Talk:Isaac Davis (soldier)

A few concerns, dubious info, other
Yay, people are working on this article!!!! My baby is all grown up! I'm sad to see a lot of what I wrote gone, but clearly I am no writer, nor was I very good at finding sources.

I read through the article and had a few points:

1) Charge? I never read of a charge in any of my sources. Could someone clarify what is meant by "charge?" I imagine running and screaming, perhaps I've seen too many war movies? My limited sources speak of soldiers standing and speaking and then diving for cover, but not charging.

2) I added a citation needed tag next to the "fact" about Davis being chosen to lead because his men had bayonets. As I had originally written (and I think cited), nobody knows for sure why this junior officer was chosen to take the lead position, nor even if he was chosen or if he took it himself, nor if it was offered to someone else who declined. Perhaps my source was wrong, but please cite a source contradicting that. It also might be of interest to mention that he was not the senior officer when given the lead.

3) Also, why was Samuel Prescott removed from this article and replaced with "a messenger?" That's quite the demotion for someone who helped found a country!

4) The Acton Historical Society library at the Hosmer House has a wealth of history books and artifacts. I rarely make it to Acton anymore, but if someone lives nearby they probably have more info that you could ever look through. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skintigh (talk • contribs) 02:23, 11 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for starting the article about Davis. There's actually a good amount of your original stuff in here, it's just been expanded. Some responses to your concerns:
 * 1) Quite right, "charge" is not the right word. I've replaced it with "advance."
 * 2) It's true, there is some confusion as to how and why Davis's company ended up in the lead. But there is credible primary source evidence that Davis was deliberately ordered to take the lead (according to the deposition of Thomas Thorp, an Acton minuteman) and that he was given the lead because his company was equipped with bayonets (according to Amos Baker, a Lincoln minuteman). Granted, these depositions were given decades after the fight, but many leading historians have accepted their accounts as fact. I will add a citation for one or two of them.
 * 3) As for Samuel Prescott, I do not know of any firm evidence that he warned Acton. There is certainly a strong tradition that this happened (his ride is still reenacted in Acton). But I do not think it is actually documented by a primary source. Davis himself was apparently warned by the son of Capt. Robbins of Acton. The rider who woke the Robbins household was probably Prescott, but not actually identified. I think it is probably worth noting in the article that tradition places Prescott in Acton. I will add this.
 * 4) The Acton Historical Society has little primary source material on Davis, unfortunately. There just isn't much left.
 * Best,Historical Perspective (talk) 14:49, 11 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Disregard my comments under #3 re: Prescott. Reading more closely, I see he is still in the article. David Hackett Fischer confidently states that it was Prescott who brought word to Acton. Other historians are more hedgy about it and I still believe there is an issue as to definite documentation. But, in the end, I think the tradition is firm enough to leave in the article.

I think some of the narrative is confusing as to direction. It says "...Davis then moved his company to the right of the line.[1] Around 10:30, the provincials faced to the right...". If they marched to the right, and then faced to the right (or the military command, 'Face right'), they would be facing the rear of their lines. --vkt183

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:37, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * "The Minuteman" by French.jpg

The Minuteman
Who the statue is based on is a big deal, yet none of these sources: mention a connection with Isaac Davis. There is a singular pamphlet from the 1940s that is only found in 14 libraries in the world that mentions it. It is by far a minority viewpoint and should be given appropriate weight. -- Guerillero  Parlez Moi 12:26, 18 March 2022 (UTC)


 * I hear your point regarding appropriate weight but listing sources that simply do not mention the claim is very different from sources that refute the claim or offer alternative claims as to the subject or inspiration behind the statue. Further, the Davis claim is supported in additional works. Some examples follow, all scholarly works (there are other popular histories and magazine articles I’ve not listed).
 * …so it's not just a matter of a singular pamphlet. Editing to reflect that the assertion is not universally acknowledged might make sense. I don't know of any sources that dispute the claim--the matter simply isn't addressed in many sources. Either way, to straight up remove the sources and any mention of the claim is not, I think, appropriate here.
 * Best, Historical Perspective 2 (talk) 18:15, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm going through and cross checking; dropping Xlibris since it is a self-publishing house. Do you have access to a copy of The Story of the Minutemen Man? -- Guerillero  Parlez Moi 16:43, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Checking The Life of Daniel Chester French: Journey into Fame, Creston mentions a plow, but never connects it to David, who is not mentioned. -- Guerillero  Parlez Moi 17:13, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delay. Busy week in real life. The plough is a local relic owned by the Town of Acton and belonged to Davis. So, though Cresson doesn't mention it, there is a Davis connection with that plough and it is telling that French used that specific artifact as a model. If there isn't a citation re: the Davis plough in the article, I can add one. I do not have access to a copy of the Story of the Minuteman only notes I took when viewing a library copy ages ago. Historical Perspective 2 (talk) 17:30, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I will hopefully take a look at it next week when I am at the LOC. This what I am including in the The Minute Man: "It is, perhaps, a portrait Isaac Davis, an officer that died in the battle." with this note: "The claim that The Minute Man depicts Davis first appeared in Robbins (1945) and can be found in sources such as Linenthal (1991, p. 30) and Stout (1999). Other sources about Daniel Chester French, such as Creston (1947), Richman (1972), and Holzer (2019), are silent on the subject. Contemporaneous sources such as Hoar, Emerson & Walcott (1876) also do not mention the connection between Davis and the statue." Guerillero  Parlez Moi 23:04, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Sounds reasonable to me. Best, Historical Perspective 2 (talk) 10:31, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * …so it's not just a matter of a singular pamphlet. Editing to reflect that the assertion is not universally acknowledged might make sense. I don't know of any sources that dispute the claim--the matter simply isn't addressed in many sources. Either way, to straight up remove the sources and any mention of the claim is not, I think, appropriate here.
 * Best, Historical Perspective 2 (talk) 18:15, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm going through and cross checking; dropping Xlibris since it is a self-publishing house. Do you have access to a copy of The Story of the Minutemen Man? -- Guerillero  Parlez Moi 16:43, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Checking The Life of Daniel Chester French: Journey into Fame, Creston mentions a plow, but never connects it to David, who is not mentioned. -- Guerillero  Parlez Moi 17:13, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delay. Busy week in real life. The plough is a local relic owned by the Town of Acton and belonged to Davis. So, though Cresson doesn't mention it, there is a Davis connection with that plough and it is telling that French used that specific artifact as a model. If there isn't a citation re: the Davis plough in the article, I can add one. I do not have access to a copy of the Story of the Minuteman only notes I took when viewing a library copy ages ago. Historical Perspective 2 (talk) 17:30, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I will hopefully take a look at it next week when I am at the LOC. This what I am including in the The Minute Man: "It is, perhaps, a portrait Isaac Davis, an officer that died in the battle." with this note: "The claim that The Minute Man depicts Davis first appeared in Robbins (1945) and can be found in sources such as Linenthal (1991, p. 30) and Stout (1999). Other sources about Daniel Chester French, such as Creston (1947), Richman (1972), and Holzer (2019), are silent on the subject. Contemporaneous sources such as Hoar, Emerson & Walcott (1876) also do not mention the connection between Davis and the statue." Guerillero  Parlez Moi 23:04, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Sounds reasonable to me. Best, Historical Perspective 2 (talk) 10:31, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Sounds reasonable to me. Best, Historical Perspective 2 (talk) 10:31, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Attack / Charge
I think it's misleading to call the march the bridge a "charge" or "attack." It was an orderly march, and the intended destination was the center of town, where smoke was rising. They did not attack, but they clearly meant to cross the bridge. 172.56.194.236 (talk) 11:40, 10 June 2024 (UTC)