Mary Hays, AKA: Molly Pitcher

The Molly Pitcher Monument

Last week I posted about Hannah Duston and her escape from the Indians. Another monument to a strong female historical figure is the Molly Pitcher grave and statue in the Old Public Graveyard in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. Molly Pitcher is one of those stories that can be filed under the heading of “If it ain’t true it outta be.” Of course, that’s my Texas heritage coming out. But I’m convinced that there really is only one Molly Pitcher, her real name was Mary Hays, and she’s buried in Carlisle.

Here's her story: During the American Revolution, Mary Hays followed her husband, William Hays, to war, as a large number of women did. In those days, women would follow the army to care for their soldier family members in a variety of ways, like cooking, sewing, laundry, or assisting with medical care. One other task these volunteers provided was bringing water to the soldiers during training, or even during battle. These women earned the nickname “Molly Pitcher.” Molly is a way of saying Mary, and Pitcher of course is for the pitcher of water they’d carry.

The current monument is from 1916.

William Hays enlisted in Proctor’s 4^th Pennsylvania Artillery in 1777. Mary first went with the battery to Valley Forge, then the next year to the Battle of Monmouth Courthouse in New Jersey. This is not disputed. During the battle, Mary was bringing water to the artillerymen in her husband’s battery. When her husband fell, either from a wound or heatstroke, Mary took over his job, using a ramrod to swab and load the canon.

Legend has it that during the battle she was seen working with the gun’s crew by General George Washington. The General supposedly congratulated her and made her a sergeant as a reward for her bravery. None of that can be proven, although Mary reportedly went by the nickname “Sergeant Molly” for the rest of her life. However, in 1830 a war veteran’s narrative was published that described the incident of a woman taking over for her husband on an artillery piece during the Battle of Monmouth. In it, the writer says that a British cannon ball passed between the woman’s legs, tearing through her skirt but leaving her unharmed.

After the battle, Mary Hays and her husband returned to their home in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. William Hays died in 1786. Mary later married again, to a man named John McCauley. In 1822, Mary was granted a pension by the state of Pennsylvania for her service. Mary died in 1832 and is buried in the Old Public Graveyard as Mary McCauley. The current Molly Pitcher monument was erected in 1916.

Union troops were behind this wall
during a Civil War skirmish.

There are a number of Molly Pitcher monuments. Some are in the form of street names, murals, and even business names. I believe that Molly Pitcher is a moniker given to women who followed their husbands to war during the Revolution. Mary Hays is the personification of that. Much like Rosie the Riveter was a name for women working in the defense industry during WWII and Naomi Parker was the inspiration for that. However, there is still controversy. You can read a Wikipedia article that does not question the existence of Molly Pitcher. An article on the American Battlefield Trust website, says that she is a composite character, made up of the many Molly Pitchers. Yet finally, there is an article from Smithsonian that says she probably never existed.

If you ever get the chance to walk around Carlisle, please do. Lots of history there from the Revolution to the Civil War. Take a look at the Old Public Graveyard on South Street at Bedford. It’s an interesting place, with the oldest burial from 1757. The east wall protected approximately 200 Union soldiers when Jeb Stuart’s Confederate cavalry raided Carlisle during the Gettysburg Campaign. They traded shots with Confederate skirmishers who were deployed in what would become Letort Park, on the other side of the creek. But that’s a story for a future post. 

Bunker Hill, John Adams, and Nathaniel Philbrick

This Book R & R is about "Bunker Hill: A City, A Siege, A Revolution" by Nathaniel Philbrick

I know it sounds incredibly geeky, but I just finished reading Nathaniel Philbrick’s “Bunker Hill,” and I’m watching the HBO series “John Adams,” both on the Fourth of July. Perhaps it is coincidence, but let me briefly tell you how this has come about.

My posts have been few over the last two years due to the fact that I have been completing a masters degree in education and earning my California teaching credential in social studies. Last fall I did my student teaching in US history and economics. The day after that was concluded I began a long term substitution teaching world history for the remainder of the year. I also have the opportunity to teach civics and economics during summer school, which started the week after the spring semester ended. So within the last year I have taught four different classes for the first time. As you can imagine, that required a great deal of preparation time that normally would have been spent reading books of my own choosing. Spending all of that time prepping for classes and grading papers of course did not prevent me from buying new books. My shelves are full of unread titles waiting for their turn.

Nathaniel Philbrick is one of my favorite nonfiction authors. I picked up a copy of Bunker Hill some time ago. Teaching civics this summer brought with it a new excitement for learning about the founding. (I am now working on “Plain, Honest Men” by Richard Beeman.) So I finally picked up Philbrick’s book and it immediately grabbed my attention. Of course, I knew it would. Bunker Hill has the same level of detail that Philbrick put into “The Last Stand” so that while with this book you might not feel like you are with the patriots, you certainly are standing at a window watching the goings on. I actually have a criticism. The book should not have been titled “Bunker Hill” because it gives the potential reader the idea that it is specifically about that battle. I actually asked myself before reading the book, how much do I really need to know about the battle of Bunker Hill? Well, the title is a misnomer.

Bunker Hill, as the subtitle states, is about the siege of Boston. It begins with the arrival of British troops in response to the unrest over the stamp act. It ends with the British withdrawal from the city. In between you will read about the Boston Massacre and the Boston Tea Party, the battles of Lexington and Concord, the formation of the Continental Army and the trials faced by George Washington in attaining his goal of expelling the British from Boston. You will of course read about the battle of Bunker Hill and understand what it was, who took part in it, and what the effects of it were on the larger story of the beginning of the Revolution, although that is actually only a fraction of the book.

At 295 pages, “Bunker Hill” is not a major life commitment. It paces well and keeps the reader’s attention. It’s good history, with no bias, reinterpretation, or analysis. Not only did I enjoy the book, but I feel like I can now see the real history, separated from the modern mythology that has grown up around the founding and the beginning of the revolution. And what does this have to do with binge watching HBO’s “John Adams”? Well…I really did take advantage of the holiday weekend to finish reading “Bunker Hill” and it just put me in the mood to watch “John Adams” again. Am I a geeky patriot or what? But you know, the first hour and a half of that series makes so much more sense now. I understand more of the references made in the dialog now that I have the background on the subject. So this summer, get your patriotic history geek on. 

Palatable History Through Fiction

Book Review of "The Fort" by Bernard Cornwell

As you know I enjoy a good historical fiction. The closer the plot is to the historical record the better. One of the books that really turned me on to history years ago was the Killer Angels by Michael Shaara (the greatest historical fiction book of all time, in my humble opinion) and I still run out and pay full price for hard cover as soon as anything by Jeff Shaara is released. I was pleasantly surprised when one of my holiday reads, The Fort by Bernard Cornwell, turned out to be factual historical fiction, a really exciting tale well told and with only minor exceptions, an accurate historical narrative.

Bernard Cornwell is a British author most well known (to me anyway) for his immensely popular Richard Sharpe series about the Napoleonic Wars. He has also written series in the foreground of post-Roman Briton, the Hundred Years War, and Ninth Century England. Occasionally he does venture into American history. I've read a couple of Cornwell's books previously. Namely "Rebel," the first is a series about the Civil War, and "Redcoat" that is set in the American Revolution. Both books were enjoyable reads, but were only a fiction story set in the period. I found a hardback copy of "The Fort" at my library's used book sale recently. I thought it would be the same as the other Cornwell novels - certainly worth the $1 I paid for it - and would make a good Christmas vacation book. I was wrong.

A narrative of the American Revolution, "The Fort" turned out to be Shaara-esque historical fiction. The story is a retelling of the Penobscot Expedition of 1779, where Massachusetts militia and naval vessels sailed to the Penobscot River in (present day) Maine to expel British forces who had recently arrived there to construct a fort and establish a base for naval operations. Upon arrival the Americans outnumbered the British defenders in their woefully unfinished fort and had the initiative. However, the initiative is lost through a series of incompetent decisions on the part of the American militia commander, and lack of action on the part of both him and the American naval commander, born of stubborn pride. The British forces, led by a professional soldier, are able to hold out for weeks until rescue arrives in the form of British warships dispatched from New York. The entire American fleet is lost and the adventure is arguably the worst American naval disaster until Pearl Harbor. In case that isn't interesting enough, the American artillery is commanded by a Lieutenant Colonel of militia by the name of Paul Revere. In this novel as in real life, Revere's performance on this operation does not exactly make his country proud or live up to the reputation that is evolved by Longfellow' poem.

Cornwell provides a section of historical notes at the end of the novel that provides the background of the Penobscot Expedition. He also points out the few places where he "took artistic license" to advance the story. The main departures being how many times the Americans tried to lure the British out of their fortifications in small numbers in order to ambush them, and who was present at a truce meeting to inquire about a wounded and captured officer. 

I assume that using a factual plot line from history is new, or certainly seldom used vehicle for Cornwell. That's not to say that his other books are not well researched, I believe they are. I'm saying that he is good at choosing, researching, then re-telling a historical narrative. I enjoyed this book and I learned about an event in our country's history that I dare claim has been down played? This book is getting the best recommendation I can give a novel: I'm sending it to my dad to read. 

I thought the "characters" in this novel were well developed and the book itself was fast paced. Unfortunately, the most disappointing thing about "The Fort" for me was reading the reaction to the book of the one and two-star reviews on Amazon. I wonder how a person can be critical of the plot and characters of a story that is true? I hope Mr. Cornwell writes more books like this. "The Fort" is a keeper, and it is going on the shelf right next to my collection of Shaara novels. ;-)