SAMUEL CROWLEY
Samuel Crowley is believed, by some historians, to be the first casualty of the American Revolution.
Samuel is my sixth great-grandfather, through the Munkers/Munkirs line.
Important note from the author, Hart — There are significant objections to the claim that Samuel Crowley should be identified as the first to die at the Battle of Point Pleasant. For a well-researched, detailed critique of this claim, along with additional information about Samuel and the battle, itself, please read the detailed comment by Ken Green, posted October 24, 2023, in the comments section below. Thanks to Ken, a Crowley descendant, for his contributions to this subject.
++++++++++++++++++
I suspect we all — at least all of us who have studied American history in school — are familiar with the phrase, “The Shot Heard Round the World.”
We learned about it as school children: April 19, 1775, the day the Minutemen confronted the British Redcoats at Lexington and Concord. Historians debate some of the details…but Ralph Waldo Emerson’s “Concord Hymn” etched the phrase into our American historical narrative, connecting it permanently with the beginning of the American Revolution.
Have you, however, ever heard of, “The Battle of Point Pleasant”? I doubt you have.
Well, neither had I. Until I researched the line of my maternal grandmother, Cecil Munkirs. I traced back generation-by-generation, person-by-person, over a period of several months, until I came to my 4x great-grandmother, Agnes Crowley (1793-1884). Agnes seems to have been quite a character in her own right (more about her on another occasion). Her father was John Crowley, and John’s father is the subject of today’s post: Samuel Crowley (1741-1774) – my 6x great-grandfather.
Samuel was a Virginian — a “longhunter.” Longhunters (sometimes written ‘long hunters’ — two separate words) were a unique and sturdy group of 18th century frontiersmen of whom Daniel Boone is the most famous. They went on long hunting trips (hence the title, “longhunters”) – often six months or more at a time – into the unexplored regions beyond western Virginia, into what is now Kentucky and Tennessee. They rarely went out in groups of more than two or three. (Wikipedia article on Longhunters).
In October, 1774, Samuel Crowley and his brother Benjamin were scouts for Virginia militia Commander Andrew Lewis in what has traditionally been known as Lord Dunmore’s War. On October 10 the forces commanded by Commander Lewis confronted a large force of American Indians led Chief Cornstalk in what is known as The Battle of Point Pleasant.
This is where the interesting part — and the controversy — begins. For nearly two centuries a group of dedicated folks have been arguing that The Battle of Point Pleasant has not been fully recognized as what they believe it actually was: the first engagement of the American Revolution.
Of course a somewhat larger group insists that while the Battle of Point Pleasant was indeed a very important battle, even a critical turning point in the movement toward Revolution, it was actually the final battle of the Indian wars.
Who’s right? So far as I’m concerned that’s a debate for others to carry on. If you want more background there is additional information at the end of this post. Plus, entering “Battle of Point Pleasant” into your search engine will lead to lots of information on both sides of the debate.
I do think it’s significant that both the Daughters of the American Revolution and the Sons of the American Revolution — who have a vested interest and a lot of experience in this area — recognize colonial combatants who fought and died at Point Pleasant as Patriots of the American Revolution. Not only that, there was literally “an act of Congress” which recognized The Battle of Point Pleasant as a battle of the Revolutionary War (see the excerpt from the Congressional Record below).
So what does all this have to do with our Virginia longhunter ancestor, my 6x great grandfather, Samuel Crowley? Let’s return to October, 1774.
Lord Dunmore was the colonial governor of Virginia. He was in fact the last Royal Governor of Virginia. He took a number of actions designed to stifle the growing revolutionary restlessness in the Virginia Colony, including disbanding the Virginia Assembly which was dominated by Patriots like Thomas Jefferson.
Dunmore called out the Virginia militia to do battle with the Shawnee in the western part of the Virginia Colony. My great grandfather, Samuel, was assigned to the command of Commander Lewis as a scout and Indian spy. It was in that capacity he was serving when Commander Lewis’ army reach Point Pleasant.
This is where the plot thickens. Ostensibly, the plan was for Lord Dunmore, leading an army of British regulars (Redcoats) to meet Lewis and the militia at Port Pleasant and, using their combined force, subdue Cornstalks warriors.
However, according to some historians, Lord Dunmore had actually reached a secret agreement with Chief Cornstalk: Dunmore would hold back the regulars, allowing Cornstalk to attack the militia and destroy them. This was to serve the dual purpose of allowing Cornstalk to eliminate the threat to the Indians presented by the spread of the settlers into Indian lands, while at the same time eliminating the threat of the militia as a force in any upcoming rebellion (that is, the American Revolution which officially began only months later).
If, in fact, Dunmore made such an agreement with Chief Cornstalk, then the argument that this was the opening battle of the Revolution would be greatly strengthened. It would have been a planned and calculated effort on the part of the British to collude with the Indians for the purpose of subduing the colonials. However that is a point of great contention! Some historians believe Dunmore reached such an agreement…other historians do not accept that assertion.
Whatever Lord Dunmore’s motivations, he was late arriving at the appointed place. That is documented fact. The question is, of course, why was he late? Did he actually make a secret agreement with Chief Cornstalk?
On the evening of October 9, 1774, two great armies were gathered in close proximity to one another. About 1000 colonial militia combatants, under the leadership of Commander Lewis, waiting for Lord Dunmore…but knowing the Shawnee were close at hand. And, not far away, about 1000 Shawnee and other Native American warriors, under the leadership of Chief Cornstalk.
Early on the morning of October 10 colonial scouts were deployed to gather information…in some of the written reports they were referred to as “spies.” One of these was Samuel Crowley (often written, “Samuel Croley”). A second scout was with him. Some accounts say the second scout was his brother, Benjamin Crowley; other accounts report Samuel’s partner that morning was a scout named Robertson. In either event the scouts/spies were Virginia longhunters, recruited specifically for the unique skills they had acquired as frontiersmen.
Samuel Crowley and his partner encountered the Shawnee advancing for battle. Seeing the scouts, the Shawnee quickly reacted to begin firing on the scouts. One of the scouts was shot and killed…the other managed to get away, return to his comrades in arms, and raise the alarm that the Shawnee were on the way.
Samuel is the scout who died. And at that moment Samuel Crowley became, in the minds of many, the first casualty of the American Revolution.
There appears to be no doubt Samuel was the first man to die that day in the Battle of Point Pleasant. Several reports attest to the fact. A monument now stands to the battle and its combatants. Samuel Crowley is buried in a mass grave along with other soldiers who died in the battle. His name is inscribed in various places on the grounds, including on the monument itself (though the engraver misspelled his name as “Samuel Corley”…in many of the documents related to the battle and his death his name is properly spelled “Croley”). His wife applied for and received a modest pension from the Virginia House of Burgesses. She used it to help raise their seven children. These pension application documents have become very important historical documents of the Revolution. Part of the testimony used to support Samuel’s pension application forms the basis for what we know about Samuel’s service and his death.
The reality is, “the shot heard round the world” will always be connected with the events at Lexington and Concord – never with shots fired at the two scouts which began the Battle of Point Pleasant. But after extensive study and consideration, both the Daughters of the American Revolution and the Sons of the American Revolution recognize Samuel, and the others who died at The Battle of Point Pleasant on October 10, 1774, as true Revolutionary War Patriots…and Samuel was the first to die that day. He was a true Patriot and, in the hearts and minds of many, he was the first to die in the American Revolution.
Below is a chart showing the relationships from Samuel Crowley to me.
After that you will find other documents, including an excerpt from the Congressional Record of 1908 in which the U.S. Senate recognized the Battle of Point Pleasant as a battle of the Revolutionary War.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Samuel Crowley is the 6th great-grandfather of Hartford Cheney Inlow (* = Direct Line)
* Samuel Crowley (Abt 1741-1774) married * Elizabeth Strong (1744-1815)
|
|
* John Crowley (768-1847) married Elizabeth McClain (1766-1805)
|
|
James Munkres (1788-1854) married * Agnes C. Crowley (1794-1883)
|
|
Wesley E. P. Moore (1820-1870) married * Jemima Evalina Munkres (1825-1895)
|
|
Henry A. Lynn (1847-1930) married * Paulina Elizabeth Moore (1845-1930)
|
|
Solomon Lynch Munkirs (1861-1939) married * Maud Lynn (1869-1968)
|
|
Roy Victor Harp (1890-1972) married * Cecil Munkers (1889-1972)
|
|
Rev. Hartford Cheney Inlow (1919-2001) married * Esther Louise Harp (1915-1986)
|
|
* Hartford Cheney Inlow
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Here is a link to an excerpt from the Congressional Record of February 21, 1908, in which the U.S. Senate passed bill No. 160, recognizing the Battle of Point Pleasant as a battle of the Revolution. The bill did not pass the House of Representatives
Point Pleasant – US Senate Action on Point Pleasant Monument 1908
17 thoughts on “Samuel Crowley – First Casualty of the Revolutionary War”
Hey cuz, I’m a descendant of Samuel, still a Croley. Nice to find out the story . Gonna ride my Harley to the monument soon.
A few years ago my wife and I were driving through that area, but I didn’t discover until later about Samuel! Have to make the trip again! I have other ancestors in that area, as well.
I, too, have traveled through the area. This is a good reason to go back someday – post covid. Meanwhile, I’m glad to “meet” any Crowleys/Croleys that pop up.
I’ve just learned that Samuel Crowley was my 7X great grandfather. I traced back from my paternal grandmother – maiden name Crowley and discovered him. Reading your original post above has been very interesting, adding to my knowledge of the events.
Thanks for writing, Diana. Samuel is my 6X great grandfather, through my maternal grandmother. Very interesting story and very interesting character. Great to meet another cousin!
Benjamin Crowley is my 6th great grandfather -Samuel was 7th great uncle. Very interesting story. will have to stop next time I am in the area.
Was Benjamin Crowley from the Crowley prairie in Texas? If so, he was in my direct family line, too.
I found this history amazing! You must be so proud of your ancestor! I came across this online information because my gr gr gr gr gr Grandfather was killed at point pleasant as well. He was a special unit soldier hunting deer and was killed by Shawnee. I wonder if he was a long hunter and would like to know more about it. My ancestor was killed in Sept 1774 and his name is William Mitchell Clay. He was with a man named Cowardly who was only wounded. I looked up some resources on the Battle and _____”clay” is down killed and ____ Cowardly is down as wounded. https://familypedia.wikia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Point_Pleasant_(1774)/Alphabetical_Roster https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/52867675/William-Mitchell-Clay. I dont think my ancestor was a spy but who knows, He was definitely and older man – older than most
He is also my great, great….. paternal grandfather. Nice to see this article recognizing such bravery. ☺️☺️
That’s very cool! Sorry I haven’t responded earlier…I was having a lot of trouble with the site…it wouldn’t load at all…thankfully my web-host knows much more about it than I, and was able to fix in in only a few minutes.
I Samuel is your paternal grandfather, we must be related somewhere along the line. So…hello, cousin! Thanks for writing! Hart
I am trying to locate a book that contains this information about Samuel Crowley being the first casualty of the American Revolution. It would be a gift to one of his Crowley descendants, and possibly an addition to our museum bookstore at the Battle of Pickuwe.
My apologies for failing to respond sooner. I don’t know of anything of that nature. Good luck on your search.
Samuel is also my 6th great grandfather, through his son, John.
Thanks for the note!
Wow, everybody, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but…
Samuel Crowley was definitely, provably, not the first man killed at the Battle of Point Pleasant.
The myth about Samuel (my 6th Great Grandfather) being the first man to die at Point Pleasant stems from an error by family historian Jack Grantham, writing in the 1980’s. His error has since been perpetuated by others, copying Jack’s error, sometimes enhancing the error by citing vague “proofs” that don’t actually exist.
Grantham had no actual documentation regarding the timing and circumstances of Samuel’s death, and apparently also no real awareness of the progression of events before, and during, the battle. His notes reveal that he ASSUMED that that the first men out that morning, including the first man killed, would have been the scouts, and Jack believed (wrongly) that Samuel was the only scout killed in the battle – and that seems to have been the extent of Grantham’s unfortunately incomplete research.
I will have to add – Grantham has a history of being somewhat of a “glory seeker” in his histories. He also has pushed a proven false claim that our ancestor Jeffrey Crowley was the grandson of Ambrose Crowley II and, importantly, his wife Sarah Morris, who had noble ancestry.
Samuel Crowley was in fact a scout, as Jack knew; his widow, in her application for Samuel’s pension, described him as a “spy” for General Lewis, a term commonly used for a scout at the time. Grantham was wrong, however, in assuming that the scouts would have been the first men out of camp that morning, as well as in assuming that Samuel was the only scout killed at the battle.
Every record, from people actually present at the battle, describes how the first men out that morning were not scouts, but rather regular militiamen, who went out hunting for game very early that morning. This is all well-recorded; rations were poor – General Lewis had begun his march over the mountains to the mouth of the Kanawha with numerous cattle in train, but by the time they reached Point Pleasant, on the Ohio River, the cattle were largely starved and in miserable condition. At that point, General Lewis ordered that the cattle in the worst shape should be the first slaughtered, and most of the companies found the resultant portions too poor to adequately feed their soldiers. And this resulted in the regular militiamen, from several companies, being up before dawn and out hunting for game to supplement the poor rations they were being served. They were out hunting before the scouts had even mustered to receive their orders that morning.
The fact that the men were hunters is confirmed in several other sources. For example, Mr. Stephen T. Mitchell, in 1827, in a publication called “The Spirit of the Old Dominion” published at Richmond Virginia, gave the following account:
“On the 10th of October, 1774, about sunrise, the hunters came in at full speed, and gave the appalling information that a large body, of Indians had spread themselves from river to river, and were advancing by slow degrees, towards the fort…”
Further, Samuel was certainly not the only scout killed during the battle. There was at least one other killed that day, a man name Thomas Baker. He was also listed as a “spy” (again, another term for “Scout”) on his pension record, granted his widow after his death at Point Pleasant. See more on this below; also, see the description of the battle, below.
Grantham apparently was unaware of the several publications and reports, by persons who were present at the battle, that described the initial contact with the Indians that morning, and in fact specifically named the first person(s) killed during that encounter. The reports are somewhat conflicting, perhaps reflecting the fact that there were actually two separate encounters, at approximately the same time; two separate instances of pairs of hunters being attacked, separately, early that morning the day of the battle.
A “News Report” from Williamsburg, VA (received at Falmouth MA), dated Nov 10, records the fact of the two parties:
“The following letter is just received here [Williamsburg] from the camp at Point Pleasant, at the mouth of the Great Kenhawa [as then spelled], dated October 17, 1774:
“The following is a true statement of a battle fought at this place on the 10th instant: On Monday morning, about half an hour before sunrise, two of Capt. Russell’s company discovered a large party of Indians about a mile from the camp, one of which men was shot down by the Indians; the other made his escape, and brought in the intelligence. In two or three minutes after, two of Capt. Shelby’s company came in and confirmed the account.”
Importantly, every other account also says that the men were from either Captain Shelby’s company (from Holston in Fincastle County), or from Captain Russell’s company (from Fincastle).
Sam Crowley was from neither company; he was in Captain John Lewis’ company, from Botetourt County. And the name Samuel Crowley does not appear in any of the reports of the initial encounters. The various accounts name the men as either Valentine Sevier and Joseph Robison of Shelby’s company; Joseph Hughey of Shelby’s company and James Mooney of Russell’s company; or James Robertson and Valentine Sevier of Shelby’s company.
And according to Colonel Andrew Lewis, the commanding officer at Point Pleasant, the man killed was named Robertson.
There is also, by the way, no record at all of Samuel’s brother Benjamin Crowley being present at the battle, as some accounts claim. This is a family tradition, but Benjamin doesn’t appear in any of the reports, or lists of men present at the battle.
Of the men who went out hunting that morning, Lieutenant Isaac Shelby, in Captain Evan Shelby’s company, recorded: “Monday morning the 10th Instant when two of our Compys went out before day to hunt, To wit: Val.[Valentine] Sevier & Jas Robison & Discovered a party of Indians…”
John Haywood, the historian of Tennessee, said: “. . . the two men who discovered the Indians were James Robertson and Valentine Sevier, sergeants in Capt. Evan Shelby’s Company.” His source may have been Lieutenant Shelby’s report, above.
Col Andrew Lewis himself, commander at the battle of Point Pleasant, is reported to have called him Robertson, as mentioned above, as did two other soldiers (Reed and Moore) who saw him. There was a Sergeant James Robertson in Shelby’s company, and he did die in the battle. This might actually have been the Joseph “Robison”, of Shelby’s company, mentioned by Lieutenant Shelby.
On the other hand, Reuben G. Thwaites said in a footnote published in his 1906, “A Documentary History of Dunmore’s War: “The men were Joseph Hughey of Shelby’s company, and James Mooney of Russell’s…. The former [Joseph Hughey] was killed by a white renegade, Tavenor Ross…” This was based on an extract from a Journal kept by Col. William Fleming, an officer in the Army under Col. Andrew Lewis [this journal of Fleming’s, in his own hand writing, is found at the end of his Orderly Book and evidently is an abbreviated account written from the data in the book, a description of the expedition].
Colonel John Stuart, who was present at the battle, also said the name of the man who returned was Mooney, and that Mooney stopped at Stuart’s tent to relate his adventures.
It seems most likely, from the reports given, that there were actually two hunters killed that morning – the two who might actually have been the first two men killed in the Revolution: Sergeant Robertson of Shelby’s company, who was out with Valentine Sevier, and Joseph Hughey, of Shelby’s company, who was out with James Mooney of Russell’s company. The issue, however, remains uncertain.
In any case, not only was Samuel Crowley not mentioned as one of the two killed, he wasn’t mentioned as even being present at the event.
Regarding the battle: Following the initial reports of contact with Indians that morning, Colonel Lewis ordered Colonels Charles Lewis (Andrew Lewis’ brother) and William Fleming to form their troops, and to march out and chase off what he presumed was a smaller scouting party. The companies under the command of the Colonels were:
Under Col William Fleming, on the left, with Captains:
Thomas Buford – Botetort
Capt Love – Botetort
Evan Shelby – Fincastle
William Russell – Fincastle
Under Col Charles Lewis, on the right, men of Augusta County, with Captains:
John Dickenson
Benjamin Harrison
Samuel Wilson
John Lewis (including Samuel Crowley)
Andrew Lockeridge
From Chambers’ “Point Pleasant Battle”: “They marched in two lines 600 feet apart, Lewis’ men on the east side of Crooked Creek, Fleming’s on the left. When they were a quarter of a mile from the point, Lewis’ party encountered savages hiding behind brush and trees, The Indians opened fire…”
From “The Battle of Point Pleasant, The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 10, No. 1 (Jul., 1902): “They had gone only about half-mile when a most vigorous attack was made by the united tribes… the men who stayed in camp heard the clash of hundreds of guns ringing out together, proclaiming that the attack was a serious one. Both of the scouts in front of the white line were killed.”
Samuel Crowley may have been one of those two scouts killed, early in the actual battle. His company, under Capt John Lewis, was with Colonel Lewis, on the right, during that initial contact.
In spite of all the factual documentation disproving the claim that Samuel Crowley was the first man killed, a cottage industry has arisen with the goal of furthering that claim, with some going so far as to claim sources and documentation that simply don’t exist. Commonly one sees terms in these accounts such as “Jack Grantham’s research is well supported by authentic sources,” “Grantham has found evidence that our Samuel Crowley was sent out early the morning of 10 Oct 1774 with another man, Robertson, to search for Indians,” “…definitively making him the first patriot to die in the Revolutionary War,” “There appears to be no doubt Samuel was the first man to die… Several reports attest to the fact.”
All of these attestations are false.
We also frequently see the claim “Samuel Crowley was the only Virginia Ranger recognized by the Virginia House of Burgesses for his sacrifice.” This claim is based on the fact that Samuel’s widow was granted a pension due to his death at Point Pleasant [there was no other “recognition” awarded]; the narrative further claims that Samuel was the only person for whom such a pension was awarded. That claim, too, is false; the Archives of the State of Virginia contain records of similar pensions awarded to at least six other men, specifically based on their deaths or disability inflicted at the Battle of Point Pleasant: John McKinney, Thomas Baker (Spy), Captain John Dickinson, Joseph Mays, Alexander McFarlane, and William Shephard.
In summary, the claim that Samuel Crowley was the first man killed in the Revolution is provably, factually, untrue. It’s a glorious claim, but I prefer that my ancestor be known for his actual contribution – his death at the battle – to our country’s founding than to have him and his contribution obscured by a sensational, however untrue, story about him.
We are related to Samuel Crowley through the Burnnett and Harris families.