News:

Want Appleseed to grow and fill our firing lines?  We need help with advertising, social media, graphics design, and administrative tasks.  An hour of time spent at this level can have a huge impact.  You can make a difference!  Send a Personal Message to Cleveland.

Main Menu

April 19 orders

Started by Flintlock54, February 25, 2026, 10:38:17 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Flintlock54

Capt Parker, Major Buttrick, etc. all had orders and rules of engagement. Where did these orders originate? 
Acts 22:28. I was freeborn

OldDominionIron

I believe Samuel Adams came up with the idea. By getting the British to fire first, it would give the colonists the "moral high ground" they needed to claim they were defending themselves, turn public opinion against the regulars and England, and justify the actions of the colonists.
"(Were) they nourished by your indulgence? They grew by your neglect of them. As soon as you began to care about them, that care was exercised in sending persons to rule over them, in one department and another…Sent to spy out their liberty, to misrepresent their actions and to prey upon them; men whose behaviour on many occasions has caused the blood of these sons of liberty to recoil within them."
      -Isaac Barre

Flintlock54

 I meant the chain of command. Captain Parker received orders from and reported to whom. Who was his superior officer and how did the chain of command work in the militia structure
Acts 22:28. I was freeborn

OldDominionIron

Most militia companies elected their own commanders...I don't believe there was a central command structure in place giving orders to selected militias, telling them what to do, at least not until William Heath came on the scene and started ordering units to harass the retreating regulars in his "circle of fire."

Samuel Adams remark of "What a glorious morning for America" on April 19 makes me think he was hoping for event that would kick off the Revolutionary war.

If there was a higher up in the chain of command giving orders, I'm not aware of who it was (with my limited research)...not saying there wasn't, though.
"(Were) they nourished by your indulgence? They grew by your neglect of them. As soon as you began to care about them, that care was exercised in sending persons to rule over them, in one department and another…Sent to spy out their liberty, to misrepresent their actions and to prey upon them; men whose behaviour on many occasions has caused the blood of these sons of liberty to recoil within them."
      -Isaac Barre

Bundt Pan

i don't have citations, but i do recall hearing in a preamble or 1st strike that Massachusetts had been "warned" by the other states that if they started it, they were on their own, AKA don't shoot first.

NRA Training Counselor, Chief Range Safety Officer and Life member

No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms. 1st Draft of the VA Constitution by T. Jefferson

Oz

I've looked into this a bit, trying to lean on primary sources where I can. The surviving paperwork is incomplete and the system itself was in transition, so the picture is a little messy. I'm hopeful others have dug deeper than I have and can correct any errors—I'd be genuinely grateful for that. Please forgive any mistakes, and also that this is somewhat off-the-cuff rather than as tidy as I'd like.

I have not found evidence of a formal written, province-wide "don't shoot first" order or a written rules-of-engagement directive issued to Middlesex regiments. The clearest written guidance I've seen from the Provincial Congress / Committee of Safety tends to focus on readiness: enrolling able-bodied men, forming minute companies, election/confirmation of officers, training, arms/ammunition, creation and movement of magazines, etc.

--Provincial Congress (Oct 1774): Functioned as the colony's de facto legislative authority outside British control. It set broad policy, created executive committees, and handled commissions/ appointments at the senior level.

--Committee of Safety (formed Oct 26, 1774): Created by the Provincial Congress to act as an executive body (especially when Congress was not in session), oversee military preparation, and respond rapidly to emergencies. In practice, much of its work looks like what we'd now call logistics and preparedness—magazines, munitions, procurement and movement of matériel, readiness measures, and also intelligence/warning. It was not a "general staff" issuing day-to-day tactical orders in the field.

--General officers elected by the Provincial Congress (Oct 26, 1774): Artemas Ward as "General," and brigadiers Seth Pomeroy, John Thomas, and William Heath. These posts created a real senior hierarchy on paper, but before April 19 there was no standing provincial field army, no permanent staff, and no continuous headquarters. Their authority mattered most once forces began to concentrate (Cambridge/Watertown area after April 19), rather than as an everyday intermediary chain of command.

--"Brigade" terminology: The word "brigade" existed in the militia vocabulary as an administrative echelon above regiments. That said, before April 19 it's easy to over-read it as a formed field organization. In a place like populous Middlesex—where multiple regiments existed and a brigadier (Heath) was associated with the county—to a modern eye it certainly looks like all the pieces were available to be a brigade but it seems to have been an administrative reference, but it does not appear to have organized operated as an assembled brigade with a functioning headquarters prior to the alarm.

--Regiments and colonels (Middlesex): Regiments consisted of multiple town companies and were commanded by colonels. For Middlesex in early 1775, the clearest "district" regimental commander is Col. James Barrett (Concord-centered). Other Middlesex colonels whose names show up in April 19 alarm documentation include David Green, Ebenezer Bridge/Bridges, and William Prescott. There are also references to a "Gardner" regiment in some material; I'm not confident whether that reflects the pre-April militia map or a post-April reorganization.

Unfortunately, it's not cleanly documented (at least in what I've seen) which colonel Parker's company was under on April 19. Based on geography, Bridge seems the most plausible, but I can't point to a single surviving April-dated document that explicitly says "Parker in Col. ___'s regiment."

(Barrett is prominent in North Bridge narratives partly because Concord was a static concentration point where he could exercise direct command in person. The other colonels are not very visible in reports of the day, perhaps because most of their companies formed, marched, and engaged rather independently.)

--Company officers: Towns/companies typically elected their officers (captain, lieutenants, etc.), and those choices were then commissioned/confirmed by the recognized authority (pre-collapse, the royal government; after Oct 1774, the Provincial Congress/provincial structure).

That's the best "chain of authority" picture I can assemble from the material I've looked at so far.  It's never enough...

Best regards.

Oz/John
"You don't know they're all Riflemen.  They might just be people with rifles." - Zazzles, 9/22/12

"Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot,
Nothing is going to get better. It's not."
― Dr. Seuss, The Lorax

"There are no accidents in my philosophy. Every effect must have its cause. The past is the cause of the present, and the present will be the cause of the future." - Abraham Lincoln

"My biggest decision this week?  Well...long story short, I went with the mild sauce."

Flintlock54

Thanks, Oz. This was pretty much what I was looking for and quite thought provoking.
Basically we have:

Provincial legislature
Committee of safety
General officers
Brigade
Regiment
Company

I think the level of organization you describe is amazing especially considering issues like, staffing, funding , legality, etc. What manner of men were these!
Acts 22:28. I was freeborn

OldDominionIron

Thanks everybody...with a little imagination, I can see us gathered around the hearth in Buckman's tavern, savoring a frothy alcoholic beverage and discussing this.
"(Were) they nourished by your indulgence? They grew by your neglect of them. As soon as you began to care about them, that care was exercised in sending persons to rule over them, in one department and another…Sent to spy out their liberty, to misrepresent their actions and to prey upon them; men whose behaviour on many occasions has caused the blood of these sons of liberty to recoil within them."
      -Isaac Barre