"They had built huts of bushes and leaves."
Analysis of American Soldiers' Campaign Lodging, 1776-1781

(Published in The Brigade Dispatch, vol. XXXII, no. 3 (Autumn 2002), 7-10.)

"How hard is the soldier's lott who's least danger is in the field of action? Fighting
happens seldom, but fatigue, hunger, cold & heat are constantly varying his distress."
Surgeon Jabez Campfield,  Spencer’s Additional Regiment, 4 August 1779.¹

“The Company … never were encamped nor were the Militia Reg’t or even the Continental Light Horse or Foot Regiments or parties – it was not the fashion in those days. They laid in houses & barns in woods & Swamps & open fields on the ground”
Private David Bogert, Militia, Bergen County, New Jersey,
1832 pension deposition.²

*     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *

A response (Kim Stacy, “Notes,” Dispatch, XXX, 2, Summer 2000) to my article “We Are Now... Properly... Enwigwamed”: British Soldiers and Brush Shelters, 1777-1781” (Dispatch, XXIX, 2 Summer 1999) contended that “American forces used brush huts fully as much as the British Army,” cited several examples, and included an illustration of a British hut at Fort St. Johns in 1776, as well as a detail from the Xavier della Gatta Paoli painting showing American wigwams. While admitting that American regular and militia troops used makeshift shelters throughout the war, my studies lead me to believe that British forces used such constructs in a more organized manner and on a more frequent basis. A concluding section to an ongoing Military Collector & Historian series will include numerous primary accounts to back up my findings, but I include here compiled statistics and analysis to support my contentions.

Two soldiers' diaries serve to show the wide range of shelters used by Continental troops, the frequency with which each different type was employed and under what conditions. Since the two accounts cover a large proportion of the war day by day they also show evidence of differing trends of usage as the war progressed. Both men were officers who rose from the ranks. Ebenezer Wild of Massachusetts, a corporal in 1775, was promoted to sergeant the year after; he continued in that rank until October 1779 when he was appointed ensign. In May 1781 Wild was promoted to 2nd lieutenant, ending the war in that post. Rhode Islander Jeremiah Greenman started as a private in Arnold's 1775 Quebec expedition, and was imprisoned in Canada in 1776. In January 1777 Greenman was appointed sergeant in the 2nd Rhode Island, rising to ensign in May 1778, and finally to lieutenant in 1781. Wild's account covers the years 1776 to 1779, and 1781; Greenman is used to fill the void for 1780 and his 1777 diary is included to provide a one-year comparison with Wild's narrative.³

Let us take a look at just how often the two diarists mentioned makeshift shelters. In Wild's five year long narrative (1776-1781, the 1780 journal is missing) he mentions building a plank shed in 1776, a series of brush huts in late November and December 1777, makes no mention of them at all in 1778 and 1779, and then notes intermittent use of brush huts, booths, and "bowries" in June, July, and September 1781. Jeremiah Greenman’s eight-year account mirrors Wild's experience, additionally recording a twenty-five day period of living in brush shelters in summer 1780 when confronting the British in New Jersey, and building a brush hut later that same year while on guard duty.

Data from the two diaries show that tents were by far the predominant shelter type, but that the percentage of tent usage decreased in those years with the longest periods of contact with, or maneuvering against, enemy forces. Buildings (private homes, barns, meeting houses, taverns, and in one case the Connecticut State House) were often taken advantage of when on the march in a suitably populated area; not only did buildings afford better shelter in inclement weather, but their use could save precious time since the need to pitch and take down tentage was done away with. Facing the lack of any other covering, soldiers sometimes built brush shelters for protection from precipitation, the hot sun, or cold weather. When time and materials were available use of makeshift constructs averaged only about four percent of the time. Bedding down under the "canopy of heaven" suited the purposes of lightly laden, quick moving troops, especially in good weather. Below are data gleaned from the two diaries; the first series of tables gives the findings for individual years; the two following tables show totals for the six years examined.⁴

Pennsylvania Colonel Adam Hubley recalled that on 19 September 1777, "the weather threatening with rain Genl. Wayne, gave orders, for the division to make Booths, etc., in order to secure their Arms & Ammunition from being damag'd by the rain, wh[ich] were punctualy exicuted, the Division after securing their Arms, etc. took to rest ..." (Thomas J. McGuire, Battle of Paoli (Mechanicsburg, Pa.: Stackpole Books, 2000), 82-83.) American brush huts pictured in the 1782 painting "Battle of Paoli" by Xavier della Gatta. Collections of the Valley Forge Historical Society. (Permission pending.)

Data on Shelters Noted in Soldiers' Narratives
Ebenezer Wild, 6th Continental Regiment, 1776
1st Massachusetts Regiment, 1777-1781
Jeremiah Greenman, 2nd Rhode Island Regiment, 1777-1780

	Year		Days in Tents	Days in Buildings	Days Lay in Open	Days in Makeshift Shelters	Days on Shipboard	Total Days
Wild	1776	7 Aug. to 30 Nov.	92	12	5	1	0	110
			(83.7%)	(10.9%)	(4.6%)	(0.95%)
						plank hut
5 days shelter uncertain (March from Boston to Fort Ticonderoga, fortress garrison.)
Wild	1777	9 Apr. to 19 Dec.	122	30	19	7	4	182
			(67%)	(16.5%)	(10.4%)	(3.9%)	(2.2%)
						brush huts
1 day's shelter uncertain, 70 days sick absent (March from Boston with recruits to Stillwater, New York; includes active operations against Burgoyne's army. In late November Wild's regiment joined Washington's army at Whitemarsh and went to Valley Forge a month later.)
	Year		Days in Tents	Days in Buildings	Days Lay in Open	Days in Makeshift Shelters	Days on Shipboard	Total Days
Greenman	1777	26 May to 18 Dec.	104	36	18	12	0	170
			(61.2%)	(21.2%)	(10.6%)	(7.1%)
						brush huts
37 days' shelter uncertain. (Morristown, New Jersey; operations against the British in New Jersey, march north to New York, Continental Village garrison, march south through New Jersey into Pennsylvania, Fort Mifflin and Fort Mercer garrisons, Whitemarsh camp, march to Valley Forge.)
Wild	1778	10 June to 3 Nov.	113	2	15	0	0	130
			(86.9%)	(1.6%)	(11.6%)
17 days absent on trip to Boston. (March from Valley Forge to Monmouth Courthouse, then north across the Hudson to Rhode Island, operations against British forces there, Rhode Island winter cantonment.)
	Year		Days in Tents	Days in Buildings	Days Lay in Open	Days in Makeshift Shelters	Days on Shipboard	Total Days
Wild	1779	31 May to 3 Oct.	113	15	0	0	0	128
			(88.3%)	(11.7%)
(Rhode Island encampment, march to New York, New York encampment.)
Greenman	1780	7 June to 29 Oct.	111	0	8	25	0	144
			(77.1%)		(5.6%)	(17.4%)
						brush huts
(Operations against British forces in New Jersey, various encampments in northern New Jersey and New York, West Point garrison.)
	Year		Days in Tents	Days in Buildings	Days Lay in Open	Days in Makeshift Shelters	Days on Shipboard	Total Days
Wild	1781	19 Feb. to 29 Nov.	148	52	51	3	31	285
			(51.9%)	(18.3%)	(17.9%)	(1.2%)	(10.9%)
						brush huts and booths
(March from West Point to Virginia, operations against British forces in Virginia, Yorktown siege operations, march north to New York winter cantonment.)

Combined Statistics for Six Years (1776 - 1781)
(Wild diary, 1776-1779, and 1781; Greenman, 1780

	Year		Days in Tents	Days in Buildings	Days Lay in Open	Days in Makeshift Shelters	Days on Shipboard	Total Days
	1776 - 1781		699	111	98	36	35	979
			(71.4%)	(11.4%)	(9.7%)	(3.7%)	(3.6%)

OR

Combined Statistics for Six Years (1776 - 1781)
(Wild's diary, 1776, 1778-1779, and 1781; Greenman, 1777 and 1780

	Year		Days in Tents	Days in Buildings	Days Lay in Open	Days in Makeshift Shelters	Days on Shipboard	Total Days
	1776 - 1781		681	117	97	41	31	967
			(70.4%)	(12.2%)	(10.1%)	(4.2%)	(3.2%)

For a comparison within an even more limited timeframe let us turn to Lieutenant Ebenezer Wild's 1781 narrative detailing daily shelter during Lafayette's maneuvers against Cornwallis in Virginia. For the four months studied (6 May to 9 September) Colonel Joseph Vose's Massachusetts light troops slept in tents 67 days out of a total of 129. The remainder of the time the heavy baggage was sent back into the country for safety or, on occcasion, remained with the main body while Vose's Battalion was sent on detached service. Between 6 May and 7 July, a time when the enemy was a constant threat, tents were used only 29 percent of the time; on the other hand, after British forces crossed the James River on their way south to Portsmouth tents sheltered Vose's troops seventy-five percent of the time. (See table below.)⁵

Number of Days the Tents were Present
With Vose's Light Infantry Battalion
May to September 1781

1. 6 May to 7 July 1781 (first two months) (The time of the arrival of the baggage from Baltimore until Cornwallis' forces crossed over the James River towards Portsmouth)

Days Present		Days Not Present (Sent to the Rear, etc.)		Total Days
19		45		64
(Tents Used as shelter 29% of the time)

2. 8 July to 10 September 1781 (final two months)

Days Present		Days Not Present (Sent to the Rear, etc.)		Total Days
54		11		65
(Tents Used as shelter 75% of the time)

3. 6 May to 10 September 1781 (entire four month period) (The time of the arrival of the baggage from Baltimore until Lafayette's detachment joined the French troops at Williamsburg)

Days Present		Days Not Present (Sent to the Rear, etc.)		Total Days
67		62		129
(Tents Used as shelter 52% of the time)

As previously intimated, there were several reasons why tents were unavailable, making it necessary for soldiers to find an alternative. Tentage may have been lost or in poor supply, sent away with the army's baggage due to the enemy's proximity, or left behind because of the need to travel quickly. In all these instances buildings, or woods and open fields supplied the place of absent tents. Given the proper circumstances, soldiers were occasionally able to construct brush huts, sometimes on their commander's orders, probably more often on their own initiative. And while brush huts were sometimes used together with tents, as with Vose's Battalion in 1781, and British and German troops during the Monmouth campaign, such instances were the exception rather than the rule.

Conclusion: Analysis of little-known details can sometimes refute faulty notions of the past. In this case, as regards makeshift shelters, it was the Continental Army that proved the most conventional. British commanders' frequent reliance on wigwams to house their troops is just one example of the resourcefulness and adaptability displayed by Crown forces in America. British commanders very early on adapted clothing, equipment, and tactical formations to American conditions, a penchant for innovation instigated by hard-won experience during the Seven Years' War in the colonies. In this same vein, Revolutionary War makeshift shelters emulated those built by British and Provincial troops in the 1750's and 60's. Both sides preferred to house their men in tents, but buildings, watercraft, and soldier-built vernacular architecture all played a role when the need and opportunity arose. There were differences between the opposing armies, the most striking being extensive British use of brush or plank wigwams on numerous occasions, and only rarely did a large portion of the American army use makeshift shelters for an extended period. The exceptions were the Whitemarsh/Gulph Mills camps in late 1777, the summer 1780 encampments in and around Springfield, New Jersey, and possibly General Horatio Gates' southern army encampment at Hillsboro, North Carolina, in autumn 1780.⁶

Endnotes

1. Journal of Surgeon Jabez Campfield, Spencer's Additional Regiment, 4 August 1779, Journals of the Military Expedition of Major General John Sullivan Against the Six Nations of Indians in 1779 (Glendale, N.Y.: Benchmark Publishing Co., Inc., 1970), 53 (hereafter cited as Journals of Sullivan's Expedition, 1779).

2. David R. Bogert, Revolutionary War Pension and Bounty - Land - Warrant Application Files, National Archives Microfilm Publication M804, W3502.

3. Francis B. Heitman, Historical Register of Officers of the Continental Army During the War of the Revolution, April, 1775, to December, 1783 (Washington, D.C.: The Rare Book Shop Publishing Co., Inc., 1914), 261, 591.

4. "Journal of Ebenezer Wild," Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society, 2nd series, vol. VI (Boston, Ma., 1891), 79-160 (hereafter cited as "Journal of Ebenezer Wild," PMHS). Robert C. Bray and Paul E. Bushnell, eds., Diary of a Common Soldier in the American Revolution: An Annotated Edition of the Military Journal of Jeremiah Greenman (DeKalb, Il., 1978), 73-88, 172-187 (hereafter cited as Bray and Bushnell, Diary of a Common Soldier).

5. 1781 data compiled from "Journal of Ebenezer Wild," PMHS, 137-140, 142-143, 146, 149-150, and "Journal of Captain John Davis of the Pennsylvania Line," Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, 5 (1881), 292 (hereafter cited as "Journal of Captain John Davis," PMHB).

Wigwams, brush huts, and booths: Hut, "a soldier's lodge in the field." Source cited as Edward Phillips (1658), The new world of English words; or, a general dictionary (1662, 1678, 1696; ed. by J. Kersey, 1706), Oxford English Dictionary, Compact Edition (Glasgow, New York, and Toronto, Oxford Univ. Press, 1971), 1354 (hereafter cited as OED Compact Edition). Interestingly, in the letters and diaries studied only two American soldiers were found who used the term "wigwam" in their writings; New Jersey Captain William Gifford used it to describe the Valley Forge winter huts and Rhode Islander Jeremiah Greenman twice told of coming across "sum Indians wigwan [sic]" on Benedict Arnold's 1775 march to Quebec. William Gifford to Benjamin Holme, from Valley Forge, 12 January 1778, Revolutionary War Documents, New Jersey Historical Society. Bray and Bushnell, Diary of a Common Soldier, 15, 19.

Origin of booth: buode (Middle High German), "hut, tent," OED Compact Edition, 250.

The earliest mention of booths in the War for Independence regards British brush shelters in summer 1777. Colonel Timothy Pickering noted "On the 19th [June 1777], General Howe decamped with the greatest precipitation from Millstone [New Jersey], and retired to Brunswick ... That part of his army which had advanced to Middle Bush and Millstone had no tents, but lodged in booths." New Yorker Ebenezer Hazard observed these same structures the following month: "[August] 7th. [1777] ... Great Devastation was made by the Enemy at Somerset Court House ... two Orchards were cut down that Booths might be made for the Soldiers, of the Branches of the Trees. The Enemy's advanced Guard was kept in an Orchard just back of the Court House; their main Body laid about half a Mile farther on a beautiful rising Ground: their Booths still remain there."

Delaware captain Robert Kirkwood gave the earliest mention of American booths in New Jersey in June 1777, while three Pennsylvania officers noted that General Anthony Wayne's troops built booths in their camp the day before the Paoli Battle in September 1777. Two of the soldiers who wrote of booths were obviously describing flat-topped shades or bowers. Brigadier General John Muhlenberg, "Cross Roads" camp, Bucks County, Pennsylvania, 10 August 1777: "B[rigade].O[rders]. As it is uncertain how long we shall remain in the Present Encampment the Soldiers are to fix Booths before their Tents to shelter them from the Heat."; New Hampshire captain Daniel Livermore used booth to name a large sun shade cum dining area. He wrote on 5 July 1779, near Forty-Fort, Pennsylvania, "This day General Poor makes an elegant entertainment for all the officers of his brigade, with a number of gentlemen from other brigades, and from the town ... The dining room was a large booth, about eighty feet in length, with a marquee pitched at each end." Both these uses of the term go against common convention; all other soldiers called the described structures bowers or shades.

The eleven men who wrote of booths were:

Ebenezer Hazard (N.Y.), British booths in New Jersey, June 1777.

Timothy Pickering (Mass.), British booths in New Jersey, June 1777.

Robert Kirkwood (Delaware), New Jersey, June 1777.

John Muhlenberg (Va.), shades for common soldiers' tents, Pennsylvania, August 1777.

Daniel Broadhead (Pa.), Pennsylvania, September 1777.

Samuel Hay (Pa.), Pennsylvania, September 1777.

Adam Hubley (Pa.), Pennsylvania, September 1777.

Jeremiah Greenman (R.I.), Pennsylvania, November 1777.

Joseph Martin (Ct.), New Jersey, June 1778.

Daniel Livermore (N.H.), large sun shade(bower)/dining area, Pennsylvania, July 1779.

Ebenezer Wild (Mass.), sun shade and/or overnight lodging late summer/early autumn, Virginia, 1781.

Octavius Pickering, The Life of Timothy Pickering, I (1867), 142 (hereafter cited as Life of Timothy Pickering). "Ebenezer Hazard's Diary: New Jersey During the Revolution," New Jersey History, XC, no. 3 (whole no. 350) (Autumn 1972), 173 (hereafter cited as "Ebenezer Hazard's Diary," New Jersey History). "Orderly Book of Gen. John Peter Gabriel Muhlenberg, March 26-December 20, 1777," The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, 34 (1910), 345. Journal of Captain Daniel Livermore, 3rd New Hampshire Regiment, 5 July 1779, Journals of Sullivan's Expedition, 1779, 182.

6. Examples of British army innovation during the War for Independence include adapting soldiers' clothing for rugged campaign conditions, supplying bags with camp kettles to ease the burden of cooking utensils, the adoption of two-rank open formations from 1776 to 1783, and tactical use of light infantry; British commanders were also the first to divest their armies of heavy baggage and rely on makeshift constructs to shelter large numbers of troops. By comparison, American forces seemed wed to their tents and baggage for much of the war, did not adopt a two-rank formation until 1777, and continued to use closed formations for line battalions until 1782. See, William W. Burke and Linnea M. Bass, "Preparing a British Unit for Service in America: The Brigade of Foot Guards, 1776," Military Collector & Historian, XLVII, no. 1 (Spring 1995), 2-11; James L. Kochan and George C. Woodbridge, "Uniform of the 40th Foot Light Infantry Company, 1777," The Brigade Dispatch, XXI, no. 2 (Summer 1990), 8-10; John U. Rees, "'To subsist an Army well ...': Soldiers' Cooking Equipment, Provisions, and Food Preparation During the American War for Independence," Military Collector & Historian, 53, no. 1 (Spring 2001), 10, 16-18. For the differing formations used by British and American troops, see Colonel John Mercer's account of the Battle of Greenspring, 6 July 1781, Gaillard Hunt, Fragments of Revolutionary History. Being hitherto unpublished writings of the men of the American Revolution ... (Brooklyn, N.Y., 1892), 50-51; Johann Ewald's description of American troops in 1782 in Diary of the American War ‑ A Hessian Journal, Joseph P. Tustin, ed. and trans. (New Haven and London: Yale Univ. Press, 1979), 340. British troops fought in two ranks, with open files, usually eighteen inches apart, starting in 1776: General Sir William Howe's orders, Boston, 29 February 1776: "Reg[imen]ts ... are always to have their Files 18 Inches distant from each other, which they will take care to practice for the future, being the Order in w[hi]ch they are to Engage the Enemy." Benjamin Franklin Stevens, ed., General Sir William Howe's Orderly Book, at Charlestown, Boston and Halifax, June 17 1775 to 1776 26 May (Kennikat Press: Port Washington, N.Y. and London, 1970), 222. For evidence of German officers' skepticism of using open formations, see, Rodney Atwood, The Hessians: Mercenaries from Hesse-Kassel in the American Revolution (Cambridge, London, New York, etc.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1980), 61, 82.