Women and children who followed Washington's army were called "camp followers". They were seeking safety, shelter, and food for themselves and their children. Camp followers were frowned upon and criticized. Even the public watched in disdain as these women and children marched through various communities. Yet, it was a mutually beneficial agreement. Washington and his men needed the camp followers just as much as the camp followers needed the protection and help of the military. The military unit needed someone to cook for the soldiers, do their laundry and help in any way the military deemed necessary; including going out among the fallen soldiers to gather much-needed supplies.
Because many women feared the possible outcomes of defending their homes alone, some made the difficult decision to leave their homes and follow the army. If they stayed home they were doomed to a life of "loneliness, poverty, fear of starvation, [and] the possibility of . . .death" (Berkin, 52). If captured, they were considered “spoils of war” (Berkin, 41). Yet, if they waited until after the invasion of their towns, they would often starve or die of exposure while trying to escape. As a result, many women followed the army, performing menial tasks in hopes of meager meals, shared tents, and the chance to scrounge for clothing among the dead.
A Symbolic Representation of Molly Pitcher
|
A well-known example of a camp follower is known as Molly Pitcher. However, Molly Pitcher is not a single woman, but rather is much like Rosie the Riveter of World War II. Molly Pitcher was a representation of hundreds of women who carried water to cool down the cannons as well as other supplies the troops needed as they fought.
|
Rosie the Riveter
|
One very famous example of a Molly of the Pitcher was Margaret Cochran Corbin. She was with her husband at Fort Washington in 1776 when it came under attack. Her husband, John was an assistant gunner "but soon had to take over the cannon when the gunner was killed. Margaret immediately stepped into John's place, helping her husband load the cannon until he too fell dead. Margaret had no time to grieve. She stepped again into John's place, loading and firing the cannon herself." (Berkin, 138)
Watch the video below. Why do the Daughters of the American Revolution say it important to recognize women such as Margaret Corbin and their efforts during the American Revolution?
|
|
An additional example is Mary Ludwig Hays. She was with her husband at the Battle of Monmouth. When her husband became wounded, she also took up the job of cannoneer. She continued to fight and Joseph Plumb Martin witnessing her heroics, recorded what he saw:
A woman whose husband belonged to the artillery and who was then attached to a piece in the engagement, attended with her husband at the piece the whole time. While in the act of reaching a cartridge and having one of her feet as far before the other as she could stemp, a cannon shot from the enemey passed directly between her legs without doing any other damage than carrying away all the lower part of her petticoat. Looking at it with apparent unconcern, she observed that it was lucky it did not pass a little higher, for in that case it might have carried away something else, and continued her occupation" (Martin, 1830). |
|
Women on the Frontlines
|
One of their tasks included cooking for hundreds of soldiers--sometimes even in the midst of battles. For example, while in Yorktown, Sarah Osborn “cooked and carried in beef, and bread, and coffee (in gallon pot) to the soldiers in the entrenchment . . . and thus employed carrying in provisions, she met General Washington who asked her if she ‘was not afraid of the cannonballs?’ [To which] She replied, ‘No, the bullets would not cheat the gallows. . . It would not do for the men to fight and starve too’” (Osborne, 1832). Unfortunately, this was a common occurrence. Women who became camp followers showed immense bravery to provide necessary sustenance to the soldiers with little or no recognition for their service.
|
|
Furthermore, camp followers were expected to wash the clothes of the men. This critical task was important in keeping the rate of communicable diseases in check. However, it would prove an almost impossible task as in some Continental communities the “ratio of washerwomen to soldiers that was absolutely necessary [was] for [every] 248 men, the 2nd regiment required two women; the 3rd, with 435 men, listed their needs at four women” (Berkin, 2018). These women worked endlessly in water up to their elbows, fingers raw, while being paid only pennies for the task. This left little time for them to worry about their own appearance or that of their children.
|
Camp Followers Re-enactment
|
Nurses of the American War for Independence
|
Another important role women who became camp followers fulfilled was that of a nurse. In one advertisement General Washington described the duties of nurses traveling with the army. Their job was to "Administer the medicine and diet prescribed for the sick according to order; be attentive to the cleanliness of the wards and patients . . . they are to see that they close-stool or pots are to be emptied as soon as possible after they are used . . . they are to see that every patient, upon his admission into the Hospital is immediately washed with warm water, and that his face and hands are washed and head combed every morning . . . that their wards are swept over every morning or oftener if necessary and sprinkled with vinegar three or four times a day; nor are they ever to be absent without leave" (Berkin, 58). For all of this trouble, they would get paid one ration and twenty-four cents per day--approximately $3.22 in US dollars today. This was less than ten percent of what the males received who cared for the sick and wounded.
|
Ironically, even though the tasks they performed were essential to maintaining a working regiment when they joined "the court of last resort" as a camp follower, they were sentenced to forfeit "all claim to respect or chivalry" (Berkin, 53). Both officers and enlisted men spoke critically of the women who traveled with them and compared them to wild beasts. A private in the Continental Army wrote, “Of all specimens of human beings, this group capped the whole. A caravan of wild beasts could bear no comparison with it” (Berkin, 53). Obviously, their contempt was thoroughly evident in the language they regularly used to describe the camp followers.
Analyze the political cartoon below. What are the subtle things do you notice? Which army are they following? How do you know?
Political Cartoon of the Camp Followers
As further evidence of their disdain, when marching to new areas, officers ordered camp followers to stay behind the baggage wagons. This forced the women to carry their pots and pans, children, and sometimes even furniture. They had little time or ability to keep up a respectable appearance and many looked so ragged and worn that witnesses made mention of their battered appearance. Hannah Winthrop, in her letter to Mercy Otis Warren referred to these female camp followers as “beasts of burthen” with “bare feet, cloathd in dirty raggs [while] such Effluvia filld the air [when] they were passing, had they not been smoaking all the time, I should have been apprehensive of being contaminated by them” (Winthrop, 1777). Even George Washington called the women and children a nuisance and a “clog upon every movement” (Berkin, 55) but, on the other hand, also realized that “most of the women were ‘absolutely necessary’” (Berkin,56).
|
|
|
|
Hannah Winthrop Letters to Mercy Otis Warren Describing the British Troops after their Surrender to Washington in Cambridge November 11, 1777.
Letters Courtesy of the Massachusetts Historical Society |
| ||
In the letter above, what are some additional ways Hannah Winthrop describes the Loyalist camp followers in the first page of her letter? How do they travel? What do they have to carry? How does she further describe the American victors? Do you think her description is accurate of the Americans? Why would she describe both parties in such a way?
This “clog” Washington referred to was the very thing that kept the camp mobile and alive. These so-called beasts of burden performed vital tasks and thankless labor with little time for themselves and often at the peril of their own lives. On the other hand, they were vulnerable to the perils of war in their own homes as well. Women had very few options and were essentially caught in a Catch-22--damned if they stayed home and damned if they went to war as camp followers. However, by choosing the army, at least they could play an important enough role in the Revolutionary War that they had the protection of the soldiers and at least one ration a day.