The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]

The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]

Username:	Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

All Forums

AGAINST ALL ODDS MESSAGE BOARD - Mohicans Version

Lexington Green - 1775

Who Fired First?

Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!

Screensize:

UserName:

Password:

Format Mode:

Format:

Videos:

Message Icon:

Message:

Smilies




		$computer woes {CW:_(}$

[quote][i]Originally posted by CT•Ranger[/i]
[br]"I saw, and heard, a gun fired, which appeared to be a pistol. Then I could distinguish two guns, and then a continual roar of musketry." -Paul Revere, Deposition, 1775

"a few guns which we took to be pistols, from some of the Regulars mounted on horses."

"the second of these Officers fired a pistol towards the militia as they were dispersing." -Jonas Clarke, Lexington Minister

"Which party fired first I cannot exactly say, as our troops rushed on shouting and huzzaing." -Lieutenant Edward Gould, King's Own Lights

"Some of the villians were got over the hedge, fired at us, and it was then and not before that the soldiers fired." - Lietenant Sutherland, 38th Foot

"some of the Rebels who had jumped over the wall, fired 4 or 5 shott at the soldiers...upon this, without any order or regularity, the Light Infantry began a scattered fire." Major Pitcairn, Royal Marines

In his excellent book on the Battle of Lexington and Concord titled "Paul Revere's Ride," historian David Hackett Fischer proposes a theory where several shots were fired nearly simultaneously by a British officer on horseback and a militiaman/men near Buckman's Tavern. Few were able to see the entire field, and most men were watching only their opponents and would not have seen a shot from their own side. Nearly everyone agreed, the  first shot did NOT come from Parker's militiamen on the common, nor the Light Infantry rank and file before them. What do you think?

-CT•Ranger

"Now we are glad to learn the skulking way of war.” - John Eliot (during King Philip's War 1675/6)
[/quote]

Upload an Image File From Your PC For Insertion in Your Post

- HTML is OFF | Forum Code is ON

Check here to include your profile signature.
Check here to subscribe to this topic.

T O P I C R E V I E W
CT•Ranger	Posted - October 28 2002 : 9:37:28 PM "I saw, and heard, a gun fired, which appeared to be a pistol. Then I could distinguish two guns, and then a continual roar of musketry." -Paul Revere, Deposition, 1775 "a few guns which we took to be pistols, from some of the Regulars mounted on horses." "the second of these Officers fired a pistol towards the militia as they were dispersing." -Jonas Clarke, Lexington Minister "Which party fired first I cannot exactly say, as our troops rushed on shouting and huzzaing." -Lieutenant Edward Gould, King's Own Lights "Some of the villians were got over the hedge, fired at us, and it was then and not before that the soldiers fired." - Lietenant Sutherland, 38th Foot "some of the Rebels who had jumped over the wall, fired 4 or 5 shott at the soldiers...upon this, without any order or regularity, the Light Infantry began a scattered fire." Major Pitcairn, Royal Marines In his excellent book on the Battle of Lexington and Concord titled "Paul Revere's Ride," historian David Hackett Fischer proposes a theory where several shots were fired nearly simultaneously by a British officer on horseback and a militiaman/men near Buckman's Tavern. Few were able to see the entire field, and most men were watching only their opponents and would not have seen a shot from their own side. Nearly everyone agreed, the first shot did NOT come from Parker's militiamen on the common, nor the Light Infantry rank and file before them. What do you think? -CT•Ranger "Now we are glad to learn the skulking way of war.” - John Eliot (during King Philip's War 1675/6)
14 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First)
1812marine	Posted - January 04 2003 : 5:59:57 PM Not having studied all accounts of the action on the Green, but having military experience and two reenactments at North Bridge and Buckman's Tavern, my educated (sort of) conclusion would be accidental discharge on the militia's side. I know my hands were slightly shaking when confronted with about 70+ Redcoats inline.
SgtMunro	Posted - November 01 2002 : 09:21:05 AM I have been perusing the Lexington Milita Rolls, and found a 63 year old Ensign Robert Munroe. I was able to cross reference his name to a Corporal Robert Munroe of the 42nd, who was present at Fontenoy in 1745. Do you think they were the same man? Your Humble Servant, Sgt. Duncan Munro Capt. Graham's Coy 1/42nd Royal Highlanders "Nemo Me Impune Lacessit"
SgtMunro	Posted - November 01 2002 : 09:08:17 AM Yes, obviously a tactical folly on the British Commanders part. The smart thing would have been to have the Light Company skirt wide to the right or left, and engage in harrasing fire until a proper flanking action could have been made or a general assault supported. If anyone appeared green, it was Pitcairn, he should have stayed on board a ship with his marines. Sgt. Duncan Munro Capt. Graham's Coy 1/42nd Royal Highlanders "Nemo Me Impune Lacessit"
CT•Ranger	Posted - November 01 2002 : 08:35:57 AM There were 8 miltia casualties at Lexington Common, and the miltia was already dispersed when the British soldiers began firing, with no orders. And they weren't firing volleys. It was a case of 2 or 3 soldiers breaking ranks, firing here or there at indiviual militiamen they picked out from the others, mutch like a wild indisciplined skirmish. Their officer's were helpless to restrain them. Until Smith arrived and ordered the drummer to call the men back to order. Later that day Parker brought his militiamen back to order and they engaged the returning British at the county line, inflicting heavy casualties, including shooting Pitcairn off his horse. At the North Bridge, the British Lights were ordered to form a "street firing" formation, designed to mass as much firepower as possible in a small constricted area. It consisted of several short ranks, the second rank took a half step to the right, the third rank a half step to the left. This let three ranks present at the same time, fire a volley, then move to the rear and re-load. The idea was to present continuous volley fire in a constricted area. This was not the normal skirmish formations the Lights were used to. They should have been firing heavy massed volleys, but they were green, and their firing was ragged and too high. The Militia on the other side of the Bridge were in 2 long files which curved down the hill and along the causeway. They were effectivley "crossing the T" to borrow a naval term. The British were caught in a confused mass, where only the front ranks could fire, while all the militiamen had a clear shot at the British. YMHOS, CT•Ranger "Now we are glad to learn the skulking way of war.” - John Eliot (during King Philip's War 1675/6)
SgtMunro	Posted - October 31 2002 : 11:01:18 PM As far as the soldier who fired first at the North Bridge, this was after they already had an engagement at Lexington, by then the Crown Forces were 'commited' so to say. Their fire may have appeared ragged at North Bridge (Light Infantry Tactics did not involve the volley fire of battalion or 'hat' companies, they fired independent at a mark), but it was still efficent enough to drive the milita from Lexington Green (With substantial casualties, on the colonials side if memory serves me correct). As for the 'flee in panic', an initial repulse is expected (as anyone who has seen real combat knows), but it was more of a tactical withdraw or 'fighting retreat' back to Boston, where a certain level of discipline was maintained (Albeit with quickly deteriorating morale). Your Humble Servant, Sgt. Duncan Munro Capt. Graham's Coy 1/42nd Royal Highlanders "Nemo Me Impune Lacessit" Edited by - SgtMunro on October 31 2002 11:04:15 PM
CT•Ranger	Posted - October 31 2002 : 10:29:24 PM quote: Originally posted by SgtMunro: (Remember, these were professional soldiers, not prone to fire at the drop of a hat. Firing without being fired upon, sans the order of a commisioned officer, was almost an instant death penalty in the British Army). You might think that, but their conduct that day suggests otherwise. I agree the British garrison of Boston were supposed to be professionals, but I would say the militia, minutemen, and alarm companies acted more like professional soldiers that day. Especially when you compare the colonials and redcoats at Concord. The typical portrayal of the legendary individuals sniping from the cover of trees and stone walls, an army of one, acting on their own, against the invading British is really a complete myth. Several British soldiers described that the Colonials at the North Bridge "advanced with the greatest regularity," and "they moved down upon me in a seeming regular manner," and "they began to march by divisions down upon us from their left in a very military manner." These redcoats were amazed that the "country people" would march against the King's troops in military formation with order and discipline. It was a British soldier who fired first at the North Bridge, without orders. Followed by two others, and then a ragged volley, showing the same indiscipline the British troops showed at Lexington. At both Lexington Common and the North Bridge the green troops fired high. And the militia advanced through the British firing with a discipline which astonished the Regulars. At fifty yards the miltia fired a deadly accurate volley, they aimed carefully and low. This brings up the question, how could supposed ill-trained militia cause elite light infantry, picked troops, to flee in panic? British Ensign Lister wrote that "The weight of their fire was such that we was obliged to give way, then run with the greatest precipitance." They may have been "professionals" but they certainly weren't seasoned veterans. But then, neither were the miltia. The miltia certainly had less training than the redcoats, but countless primary accounts show that throughout the day the miltia engaged the British in disciplined regular military formations all along the battle road. So what accounts for their superior performance in battle that day? And why did the British act so poorly? Forgive my confusing ramblings, I'm too tired to be typing. -CT•Ranger "Now we are glad to learn the skulking way of war.” - John Eliot (during King Philip's War 1675/6)
SgtMunro	Posted - October 31 2002 : 4:50:42 PM Ranger, I might understand the point of the 'tired and irritatted soldiers' but it was not as long a "ruck" as British Soldiers were used to making, just from their daily drill (in all weather). As far as 'provactive/combative conduct', there is just no comparrison to throwing rocks/ice and other objects from a large crowd at a couple of soldiers (Remember, these were professional soldiers, not prone to fire at the drop of a hat. Firing without being fired upon, sans the order of a commisioned officer, was almost an instant death penalty in the British Army). The 'local festering distrust', also fails to measure up to the months and months of off-duty soldier/civilian confrontation which had occured in Boston (To also include documented physical attacks on single and small groups of off-duty soldiers by the civilian populace). Now your last point about Adair's failure to follow Maj. Pitcairn's orders to the letter, might have prevented the whole affair or at least delayed it. Your Humble Servant, Sgt. Duncan Munro Capt. Graham's Coy 1/42nd Royal Highlanders "Nemo Me Impune Lacessit"
CT•Ranger	Posted - October 31 2002 : 2:10:03 PM quote: Originally posted by SgtMunro: You may point to the Boston Massacare of a few years before, but that situation was not unlike Kent State (Tired and irratated soldiers, provactive/combative conduct by the civilians present, a local festering distrust from and of both parties, etc.). Sgt.Munro, I think your statement about the conditions leading to the Boston Massacre and Kent State also fits the situation on Lexington Common quite well. "Tired and irritated soldiers": The British troops had been marching all night at a good pace in soaking wet uniforms(after crossing the back bay they disembarked in waist deep water, and stood shivering on shore for quite awhile before marching through wet marshland), and were also irritated and alarmed that their "secret" mission had been discovered. "provactive/combative conduct by the civilians present": The fact that the militia was mustered at all was provactative, and they further did not lay down their arms as the King's officer ordered them to, and reluctantly began to disperse while some defiantly stood their ground. The number of civilian spectators gathered around the common also made it confusing, Pitcairn thought there were "near 200 of the rebels." "a local festering distrust from and of both parties": There had been similar confrontations in the recent past, just a little over one month before, Leslie's expedition to Salem Feb. 26-7, 1775 had been turned back in a very heated confrontation at the bridge between Salem and Marblehead by local men who were armed and ready to fight, rather than let the British troops proceed to take their munitions. And 4 months before the first blows of the Revolution ocurred on December 14th, 1774, local miltiamen stormed Ft. William and Mary in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, shots were fired and 2 british soldiers were wounded. Now here's a what if. Would there have been a battle at all if Jesse Adair hadn't led the vangaurd onto Lexington Common, but had just proceeded on the left fork past the Common as Pitcairn ordered? -CT•Ranger "I'll give them the guts of my gun!" Ebenezer Munroe, Lexington Common, April 19, 1775
SgtMunro	Posted - October 31 2002 : 10:09:24 AM The question remains, for all of us "What if?" types. Would those soldiers have fired first, on what was still then, their own countrymen?(Who were doing nothing up to that point, but failing to disarm/disperse) You may point to the Boston Massacare of a few years before, but that situation was not unlike Kent State (Tired and irratated soldiers, provactive/combative conduct by the civilians present, a local festering distrust from and of both parties, etc.). Your Humble Servant, Sgt. Duncan Munro Capt. Graham's Coy 1/42nd Royal Highlanders "Nemo Me Impune Lacessit"
Theresa	Posted - October 30 2002 : 07:48:11 AM quote: BTW, my own, unsubstantiated opinion is that someone not on the Green fired that infamous shot. Just a hunch ... [/b] Was there a "grassy knoll"? Theresa
richfed	Posted - October 30 2002 : 04:56:31 AM Gee willickers!!! Over on the real Against All Odds site, I've begun a series of polls - in a [so-far] vain attempt at stimulating some conversation over there ... SIDEBAR: _______ One of the worst errors I've made in this here webmaster business was combining the two boards, Mohican Board & Against All Odds board, when we converted to Snitz Forums from the old WWWboard system. They had been, to that point, two separate & distinct sites & boards. Though the Against All Odds board never flourished like this Mohicans board has, it did garner some activity from a mostly different audience. It "died" after the combining, and has remained mostly dead even after I re-setup a new board over there. Weird, cause the Custer section of that site, in particular, usually ranks ahead of just about every LOTM page we have in terms of daily visitation. Anyway ... _______ ... and the next poll I had planned to put up was a "Who fired the first shot at Lexington?" poll!! Guess I'll add one ... right here, in just a bit!!! Thanks for bringing it up, CT! BTW, my own, unsubstantiated opinion is that someone not on the Green fired that infamous shot. Just a hunch ...
SgtMunro	Posted - October 30 2002 : 03:23:45 AM Aye Sergeant, war is always easy to start, if only it could end the same way. I've even heard it was an aged fellow, nearby dispatching a dog/fox/cow/horse (depending on the story teller), but I have found no concrete documentation supporting such a therory. Your Humble Servant, Sgt. Duncan Munro Capt. Graham's Coy 1/42nd Royal Highlanders "Nemo Me Impune Lacessit"
Gasaka Soquilla	Posted - October 29 2002 : 04:31:05 AM O'Siyo, I'd even heard a (conspiracy) theory somewhere (too late in the evening to remember) that the ol' rabble rouser Sam Adams fired a pistol from a carriage, thereby triggering the general melee! ;-) A nervous trigger finger, a poorly functioning weapon, Sam Adams? I guess we'll never really know.... Cheers, "Sjt. Scobie" Geneway's Co'y, Butler's Rangers 1777-1784 "They waged a bloody, no-quarter war, and were paid back in kind."
SgtMunro	Posted - October 29 2002 : 01:44:05 AM Ranger, I agree with your theory. It could have been very well an A/D (Accidental Discharge) in either line, or nearby, not related to the stand-off. This would be followed by what is known as "The Feeding Frenzy Effect", where everyone engages, believing that the shot was destined for them. Your Humble Servant, Sgt. Duncan Munro Capt. Graham's Coy 1/42nd Royal Highlanders "Nemo Me Impune Lacessit"

DISCLAIMER
Tune, 40, used by permission - composed by Ron Clarke

Custom Search

The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]

Current Mohicanland page raised in 0.16 seconds