By Juliana Varsalona, B.A. in History, Christopher Newport University, Class of 2025 and Sheri Shuck-Hall, PhD, Professor of History, Christopher Newport University
Wars are won or lost as much by supply wagons as by battlefield tactics. When the American Revolutionary War erupted in 1775 at the Battles of Lexington and Concord, the newly formed Continental Congress faced a staggering challenge: it had to build a new nation and equip a brand-new army at the exact same time. For General George Washington, one of the most agonizing struggles of the war was simply finding enough food to keep his soldiers alive. Operating without established supply lines, the Continental Army routinely faced broken transportation networks, empty bank accounts, and brutal winter weather that left troops on the brink of starvation. This digital exhibit explores how early Americans struggled to feed their army, looks inside the desperate winter encampment at Valley Forge, and honors the frontline cooks and laborers who fueled the fight for American independence.[1]
The Logistics of Supply: The Commissary Department
At the start of the Revolution, the colonies lacked a centralized system to provide food or clothing. Instead, individual New England towns had to gather supplies from local family barns to feed nearby militias. Realizing this makeshift support could not sustain a long war, the Continental Congress created an official “Commissary Department” on July 19, 1775. Congress appointed a merchant named Joseph Trumbull as the first Commissary General, charging him with purchasing and distributing rations for the entire army. However, state rivalries, poor roads, and food hoarding made deliveries highly unpredictable.[2]
The system broke down completely in the summer of 1777 when Trumbull resigned after political arguments with Congress. In the Middle Department—the vital theater covering New Jersey and Pennsylvania—food distribution collapsed under the new agent, Carpenter Wharton. The job of feeding thousands of mobile men proved too immense for one person. In March 1777, a congressional committee investigated the department, found Wharton guilty of financial mismanagement, and fired him.[3]
Joseph Trumbull, “Printmakers include Asher B. Durand, Henry Bryan Hall, Albert Rosenthal and Max Rosenthal. Draughtsmen include David McNeely Stauffer,” New York Public Library‘s Digital Library, ID 6abb1cd0-c605-012f-823a-58d385a7bc34.
To rescue the supply lines, Congress split up responsibilities by region. They appointed William Buchanan as the new overseer in August 1777, who then selected Deputy Commissary Ephraim Blaine to manage food collection across Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and parts of New York.[4] To protect soldiers from sudden food shortages, field assistants like John Chanoner and James White marched directly alongside Washington’s troops. These agents acted as a live human link between civilian farms and the fighting front.[5]
The Grand Forage of 1778: Managing the Crisis at Valley Forge
The deep cracks in the supply system collided with disaster during the winter of 1777–1778 at Valley Forge, Pennsylvania. Washington chose this location for strategic reasons: it was close enough to British-occupied Philadelphia to monitor enemy movements, yet easily defendable. But without reliable supply routes, the camp quickly turned into a humanitarian crisis. By late December, Washington warned Congress that the army was facing total collapse due to administrative failures, writing:
“Since the month of July, we have had no assistance from the Quartermaster General, and in want of assistance from this department, the Commissary General charges a great part of his deficiency.”— General George Washington, December 1777 [6]
Fearing his army would dissolve before spring, Washington ordered a massive emergency mission known to history as the Grand Forage of 1778.[7]
For nearly six weeks, Washington sent 150 to 200 of his remaining able-bodied soldiers on an expedition sweeping through southeastern Pennsylvania, southern New Jersey, Delaware, and northeastern Maryland. Their mission was to seize cattle, livestock, grain, and flour from local farms to keep the garrison alive. Letters written by supply officers at Valley Forge reveal just how desperate the situation had become. On January 20, 1778, Deputy Commissary Ephraim Blaine wrote to Washington, begging him to cut standard food portions to stretch their disappearing reserves:
“May it please your Excellency—The vast daily consumption of beef and the appearance of want of that articles induces me to present your excellency with the under mentioned queries—which if approved of may be of great service to the public—Qu. 1 would not a reduction of the rations of beef to the soldietry [sic] be a great service to the publick, suppose the ration 1 ½ flour or bread 12 ounces beef or pork, and one gill of whiskey… Flour is plenty and whiskey may be procured to supply the army, and without great assistance from the Southern and Eastern departments it will be impossible to procure beef”— Ephraim Blaine to George Washington, January 20, 1778 [8]
That same day, Blaine wrote a frantic letter to his boss, William Buchanan, warning that regional supply agents had run completely out of cash, meaning local farmers refused to sell to them:
“Sir, The vast expense in supplying the army makes the demand of cash in our department very great I made a distribution of 208 thousand dollars which was but a mere trifle among them, half my assistant purchases are not above one fourth paid they complain the want of cash is a great injury in their purchases… Indeed this is a very heavy complaint… wou’d request you to procure an order for three hundred thousand dollars and without delay forward me 250 of it, I am this moment without one shilling… those reasons with sundry others have determined me upon quitting the service…”— Ephraim Blaine to William Buchanan, January 20, 1778 [9]
NPS Photo, Hannah Till portrayed by Park Ranger Ajena C. Rogers.
The Labor of the Camp: Hannah Till and Paid Staff
While ordinary soldiers cooked their own meals in small outdoor squads, high-ranking officers relied on a dedicated staff of laborers, cooks, and artisans to run their headquarters and manage daily cooking. The life of Hannah Till provides a powerful window into the complex labor dynamics that sustained the army’s leadership.[10]
Born into bondage around 1721, Hannah Till was an enslaved woman owned by Reverend John Mason of New York. During the war, she was leased out as a cook, eventually working directly for General George Washington. However, unlike many workers at the time, Till successfully negotiated a contract during her service that allowed her to earn wages to purchase her freedom.[11]
Alongside her husband Isaac, Till managed the bustling fireplace kitchen inside the Isaac Potts House, Washington’s official headquarters at Valley Forge.[12] Working under grueling wartime conditions, Hannah and Isaac carefully saved their earnings and fully paid off their self-purchase agreements by 1780. Even after winning her liberation, Till chose to stay with Washington’s staff—and later General Lafayette’s—for the remainder of the war as a paid pastry cook, marking a remarkable personal transition from forced labor to self-determined, paid employment.[13]
Revolutionary Rations and Daily Reality
In 1775, the Continental Congress set a standard daily ration that every enlisted soldier was legally supposed to receive:
“One pound of fresh beef, or ¾ of a pound of Pork, or one pound of Salt Fish, pr diem. One pound of Bread, or Flour pr diem. Three pints of Peas, or Beans pr Week, or Vegetables equivalent… One pint of milk pr Man, pr diem, when to be had. One half pint of Rice, or one pint of Indian meal pr Man, pr Week. One quart of Spruce Beer per man, pr diem…” [14]
In reality, these items rarely reached the soldiers. By 1776, supply delays were so frequent that Washington ordered all troops to carry at least two days of provisions in their bags at all times so they wouldn’t starve during an emergency. If baked bread could not be delivered, soldiers received raw flour, which they mixed with water and baked on hot rocks over open campfires to create “firecakes.”[15]
Depiction of Continental soldiers’ daily rations, including the notorious hard bread. Photo by author, taken at the American Revolution Museum at Yorktown encampment, April 2025.
The food soldiers did manage to find was often terrible or hazardous to their health. In his famous wartime diary, Private Joseph Plumb Martin remembered the dental hazards of eating “hardtack” biscuits during the 1776 campaign:
“We marched a short distance when he halted to refresh ourselves. Whether we had any other victuals besides hard bread I do not remember. I do remember my gnawing at the bread. It was hard enough to break the teeth of a rat.”— Private Joseph Plumb Martin, 1776 [16]
Similarly, Samuel Dewees of the 11th Pennsylvania Regiment remembered how terrible nutritional deficiencies made the soldiers sick:
“…sometimes we had one biscuit and herring per day, and often neither the one nor the other…a biscuit and a herring each day, the soldiers lived until their mouths broke out with scabs, and their throats became as sore and raw as a piece of uncooked meat.”–Samuel Dewees, 11th Pennsylvania Regiment [17]
To survive these shortages, the army relied heavily on “camp followers”—the wives, mothers, and daughters of enlisted men who marched alongside the troops. These women ran makeshift outdoor kitchens, butchered animals, and managed tight ration portions to stretch every single ingredient as far as possible.[18]
Starving for Liberty
The history of the American Revolution proves that administrative endurance is just as vital to victory as battlefield strategy. The fight for independence was won not only by generals drawing maps, but by the daily labor of supply officers, regional farmers, and camp cooks who kept the army fed under near-impossible conditions. Looking at the evolution of the supply system, from the dark days of Valley Forge to an organized national rationing system, reveals the true human cost of building early America.[19]
To explore these historical artifacts and experience the reality of Revolutionary camp life firsthand, visitors are invited to view the public exhibitions and step inside the live, interactive military encampments at the Jamestown-Yorktown Foundation museums in Williamsburg and Yorktown, Virginia (https://www.jyfmuseums.org/). By walking among the tents and engaging with the period’s material history, modern audiences can truly appreciate the physical sacrifices required to lay the foundations of American liberty.[20]
Notes
[1] Joseph Boyle, My Last Shift Betwixt Us & Death: The Ephraim Blaine Letterbook 1777-1778 (Westminster, MD: Heritage Books Inc., 2016), v.
[2] Erna Risch, Supplying Washington’s Army (Washington, D.C.: Center of Military History, U.S. Army, 1981), 8–12.
[3] Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774-1789, vol. 8 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1907), 500–501.
[4] Boyle, The Ephraim Blaine Letterbook, v–ix.
[5] Ibid., xi.
[6] George Washington to the President of Congress, December 23, 1777, in The Writings of George Washington, ed. Worthington Chauncey Ford (New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1890), 6:255.
[7] Boyle, The Ephraim Blaine Letterbook, x.
[8] Ephraim Blaine to George Washington, January 20, 1778, in Boyle, The Ephraim Blaine Letterbook, 96.
[9] Ephraim Blaine to William Buchanan, January 20, 1778, in Boyle, The Ephraim Blaine Letterbook, 96–97.
[10] Ricardo A. Herrera, Feeding Washington’s Army: Surviving the Valley Forge Winter of 1778 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2023), 88–91.
[16] Joseph Plumb Martin, A Narrative of a Revolutionary Soldier: Some of the Adventures, Dangers, and Sufferings of Joseph Plumb Martin (New York: Signet Classics, 2001), 16–17.
[17] Quoted in Backus, “Getting Food in the Continental Army.”
[18] Herrera, Feeding Washington’s Army, 1–4.
[19] Risch, Supplying Washington’s Army, 28–32.
[20] On-site living history interpretation guidelines, Jamestown-Yorktown Foundation Educational Materials, https://www.jyfmuseums.org/.
Kathryn Allen, B.A. in History (Class of 2024), Christopher Newport University
Sheri Shuck-Hall, Ph.D., Professor of History, Christopher Newport University
Almost 250 years ago, on November 25, 1775, the first Black regiment in English-speaking North America fought for their freedom. They followed the offer of Lord Dunmore, Royal Governor of Virginia, who proclaimed in 1775 that any enslaved person willing to fight for the British would be freed. Despite being on the opposing side of the Americans, these formerly enslaved men understood the revolutionary principles of liberty and wanted it for themselves. Known as the Ethiopian Regiment, the Black soldiers engaged in several raids and battles on behalf of Lord Dunmore. Yet the culmination of their British military service was in Chesapeake, Virginia, where the Great Bridge Battlefield & Waterways Museum is today. This exhibit explores the history of the Ethiopian Regiment and how their determination led to enslaved resistance throughout the colonial South in pursuit of independence.
“Liberty to Slaves”
Since the first enslaved Africans arrived in 1619 at Point Comfort (present-day Fort Monroe) in Virginia, the institution of slavery continued to spread along with white settlement. Southern landowners focused on cash crops like tobacco that demanded intensive, exploitative labor. By the eve of the American Revolution in 1775, slavery had saturated the South. In the 1750s, Virginia had a population of around 100,000 enslaved Blacks; by the 1780s the number had doubled. Those in bondage eagerly anticipated the day where they would be free because the system of slavery was violent, dehumanizing, and unjust.[1]
The plantation owner sits and smokes while enslaved Blacks harvest tobacco. George Arents Collection, The New York Public Library. “Ford’s Virginia at the Dagger upon Bread-Street-Hill near Queen-Hith, London, 1745.” Courtesy of New York Public Library Digital Collections.
The American Revolution created both chaos and opportunity for the enslaved to escape and gain their freedom. By 1775, war between the colonists and Great Britain was imminent. Major conflicts over taxation, representation, and western expansion led to rebellion, commencing at the Battles of Lexington and Concord on the 19th of April. The ‘shot heard round the world’ resulted in an American victory as they forced British troops back to Boston. In Virginia’s capital at Williamsburg, Royal Governor John Murray, Fourth Earl of Dunmore, plotted to thwart Patriot advances. Two days after the first British defeat, Lord Dunmore ordered the Royal Marines to take the gunpowder from the magazine in Williamsburg. When local enslaved Blacks heard of his plans, they came to Lord Dunmore to offer their services.[2]
Word spread quickly that Lord Dunmore planned to arm Blacks in the British defense of Virginia. Enslaved people from all over the South made their way to the Virginia coastline where Dunmore sought refuge in his ship, the H.M.S. Fowey, in the York River. Lists of runaways littered the Virginia Gazette. Reports of slave insurrections in Norfolk, Chesterfield County, and Prince Edward County fueled Black resistance.[3]
Allan Ramsey, “Portrait of Lord John Murray (1711-1787), 1743.” Oil on canvas in painted oval. Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.
On the first of May 1775, Dunmore wrote to William Legge, the 2nd Earl of Dartmouth, explaining that he would begin accepting Blacks into his ranks. Yet he only took Blacks from Patriot lines; he refused refugees from the Loyalists. The rising number of Black soldiers struck fear in the colonial South. George Washington, General of the Continental Army who owned a plantation built and operated by enslaved Blacks, admitted that Lord Dunmore was the greatest threat to the American cause. Spring brought war, but it also provided hope to Blacks who had escaped bondage, and the British grew stronger.[4]
After his letter to Dartmouth in May, Dunmore spent the summer recruiting soldiers and raiding the Virginia coastline in Hampton Roads. As the British conducted raids against colonial settlements, more enslaved Blacks sought freedom and joined the British. On November 7, 1775, Lord Dunmore wrote “A Proclamation,” and published it eight days later. He wrote that he had hoped for a resolution to the conflict between the colonists and the British, but seeing no solution, Dunmore proclaimed:
“And I do hereby further declare all indented Servants, Negroes, or others, (appertaining to Rebels,) free that are able and willing to bear Arms, they joining His Majesty’s Troops as soon as may be, for the more speedily reducing this Colony to a proper Sense of their Duty, to His Majesty’s Crown and Dignity.”[5]
John Murray, “Dunmore’s Proclamation, signed November 7, 1775.” Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.
This document provided incentive for many enslaved people to escape, but it was at a significant risk. If caught, they would receive severe punishment. Lord Dunmore’s proclamation was so effective in motivating Blacks to cross British lines that many neutral Southerners became Patriots as they feared widespread slave revolts.[6]
While Lord Dunmore’s proclamation targeted able-bodied Black men, even more ran towards his offer. Women, children, and the elderly fled to Dunmore’s ships in search of freedom. Within just a week of Dunmore’s proclamation, around 100 Blacks had fled to Dunmore’s encampment. Those who could not serve as soldiers joined the war effort in other ways; for example, women served as washers and tended to the uniforms of British soldiers.[7]
According to Patriot reports in the Virginia Gazette, soldiers of the Ethiopian Regiment had “Liberty to Slaves” painted across their uniforms. Courtesy of the National Park Service.
Shortly after issuing the proclamation, Lord Dunmore established the Ethiopian Regiment, constituting around 200 to 300 men. Unlike their namesake, these men were mostly American-born or from West Africa. The Black soldiers began their work immediately though they lacked military training. On November 15, the Ethiopian Regiment joined the British troops and other Loyalists at the skirmish of Kemp’s Landing in present-day Kempsville. The Virginia militia’s ambush failed, so the British troops marched on to Norfolk County (present-day Chesapeake) to Fort Murray, a small stockade north of Great Bridge.[8]
“Part of the Province of Virginia. American Revolution and Its Era: Maps and Charts of North America and the West Indies, 1750 to 1789,” The bottom of the map indicates north. Courtesy of the Library of Congress.
The Battle of Great Bridge
Great Bridge was a terrain that had strategic significance. The Elizabeth River guarded on both sides a small strip of land connecting northeast North Carolina to the port of Norfolk. The low-lying Virginia land was a marsh, and the causeway was only large enough to hold five- or six-men side-by-side. It provided the only land route towards Dunmore’s Norfolk holdings and protected his supply lines. Animosity between the Patriots and Loyalists quickly intensified. On December 9, Dunmore took the offensive despite being at a defensive advantage.[9]
A sketch of the 1775 Battle of Great Bridge, Virginia. Lord Rawdon, “A view of the Great Bridge near Norfolk in Virginia where the action happened between a detachment of the 14th Regt: & a body of the rebels.” Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.
The combined fear of advancing militiamen and incorrect information from a spy that Patriot forces were only 300-strong prompted Dunmore to move. The Ethiopian Regiment was there to draw the American troops away from the front lines. However, this did not go to plan, and the Patriot militiamen thwarted British forces. The Patriots moved east to take the British on two sides, and Virginia Colonel William Woodford forced British Captain Samuel Leslie, who ordered the attack, into a retreat. Under the cover of darkness, the British withdrew to their ships in Norfolk harbor. The Battle of Great Bridge was the first Patriot victory in the Virginia colony. [10]
Between 62 and 102 British troops were killed, captured, or wounded. According to Dunmore, confirmed British casualties included Captain Charles Fordyce, two other officers, and 17 enlisted men. It is unknown how many died from the Ethiopian or Loyalist Regiments. The Americans only reported one wounded soldier with no casualties on their side. The preemptive attack by the British at Great Bridge cost Dunmore control over Norfolk, Virginia, and the South. Virginians who captured Black soldiers at the battle sold them back into slavery. The loss at Great Bridge forced Dunmore to abandon Norfolk and resigned the regiment to the seas, where they would continue raiding coastal settlements. Yet fear of the Ethiopian Regiment’s power had already permeated throughout the South. The possibility of a slave revolt terrified white plantation owners, while those in bondage kept alive the hope of freedom.[11]
Leaving Virginia Behind
From Great Bridge, the remnants of the Ethiopian Regiment made their way to Lord Dunmore’s ship. Shortly after, the soldiers became extremely ill with smallpox or fever. Dunmore began searching for a place to rest and recuperate, finally settling on Gwynn’s Island at the mouth of the Rappahannock River. For months, the troops remained on the island. Their presence led many more Black refugees to join their cause, but also left them exposed to frequent Patriot attacks. They eventually left the island, where over half of the soldiers were too sick or incapacitated to fight.[12]
Aerial shot of Gwynn’s Island by Bob Tanner, 2001. In “Battle of Gwynn’s Island: Lord Dunmore’s Last Stand in Virginia, Journal of the American Revolution. www.allthingsliberty.com
After leaving the Chesapeake Bay, the Ethiopian Regiment headed to New York. The soldiers officially disbanded on August 13, 1776, on Staten Island. The British appointed those that remained to the Black Pioneers; they were not a combat unit, but a construction crew tasked to build temporary housing. British General Samuel Birch gave each Black soldier of the former Ethiopian Regiment (and any other refugees who joined the British cause) a certificate that listed them as a member of the British forces. Classified as a Loyalist, the document guaranteed their freedom and passage to Nova Scotia. General Birch issued around 3,000 certificates to formerly enslaved people. Only one certificate survives today, bearing the name of Cato Ramsey. Ramsey’s information can be found in the logbook entitled, The Book of Negroes, which was a log of every man, woman, and child who was leaving for Nova Scotia.[13]
“Certificate of Freedom for Cato Ramsey.” Samuel Birch, Book of Negroes, 1783. Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.
After the British defeat in 1781 at Yorktown and the signing of the Peace of Paris in 1783, the Loyalist evacuation of the former American colonies began. The exodus from New York to Nova Scotia was slow and continued for 3 years. Black Loyalists settled the towns of St. John, Port Roseway, Birchtown, and others. Unfortunately, the land given to Black settlers was not fertile. Many fell victim to famine, forcing them to become indentured servants. Unrest spread among those formerly enslaved as their status in Nova Scotia started to mirror the life that they had escaped. Disgusted with their conditions, many Black people began searching for a way out. Thomas Peters, a former sergeant in the Black Pioneers, transported willing settlers in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick to Freetown in Sierra Leone, Africa. David George, a Black Loyalist who founded the first all-Black Baptist church in America and Canada, published in 1793 a memoir of their long struggle, ending in Africa. His work, along with the story of the Ethiopian Regiment, led to the growing abolitionist movement throughout Europe and the United States.[14]
Cornelis Apostool, “A View of the New Settlement in Sierra Leone, 1790, before the re-settlement of the Nova Scotian Black Loyalists.” Maps, 117.100. Courtesy of the British Library.
A Revolution of Ideas and the Significance of Freedom
The American Revolutionary War sparked the beginning of what is now known as the Age of Revolutions. Taking examples from American ideals and experiences, other countries across the world began to challenge and fight against oppressors. After Americans won their independence, the revolutionary ideas expressed by the Patriots about freedom and equality led many to question slavery and pushed for emancipation. Debates of whether to support, limit, or eradicate the institution of slavery brimmed at the surface of founding political decisions that would forever impact the course of U.S. history. Abolitionist societies continued to flourish in Great Britain and the North, creating a movement that only began the long struggle for freedom in America. While the surviving soldiers of the Ethiopian Regiment escaped bondage, as did thousands of others, slavery was still a supported institution around the world by the close of the American Revolution. The fight for independence was not over yet; it was just beginning for enslaved people.[15]
Josiah Wedgwood (1730-1795), “Official medallion of the British Anti-Slavery Society, 1795.” Wedgwood, a staunch British abolitionist, created this jasper-ware cameo to support the cause. It became the emblem of many Abolitionist societies in the early 19th century. Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.
Some may ask why Americans would commemorate a regiment of opposing soldiers who fought against American independence from Great Britain. Yet the Black soldiers in the Ethiopian Regiment believed in the principle of liberty and made tremendous sacrifices for themselves and future generations. It is important to commend the bravery of enslaved people who risked their lives in search of freedom. Their story is at the core of our nation’s history.
To learn more about the Ethiopian Regiment and the beginnings of the American Revolution, visit the Great Bridge Battlefield & Waterways Museum in Chesapeake, Virginia. The museum sits next to a recreation of the bridge on which the battle took place. The grounds include monuments, an interpretive historical trail, and a stunning view of the Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal. The Foundation aims to preserve and protect the site where so many died in search of freedom. As an institution, the museum and park provide year-round educational programs to learn about the American Revolution and its diverse history.
We would like to give special thanks to Elizabeth Goodwin, the Executive Director of the Great Bridge Battlefield & Waterways History Foundation, who inspired this exhibit. We are grateful for the invaluable opportunities she has provided for our history students. We would also like to thank Dr. Phillip Hamilton, Professor of History at Christopher Newport University and author of The Revolutionary War: Lives and Letters of Lucy and Henry Knox and Justifying Revolution: Law, Virtue, and Violence in the American War of Independence, and Jon Stull of the Great Bridge Battlefield and Waterways Museum, who kindly offered their expertise and peer-reviewed this exhibit.
About the Author
Kathryn Allen will be graduating with a B.A. in History and a minor in Museum Studies from Christopher Newport University in Spring 2024. She completed this exhibit as a service-learning project for Great Bridge Battlefield & Waterways Museum in partnership with the CNU Public History Center. While at CNU, she interned at Bluebird Gap Farm in Hampton, Virginia, where she traced its early history and archaeology. She also serves as the student assistant of the CNU Department of History. She plans to pursue a career in public history.
Notes
[1] By the American Revolution, around 80 percent of enslaved Blacks in the British colonies were born in America, not Africa. In 1790, the first federal census reported 292,000 enslaved Blacks in Virginia. Herbert S. Klein, Slavery in the Americas: A Comparative Study of Virginia and Cuba (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1967), 177; Peter Kolchin, American Slavery, 1629-1877 (New York: Hill and Wang, 1993), 49, 168.
[2] Simon Schama, Rough Crossings: Britain, the Slaves and the American Revolution (United Kingdom: HarperCollins, 2006), 62-65; Silvia Frey, Water from the Rock: Black Resistance in a Revolutionary Age (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1991), 55; Kate Gruber, “The Gunpowder Incident,” American Battlefield Trust. Accessed 1 February 2024. The Gunpowder Incident | American Battlefield Trust (battlefields.org)
[7] Frey, Water from the Rocks, 63; Holton, Black Americans in the Revolutionary Era, 54-55; Donald Gara, “Loyal Subject of the Crown: The Queen’s Own Loyal Virginia Regiment and Dunmore’s Ethiopian Regiment, 1775-76,” Journal of the Society for Army Historical Research 83, no. 333 (Spring 2005): 32-34; Justin Iverson, “Liberty to Slaves: Lord Dunmore’s Ethiopian Regiment, 1775-1776,” in Rebels in Arms: Black Resistance and the Fight for Freedom in the Anglo-Atlantic (Georgia: University of Georgia Press, 2022), 64, 80.
[8] Iverson, “Liberty to Slaves,” 68; Schama Rough Crossings, 79; John Selby, The Revolution in Virginia, 1775-1783 (Virginia: The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, 1988), 70.
[13] Gara, “Loyal Subject of the Crown,” 41; Schama, Rough Crossings, 150-152; Alan Edward Brown and Graham Russell Gao Hodges, The Book of Negroes: African Americans in Exile after the American Revolution (New York: Fordham University Press, 2021), 39.
[14] David George recounted his early struggles under slavery. Born in Virginia, George had started his journey early on, by founding the first black Baptist church in Silver Bluff, South Carolina. During the Revolutionary War, he and his family made their way to the British lines to take their claim to freedom. Eventually they ended up in New York, and later, Nova Scotia. While in Canada, he searched for audiences to preach to, but he faced severe backlash from white neighbors. Thus, he decided to immigrate to Sierra Leone, where he lived out the rest of his life. George’s story is just one of many that travelled to Sierra Leone in search of the freedom promised by the British. See David George and John Rippon, ed. “An Account of the Life of Mr. David George, from Sierra Leone in Africa; Given by Himself in a Conversation with Brother Rippon of London, and Brother Pearce of Birmingham.” Baptist Annual Register 1 (1793); Holton, Black Americans in the Revolutionary Era, 112-118; Frey, Water from the Rocks, 172-196.
[15] While the exact number cannot be determined, Thomas Jefferson estimated that up to 100,000 enslaved Blacks escaped during the American Revolution, though many historians believe this number is too high. Iverson, “Liberty to Slaves,” 84.
Brooke Patten, B.A. in History (Class of 2024), Christopher Newport University
Sheri Shuck-Hall, Ph.D., Professor of History, Christopher Newport University
Did you know that the distribution of American pharmaceuticals has been a developing industry since the colonial period? Yet we often overlook how various cultural groups influenced American medicine and why in 1906 the United States developed government standards and regulations of products to treat illness and disease. Until then, sellers of patent medicines, sometimes referred to as quack doctors, were able to provide pharmaceuticals that had dangerous and addictive side-effects. This exhibit examines how the American pharmaceutical industry developed from the colonial period to the early 20th century and its impact on the public. Featuring artifacts from the Isle of Wight County Museum in Smithfield, Virginia, we will explore the origins of pharmaceuticals in early American medicinal practices, the roles of doctors and pharmacists in the 19th century, and the hazards of unregulated patent medicines that led to U.S. legislative action to protect consumers.[1]
Early Influencers
Drawing labeled, “A man holding his nose to avoid breathing in a miasma.” Miasma 17th Century, Courtesy of the Wellcome Collection.
A significant influence on colonial and early American medicine was the knowledge brought by European colonizers. Throughout the 17th century, many people believed in a popular scientific theory that miasmas – or poisonous air – harmed those close to it and caused diseases. The earliest references of this hypothesis could be traced all the way back to ancient Greece. Greek philosopher Hippocrates argued that a person’s environment, the proximity to certain waters, and overall geographic location all played a role in why someone fell ill. The miasma theory ultimately led most people to believe that their bodies became infected when miasmatic air entered their system and therefore needed to remove the toxins to be cured. Coincidentally, herbs that naturally increased the excretion of urine (diuretics) and feces (laxatives) appeared in many popular early medicines. Americans favored this reasonable understanding of disease through the late 19th century, gravitating towards pharmaceutical products that provided the quickest and simplest way to cure themselves.[2]
Rare Book Division, The New York Public Library. Jacob Bigelow, “Laurus Sassafras. (Sassafras tree),” 1817-1820. New York Public Library Digital Collections.
Europeans also acquired medicinal knowledge from Indigenous communities and incorporated native plants and herbs into prescribed remedies and treatments. Sassafras, which is native to the present-day eastern United States, was a popular herbal remedy throughout many tribes. The Lenape (the original inhabitants of Manhattan) used sassafras in spring as a cleansing tonic and its root to thin the blood. The Cherokee, Creek, Koasati, Iroquois, Delaware, Chippewa and others treated many ailments like bladder pain, coughing, bruising, and eye disorders with sassafras bark, roots, and leaves.[3] In the West, the Tewa (a linguistic group within the Pueblo people of modern-day New Mexico) traditionally used the juniper plant for a variety of medical benefits. It reduced pain and swelling, aided childbirth recovery, and functioned as a filling for teeth and as a diuretic. American colonists widely adopted the medical use of native sassafras and juniper (and countless others), and eventually medical manufacturers profited off this knowledge.[4]
Photos of Ramon’s Brownie Pills. These were advertised as a “diuretic stimulant to the kidneys” and contained oil from juniper berries. Courtesy of the Isle of Wight County Museum, Virginia (264.99).
Other influencers of American medicine were Black medical practitioners in the 18th century, known as herb doctors. Informal apprentices trained with elders as they learned and used plants to produce medicine based on family traditions and knowledge. For example, herb doctors used balmony (a white flowering plant native to North America) and bittersweet nightshade in a medical drink known as “bitters.” Black herb doctors prescribed it not only to cure and strengthen the body, but also to purify the blood. Black families handed down such practices and recipes over generations, which expanded the medical knowledge available to those enslaved in the South. In the American colonies, then, medical practitioners benefitted from the abundance of new medicinal plant life around them and learned from the neighboring Indigenous and enslaved African communities.[5]
Balmony, or turtlehead (Chelone glabra), is a perennial plant from the figwort family that grows in the eastern half of the United States and Canada. For generations, herbalists have used it to aid digestion and relieve constipation and inflammation. For more information, see Chelone glabra L., United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
Physicians vs. Pharmacists
In colonial America, doctors not only cared for sick patients, but also prepared medical remedies and sold them in “doctors’ shops”—the precursor to modern-day pharmacies.[6] Physicians who practiced in the colonial period could receive either formal or informal training in the field. Yet most colonial doctors lacked a licensed education; they instead established their medical knowledge based on family records and experience as an apprentice. Some of the informal medical experts were women in the communities as they were responsible for their family’s medical care, including managing births. Other practitioners earned respect through costly (often prohibitive) doctoral research at established universities in Great Britain or at the early American medical colleges.[7]
Men who could afford the expense attended the first medical school at the College of Philadelphia (now the University of Philadelphia), established in 1765. Schools that followed included Harvard Medical School (1782), Dartmouth Medical School (1797), the Medical Institution of Yale College (1810), and Columbia University’s College of Physicians and Surgeons (1814). By the early 19th century, a nationwide surge in scientific endeavors led to the growth of professional medical training at these institutions. As the United States was still in its early years, medical and healthcare advancements progressed slowly. Yet increased knowledge and professionalization from these universities lead to the eventual divide between physicians who diagnosed the ailments and the pharmacists who distributed the actual medicine.[8]
Photo of a Virginia Medical License from 1894. Courtesy of the Isle of Wight County Museum (1728-87).
While apothecary and pharmacy are often used interchangeably, the separation of both from professional medical experts started in the early 18th century. The colonial apothecary owner was someone involved and knowledgeable in both the pharmaceutical and medical fields, with responsibilities ranging from prescribing treatments to administering them. However, as exclusiveness of the medical field developed, colonial legislative acts eventually solidified the pharmaceutical industry as a subfield of medicine. For example, an early Virginia law from 1736 separated the physician from “any apothecary making up the prescription of another.”[9] Later on, the establishment of the American Pharmaceutical Association in 1852 led to further professionalization and standardization of pharmacists, which became the preferred title. Yet the medical industry headed for a revolution full of hidden dangers with industrialization and deregulation.[10]
“Palatable Poison” for the People
Front cover of Collier’s: The National Weekly, 3 June 1905, featuring E. W. Kemble’s illustration for “Death’s Laboratory,” an exposé of patent medicine fraud. The description reads: Cartoon shows a skull surrounded by money bags. Inside the nose of the skull a skeleton pours Laudanum and alcohol from barrels in the skull’s eyes into bottles labeled with various types of patent medicine. Courtesy of the Library of Congress.
After the American Revolution, a populist movement rejected elitist, traditional physicians and even pharmacists—both associated with British colonialism—in favor of do-it-yourself medicine that was reminiscent of the frontier mentality. By the 1840s, U.S. manufacturers began producing their own medicinal products to match this growing trend. Companies secured trademarks of their concoctions, protecting their brands. These goods, known as patent medicines, often included opium, cocaine, and nightshade. Manufacturers avoided the full disclosure of the ingredients in their products (and therefore were not officially patented). Patent medicines appeared in newspaper advertisements, featuring drugs and special remedies to heal even the worst ailments without a doctor’s prescription. The medical profession warned against these claims, but many Americans ignored them. Congress instead supported a free market without government control in the hopes of encouraging innovation and entrepreneurship.[11]
Trademark registration by Weismann & Muellenbach for Comanti Victoria brand, “Fluid Extract Taraxicum, Olive Oil, Tincture of Laudanum, and Insect Powders.” Notice that the exact amount of each ingredient is missing. Courtesy of the Library of Congress.
Until 1906, there were no federal regulations protecting the health and safety of Americans regarding the food and medical products that citizens purchased. Americans subsequently fell prey to the deceptions and exaggerations of patent medicines because of the shortage of healthcare options. Many communities, especially in more rural areas, lacked a doctor within a safe distance, and even more people could not afford a doctor’s visit, let alone the additional medication needed. This desperate lower-class population hoped to find cheap and convenient remedies for their painful ailments, leading them towards the potentially dangerous, untested concoctions. The public purchased patent medicines at local shops and even on the streets from travelling salesmen. Profiting on pain, unscrupulous companies built and expanded the market full of questionable and sometimes toxic products.[12]
This political cartoon is titled, “The Quack Doctor Superseding the Faculty.” It depicts an upset, “gouty” patient who traditional doctors cannot offer an immediate cure. Instead, he sees an advertisement for an expedient “universal medicine” from a quack doctor. Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.
Opium was a popular additive of patent medicines. As early as 1753, Scottish doctor and surgeon George Young published ATreatise on Opium, which observed the effects of opium on over thirty-five ailments. He argued that the drug was far more effective than many had previously thought when given in larger doses. Though Dr. Young prefaced his work by mentioning that his research might increase the demand and consumption of the drug, he nonetheless felt it necessary to share his knowledge on opium’s productive uses. After the United States began the formal importation of opium in the early 19th century, the availability and popularity of the drug began to flood the American market, along with its addictive consequences. Despite opium’s effectiveness on pain relief, millions of people became addicted and abused the drug. Patent medicines offered elixirs or pills containing opium without a prescription, so Americans consumed these drugs without knowing how deadly they could be over time.[13]
This image shows an advertisement from Dr. Pierce’s brand of patent medicines. Some of these “family medicines” contained unknown amounts of opium. All sorts of products for a multitude of ailments claimed to be safe for adults as well as children. Courtesy of the Library of Congress.
Cocaine was another popular drug in patent medicines, but its consumption began long before its use as a popular anesthetic in the late 1800’s. For generations, Indigenous peoples of South America had used the coca leaf to lessen the effects of living in high altitudes and to stimulate the mind, much like caffeine does today. Medical observations of cocaine’s benefits had been circulating since the mid-19th century. During the age of patent medicines, cocaine was a popular additive, advertised to produce “strength, vigor, and new life into all parts of the system.”[14] The most commercially successful cocaine tonic was Vin Mariani, a mix of red wine and cocaine. It claimed to treat many maladies, including the following: “malaria, fever, chills, nervous disability, mental and physical depression, and consumption.”[15] Other companies soon followed with their own concoctions, including the now world-renowned Coca-Cola. Its original recipe contained cocaine (omitted in the early 1900s) and rose in popularity as a tonic to increase energy and even as a cure for opium or coffee addictions. Yet the addictive nature of the drug was not immediately apparent to consumers.[16]
“VIN MARIANI, Report by Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry – With Comments Thereon.” in Propaganda for Reform in Proprietary Medicines (Chicago: Council on Pharmacy & Chemistry: 1908), 63.
Commonly known in America as deadly nightshade, belladonna also found its way into patent medicines. Nightshade consumption had its origins since antiquity as a hallucinogenic. In colonial America, nightshade had associations with witchcraft. As the name suggests, deadly nightshade harbors a toxicity fatal to humans in a large enough quantity. Those who ingested too much belladonna medicinal elixirs experienced dry throat and hazy vision, followed by restlessness, hallucinations, and convulsions. Those who died of belladonna overdose appeared to suffer from asphyxia and heart failure. Yet these dangerous side effects did little to stop the population from consuming belladonna by using lesser amounts as medicine. The limited medical science available left many illnesses unidentified, so patent medicine bottles often advertised a wide range of remedies; the grossly exaggerated claims to cure many ailments increased sales. Despite its potentially threatening effect, belladonna was sold in bottles like the one below for the purpose of treating constipation, muscle pain, whooping cough, epilepsy, and asthma.[17]
Photo of a bottle labeled “Belladonna Leaves.” Courtesy of the Isle of Wight County Museum (2022.003.0011).
The late 19th century patent medicine industry ranged from large companies that were deliberately dishonest about their treatments’ success, to small entrepreneurs attempting to scam vulnerable, uneducated people in need of a quick cure. Despite the sometimes comedic or exaggerated advertisements, these medications were often far cheaper and easier to procure than possibly safer, more effective alternatives from a traditional doctor or apothecary. How could so many Americans be duped so easily? With much of the science surrounding medicine still left to be discovered and accepted by the public, unscrupulous businesses continued to profit from deceiving their customers in an unrestricted market.[18]
Photo of a liniment bottle advertised “for Man or Beast” and labeled to give pain relief to ailments in men, cattle, or horses. Courtesy of the Isle of Wight County Museum (2011.168.1).
The Death of Patent Medicines
While England spearheaded research towards a better understanding of how and why people contracted diseases, the American medical community lagged. Many American students attended European medical schools because they were well-established with good reputations compared to their American counterparts, where there were “few laboratories, little decent equipment, and no funds for hiring capable assistants.”[19] Coinciding with the American Civil War (1861-1865), the number of international graduates declined – lowering American access to current medical knowledge. During the mid-19th century, European medical experts contributed to the germ theory, whereby germs (microorganisms) caused illness or disease. Yet the germ theory held little credibility to the American people until the end of the century. Instead, patent medicine manufacturers and sellers made a fortune on citizens’ desperation and subsequently prevented advancements in medical knowledge.[20]
The Johns Hopkins Hospital in the late 19th century. Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.
Beginning in the 1870s, the longstanding skepticism about the germ theory had finally declined in the United States and Europe. New research conducted on diseases by influential scientists who studied bacteria like Louis Pasteur transformed the perceptions on how to treat illnesses. Manufacturers started to mass produce anti-toxins for diseases, including diphtheria and tetanus. Coinciding with these changes, Johns Hopkins University opened in 1876 and was the first American college that ran its research based on the established European model. The nation slowly expanded its medical research capabilities compared to previous decades. By the turn of the century, there was a national initiative led by reformers—labeled as Progressives—who focused on ending corruption and improving medical research and knowledge so that American citizens could make more informed decisions rather than trusting quack doctors and their untested, cure-all elixirs.[21]
This political cartoon celebrates Dr. Harvey Wiley, Chief Chemist of the U.S. Bureau of Chemistry, who led a crusade against patent medicines and their dangers to the public. His work, along with the support of President Theodore Roosevelt, ultimately led to the passage of the Pure Food and Drugs Act in 1906 that outlawed “adulterated and mis-branded food and drugs.” Courtesy of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Despite patent medicine companies rallying against national legislation to regulate products, Progressives like Dr. Harvey Wiley, a chief chemist who led the U.S. Bureau of Chemistry (later named the Food and Drug Administration in 1931) and other reformers pushed to end quack medicine. President Theodore Roosevelt signed into law the Pure Food and Drug Act in 1906 (also known as Dr. Wiley’s law). It demanded that manufacturers label medicines with dangerous ingredients such as opium, morphine, chloroform, alcohol, and cocaine, and it prevented manufacturers from displaying false statements regarding their products. This regulatory law ultimately decreased the sales of patent medicines. Though medical scams and patent medicines still exist in the United States today and prey on those who lack access to proper healthcare or life-saving medicines even in the 21st century, the numbers have greatly decreased.[22]
This medicine bottle represents the decline of the use of cocaine in patent medicines. It reads: “This tablet is the same as our very popular Throat No. 3 except that the Cocaine is omitted. Many practitioners prefer to discontinue the use of Cocaine in any form.” Courtesy of the Isle of Wight County Museum (2022.003.0009).
Learning from the Past
It would be easy to focus on the absurdity of advertisements for quack medicines. Yet to do so would overlook the larger problem. The popularity of dangerous patent medicines demonstrated the need for proper healthcare. A large population of American citizens lacked the resources or funding to afford traditional, educated physicians and treatment, which still plagues many American communities today. Instead, these people obtained the limited medical knowledge available to them and the popular remedies within their society and culture, regardless of their sometimes-dangerous perceptions and side-effects. If you wish to see more of these medicines for yourself, consider a visit the Isle of Wight County Museum in Smithfield, Virginia where you can place yourself in an early American country store and learn more about the popular brands and ingredients in pharmaceuticals.[23] See https://www.historicisleofwight.com/ for more details on events and exhibits.
Acknowledgements
We would like to give a special thanks to CNU history alumna Rachel Popp, curator of the Isle of Wight County Museum, who not only inspired and helped guide this project, but also allowed Brooke to access their artifacts, special collections, and galleries. We would also like to thank Dr. Sara Black, Assistant Professor of History at Christopher Newport University and author of Drugging France: Mind-Altering Medicine in the Long Nineteenth Century, who kindly provided her expertise by peer-reviewing this exhibit.
About the Author
Brooke Patten is a history major and political science and leadership minor at Christopher Newport University (Class of 2024). Brooke completed this exhibit as a service-learning project for the Isle of Wight County Museum in partnership with the CNU Public History Center. In addition to volunteering at many non-profits, she is currently working as an intern at the Mariners’ Museum Library and hopes to pursue a career in archives and special collections.
Notes
[1] J. Worth Estes, “The Pharmacology of Nineteenth-Century Patent Medicines.” Pharmacy in History 30, no. 1 (1988): 3.
[2] Marianna Karamanou, George Panayiotakopoulos, Gregory Tsoucalas, Antonis A. Kousoulis, and George Androutsos, “From Miasmas to Germs: A Historical Approach to Theories of Infectious Disease Transmission” Infez Med 20, no. 1 (2012): 58; Phyllis Allen Richmond, “American Attitudes Toward the Germ Theory of Disease (1860-1880)” Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 9, no. 4 (1954): 439.
[3] Rebecca Tannenbaum, Health and Wellness in Colonial America, (Greenwood, 2012), 156.
[4] Rebecca Tannenbaum, Health and Wellness in Colonial America, (Greenwood, 2012), 156; United States Department of Agriculture, “Sassafras Plant Guide: Nature Resources Conservation Service,” National Plant Data Center https://plants.usda.gov/DocumentLibrary/plantguide/pdf/pg_saal5.pdf; Plants as Medicine: Lenape Healing Traditions Continue Today | Columbia School of Nursing, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, 20 April 2021; Wilfred William Robbins, Harrington, John Peabody, and Barbara Freire-Marreco, “Ethnobotany of the Tewa Indians,” Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin. 55 (1916): 1–124; Tannenbaum, Health and Wellness in Colonial America, 156.
[5] Tannenbaum, Health and Wellness in Colonial America, 158.
[6] Bob Zebroski, A Brief History of Pharmacy: Humanity’s Search for Wellness (New York: Routledge, 2016), 114.
[7] Ibid.; Tannenbaum, Health and Wellness in Colonial America, 21-22.
[8] Wyndham B. Blanton, Medicine in Virginia in The Eighteenth Century (Richmond: Garrett and Massie, Incorporated, 1931), 437.
[9] Gregory J. Higby, “Professionalism and the Nineteenth-Century American Pharmacist,” Pharmacy in History 28, no. 3 (1986): 117.
[10] Higby, “Professionalism and the Nineteenth-Century American Pharmacist,” 117; Tannenbaum, Health and Wellness in Colonial America, 161.
[11] Zebroski, A Brief History of Pharmacy, 138; Arthur Joseph Cramp, Nostrums and Quackery: Articles on the Nostrum Evil and Quackery (Chicago: Press of American Medical Association, 1912), 9.
Volume 1 of Nostrums and Quackery, American Medical Association
[12] Norman Gevitz, “Domestic Medical Guides and the Drug Trade in Nineteenth-Century America,” Pharmacy in History 32, no. 2 (1990): 51.
[13] Jacques M. Downs, “American Merchants and the China Opium Trade, 1800-1840.” The Business History Review 42, no. 4 (1968): 421; George Young, A Treatise on Opium: Founded upon Practical Observations (A. Millar, 1753), v-vii; Zebroski, A Brief History of Pharmacy, 108-109.
[14] Estes, “The Pharmacology of Nineteenth-Century Patent Medicines,” 4.; Henry Kraemer, Fred B Kilmer, and Johnson & Johnson, Belladonna: A Study of Its History Action and Uses in Medicine (New York: Johnson & Johnson, 1893), 13.
[15] Estes, “The Pharmacology of Nineteenth-Century Patent Medicines,” 12-13.
[16] Estes, “The Pharmacology of Nineteenth-Century Patent Medicines,” 4.
[17] Jurgen Leo Müller, “Love Potions and the Ointment of Witches: Historical Aspects of the Nightshade Alkaloids,” Journal of Toxicology: Clinical Toxicology, 36:6, (1998), 617-627, DOI: 10.3109/15563659809028060; Kraemer, et al. Belladonna: A Study of Its History Action and Uses in Medicine, 38; Estes, “The Pharmacology of Nineteenth-Century Patent Medicines,” 38.
[18] Despite our current medical advancements and state-of-the-art technologies to treat illness and disease, during the pandemic in 2020, the drug hydroxychloroquine became a sought-after remedy to Covid-19. Medical experts warned against its consumption due to its harmful side-effects, but some Americans ignored the dangers and suffered deadly consequences. https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/in-depth/hydroxychloroquine-treatment-covid-19/art-20555331; Estes, “The Pharmacology of Nineteenth-Century Patent Medicines,” 3-18
[19] Richmond, “American Attitudes Toward the Germ Theory of Disease (1860-1880),” 438.
[20] Steven M. Opal, “A Brief History of Microbiology and Immunology,” Vaccines: A biography (2010): 31-56; Richmond, “American Attitudes Toward the Germ Theory of Disease (1860-1880),” 437.
[21] Richmond, “American Attitudes Toward the Germ Theory of Disease (1860-1880),” 438; Zebroski, A Brief History of Pharmacy, 188; J. M. Cavaillon and S. Legout, “Louis Pasteur: Between Myth and Reality” Biomolecules 12:4 (2022), 596. https://doi.org/10.3390/biom12040596
[22] Estes, “The Pharmacology of Nineteenth-Century Patent Medicines,” 3; Zebroski, A Brief History of Pharmacy, 212.
[23] Estes, “The Pharmacology of Nineteenth-Century Patent Medicines,” 4.
By Lauren Tamayo, B.A. in History, Christopher Newport University and Sheri Shuck-Hall, Ph.D., Professor of History, Christopher Newport University
In the early settlement of present-day Chesapeake, Virginia, Indigenous people and later European colonists used the surrounding waterways to survive and prosper. Its strategic location factored into the area’s major role at the start of the American Revolution. On November 7, 1775, near Norfolk, John Murray, Earl of Dunmore and Royal Governor of Virginia, emancipated enslaved Africans and indentured servants if they joined the British cause against the rebellious Virginians. Many escaped slaves ultimately aided Dunmore and the British Army in the attempted siege of Great Bridge on the Southern Branch of the Elizabeth River. The ensuing battle on December 9, 1775, led to a consequential victory for the Patriots, providing a momentum to the cause for independence. Why was Great Bridge such an important place for the British and colonists in Virginia? This exhibit will explore the significance of the waterways of Hampton Roads, transportation in the Revolutionary Era, and everyday life along the Elizabeth River.[1]
Traveling by boat was a daily occurrence for the locals living in and around the Southern Branch of the Elizabeth River, named after the daughter of King James I (1566-1625) by English colonists. During the early and mid-1700s, the South relied heavily on agriculture and the sale of raw materials. The area between present-day upper North Carolina and southern Virginia was covered in marshlands and waterways that prevented direct travel to port cities. In order to transport many of the goods and materials produced in these regions to high commerce areas, it was almost a necessity to travel by boat. These passageways would be the foundation to the development of Hampton Roads, Virginia and the continuous use of the surrounding waterways.[2]
The essential use of water transportation is what led to the region being known as Hampton Roads shortly after the founding of Virginia. Likely named after the 3rd Earl of Southampton, Henry Wriothesley–a founding member of the Virginia Company of London–Hampton Roads referred not to roads, but to the many rivers, streams, and other bodies of water found throughout the area. Colonists often referred to water routes as roads. Hampton Roads constituted the area or channel connecting the Elizabeth, James, and Nansemond Rivers with the Chesapeake Bay; today Hampton Roads includes the major cities and counties that surround these waters. People across greater Virginia and North Carolina used this area as a method of transportation for raw materials and agriculture to reach the largest port in Hampton Roads, located in present-day Port Norfolk.[3]
18th Century Ships in Hampton Roads
In Great Bridge and the surrounding areas of Hampton Roads, there were four main types of ships used to transport people and goods. The most common of these boats was the bateau; however, schooners, row galleys, and brigs could be found in deeper waters. A bateau was a flat bottomed, double-ended boat that was frequently used in the Southern colonies during the 1700s. The name bateau originates from the French word for boat and was habitually used in the region due to the ease of crafting and its ability to carry substantial amounts of cargo. Bateaux often had cloth coverings, and although the styles varied, the most common was a round, wagon style cover that enclosed a portion of the boat. Bateaux also easily handled shallow waters, which was especially useful on the Southern Branch of the Elizabeth River.[4]
Colonists used schooners in the nearby waters of the Elizabeth River for their narrow build and the shallowness of the hull. Due to their slimmer frame, schooners were less common for large amounts of cargo. Yet the boats offered speedier travel for small transports. Many schooners had multiple posts and large sails that also aided in the speed of the ship during periods of breeze; when not in use, shipmen rolled up the sails. Fishermen and coasters sailing to inland waters and at sea heavily used schooners as they were reliable in a variety of weather conditions.[5]
In comparison, row galleys were large ships that were long and narrow much like schooners; however, they were much larger and had a deep hull. Often used during the American Revolution, these boats supported more weight and often carried swivel guns and other artillery for the war effort. Row galleys frequented the surrounding waters of Hampton Roads but were less common within Great Bridge due to the shallow waters of the Elizabeth River.[6]
“Watercolor depicting the American line of battle before the 1776 Battle of Valcour Island,” featuring some row galleys powered by oars. National Archives of Canada.
One of the most efficient and popular sailing ships in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries was the brig. It was a larger ship and usually had two main sails. The appeal of this boat came from its ability to transport copious amounts of cargo. These ships also differed from the others in that they were square-rigged on both ends of the mast. While the hulls of these ships were not shallow enough to enter the waters of Great Bridge, brigs could be seen in the Chesapeake Bay and other deeper waters of Hampton Roads. Although not usually built in the colonies, these ships were commonly found in colonial waters during the 1700s and often used by the British.[7]
“First official salute to the American flag on board an American warship in a foreign port, 16 November 1776.” Painting by Phillips Melville of the Continental Brig Andrew Doria receiving a salute from the Dutch fort at St. Eustatius, West Indies, 16 November 1776. Courtesy of the U.S. Navy Art Collection, Washington, D.C.
Life Along the Intracoastal Waterway
In colonial Virginia, Bridge Town, later known as Great Bridge, was a prime location because of its easy access to the waterways that acted as highways for people and goods. Due to the constant need for transportations routes, many locals used Great Bridge as a passage from North Carolina to the port city of Norfolk.[8] The Tidewater economy relied heavily on the planting and harvesting of tobacco as a means of income; many Virginians enslaved Africans and benefited financially from this unfree labor. The colonists who lived near Great Bridge were mostly small farmers because of the sandy soil that was less conducive for large plantations. The grain industry within the colonies was also gaining momentum. The Chesapeake area was a prime exporter of wheat, as well as the front runner for Indian corn. The massive reliance on agricultural development meant that many people around Great Bridge were either farmers or were connected to the agriculture industry.[9]
Everyday life within Great Bridge revolved around the family. During this time most of the houses were smaller, one-levels built in the colonial style. These houses were often positioned along the riverbanks to provide access to the Elizabeth River and therefore easy transport of goods and services. Many of the rooms within the house were multipurpose and a majority contained the means to be turned into a bedroom to adjust to large families as well as travelers. The Three Tun Tavern located in Great Bridge provided boarding for the night as many people passing through needed food and lodging on their way to the Port of Norfolk.[10]
Throughout the eighteenth century, the influence of the waterways continued to shape the lifestyles and environment of the Chesapeake region. Between 1728 and 1729, Colonel William Byrd II, a notorious plantation owner, surveyed the border between Virginia and North Carolina, identifying the large marshlands known as the Great Dismal Swamp. After his survey was completed, Byrd wrote a petition to the king requesting the approval to drain the swamp and to create fertile land for the ever-growing agricultural production, mostly using slave labor. [11]
After Byrd’s survey, many Virginians argued for the creation of a canal that linked the Tidewater region and Chesapeake Bay to northeastern North Carolina, known as the Albemarle region. However, it would not be until 1793, when both Virginia and North Carolina state governments authorized the project, that the Dismal Swamp Company began construction of a canal. Despite Byrd’s initial thought that the project would be easy to complete, it took enslaved Africans twelve grueling years of digging the canal by hand to finish it. When it was completed in 1805, the six-foot deep and 15-foot-wide canal spanned the length of twenty-one miles and contained seven locks.[12]
Colonists also wanted a canal that would ease the journey to and from the Atlantic Ocean by means of connecting Albemarle Sound and the Chesapeake Bay. By linking these two waterways it would allow for faster and safer traveling. The idea for the Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal was conceived in the early 1700s, but it would not become a reality until well after the American Revolution. The construction began in 1855 by using steam dredges. Completed four years later in 1859, the canal measured the width of forty feet with a depth of six feet that allowed for large scale vessels including row galleys and brigs. Within the canal there were two cuts and one lock—what is known today as the Great Bridge Locks.[13]
In 1913, the United States government purchased the Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal in order to create a continuous inland waterway route. Once under the control of the United States Army Corps of Engineers, improvements to the canal began and the usage toll ceased. This transition created new competition for the Dismal Swamp Canal and led to larger commercial ships using the Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal; smaller recreational boats continued to use the Dismal Swamp Canal as their main passage. Ultimately the United States purchased the Dismal Swamp Canal in 1929. Both canals continue to be used today. The Great Bridge Locks provide passage for around nine thousand vessels a year, while the Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal is responsible for the transportation of over one million tons of cargo each year.[14]
Waterways continue to play a significant role in Hampton Roads, and all over the world. To learn more about the history of Hampton Roads and its waterways, as well as the Battle of Great Bridge in the American Revolution, please stop by the Great Bridge Battlefield and Waterways Museum located in Chesapeake, Virginia. The museum opened to the public on June 19th, 2020, and has many new exhibits, special events, and educational programs for the public to explore and enjoy.
We would like to give special thanks to Elizabeth Goodwin, the Executive Director of the Great Bridge Battlefield & Waterways History Foundation, who sponsored Lauren’s internship in the summer of 2022. We are very grateful that she provided her time and expertise on this research project, and we thank her for her exceptional mentorship of Lauren.
About the Author
Lauren Tamayo is a history major and museum studies minor at Christopher Newport University (Class of 2023). She completed a 140-hour service-learning internship at Great Bridge Battlefield & Waterways Museum during summer semester 2022, where she gained invaluable skills in many facets of museum work–from marketing and advertising to cataloging artifacts and creating educational packets. After she graduates, she plans to pursue a career in public history.
Notes
[1] Harry M. Ward, The American Revolution: Nationhood Achieved, 1763-1788 (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1995), 70-71.
[2] Edwin L. Combs, “Trading in Lubberland: Maritime Commerce in Colonial North Carolina.” The North Carolina Historical Review 80, no. 1 (2003): 1–3. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23522582.
[3] Hampton Roads includes the following cities and counties: Virginia Beach; Norfolk; Chesapeake; Newport News; Hampton; Portsmouth; Suffolk; Williamsburg; Poquoson; Franklin; James City County; York County; Gloucester County; Isle of Wight County; Currituck County, NC; Gates County, NC; Mathews County; Southampton County; Camden County; and Surry County. Tim McGlown, “What’s in a Name?” The Virginian Pilot, 6 June 2008; Peter Crawford Stewart, “The Commercial History of Hampton Roads, Virginia, 1815-1860.” Order No. 6803127, (University of Virginia, 1967), 2-4.
[4] John Fitzhugh Millar, American Ships of the Colonial and Revolutionary Periods. (New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company, 1978), 293.
[5] John Fitzhugh Millar, American Ships of the Colonial and Revolutionary Periods. (New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company, 1978), 155-157.
[6] Howard I. Chapelle, The History of American Sailing Ships. (New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company, 1935), 54-55.
[7] Howard I. Chapelle, The History of American Sailing Ships. (New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company, 1935), 15-17.
[8] Oscar Theodore Barck and Hugh Talmage Lefler, Colonial America. (New York, NY: The Macmillan Company, 1958), 7-9.
[9] William H. Siener, “Charles Yates, the Grain Trade, and Economic Development in Fredericksburg, Virginia, 1750-1810,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 93, no. 4 (1985): 409–26. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4248842.
[10]Julia Cherry Spruill, Women’s Life & Work in the Southern Colonies. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1972, 8-12.
[11] Charles Royster, The Fabulous History of the Dismal Swamp Company: A Story of George Washington’s Times. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf, 1999, 1-20.
[12] To this day the Dismal Swamp Canal is used by people for a variety of purposes, but only contains two of the original seven locks. Marcus P. Nevius, City of Refuge: Slavery and Petit Marronage in the Great Dismal Swamp, 1763-1856. (Athens, GA: The University of Georgia Press, 2020), 5-6.
[13] Alexander Crosby Brown, Juniper Waterway – A History of the Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal. (Norfolk: Norfolk County Historical Society, 1981). Pamphlet from the Wallace Room Collection, Great Bridge Battlefield and Waterways Museum. Chesapeake, Virginia.
[14] Wall text, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Protecting a Vital Resource, M2, Great Bridge Battlefield and Waterways Museum, Chesapeake, VA.
