Germans in the Susquehanna Valley. He resided along the Susquehanna River in what later became the town of Lewisburg. In 1781 he was serving with the Northumberland County militia (today the area is in Union County).
While the Yorktown campaign was underway 300 miles to the south, reports of hostile Indians brought the militia out to patrol here. Finding no hostile enemy, Christian was apparently returning home when he encountered Indians, who shot, killed, and scalped him.
His body was found by the side of the road. He left a pregnant widow, Agnes, with four children, and a daughter was born shortly after his death. His son seven-year-old son Andrew was actually with his father when he was killed. The Indians captured Andrew, but he escaped after several months.
Another view of the grave. Author Photo.
So there he rests, literally by the side of a busy road (thankfully no cars have taken out the small marker). In this quiet corner of central Pennsylvania, far from the large battlefields and campsites, is this reminder of the Revolution.
The headstone is in remarkable condition, and a Revolutionary War service plaque with flag is next to it. Author photo.
Emerging Revolutionary War Era 