“Contrary to general opinion, only thirteen percent of colonial Americans owned a gun at the start of the American Revolution and of those, clearly half did not work.”
Michael Bellesiles, noted author and researcher
The Myth of Minutemen looms large in legends surrounding the American Revolution. Statues with robust colonials grasping their musket line New England village squares. As such, one of the more romantic notions that swirl around these hardy patriots convince us that they were all crack shots who could drop a redcoat at two hundred yards. Also, they all owned guns. By the late 1800’s, gun manufacturer Smith and Western, one of the earliest marketing geniuses to launch a highly successful advertising campaign, induced Americans to believe that the gun was the most important aspect of colonial life. And as such, this gun culture resulted in incredible militia marksmen who awed their British targets.
The truth is a far cry from legend. A brief study of history shows that not only were colonials poor shots, but most did not even own a gun prior to the outbreak of the American Revolution. This leads to a very practical question: If these militiamen rarely if ever fired a gun, when given one, how the hell could they miraculously become such incredible marksmen and hit what they were aiming at? Stats give us the answer. They did not. Not even close!
How can we not believe that every colonial owned a gun and was an excellent shot when this is still drummed into our psyche, supported as common sense? So too, how can we doubt the militiamen’s accuracy with the musket when renowned authors buy into this legend, a myth vigorously propagated by self-interest gun lobbying groups like the National Rifle Association. Among the countless examples are Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States, who wrote “The American victory over the British Army was made possible by the existence of an already armed people. Just about every white male had a gun, and could shoot.” And then there is the popular American Revolution author David Hackett Fischer falling for the accepted myth when he wrote in his well-written text Washington’s Crossing; “Half a million free Americans were of military age… The great majority owned their own weapons…” These are just a few of the countless examples. The answer for this inaccuracy lies in what we all learned while in high school English or history classes; the unavoidable urge humanity has for hopping on the ‘band wagon.’
“Though fired at close range, only about one bullet in three hundred actually hit a British soldier during the Battle of Lexington and Concord.”
Webb Garrison, author and professor of history
Statistic Over Assumptions
On that eventful April 19th morning, 1775, colonial minutemen and militiamen proved they were courageous, but so too, that they were lousy shots. Only one out of fifteen militiamen who fired tens of thousands of lead balls towards the British at the Battle of Lexington and Concord even so much as grazed the coat of a redcoat. As nearly as can be determined, 73 British soldiers died with 174 wounded. Another 26 were listed as missing in action and assumed killed or deserted. That brought the total number of British casualties to 273 out of 1,800 troops who participated. An estimated 3,763 militiamen lined the route British troops marched from Boston to Concord and back again. As the British paraded by each positioning of men, even with many militiamen firing a few rounds before pulling back along the flanks and racing ahead to have another go at the redcoats, it is safe to estimate that each colonial that day fired an average of 18 shots. That would put the number of lead hurled against the hated ‘lobster backs’ as 75,000. What they lacked in skill, these hardy militiamen made up for it in tenacity as they fired from the stone walls and fences at extremely close range. But still they missed. Only one bullet in 300 killed or wounded a British soldier; three thousand’s of percent accuracy!
To put this into perspective, at today’s market, a .50 caliber bullet (most in the 18th century were as high as .70 caliber) when purchased in bulk or military surplus costs at least $3 per bullet. If you were at a firing range experiencing similar skills as the average colonial firing at the British, you would spend upwards of $900 and pretty much the entire day, to hit the target but once. Not exactly the minuteman marksmanship we have been led to believe.
Birth and Death of the Minuteman
On October 14, 1774, the Continental Congress adopted a “Declaration of Rights and Grievances.” This held that self-government was an inherent right of each British colony. It was an open invitation to armed reprisal. The first thing our founders did was to weed out loyalist commanders of the militias throughout the colonies. In Massachusetts, that amounted to half of the thirty militias across the colony. Once this was done, these citizen para-military groups were reorganized under new officers. It was decided that one-third of the men in each militia company were to be ready to act “at a minute’s notice.” These were young men, twenty-five years and younger. The first companies of minutemen were formed in the fall of 1774 and continued right up to April 1775, whereas the Battle of Lexington and Concord proved to be the first, and last, battle the minuteman as an organization participated in. After the battle, Massachusetts Provincial Congress scrapped the minuteman organization in favor of an army of thirteen-thousand volunteers who enlisted for eight months. Therefore, no patriot played the role of minuteman for more than six months and for some, only a few days.
Why Were our Founders So Keen to Smuggle and Hoard Arms Prior to Hostilities?
At the start of the American Revolution, only 13% of colonials had a gun in their household. Of that number, clearly half were so ancient, they were nearly worthless. As to militiamen practicing on the green once a month; attendance was poor at best (most had farms to manage). Some showed up with a workable musket or firelock, others with the family relic, while most just stood around with sticks, marching the hour or so, often less, before all headed over to the local tavern where the real militia muster began. It is a wonder that when the time came, with many being handed their musket just days before their use against the British, that when pointed, these farmers didn’t shoot each other.
During the early 1770’s, local patriot organizations popped up all over the colonies, such as Committees of Correspondence and their military arm labeled Committees of Safety. They spent countless hours trying to procure muskets. Why did these Founders risk both their fortunes and lives smuggling cashes of French muskets from the West Indies to be stored at a local councilman’s barn or basement? Why bother when every yeoman bending their elbow at the local tavern afterwards staggered home carting their musket or grove bored rifle? Fact is, they knew most farmers and merchants lacked a weapon. So too, the condition of the muskets that were available were pathetic at best. These influential patriotic gents had to buy all they could from local gunsmiths, or smuggle in decent firearms if they ever expected to stand toe to toe with the British in armed conflict. Some scholars believe that the Battle of Lexington and Concord, April 19, 1775, which marked the beginning of the American Revolution, would probably never have occurred had not the Massachusetts founders stashed muskets and ammunition in regional depots. This tempted the British to try and confiscate the hoard reported at a barn at Concord; the fuse that ignited into a flaming torch and beacon for revolt.
Why Did So Few New Englanders Own a Gun?
What the Minuteman lacked in skill, he more than made up for in courage.
First and foremost, guns and ammunition were expensive. A musket could cost up to sixty pounds during a time when many colonials could barely scrape twenty to thirty pounds a year in wages. Add to that black powder, because local supply was almost nonexistent, had to be imported, mainly from France and mainland Europe. This placed a very high premium on it. The Navigation Act, passed in the mid 1600’s, required all foreign goods to be first sent to England where a duty was levied before it was loaded onto English ships for America. All costs of course, then as it is now, was passed onto the consumer. To avoid this duty, much of the available powder was smuggled to America by way of the Dutch West Indies. This was a windfall for the guys running the smuggling, mainly wealthy folks like John Hancock of Boston, whose price set for the ‘black gold’ was sky-high. The lack of black powder was Washington’s most dire concern when he took over command of the hapless militia surrounding Boston that summer of 1775. It was almost non-existent and certainly not enough for the growing number of militiamen signing up to fight who, of course, showed up without black powder. The reason the British eventually swarmed over the redoubt at the Battle of Bunker Hill, June 17, 1775, was the fact the patriot defenders ran out of powder.
Secondly, there was less danger from Native Americans. By the mid 1700’s, sprawling communities of farms dotted the landscape all along the Eastern seaborn and over a hundred miles into the interior. The dangers experienced by the first pioneers, those of savage animals and hostile Native Americans attempting to keep their lands, lessened as the country was domiciled and the ‘Indian’ was pushed further west. Forests were leveled, fields plowed, and livestock filled the meadows and barns. Therefore, there was no need to own a gun for protection unless you lived on the edge of ‘civilization’, i.e.: an ‘over the mountain man’ in the Ohio Valley or west of the Adirondacks where potential clashes among Native Americans remained.
Thirdly, colonials for the most part just didn’t hunt. There wasn’t much need for it. Why pay for an expensive gun to trounce around the woods looking for game that was both time-consuming and not needed? Farming, as every agriculturalist will tell you, eats up pretty much every waking moment. Colonial times were no different if not worse. If you wanted meat, all the farmer had to do was go to the barn and slaughter all that was needed. If you were a merchant, just climb on your wagon and trot over to the nearest farm and purchase what you want. So too, wilderness settlements owned livestock and only implemented their food supplies with occasional hunting. The hunting craze in America didn’t come about until the mid-1800’s. With the advent of novelists and printed media romanticizing hunting clubs prevalent among English aristocratic society, wealthy and even middle-class Americans were sold. Americans in droves spent their money in guns, hunting lodges, and hiring ‘guides’ to simulate English royalty’s ‘country outings in the wilderness.’ And of course, gun-manufacturers saw a bonanza in sales suppling the means for these ‘gentlemen’ to enjoy their new sport.
Lastly, there was little or no violence in colonial America justifying owning a gun. Except for that against African American slaves and Native Americans which were not routinely recorded, research shows that from Maine to Georgia, the average county recorded but one homicide every four years. This averaged in those counties along the fringe of wilderness where gun ownership was higher. Also averaged in were metropolitan areas where violence was understandably elevated than rural areas. Therefore, decades passed in many colonial communities without a single violent death. This changed by the mid-1800’s. With the advent of hunting clubs and gun manufacturers’ advertising blitz resulting in many more Americans owing guns, the numbers of gun violence increased dramatically. Then as now, research tied in increased levels of gun violence with the availability of gun access.
Americans Quickly Got Better
By the time the Battle of Bunker Hill, June 17, 1775, fought two months after Lexington, the Americans were more successful in their use of firearms. Many of those in the redoubt had been supplied firearms shortly before and after Lexington. They were no longer spending militia drills in taverns, but full time on parade grounds learning the use of their weapons. Two of the largest regiments in the newly formed Continental Army, clearly half of those who fought on Breed’s Hill, were those of the 1st and 3rd New Hampshire Regiments, commanded by two skilled veterans of Robert Rogers’ famed Rogers Rangers: Colonel John Stark and Colonel James Reed. Most of their men had hacked out a life in the wilderness. Many had fought in the French and Indian War fifteen years earlier. As such, a huge percentage were familiar with the use of muskets, some carrying grove-bored rifles. These were not minutemen who reluctantly practiced once a month with or without a musket, but skilled woodsmen and fighters. And with Stark’s leadership, poured a highly accurate and devastating fire upon the British who had bunched themselves up along the Mystic River’s beach and nearby fields. And what of those in the redoubt, when the British surged over the rim and poured into the makeshift fort? What this new army lacked in skill was amply made up in mettle as they fought hand in hand with their attackers; those last few minutes of the battle resulting in most of American casualties.
The minuteman and militiamen do not deserve the title of marksman, nor should we claim that guns were common, that they all grew up with a musket in their hands. However, these early militiamen were the seed upon which America quickly blossomed into a full blown rebellion; upon which America’s liberty depended.
Quick Note on Research and the Myth of an early American Gun Culture
Historian Robert E. Churchill wrote in the William and Mary Quarterly that, “In 1996, Michael Bellesiles’ Journal of American History article on gun ownership in early America startled many early American historians. Bellesiles found that probate inventories and militia records from the 18th and early 19th centuries strongly indicated that guns were scarce in early America and that gun ownership was ‘exceptional.’ Controversy has since raged over Bellesiles’ research, which he published in more elaborate form in Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture. Critics have focused primarily on Bellesiles’ use of probate inventories. Yet Bellesiles’ research was innovative in its use of militia returns, documents seldom cited in military histories of the period. Bellesiles argues that available returns provided additional evidence of guns’ scarcity.”
The writer highly recommends the reader preview the above book by Bellesiles and either borrow his well-researched text from the local library or purchase a copy. The text is eye opening when one considers it goes against the grain of most assumptions concerning the availability of firearms in colonial America. This misconception and assumption that every colonial owned a gun at the start of the American Revolution feeds into justifying today’s ‘gun culture’ as patriotic and a ‘right’ that has been present since the founding of America – with little or no detailed research to back it up.
To Read More, Check out these Free Previews of Books on Amazon
Of Similar Interest on Revolutionary War Journal
RESOURCES
Bellesiles, Michael. Arming America, The Origins of a National Gun Culture. 2000: Soft Skull Press, Brooklyn, NY.
Churchill, Robert H. “Gun Ownership in Early America: A Survey of Manuscript Militia Returns”. The William and Mary Quarterly. Vol. 60, No. 3 (Jul., 2003), pp 615 – 642).
Garrison, Webb. Sidelights on the American Revolution. 1974: Abingdon Press, Nashville, NY.
Schenawolf, Harry. “Most Americans Did Not Own Guns at the Start of the American Revolution”. Revolutionary War Journal. March 32, 2020
Temple, John. “Five Myths About Militias.” The Washington Post. September 4, 2020.