Among the treasures in the Massachusetts Archives are the muster rolls of the French and Indian Wars for 1748 to 1763 - a climactic period in the imperial contest of Britain and France for Canada and control of the Mississippi Valley¹ These muster rolls in volumes 91-99 are arranged by years and have the following types of lists: muster rolls, pay rolls, lists, descriptive lists, returns, and billeting accounts. In addition to the names of the enlisted men and officers serving in military and naval capacities, these rolls sometimes provide other information. An individual service entry may contain all or part of the following information: length, year and date of service, residence, expedition, and the officers in charge of the company and regiment. An index to volumes 91-99, compiled by modern researchers, is also available at the Massachusetts Archives. It lists individuals alphabetically and gives their service records.

The names of Massachusetts officers and the information on their military careers have been transcribed from volumes 91-99. Where their names on the rolls were illegible, the index was used for reference. The officers have been identified from the following categories of military lists which appear in volumes 91-99: muster rolls, pay rolls, descriptive lists, and other lists. Only names of commissioned officers have been transcribed; and the "Roll of Officers and Staff" found in these Archive volumes serves, for the most part, as the basis for defining the scope of the officer rank.

In compiling this list, I have employed a uniform system of notation and recording. Each entry of military service is recorded separately, and multiple service entries associated with the same name are not compiled. Numbers in parenthesis following rank refer to first, second, and third lieutenant. Abbreviations of first name in the original rolls are changed to the full name -"Will'm" is now listed as "William." The years have been modernized to make 1 January New Year's Day. Residence is distinguished, whenever possible, from location of the company or regiment. "Co." or "Regt." signifies the town of origin for the company or regiment, and not necessarily the residence of a given individual.

A system of notation has also been adopted to distinguish certain from probable dates of service. A "(p)" appearing after the year or name means probable and is used when the dates and length, but not the year, of military service are specified on the rolls. The probable date is either inferred from the date on which the rolls were endorsed or from the date in the index. A date followed by a "(d)" notation indicates that the year of military service was not identified on the rolls and that it cannot be inferred; therefore, the "(d)" date is the year in which the rolls were endorsed or dated.

A study of the Massachusetts military officers suggests a new focus for a history of the French and Indian War. The significance of this conflict is usually defined in terms of the dramatic changes it effected in the imperial relationship; however, it also had far-reaching implications for colonial social and military history. This list of Massachusetts officers provides a different base for examining the war, and it offers useful information for both the historian and the genealogist.

To test some possible uses for this list, 150 Massachusetts officers were selected from it for a special study. The sample was derived by consulting various sources in the New England Historic Genealogical Society. Among the materials consulted were town histories, Sibley's Harvard Graduates (volumes 6-14)², genealogies organized by town and family, and the volume of Memorials of the Massachusetts Society of the Cincinnati.³ Table 1 is a profile of the officer sample - showing distribution of ranks and median age by rank.⁴ That the various ranks in the military hierarchy were associated directly with differences both in function and prominence is implied in the following order to Colonel Thomas Doty in 1758:

You are hereby directed to form a regimental store of these necessaries upon credit of the pay of the Regiment delivering such to the Quarter master of your Regiment to be by him delivered out to the men as above at such rates as the Captains of the Regiment with the consent of the field officers shall judge reasonable to pay the cariage to the General Rendevous and the Quarter master for his care and trouble. And the Lieutenant Cornall and major are hereby strictly enjoined to survey the said necessaries that they be good and make report to me accordingly.⁵

The officers' sensitivity to the gradations in military rank was intimated in the comment of Dr. Ammi Cutter, a surgeon, in July 1757: "22d to 28th. The time spent in Councils of war of which we small Folk know little but think a great deal."⁶

Most of these officers, with the exception of the lieutenant-colonels, colonels, quartermasters, adjutants, and commanders (11.3% of the total sample), were in their thirties when they entered service. A sizeable number also benefitted from a good, formal education at Harvard and Yale colleges (Table 2). Of the 150 officers, 17.3% were college graduates - many of them received commissions as chaplains and surgeons. It is almost impossible, however, to ascertain the educational level of those officers apprenticed as merchants, artisans, and public servants, but a significant percentage of the group surely had these advantages.

While differences in age and rank distinguished officers from one another, it is possible to make a more subtle catagorization of the officer class by delineating the motives which led them to accept or seek a military commission. It appears that the officer group was comprised of three classes: 1) career officers, such as Colonel Richard Saltonstall of Haverhill who had had prior military experience; 2) individuals who accepted short-term commissions and who returned to nonmilitary occupations at the end of their term of service; 3) men whose commissions represented more an honorary, rather than a real, position. Family military traditions may have sometimes swayed an individual to embark on a military career. Thus Saltontstall, a colonel of an Essex County regiment, "was the fourth generation of Saltonstalls to return from Harvard College to the familly garrison at Haverhill, from which they commanded the defence of that section of the frontier.''⁷ Many of these other career officers, like Joseph Frye, Timothy Ruggles, and Joseph Dwight, had already held colonelcies; and their service records were for the most part, continual and long-term.

Family connections and military traditions served the careers of those officers whose military service was an interruption of their normal civilian occupations. William Williams's family relationship with Colonels John Stoddard and Israel Williams explains, in part, his promotion from ensign in 1741 to colonel in 1758. For others, family intervention was effective in securing military commissions. Joseph Wilson's commission could be attributed to the political influence that often characterized colonial politics. His father apparently conributed some money to Governor William Shirley's regiment, and as an expression of the governor's gratitude, Joseph had a commission as lieutenant. Other fathers won similar favors for their sons, and the governor himself secured favors for his three sons in much the same way as Wilson did. The war provided opportunities for careers in the service, but it furthered family fortunes, too, in trade, military contracts, and political affairs. It was the origin of some fortunes and the beginning of many political careers.⁸

In addition to both career and short-term officers, there were individuals whose commissions represented honorary, rather than active, positions. For John Tyng, a commission as a colonel gave him prestige when he represented Massachusetts at an intercolonial defense conference in 1758 and when he mustered soldiers for the annual campaign.⁹

The description of the officer class outlined above should be balanced against the common interests the officers shared. Many of the officers fought in response to the same patriotic sentiments which were echoed in the letter of Mrs. Dorothy Cutter to her son Ammi, a surgeon at Crown Point, "Your thoughts of setting out in the army again something surprised me. - Hope that you have gone out of a good end - to serve God and your country. Be very careful in discharging your duty towards all the men under your care; which if you carefully observe you may expect a blessing to attend you."¹⁰ For others, their residence on the frontier undoubtedly inspired them to fight in the war. Although the sample indicates a possible correlation between military activity and geographic location, still, Lieutenant Seth Field's letter of 1750 suggests that his residence in Deerfield intensified his concern about the potential Indian threat to the extent that he perceived military recruitment as an encroachment upon the town's already weak defenses: "Our people are in the utmost distrest at the thought of having this town stripped of the first men in it, and there is general backwardness amongst the men to go and leave their families in such situation and under their difficult circumstances; for as soon as they leave the town we shall be able to make but faint resistance against the enemy and must lie at his mercy."¹¹ The expectation of personal gain probably motivated some officers to accept military commissions. Tables 3 and 4 demonstrate a relatively high correspondence between officeholding and military commissions - particularly during and following the war. Age, rather than lack of military experience, may explain why few officers held office prior to the war. Nevertheless, it is probable that a military commission helped many men win town and provincial office.

Analysis of this sample does not always yield the motive influencing the officer class. But military service brought its trials and sacrifices, and duty at home sometimes seemed greater than the distant war. One's family, town, and church often made demands upon the person who was unable to resist them. For example, Samuel Chandler's parishioners in Gloucester refused to give him additional leave when he returned home from the Crown Point campaign of 1755.¹² The officers' experiences in the war were as diversified as their motives and backgrounds. An attempt to understand what military service entailed for the 150 officers raises many questions. How did military experience differ within the officer class? How different was military, as opposed to civilian, life? To what extent did military service interrupt the town life?

The officers' experiences in the war were as diversified as their motives and backgrounds. An attempt to understand what military service entailed for the 150 officers raises many questions. How did military experience differ within the officer class? How different was military, as opposed to civilian, life? To what extent did military service interrupt the town life?

The analysis of the three types of military officers demonstrates that the motives for service and the officers' prior military experience affected the length of service. For many of the noncareer officers and commissioned surgeons and chaplains, participation in the French and Indian War was limited to a few days or weeks. For the Reverend Chandler, his duties as chaplain at Crown Point lasted only from 8 September to 28 December. The period of active military service was usually punctuated by relatively brief military encounters. John Thomas, a surgeon in the 1755 campaign, reported the battle which began at 11 a.m. on 4 June 1755 when

Indians begin to make thare most Hideous yells and Large Numbers of the Enemy Appearing Redy to Ingage us our troop keep on thare march[.] And when we have Got within musket Shot we Recived The Fire of thar Swivel Guns with Partrige Shot which seemed to Come very thick wounded Several of our men but None Killed[.] We Returned the Complent with one of our Field Peases upon which they Gave us a voley of Small arms I believe not Less than Six Hundred upon which our troops Fired Briskly[.] Capt Brooms who Commanded the arteliery Plied the Field Peases Clostly and the Fire from the Enemy was very warm for they Had Two Carage Guns and Four Swivels Beside thare Small arms but our Fire was So warm upon them and thay See our troops So Resolute that thay found we would Force them from thare Ground[.] Thay Sot all thare Buildings on Fire and Fled [.] We Recoveed the Ground about 1 of the Clock P:m.¹³

The feverish activity of this engagement is contrasted in Thomas's Diary with quieter days, when there was little of note to report:

26. Pleasant Day.
27. Pleasant mr Phillips Preached all Day maj Bourn Returned to Camp & Supposes ye
man afforementioned was Killed by ye Indians from ye Island of saint Johns
28. very Hot Colonol munckton views ye lnvaledes yt may be Sent Home to New England.
29. Nothing very Remarkable.
30. wind s:w: Blow Hard.¹⁴

However, for both the clergy and surgeons, their responsibilities in the war were not exclusively dependent upon a high level of military activity. The rigors of the climate, travel, and battle contributed to the outbreak of sickness among the troops who, in turn, offered surgeons a wide range of experience. In 1756, Dr. Cutter observed that "the Evenings unwhol'some wh Bro't on Remitting Fevers and Fluxes; used Cath [artics] freely with success; some Continual Fevers and Disenterys. An Old Man continued 48 hours without any perceivable Pulsation, his Reason perfect and Lungs good, and then declined gradually 24 hours, and died with a Diarehea."¹⁵ Similarly, the day-to-day routine of the clergy in the army did not appear to have varied significantly from that of civilian life. Serving the Gloucester community as their clergyman, the Reverend Chandler recorded his daily duties in his diary for the year 1746:

Feb. 4. I preached at Samll Prebles, Newton. His wife under much Darkness - Much Dejected. She asked prayers when I came away. I came home. My Brother Abijah at our house and Stephen Lovejoy.
Feb. 10. Brother Abija sat out for Andover. I visited the sick - went up to Mr. Kilgore's to Jno Wittims.¹⁶

His diary during the Crown Point march shows that he was likewise busy visiting the sick, preaching sermons, and providing spiritual guidance: "26. I preached Math. 24.30.31. Afternoon I went over to the other side heard Mr. Pain from 1 Chron 1. 1. Adam, Seth, Enos, Doct. that all must die - After meeting I prayed at the Funeral of Col. Willard - came home and visited the Sick, Capt. Hanford & Capt. Flynt. Mr. Dunbar preached this side this afternoon." ¹⁷

For Chandler these religious exercises were a continuation of his career of providing spiritual comfort and assistance. For others, camp life was a bore, a break with their lives as merchants, farmers, and artisans. They became homesick, fatigued, and discontented. The war, even for a short term enlistment, seemed too long for most of these officers.

But war service even for those discontented officers had an emotional impact; a perspective was gained toward the frontier, the French, the Indians, and the war itself that had long term significance. For example, Eli Forbes, the minister at Brookfield, was inspired by his experiences at Lake George in 1758 and 1759 and let his bitter feelings toward the French enter one of his sermons:

She…sent her Sons among the Natives, who prejudiced them against the Manners and Religion of the English, and faithfully sowed the Seeds of Roman Tyranny and Superstition, with savage Idolatry. Those Missionaries encouraged the Savages in Barbarities against the English, that were before unknown to Protestant Nations, and this on the Foot of Merit. By these Means and others, suited to the Character of the Mother of Harlots, France…drew out her Breasts to her true Sons, supply'd them with Arms, Ammunition aud Provisions, and…furnished them with that finished Piece of Armour that best becomes a Soldier of the most Christian King, the Scalping-Knife.¹⁸

Forbes's unchristian hatred of popery was typical of many Puritan ministers. Their feelings drove them into war service as chaplains and their sermons drove their congregations to support the campaign and war taxes.¹⁹

Bitterness had made many officers overlook the hardlships of camp life, but some, less inflamed than their ministers, found life depressing at Albany, Fort Edward, Lake George, and elsewhere on the New York frontier. Even Chandler complained in his diary that he "was very feverish - 3 days provisions in Camp, of bread and meat - destitute of other necessary[s] and comforts - the men just ready to mutiny."²⁰ Another made the following comment on the problem of unceasing exposure to the elements: "very Hard Gail of wind much Rain and Snow the camp Greatly torne to Peases with the wind major Prible Returned with his Party having Burnt 200 Houses and Barns."²¹ Weather conditions were, of course, an uncertain element and contributed often a degree of severity to other problems. Keeping sick men dry and warm was nearly impossible and doctors like Thomas were regularly distressed by the misery on all sides of them-the fevers, dysentery, and the wounds. But they often asked friends, from the dampness of their tents, what more they could do to relieve the suffering.

Besides problems of weather and epidemic diseases, officers frequently found dissidence and rebellion in the ranks. To meet the challenge, they administered whippings and sentenced men to hard labor, but the ultimate penalty was also given. An enlisted man at Crown Point in 1759 reported that "there was a man Shot to Deth for Desertion amongst the regulars."²² Often the condemned were dressed in white uniforms, marched before the assembled companies, and shot to death on the parade ground. Other offenders were then given the job of burying the executed soldiers. The horror of such a ceremony had its effect, but sometimes even the officers were disobedient. Dr. Cutter wrote in his diary for 18 August 1756 that "a General Court Marshal [Martial] sat for Tryal of delinquent Officers, as also of Deserters; 3 Officers, rather than wait the Event, resigned their commissions."²³

These realities of military service had another side also. Officers had the pleasure of advancement as a result of heroic deeds and loyal service to the British crown. In the sample far more commissioned officers received promotions than noncommissioned officers which probably suggests the recognition of military experiences, social rank, and political connections (Table 5).

To understand the meaning of military service in the lives of these officers, one should look at their civilian careers. Table 3 indicates that only a small percentage of officers held town or provincial positions prior to the war. This condition may reflect nothing more than the youth of the future officers (Table 1). Further research is required to determine the median age of officeholders and the voting habits of townsmen. However, during the war 20.8% of these officers held office which shows that military service did not preclude active participation in civilian life and that townsmen had a continuing regard for those in the armed forces.

These officers obviously thought of their hometowns, but their service took them to many interesting, distant lands-to New York, Nova Scotia, Quebec, and the Province of Maine. The impact of seeing these lands had long term results which data from the sample of 150 officers reflect. Some of the officers were intrigued by these new areas and thought possibly of moving to them. Dr. Thomas liked Nova Scotia where he had been stationed in 1755: "It is 8 miles by watter from Fort Sacvil to Hallefax this Basin abound with Cod Fish and macrill and as I am Informed thare is 70 Fatham of watter in many Parts of it and is So Large as to Contain the whole British Navey and as Butifull a Harbor as I Ever See."²⁴ Table 6 shows that more than half of the officers moved at least once in their lifetime. Those officers whose activities could be dated averaged 1.7 moves during their lifetime; those whose moves could not be dated averaged 1.8 moves. Most of the officers moved during and after rather than prior to the war. Although four times as many officers changed their residence during and after rather than prior and during the war, there is a factor of youth and marriage to be considered in determining their motivation for migration. Some were taking up homesteads for the first time, marrying, and having children. Hundreds of other families moved to new argicultural lands in Maine and Nova Scotia after the war, and this movement was a direct result of visits to these areas.

For these officers the war had an influence upon their areas of settlement as well as on the rate of their mobility (Tables 7 and 8). During and following the war, they moved outside of Massachusetts in larger numbers than prior to the war. The validity of this finding may be challenged because backcountry Massachusetts took thousands of new settlers into the real estate promotions that created Pittsfield and other Berkshire County towns. Large numbers of people, however, moved across the borders into New York,

New Hampshire, and Vermont, perhaps more people than found new homes in frontier Massachusetts, but more data is necessary to support this conclusion than is contained in the sample.

The French and Indian War also had an impact on the social mobility of the officers. The extent of that impact is not known, but more officers held prominent town positions after the war than had held them prior to and during the war (Table 3). Many of the officers in the selection served their communities not only by their active participation in town and provincial offices, but also by making available their professional services. For clergymen and surgeons, in particular, the war widened their range of experience, thereby enhancing their value to the community. Similarly the war developed the leadership potential of the officer class and offered opportunity for acquiring professional experience to many of those settling in new areas.

The long-range implications of military service in the war are difficult to analyze, especially the impact on the officers' attitudes towards the American Revolution. Table 9 reveals that more than 78.3% of the sixty-nine officers whose positions in the Revolution could be identified supported the American cause, and of these officers, 52.2% accepted commissions in the American army. The sample is too small, however, to determine the rank of officers sympathetic to the British side and to make a judgment on the nature of loyalism. Many of these officers who had sided with the British in the Revolution experienced a reversal of the popularity that they had won in the French and Indian War. For example, Timothy Ruggles, who had served as brigadier general, suffered a scurrilous attack in 1774:

You have become the Tool of a corrupt Minister, to enslave and ruin Thousands of your innocent Fellow-Countrymen. And to crown all, you have accepted Appointment of a Mandamus Councellor, for which abominable Act, committed in open defiance of the Faithful advice of many of your good Friends, you have given the finishing stroke to your tatter'd Reputation, and are now driven out from your inheritance, the Society of your good Friends and Neighbors, and like the cursed Fratricide of old, fear that every one who finds you shall slay you.²⁵

Other Tories also suffered attack, but this hostility should not be considered unusual. For those Whig Americans the sample reveals a few significant facts that are to be expected. Of the officers who fought on the American side, 47.2% held a higher initial rank in the Revolution than they had as a final rank in the French and Indian War which suggests that Revolutionary leadership put a premium on prior military experience. Other former officers contributed to the Revolutionary cause by becoming active in politics, such as the Continental Congress and provincial congresses.

The diversity in the officers' attitudes and experiences during the Revolution underscores the futility of generalizing about them as a social class. The wide range in their motives for entering military service and in their socio-economic status may, in turn, account for the differences in their wartime experiences. It is possible to conclude that there was a high correlation between receiving a military commission and holding town and provincial office. This conclusion was also accepted by the officers who regarded military service as a steppingstone to the advancement of their own military or professional careers. Their judgment of the future was accurate to the extent that participation in the war led to civilian office and a Revolutionary War commission. Their service may have influenced the rate of their mobility and shaped their careers.

This sample study has attempted to identify the uses this list may have for social historians, whose interest in it might stem from a town study or an interest in the officer class as a whole. It should prove instrumental in gaining insight into the issues of status and geographic and social mobility in pre-Revolutionary society. This list should also be of interest to genealogists and military historians. For the genealogist, it identifies an individual at a certain point in time and may give additional information on residence and his military service. Using additional information from the genealogies of individual officers, the genealogist should be able to trace family networks, if they operated, within the military. For the military historian the list raises an array of interesting questions. He might ask if a relationship existed between military and social hierarchies. He might then proceed to establish a more sophisticated typology of military officers according to motive and socio-economic status. The military historian would also want to examine more closely the relationship between French and Indian and Revolutionary War experiences.

Although the list of Massachusetts officers does evoke some significant questions for social and military historians as well as for genealogists, it contains the names of only a small segment of the colonial population. Obviously generalizations made about this group cannot necessarily be applied to the rest of the population. Therefore, one question implicit in this study but left unresolved is a comparison of the various classes of officers and enlisted men for social, economic, and political backgrounds and an estimate of the possible effects of the war on each group.

This project was made possible by the generous assistance of the Society of Colonial Wars in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and of the New England Historic Genealogical Society which provided editorial help.

The Society of Colonial Wars actively encourages the scholarly investigation of colonial military history and its implications for the study of colonial life. I should particularly like to thank those persons who provided the guidance and support indispensable to the completion of this project: Howard Gambrill, Jr., Chairman of the Charitable Contributions Committee of the Society of Colonial Wars; Richard Walden Hale, Jr., Archivist of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts; Leo Flaherty, Curator of the Massachusetts Archives; Professors David D. Hall and Richard Bushman, both of Boston University; and Robert Watkin and Mark Weissler, my two diligent assistants. I must express a special thanks to my friends at the New England Historic Genealogical Society - to the Director James B. Bell and to the Associate Editor Ralph J. Crandall and to Susan L. Patterson, the Assistant Editor. Their patience and zeal for what I have been doing made the editing and publication of this manuscript a pleasure. Finally, I owe a special debt of gratitude to Helen Drew, who typed this list.

Nancy S. Voye
Boston, Massachusetts