On June 16, 1775, George Washington stood before the Continental Congress in Philadelphia and accepted his commission as Commander in Chief of the Continental Army. Washington’s election was not just a military decision; it was a deliberate political and symbolic act, one that helped unify the colonies and provided the revolution with a face of leadership, dignity, and resolve.
On June 14, 1775, the Congress established the Continental Army, and the next day (June 15), delegates unanimously chose George Washington to lead it.
Why Washington? He was a Virginian, which brought balance to a cause that, up to that point, had been largely centered in New England. He was also widely respected as a man of integrity, with military experience gained during the French and Indian War. Just as important, Washington had been an early and vocal critic of British policy. His commitment to liberty, combined with a calm and dignified demeanor, made him the ideal figure to rally support across the colonies.
On June 16, Washington formally accepted the command. In a modest speech, he thanked Congress for their confidence but expressed sincere doubts about his own abilities. “I do not think myself equal to the command I am honored with,” he told them. He went on to pledge that he would accept no salary, only reimbursement for expenses. It was a powerful gesture, signaling that he was not seeking personal gain but was instead answering a call to duty.
On June 19, Washington received his commission in writing. It read, in part: “We, reposing special trust and confidence in the patriotism, valor, conduct, and fidelity of George Washington, do hereby constitute and appoint him General and Commander in chief of the Army of the United Colonies.”
Washington departed Philadelphia shortly thereafter and traveled north to take command of the troops besieging Boston. His arrival at Cambridge on July 3 marked the beginning of a long and arduous campaign. Throughout the war, Washington would lead with patience, resilience, and an unwavering sense of purpose.
The choice of George Washington as commander of the Continental Army would turn out to be one of the most important decisions made in American history. The wisdom of their choice was apparent on December 23, 1783, when Washington, at his zenith following the American victory in the war, he resigned and returned the every same commission to the Congress.
On June 14, 1775, the Continental Congress met in what we call today Independence Hall in Philadelphia. While the delegates met, Massachusetts soldiers under General Artemas Ward were laying siege to the British army in Boston. They were just a few days away from fighting the bloody battle of Bunker Hill. At this point, the thirteen American colonies were carrying on their resistance to British tyranny individually. But with war underway in Massachusetts, an important event occurred on June 14, 1775. That day, the Continental Congress voted to adopt the Massachusetts army and add to it soldiers from Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia. This was the beginning of the Continental Army. The Continental Army would become the unifying force between the various colonies, and would ultimately secure American independence on the battlefield. Today, the United States Army claims June 14, 1775 as its birthday.
The journal of the Continental Congress recorded this for the day:
“Resolved, That six companies of expert riflemen, be immediately raised in Pennsylvania, two in Maryland, and two in Virginia; that each company consist of a captain, three lieutenants, four sergeants, four corporals, a drummer or trumpeter, and sixty-eight privates.
That each company, as soon as completed, shall march and join the army near Boston, to be there employed as light infantry, under the command of the chief Officer in that army.”
Of course, the chief officer of the army had not been selected yet. John Adams rose and nominated Colonel George Washington from Virginia. Washington immediately left the room as the Congress debated choice. While the Congress would not vote on Washington’s nomination until the following day, they had taken a momentous step in creating an army, even while they hoped for an ultimate reconciliation with Great Britain with their English rights preserved.
The Continental Congress prescribed the oath for enlisting Continental troops:
“I have, this day, voluntarily enlisted myself, as a soldier, in the American continental army, for one year, unless sooner discharged: And I do bind myself to conform, in all instances, to such rules and regulations, as are, or shall be, established for the government of the said Army.”
By mid-July the Virginia Continentals would already start marching towards Boston.
This year the United States Army will be doing numerous events to celebrate the momentous event. The National Museum of the US Army in Fairfax County, Virginia also has a special exhibit on display to mark the 250th. Remember the tens of thousands of men who fought in the Continental Army over the eight year war, and the thousands who died in its ranks for our freedom.
On Tuesday, the 250th anniversary of the Battle of Bunker Hill, fought on Breed’s Hill on Charlestown Peninsula, will be remembered. On June 17, 1775, the last major engagement before George Washington arrived in Massachusetts to take command was fought between militia under Colonel William Prescott and British forces under General William Howe. Although a defeat for the patriots, resulting in the death of Dr. Joseph Warren, the victory was a pyrrhic one for the British.
Join Emerging Revolutionary War historians as they discuss the engagement, the personas, and the ramifications of the Battle of Bunker Hill. Also, stay tuned until the end for an announcement as well.
So, two days before the 250th, grab your favorite beverage and tune into our Facebook page at 7 p.m. EDT and have your questions ready. If you are unable to attend the live on Sunday evening, don’t fret, the video will be posted to YouTube by the anniversary and to our podcast channel as soon as possible
The American Revolution on the frontier produced its share of stories and legends. In many ways, the heroes in those tales were more relatable than the men who led the war east of the Appalachians. They were not land-owning generals like George Washington, political organizers like Sam Adams, world-renowned scientists like Benjamin Franklin, inspiring speakers like Patrick Henry, or political philosophers like Thomas Jefferson. Instead, they were farmers turned amateur soldiers, trappers and hunters turned scouts, family men turned avenging marauders. In at least one case, even a quasi-fugitive from the law could become a symbol of protection and security.
By the 19th century, names like Daniel Boone, Simon Kenton, Ebenezer Zane, Lewis Wetzel, Issac Shelby, and Samuel Brady were known to every schoolboy west of the Appalachians. Some of their reputations faded with time as the frontier moved west onto the Great Plains and into the Rocky Mountains. Still, the stories remained, mostly to sit in in aging volumes on a library bookshelf, but occasionally to be dusted off for works of historical fiction. Like most stories, they occasionally morphed and evolved over time in the retelling. Sometimes they hold up quite well on close examination and can be verified.
Sometimes a little more skepticism may be in order. Samuel Brady’s leap over a river is one such story. There are two versions of the story. In one he leaped to the opposite side of a rocky Cuyahoga River chasm. In the other, he leaped entirely across a deep ravine through which Slippery Rock Creek ran.
Emerging Revolutionary War welcomes guest historian Riley Sullivan, Professor of History at San Jacinto College in Houston, Texas.
While many might be familiar with famed engagements at places like Bunker Hill, Saratoga, and Yorktown during the Revolutionary War, few are familiar with the actions that took place near New London, Connecticut in September of 1781. However, for the people of Connecticut, the battles that took place near Groton Heights and New London have been immortalized as a campaign highlighted by treachery and massacre. Largely, this interpretation has been adopted due to the commander of the British forces who engaged in this raid, Benedict Arnold.
Perhaps no other name in American History brings about more scorn than that of Benedict Arnold. Having defected to the British cause late in the Revolutionary War, for Americans at the time–and even today–he is viewed as a modern day Judas. However, with such infamy ultimately comes much misinterpretation of this historical figure and the events he was involved in. In Matthew E. Reardon’s recent study The Traitor’s Homecoming, he attempts to undo much of this misinterpretation. Drawing on previously unused primary sources, Reardon constructs an engaging argument that challenges the traditional view of Arnold’s conduct in the New London raid.
To construct this narrative of the New London raid, Reardon attempts to place into context the setting of the New London raid. By this stage in the war, the conflict in New York had been a state of stalemate for the previous few years. However, with Generals Washington and Rochambeu’s combined Franco-American forces on the move, the British commander in the region, Henry Clinton—informed by faulty intelligence as Reardon demonstrated—was convinced that an attack on New York was imminent. As a result, to divert Washington’s attention away from a possible attack on New York, Clinton authorized Arnold to lead a contingent of British troops to attack the vulnerable Connecticut coastline.
New London made the ideal target for a British raid as it had been a hotbed for commerce and privateering for the Patriot cause. To conduct such a raid, Clinton turned to Arnold as he was both a native of Connecticut and familiar with the New London area. Largely only being contested by militia behind a number of forts that guarded approaches to both the town and the Thames River, Arnold’s combined force of Loyalists, Hessian Jaegers, and British regulars made quick work of the Patriot militia throughout the campaign. Even with New London in their hands, outside events–notably Clinton’s realization that Washington was moving on Cornwallis at Yorktown–led to Arnold having to relinquish his gains. However, with the high casualties suffered by both sides during the raid, coupled with the burning of much of the town, the events “cemented Benedict Arnold’s reputation for villainy.” (x)
When considering the traditional interpretation of Arnold’s raid on New London, Reardon makes it clear throughout his work that a “distorted interpretation” of the events had emerged (ix). From veterans to the Groton Battle Monument at Fort Griswold Battlefield State Park, the events that took place in Connecticut in 1781 have been enshrined as a massacre of Connecticut militia at the hands of Arnold. However, when looking at contemporary letters, diaries, and later pension records, Reardon demonstrates that there are some noticeable gaps within the traditional account of this campaign. In particular, when examining the death of Colonel William Ledyard–who was alleged to have been killed while attempting to surrender–Reardon concluded that through these sources, the traditional accounts accepted proved to be inconsistent with contemporary accounts of the campaign.
But, even with these inconsistencies, this is not to say that the fighting at Fort Griswold and the subsequent burning of New London was less than brutal. Reardon wrote that “the immediate reaction of the community was shock” and that “for many it was beyond comprehension.” (339) To no surprise, this sheer shock of the fighting coupled with Arnold’s involvement led to this distorted narrative of the campaign.
Through the examination of contemporary letters, diaries, and later pension applications, Reardon is able to reconstruct in great detail the events of Arnold’s New London raid and offer an unbiased narrative. By providing these fresh sources in The Traitor’s Homecoming, Reardon effectively builds on the existing literature of the subject and demonstrates how public perception can lead to the misinterpretation of historical events like that of the New London raid.
Details:
Matthew E. Reardon, The Traitor’s Homecoming: Benedict Arnold’s Raid on New London, Connecticut, September 4-13, 1781. Published by: Savas Beatie LLC. Summer 2024. 448 Pages.
*Check out Emerging Revolutionary War’s YouTube page as well for a “Rev War Revelry” interview with author Matthew E. Reardon.*
Katy in her later service as the Continental Navy ship Providence. “Sloop Providence under Sail by Kristopher Battles” (Naval History and Heritage Command)
Since his brief visit in November 1774 and his longer term stay commencing in December, Captain James Wallace of the British ship Rose (20 guns), had patrolled Narragansett Bay to enforce the Coercive Acts and prevent Britain’s rebellious colonies from importing gunpowder and armaments. Loyalists had taken heart and rebels had been frustrated with his presence. Not only were his patrols interfering with local commerce by seizing ships and their cargos—his main mission—but he created a more visible symbol of Britain’s ability and willingness to force its colonists to comply with Parliament’s laws.
One of the loyalists encouraged by the Royal Navy presence in Narragansett Bay was a Newport merchant named George Rome. Wallace had visited Rome and was dining with him when a breathless messenger warned the captain that a mob was out to tar and feather him back in December, 1774. In the moment, nothing came of it, but Governor Joseph Wanton warned Wallace that the town was not safe for British officers, sailors, or loyal subjects. Things remained at a low simmer that winter and spring, including the initial weeks after the Lexington and Concord. Tensions, however, could not help but rise. Diarist Ezra Stiles, recorded on May 23 that some 90 Rhode Island soldiers under the command of Captains [John] Topham and [Thomas] Tew marched from the Newport courthouse and through town beating up volunteers to join the nascent American Army. Wallace was dining in town that day and no doubt heard the racket.[1] Stiles wrote, “The Tories were greatly mortified to see the daring Boldness of the Rebels as they called them. The Tories had said that the Men o’War would fire the To[wn] if any Soldiers were raised in it. But there was no Molestation.” From Stiles’ version of events, the march appears as nothing less than a provocation to determine whether the rumored threat of Wallace and his ships to Newport proper was a bluff. The lack of an immediate response may have demonstrated that it was. In truth, a significant portion of Newport’s population opposed the rebels and voluntarily supplied Wallace and contracted for grain to provide to the British army.
We are excited to announce that ERW historians Rob Orrison and Mark Maloy will be leading a four day tour of Boston and sites associated with the opening of the American Revolution. Part of BGES’ Field University Program, this tour is part of a series of tours that BGES is hosting focusing on the American Revolution.
From the BGES website: “Long considered the “Cradle of the Revolution,” Boston, Massachusetts, was home to many of the era’s leading figures—Dr. Joseph Warren, Samuel Adams, Paul Revere, John Adams, and many more. Its streets and wharves fostered the revolutionary spirit that would ignite a continent. In December 1773, tensions escalated dramatically when dozens of Bostonians and others boarded three ships at Griffin’s Wharf and dumped East India Company tea into the harbor in defiance of the Tea Act. Parliament soon responded with the punitive “Intolerable Acts,” placing Massachusetts under military control.
The powder keg exploded on April 19, 1775, when British Regulars and American colonists clashed on Lexington Green, spilling the first blood of the American Revolution. That day, a running battle raged from Concord to Cambridge—an opening salvo immortalized as the “shot heard ‘round the world.”
Join us during this 250th anniversary year for a multi-exploration of Boston and the nearby villages of Lexington and Concord. We’ll visit the pivotal sites and relive the moments that launched the Revolution, concluding with the dramatic engagements along the now-famous Battle Road.”
To purchase tickets, visit: https://blueandgrayeducation.org/tours/cradle-of-the-revolution-boston-to-lexington-and-concord/ Blue and Gray Education Society is a 501c3 created in 1994 to promote understanding of battlefields and other historic sites through the conduct of field study tours and seminars. BGES has sponsored many education and interpretive focused projects across the country.
James Wallace of the Royal Navy commanded the twenty-gun Rose and arrived in Narragansett Bay on November 5, 1774. Over the next six months, it served as a base to maintain his ship and operate in the waters off Connecticut and Rhode Island to enforce the Coercive Acts passed earlier that year and prevent the colonies from importing guns, gunpowder, or other armaments. The Rhode Island Assembly took advantage of Wallace’s brief absence in December to remove most of the armaments from Fort George, which protected Newport, and take them to Providence, ostensibly to defend the colony from Canadians and Native Americans. Of course, they were also farther from British reach. The governor was explicit with Captain Wallace about the motivation: “they had done it to prevent their falling into the hands of the King, or any of his servants; and that they meant to make use of them, to defend themselves against any power that shall offer to molest them.”[i] Wallace sensed rebellion in the air and promptly asked the governor, Joseph Wanton, whether he [Wallace] might expect assistance in carrying out the king’s policies in Rhode Island. The answer was a swift “no.”
Nevertheless, Wallace remained ashore, as officers and seamen did when a ship was in port. As if to confirm local sensibilities, Wallace heard that a mob threatened to seize, tar, and feather him while he dined ashore. He quickly ordered his pinnace and cutter—boats from the Rose—to be manned and summoned men to his temporary quarters. He waited six hours, but no mob appeared. Not wanting to over-react to rumors, he again wrote the governor to ask about the rumored mob and determine whether Wanton would use his powers in Wallace’s defense. Wanton declined to respond in writing, but assured Wallace’s messenger that “they,” meaning the men assembled on the streets, did not intend to insult Wallace. Instead, Wanton himself feared local rebels might assault him and the town. He gave the messenger, and by extension Wallace, the impression that Newport was not safe for the King’s subjects, including the ships, officers, and crew of the Royal Navy.[ii] It was unwelcome news for the naval officer, as Vice Admiral Samuel Graves, commanding the North American Station, expected Wallace and Rose to winter over in the bay.
Following the initial skirmishes at Lexington and Concord on April 19, 1775, colonial militias from throughout New England converged around Boston, with the area of Cambridge and Roxbury serving as the epicenters of the camps. These New England militia effectively layed siege to the city where British General Thomas Gage concentrated after April 19th. The British, cut off from the countryside, relied heavily on supplies brought in by sea. At the same time, American forces were eager to secure resources and deny the British any additional supplies from nearby coastal areas.
The location of the HMS Diana is marked with “16” on the map
One such resource-rich area was Noddle’s Island and Hog Island both located in Boston Harbor. These islands contained valuable livestock and hay, which the British had been attempting to secure to feed their troops and horses. American intelligence reported that the British were planning to remove these resources, prompting a proactive operation by the colonial forces to beat them to it.
In early May, Dr. Joseph Warren led a group inspecting the islands and recognized their imporance. As part of the Massachusetts Committee of Safety, Warren led the effort for a reslolution to be passed to either capture or destroy the supplies on the islands. On May 14th, the Committee stated “Resolved, as their opinion, that all the live stock be taken from Noddle’s Island and Hog Island, and from that part of Chelsea near the sea coast, and be driven back; and that the execution of this business be committed to the selectmen of the towns of Medford, Malden, Chelsea, and Lynn, and that they be supplied with such a number of men, as they shall need, from the regiments now at Medford.” Soon the commander of the New England army around Boston, General Artemas Ward, put a plan in motion to quickly strike both islands.
The American expedition was led by Colonel John Stark and Colonel Israel Putnam, both future generals in the Continental Army. The colonial forces, primarily composed of New Hampshire and Massachusetts militias, planned a nighttime amphibious raid to remove the livestock and destroy hay supplies that might benefit the British. On the night of May 27, colonial forces quietly moved onto Hog Island and began driving off livestock and burning haystacks. British forces, stationed in Boston and alerted to the colonial activity, responded by dispatching marines and the British schooner HMS Diana, a lightly armed but maneuverable vessel well-suited for operations in the shallow waters of the harbor.
As the colonists worked to transport livestock to the mainland, they encountered resistance from British marines who had landed on Noddle’s Island and began advancing toward their position. A sharp skirmish ensued, during which the American militia used the terrain to their advantage, fighting from behind trees, stone walls, and other natural cover. The colonial forces managed to repel the British marines, inflicting casualties and forcing a retreat.
Lieutenant Thomas Graves (nephew of Vice Admiral Samuel Graves) commander of the HMS Diana. Shown in his rear admiral uniform in ca. 1801. Often confused with Lord Thomas Graves, British commander during the Battle of the Capes
The turning point of the engagement came with the involvement of the HMS Diana. The schooner attempted to support the marines by moving up the narrow Chelsea Creek to engage the colonial militia and cut off their withdrawal. However, as the tide receded and the ship ventured too far inland, it became grounded in the shallow, muddy waters.
Seeing an opportunity, the colonists brought up field artillery from shore and opened fire on the stranded vessel. Over the course of the battle, they subjected the Diana to intense musket and cannon fire. Unable to refloat the ship due to the falling tide and increasing colonial pressure, the British crew was forced to abandon it. American forces quickly boarded the vessel, stripped it of usable supplies, weaponry and its 76 foot mast, and then set it ablaze, destroying the schooner completely.
The Battle of Chelsea Creek resulted in a clear American victory, both strategically and psychologically. The destruction of the HMS Diana marked the first loss of a Royal Navy vessel in the Revolutionary War, dealing a symbolic blow to British morale. For the colonists, it was a tangible demonstration of their ability to challenge British authority not only on land but at sea.
Major General Israel Putnam said after the fight on Chelsea Creek “I wish we could have something of this kind to do every day,”
Tactically, the victory helped to solidify American control of the Boston-area islands and limited the British army’s ability to forage for supplies. This contributed to the worsening conditions inside besieged Boston and increased pressure on General Gage. The morale boost for the colonial militias was significant; it reinforced the notion that British troops and naval forces were not invincible and that well-coordinated militia operations could succeed.
In addition, the battle was notable for showcasing early instances of American military ingenuity and leadership. Figures like Israel Putnam and John Stark went on to distinguish themselves in later battles, and the ability of the militia to effectively coordinate a land-sea operation foreshadowed the more sophisticated tactics that would develop over the course of the war. A few months later on August 1st, the mast of the HMS Diana was raised on Prospect Hill as a liberty pole. A symbol that was seen by not just the Americans around Cambridge but also the British in Boston. This location was also where legend states that George Washington ordered the first American flag, the Grand Union, to be raised on January 1, 1776.
While over shadowed by Lexington, Concord, or Bunker Hill, the Battle of Chelsea Creek played a crucial role in the early war. It helped secure the outer perimeter of the Siege of Boston, denied the British critical supplies, and emboldened the colonial cause at a time when confidence was still fragile. The success of the operation, including the destruction of the Diana, offered a dramatic image of colonial resistance and ingenuity that resonated beyond New England.
Today, the location of Noddle’s and Hog Island are gone. Nineteenth century and modern infill has completely reshaped the area from mudflats and tidal marshes to buildable land. Modern day East Boston, Winthrop and Logan Airport cover the area. The community of Somerville contines to commemorate the raising of the Grand Union flag on January 1 Diana‘s mast with a flag raising ceremony. Though mostly forgotten, the fighting along Chelsea Creek continued to embolden men like Joseph Warren and Israel Putnam and encourage their agressiveness a few weeks later on the Charlestown peninsula.
Remember this Memorial Day the approximately 25,000 Patriots who died to secure the independence and liberty of the United States between 1775 – 1783. They died all across the continent in battle, in prisons, and in hospitals. In Philadelphia stands a monument to the Tomb of the Unknown Revolutionary War Soldier. The memorial stands in Washington Square, just a few blocks from Independence Hall. Washington Square was an 18th-century burying ground for the destitute, a Potter’s Field. During the Revolutionary War, it was used as a burying ground for both American and British soldiers who died of disease or were killed in nearby battles.
Not as famous as the Tomb of the Unknowns in Arlington Cemetery, this one was completed in 1957. The year before, archaeologists found the remains of a soldier who had a musket ball wound in his skull. They took these remains and placed them in a sarcophagus with the words: “Beneath this stone rests a soldier of Washington’s army who died to give you liberty.” He lies as a representative of the thousands of men who gave their lives during the brutal war. In front of the tomb, an eternal flame flickers in remembrance of the dead. A statue of the soldier’s commander George Washington looks over him. Behind Washington are the words: “Freedom is a light for which many men have died in darkness.” On one side is a quote from Washington’s Farewell Address: “The independence and liberty you possess are the work of joint councils and joint efforts of common dangers, suffering and success.” On the other, an explanation of the significance of the site: “In unmarked graves within this square lie thousands of unknown soldiers of Washington’s Army who died of wounds and sickness during the Revolutionary War.”
In the plaza of the square are multiple Revolutionary War era flags. The site is somber and inspiring. It was a place of somber reflection even while the war was being fought. On April 13, 1777, John Adams walked through the burying ground and wrote to his wife Abigail what he saw:
“I have spent an Hour, this Morning, in the Congregation of the dead. I took a Walk into the Potters Field, a burying Ground between the new stone Prison, and the Hospital, and I never in my whole Life was affected with so much Melancholly. The Graves of the soldiers, who have been buryed, in this Ground, from the Hospital and bettering House, during the Course of the last Summer, Fall, and Winter, dead of the small Pox, and Camp Diseases, are enough to make the Heart of stone to melt away. The Sexton told me, that upwards of two Thousand soldiers had been buried there, and by the Appearance, of the Graves, and Trenches, it is most probable to me, he speaks within Bounds.”
Two weeks later he wrote to the unborn millions who became the beneficiaries of these mens’ ultimate sacrifice: “Posterity! You will never know, how much it cost the present Generation, to preserve your Freedom! I hope you will make a good Use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in Heaven, that I ever took half the Pains to preserve it.”
Emerging Revolutionary War Era 