Who Won the Battles of Lexington and Concord?
I
BY JIM HOLLISTER, PARK RANGER, MINUTE MAN NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK
In war, there are many ways to define victory. So, who won the Battles of Lexington and Concord? On the surface this may seem simple. The colonists were able to keep most of their military supplies safely out of British hands. The British soldiers then suffered heavy casualties during their retreat to Boston where they were trapped and besieged. However, though things certainly did not go the way they wanted, did the British Army actually lose on April 19, 1775? The answer depends upon how you define victory. On April 18, 1775, General Thomas Gage ordered Lt. Colonel Francis Smith to march with several hundred soldiers 18 miles from Boston to Concord, to “seize and destroy all Artillery, Ammunition, Provisions, Tents, Small Arms, and all Military Stores whatever…” This makes for a round trip of nearly 40 miles through a hostile countryside. The mission did not start out well. Fighting erupted at dawn in Lexington where the first colonists were killed. At Concord, most of the military supplies the British came looking for had already been moved. Around 9:30 a.m. more fighting broke out at the North Bridge, where the first British soldiers died. All that was left to do now was to return to Boston. The British began their march around noon as thousands of rebel militiamen were fast approaching. Marching a column of troops through hostile territory is a complicated and dangerous operation. Not surprisingly, there is a manual for that. Among the most influential military books of the 18th century was A Treatise of Military Discipline by Lieutenant General Humphrey Bland. Bland devoted an entire chapter to “…Marching of a Regiment of Foot, or a Detachment of Men, where there is a Possibility of their being Attacked by the Enemy.” Bland recommended forming strong advance (van) and rear guards. The purpose of the vanguard was “to reconnoiter, or view, every place where any number of men can lie 16
Discover CONCORD
| Winter 2021
4th Regiment of Foot Light Infantry Company
concealed, such as woods, copses, ditches, hollow ways, straggling houses, or villages, through which you are to march or pass near…” The rear-guard was to provide security for the rear of the column. In between the van and rear-guard, were “flanking parties.” These were “small parties, commanded by sergeants, marching on the flanks (sides) of the battalion with orders to examine all the hedges, ditches and copses which lie near the road…”1 There is strong evidence that the British column was organized for the return march using the principles laid out in Bland’s Treatise… For example, Ensign DeBerniere, 10th Reg’t of Foot, wrote “…we began the march to return to Boston, about twelve o’clock in the day, in the same order of march, only our flankers were more numerous and further from the main body…” 2 Later, Lt. Frederick MacKenzie, who marched with the reinforcements, wrote that his brigade “… marched in the following order, Advanced guard of a captain and 50 men; 2 six-pounders… Rear guard of a Captain and 50 men.”3
Smith was also fortunate that half of his force was made up of the light infantry. Light infantry were soldiers who were specially trained to operate in small units, take advantage of cover, and skirmish with the enemy. In 1771 the Army officially added one company of light infantry to each regiment.4 Despite this, the retreat to Boston was tough going. The column had not even made it out of Concord when they were attacked by newly arrived militia companies from Reading, Chelmsford, and Billerica.5 The broken agricultural landscape played much to the colonists’ advantage. According to Lt. John Barker, 4th Regiment of Foot, “…the Country was an amazing strong one, full of hills, woods, stone walls, &c., which the Rebels did not fail to take advantage of…” 6 In describing the activity of the light infantry, Captain William Soutar of the Marines wrote “Sometimes we took possession of one hill, sometimes of another…” 7 This indicates that the flanking parties were not simply sweeping across the landscape, but