Patriots Day

[August]

Yesterday the wife and I went to see the historical reenactment of the battle of Concord Bridge. It's the first time i've been there since the 200th anniversary in back 1975 when then President Ford came to speechify and get heckled by hippies.

For those who do not know the history it goes like this: In the early hours of April 19th 1775 a force of British troops departed Boston with the aim of confiscating arms and powder from the Colonists located 17 miles away in the town of Concord in a dawn raid. After routing a much smaller colonist force on the Lexington green ("Disperse Ye damned Rebels")the British then marched on to Concord where they began burning the town. Getting word that much stronger Colonist militia forces were approaching they began tearing up the north bridge over the Concord river in order to impede their progress.

They had only started when several Colonist units showed up, deployed into line and opened fire. After a few volleys the British began a retreat back to Boston being sniped at and attacked all along the way.

239 years later this is how it's commemorated:

First the British reenactors arrive and take possession of the bridge:
http://home.comcast.net/~rdsterling/pwpimages/cr%2020140421_085525.jpg?PHPSESSID=99e719f19574849 672ccad14abeef220


As the colonists arrive and begin deploying the British retreat back across the bridge and deploy into a firing line.
http://home.comcast.net/~rdsterling/pwpimages/cr%2020140421_090848.jpg?PHPSESSID=99e719f19574849 672ccad14abeef220

After several volleys from each side the British retreat and the colonists advance across the bridge.
http://home.comcast.net/~rdsterling/pwpimages/cr%2020140421_091352.jpg?PHPSESSID=99e719f19574849 672ccad14abeef220


Then in the spirit of conciliation with our British cousins both re-enactor units march together back onto the bridge and fire a volley salute to the the fallen.
http://home.comcast.net/~rdsterling/pwpimages/cr%2020140421_091704.jpg?PHPSESSID=99e719f19574849 672ccad14abeef220

The graves of the fallen British troops (Colonist dead were brought back to their respective towns for burial.
http://home.comcast.net/~rdsterling/pwpimages/cr%2020140421_110232b.jpg?PHPSESSID=99e719f1957484 9672ccad14abeef220
http://home.comcast.net/~rdsterling/pwpimages/cr%2020140421_110232.jpg?PHPSESSID=99e719f19574849 672ccad14abeef220

The Queen still remembers her fallen subjects. I'm told one of these has
been delivered to the grave site yearly since the centennial in 1875.
http://home.comcast.net/~rdsterling/pwpimages/cr%2020140421_110304.jpg?PHPSESSID=99e719f19574849 672ccad14abeef220

Monument on the "British side"
http://home.comcast.net/~rdsterling/pwpimages/cr%2020140421_110334.jpg?PHPSESSID=99e719f19574849 672ccad14abeef220

Detail of the Inscription
http://home.comcast.net/~rdsterling/pwpimages/cr%2020140421_082032.jpg?PHPSESSID=99e719f19574849 672ccad14abeef220

The monument on the "American side"
http://home.comcast.net/~rdsterling/pwpimages/cr%2020140421_082303.jpg?PHPSESSID=99e719f19574849 672ccad14abeef220

Detail of the inscription
http://home.comcast.net/~rdsterling/pwpimages/cr%2020140421_082303a.jpg?PHPSESSID=99e719f1957484 9672ccad14abeef220

Fife players (Fifers?) serenading the dead
http://home.comcast.net/~rdsterling/pwpimages/cr%2020140421_142633.jpg?PHPSESSID=99e719f19574849 672ccad14abeef220

[TarJak]

Looks like a great event.thanks for sharing the photos and your experience of it.

[Sailor Steve]

Way cool! Thanks for sharing. :rock:

[Jimbuna]

Very well presented and much appreciated :sunny:

[AVGWarhawk]

History in action! Looked like a good day for the event and a nice commemorative.

I often wonder why the British believe the red coat was the best uniform to wear? Honestly, they can be seen coming a mile away. :hmmm:

[Jimbuna]

History in action! Looked like a good day for the event and a nice commemorative.

I often wonder why the British believe the red coat was the best uniform to wear? Honestly, they can be seen coming a mile away. :hmmm:

That is precisely what scared the crap out of the enemy...well up until the above :)

[Dread Knot]

Honestly, they can be seen coming a mile away. :hmmm:

You hit upon it right there. Visibility. Muskets were the most popular weapon on the 18th century battlefield, and due to their inaccuracy and reliability problems armies employed line formations in battle. Line formations allowed armies to overcome the inaccuracy and reliability problems of the musket. However, by using line formations large clouds of smoke were produced from the concentration of so many muskets, not to mention all the artillery on the battlefield. With so much smoke, leaders needed to quickly identify friend from foe as quickly as possible, and the best way to do that was to use distrinct elaborate uniforms. Of course, when the rifle came along all that began to change.

Another reason was cost and effectiveness. At the time, red dye was very cheap and readily available. In order to dye a coat with red dye the process is easier than other colors since other colors require more than one stage in the dying process. Red dye only requires one stage for dying coats and this makes the process less expensive.

[Sailor Steve]

I often wonder why the British believe the red coat was the best uniform to wear? Honestly, they can be seen coming a mile away. :hmmm:
It's simple, really. At the time battles were fought along strict lines. The opposing armies would find each other and then form up on an open field, firing and advancing by ranks until either the enemy broke and ran or they were close enough for a bayonet charge. There had already been many cases of "irregular" warfare, but until Braddock's Defeat at the Monongahela forming a regular line of battle had always worked. Despite the legendary stories of American snipers shooting from behind trees and rocks (which they did), the Continental Army did not prevail until they created a real army and started using Regular tactics, just like the British.

[AVGWarhawk]

It's simple, really. At the time battles were fought along strict lines. The opposing armies would find each other and then form up on an open field, firing and advancing by ranks until either the enemy broke and ran or they were close enough for a bayonet charge. There had already been many cases of "irregular" warfare, but until Braddock's Defeat at the Monongahela forming a regular line of battle had always worked. Despite the legendary stories of American snipers shooting from behind trees and rocks (which they did), the Continental Army did not prevail until they created a real army and started using Regular tactics, just like the British.


Does not explain the red coats. They British were fighting in the wood against a force that knew the landscape and wore brown in color clothing. Generally the regular garb of the day. Red coat is not the best choice IMO. :yep:

[nikimcbee]

Great photos!:salute:
That's a nice walk from Concord to the bridge. I love the old colonial architecture. One of these days I'm going to remember this and fly out there for it.

Good thing you had nice weather for it.

I'll just throw these in from my last trip there.
https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/401x535q90/850/boston2012047.jpg
British uniform from museum.

https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/640x480q90/607/boston2012060.jpg
American POV of British side.

https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/713x535q90/52/boston2012046.jpg

British artillery

https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/640x480q90/14/boston2012028.jpg

Another view of the bridge.

[August]

Does not explain the red coats. They British were fighting in the wood against a force that knew the landscape and wore brown in color clothing. Generally the regular garb of the day. Red coat is not the best choice IMO. :yep:


Well they weren't wearing red coats so much as they were wearing uniform coats that happened to be colored red. It being the uniform of their national army means that it would have been almost impossible to change it even if tradition and training weren't factors.

Armies have gotten better over the years at adapting their uniforms to the local environment but they are no means perfect. Witness the US Army's ACU for example, but the problems and expenses involved with changing their uniform to something better still exists.

[nikimcbee]

@August
Did you shoot any video by chance?:D

[August]

@August
Did you shoot any video by chance?:D

No as you can tell from the pictures I had a real lousy spot for that.

Although it's further away next year we plan to be on the colonist side which is a much better view then cross over during the intermission and pick out a (better) spot to film the parade. Why don't you getcherbutt over here next April and go with us?

[AVGWarhawk]

Well they weren't wearing red coats so much as they were wearing uniform coats that happened to be colored red. It being the uniform of their national army means that it would have been almost impossible to change it even if tradition and training weren't factors.

Armies have gotten better over the years at adapting their uniforms to the local environment but they are no means perfect. Witness the US Army's ACU for example, but the problems and expenses involved with changing their uniform to something better still exists.

Coat, uniform, flare gun....at the end of the day the soldier became easy pick'ins while standing in the wood wearing the chosen outfit of the day. :yep:

[August]

Coat, uniform, flare gun....at the end of the day the soldier became easy pick'ins while standing in the wood wearing the chosen outfit of the day. :yep:

Maybe on that day but it took cannon to actually eject the British from Boston. After all sniping from the woods may give ones enemy a bloody nose when he sticks his neck out like they did at Concord but only going toe to toe can defeat them.

I think Baron von Struben contributed as much to our victory in the Revolution as anyone else except perhaps George Washington.

[AVGWarhawk]

The red coat certainly did not help while walking in the wood. Sniping was made a bit easier. :yep:

[August]

The red coat certainly did not help while walking in the wood. Sniping was made a bit easier. :yep:

Well truth be told they didn't need the red coats to find the British that day. Just following the sound of their fifes and drums would have been enough dontcha think? Besides they marched down a road. Camo won't help at all in that situation.

[AVGWarhawk]

I'm thinking they learned a lot since then.

[Aktungbby]

History in action! Looked like a good day for the event and a nice commemorative.

I often wonder why the British believe the red coat was the best uniform to wear? Honestly, they can be seen coming a mile away. :hmmm:

That is precisely what scared the crap out of the enemy...well up until the above :)

Indeed! The redcoat on 1/22/1879 was not the uniform of choice to be in even on open ground at Isandlwana the Zulu War: a total disaster. " COL Pulleine's 1,400 soldiers were totally overwhelmed. The Zulus took no prisoners and killed any they could, including Pulleine and Durnford. Approximately 60 British regulars escaped, none of whom were wearing red coats ( The Zulu King had specifically ordered his men to kill all the men wearing the red coats).
The surviving British soldiers were either officers wearing their dark blue field uniforms, troopers with the Royal Artillery (who wore light blue uniforms), or members of irregular cavalry units such as the Natal mounted units. " Some poetic license is taken in the movies with the scarlet uniform. In the movie Zulu for example, Michael Cain's officer character is in a red uniform but the real officer wore blue at Roarkes Drift, thus surviving and winning the Victoria Cross. So too with the soldiers in Heath Ledger's version of the Four Feathers, portrayed in red, actually wore khaki, introduced from India, in the Sudan against the Mahdi-but it (red) just looked better to the director. It took the sharp shooting Boer commando of the First Boer War with Mausers, to finally 'fold' the red garb with (white cross belts..( :/\\!! X:/\\k:)..(at RED framed sight pic with crossbelt target 1000yds??!... to any Mauser equipped Boer! no scope needed! :doh::dead:) and switch out the single shot Martini-Henry rifle...in time for WWI http://thinkingouttabox.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/photo_24_hires.jpg?w=490 (http://thinkingouttabox.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/photo_24_hires.jpg)The Four Feathers: ^ this didn't happen! And after 1897; for the second Boer War: This ('service dress') did happen!http://thinkingouttabox.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/the-four-feathers-1939-769617.png?w=490 (http://thinkingouttabox.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/the-four-feathers-1939-769617.png)

[AVGWarhawk]

The Zulu warriors listened well if the only remaining soldiers standing were wearing anything but a red coat.

[Sailor Steve]

Does not explain the red coats. They British were fighting in the wood against a force that knew the landscape and wore brown in color clothing. Generally the regular garb of the day. Red coat is not the best choice IMO. :yep:
You said you wondered why the British thought the red coat was the best uniform. My point was that prior to that time, when battles were always fought by regular troops in long straight lines, the color helped them identify their own side. Other than that the color didn't matter. Marching in huge columns with artillery and baggage trains making huge amounts of noise, the best camoflage in the world wouldn't have made any difference.

[August]

I don't know if it would have turned out any different if the British had been wearing Khaki at Concord. Proper tactics are far more important than uniform colors and the British made several tactical errors that significantly contributed to the problems they encountered.

[Jimbuna]

I don't know if it would have turned out any different if the British had been wearing Khaki at Concord. Proper tactics are far more important than uniform colors and the British made several tactical errors that significantly contributed to the problems they encountered.

Agreed...the tactics to be employed were usually always predictable and the colonists used the fact well to their advantage more often than not.

[AVGWarhawk]

Agreed...the tactics to be employed were usually always predictable and the colonists used the fact well to their advantage more often than not.

And they wore brown color clothing, knew the terrain and practiced guerrilla warfare tactics. I'm of mind no matter what tactics the British employed, the red coat was not wise.

[August]

And they wore brown color clothing, knew the terrain and practiced guerrilla warfare tactics. I'm of mind no matter what tactics the British employed, the red coat was not wise.

The colonists definitely didn't use guerrilla tactics at the bridge fight and not really during the running fight back to Boston either. In fact the colonists didn't really use any tactics at all other than completely disorganized and individual efforts, mostly by late comers, to take potshots at the retreating British forces. Being as how the British marched along the only road possible back to Boston beating a drum it renders their uniform color moot. Everyone in the countryside knew where they had been, where they were going and what route they would have to take. They could have been wearing multi-cam ACU's and they still would have had the same casualty rate.

I'd even go so far to say that had the British camo'd up then broke into smaller parties to escape and evade guerrilla style back to Boston their casualties would have been much higher than they were. Their disciplined formations are what kept the colonists from overrunning them completely. Remember even though we greatly outnumbered the British we were still not able to stop this tiny force from making it back to Boston mostly intact.

So bottom line here is that this particular battle is not really a good example of the superiority of camouflage and guerrilla tactics or even the problems with using brightly colored uniforms and marching in line formation. It is however a prime example of the dangers in kicking a large hornets nest with an insufficient military force. It's a lesson we didn't remember in Mogadishu a couple centuries later as there are a lot of similarities between the two battles.

Now if you do want a good example of guerrilla tactics in the Revolutionary war then i'd suggest Morgans riflemen at the battle of Saratoga. The British really paid a price for those fancy officers uniforms. It's one lesson we did learn (eventually) and today's combat leader dresses exactly like the troops around him and they keep the flags tucked away in a trunk when deployed.

[AVGWarhawk]

For the sake of Steve and August...the red coats don't mean a hill of beans. The red coat comment was in general. Not on this day concerning a bridge.

Moving along....

[nikimcbee]

For the sake of Steve and August...the red coats don't mean a hill of beans. The red coat comment was in general. Not on this day concerning a bridge.

Moving along....

Maybe a different shade of red would have worked better? We are also not taking into consideration of the thread count of the wool.

[Bilge_Rat]

Don't forget the continental army used blue coats, not brown. Even in the U.S. civil war, the Union army wore blue uniforms. Back then, you had to fire your musket from basically pointblank range, i.e. less than 50 yds to have a decent chance to hit. Wearing a distinctive colour so you could tell friend from foe was more important than camouflage. It's only around 1900 that standard earth tone became the norm in uniforms.

Back to Concord, Mark Urbain's "Fusiliers" gives a very good overview of how the British Army adapted to conditions in America, namely more light weight uniforms and new tactics more suited to the terrain, although that only came after 1775.

One little known fact about lexington and Concord is that the British, once they realised that american militiamen were sniping them from the sides and from inside houses, quickly formed skirmish parties sweeping on both sides to provide flank protection. They ambushed many militiamen that way.

http://www.amazon.com/Fusiliers-British-America-Learned-Fight/dp/0571224881

p.s. nice photos.

[Aktungbby]

Maybe a different shade of red would have worked better? We are also not taking into consideration of the thread count of the wool.

$LIGHTLY! ""The adoption and continuing use of red by most British/English soldiers after 1660 was the result of circumstances rather than policy, including the relative cheapness of red dyes. Red was by no means universal at first, with grey and blue coats also being worn. There is no known basis for the myth that red coats were favoured because they did not show blood stains. Blood does in fact show on red clothing as a black stain....
The cloth for private soldiers used up until the late 18th century was plain weave broadcloth weighing 16 oz per square yard, made from coarser blends of English wool. The weights often quoted in contemporary documents are given per running yard, though; so for a cloth of 54" width a yard weighed 24 oz. This sometimes leads to the erroneous statement that the cloth weighed 24 oz per square yard.
Broadcloth is so called not because it is finished wide, 54" not being particularly so, but because it was woven nearly half as wide again and shrunk down to finish 54". This shrinking, or milling, process made the cloth very dense, bringing all the threads very tightly together, and gave a felted blind finish to the cloth. These factors meant that it was harder wearing, more weatherproof and could take a raw edge; the hems of the garment could be simply cut and left without hemming as the threads were so heavily shrunk together as to prevent fraying.
Officers' coats were made from superfine broadcloth; manufactured from much finer imported Spanish wool, spun finer and with more warps and wefts per inch. The result was a slightly lighter cloth than that used for privates, still essentially a broadcloth and maintaining the characteristics of that cloth, but slightly lighter and with a much finer quality finish.
Colours; The dye used for privates' coats of the infantry, guard and line, was madder. A vegetable dye, it was recognised as economical, simple and reliable and remained the first choice for lower quality reds from the ancient world until chemical dyes became cheaper in the latter 19th century. During the British Civil War, red dyes were imported in large quantities for use by units and individuals of both sides, though this was the beginning of the trend for long overcoats. The ready availability of red pigment made it popular for military clothing and the dying process required for red involved only one stage. Other colours involved the mixing of dyes in two stages and accordingly involved greater expense; blue, for example, could be obtained with woad, but more popularly it became the much more expensive indigo. In financial terms the only cheaper alternative was the grey-white of undyed wool — an option favoured by the French, Austrian, Spanish and other Continental armies. The formation of the first English standing army ) saw red clothing as the standard dress. As Carman comments "The red coat was now firmly established as the sign of an Englishman". In short: Tough cheap plentiful tightly-shrunk English wool and a cheap one-step dye process for red with a growing if induced national sense of looking good amid the gunpowder smoke all contributed haphazardly to the two century military fashion; not unduly helped by a superior Brown Bess musket with a better reload rate (3 per minute) and a nasty piece of "cold steel" with "some English guts behind it!" And when that ceased to be effective: Khaki, the .303 Lee- Enfield and the 'mad minute' at Mons...:salute: