In This Article
His Story
Before dawn on March 11, 1776, Jonathan Hunnewell and approximately thirty fellow artificers prepared to march from Roxbury toward Dorchester Heights. The Americans had recently fortified the heights overlooking British-occupied Boston, and an attack was feared. Hunnewell, a mason employed in the Revolutionary military establishment, later recalled that his company was ordered to be ready at four o’clock in the morning. Under Captain William Ethridge, the men marched to help defend the position. For Hunnewell, whose principal work involved constructing military buildings and fortifications, this was a moment when the distinction between tradesman and soldier became particularly difficult to draw.
Hunnewell was born in Boston around 1759. When fighting began in Massachusetts in April 1775, he left Boston with his father and traveled to Providence, Rhode Island. He remained there until November, when he returned to the American military lines around Boston intending to enlist.
At Roxbury, Hunnewell encountered Captain William Ethridge, an acquaintance who needed skilled masons. Ethridge offered him sixty shillings monthly for service as an artificer, compared with the forty shillings Hunnewell understood an ordinary soldier would receive.
Hunnewell accepted the assignment. His work would support the American army through the construction and maintenance of military facilities, including barracks, magazines, and other structures essential to sustaining troops in the field.
Following Ethridge’s death in 1776, command of the mason artificers passed to Richard Hunnewell, Jonathan’s father. The company served under the authority of Colonel Thomas Chase, a deputy quartermaster general.
Unlike soldiers whose duties centered upon infantry drill and battlefield maneuver, artificers supplied the technical skills needed to build and maintain an army’s infrastructure. Carpenters, blacksmiths, and masons were indispensable to fortifications, military housing, storage facilities, and transportation systems.
Jonathan Hunnewell maintained that he had enlisted for three years and remained subject to military obligations throughout his term. Massachusetts military accounts subsequently credited him with thirty-one months of service in Richard Hunnewell’s company between January 1777 and July 1779.
The distinction between military enlistment and civilian employment became the central controversy of his later pension claim. Federal officials questioned whether his masonry work qualified as military service under the pension laws.
Hunnewell responded with detailed sworn statements describing barracks life, military rations, obedience to orders, restrictions upon leaving the service, and the possibility of punishment as a deserter.
His case also preserved testimony from fellow artificers Samuel Dow and Peter Mackintosh, who identified him as a member of Richard Hunnewell’s company.
Despite these records, his application encountered repeated rejection and appeals. The pension dispute continued after Hunnewell died on April 3, 1842.
His daughter Frances, the only surviving child identified in the court records, pursued the amount she believed was due to her father. Subsequent pension documents recorded an allowance of $144 annually for two years of qualifying service, with payment associated with Frances’s claim.
Jonathan Hunnewell’s story illuminates an often overlooked dimension of the Revolutionary War. Independence depended not only upon men carrying muskets but also upon craftsmen who built the positions, barracks, magazines, and other infrastructure that made military operations possible. His pension file preserves both the practical responsibilities of those craftsmen and their later struggle to have that service recognized.
Early Life
A Native of Boston
Jonathan Hunnewell was born in Boston, Massachusetts, approximately 1758 or 1759. His age of eighty-two in October 1841 provides the basis for this approximate birth period.
His exact birth date has not been established from the pension transcriptions.
Boston was one of the most important commercial ports in colonial New England. Its economy depended upon maritime trade, shipbuilding, construction, skilled trades, and a wide network of merchants and artisans.
Hunnewell grew up in a community where skilled craftsmen contributed to the city’s buildings, wharves, warehouses, and commercial infrastructure.
The Hunnewell Family’s Masonry Trade
Jonathan’s father, Richard Hunnewell, was a mason who eventually commanded a corps of mason artificers in the Revolutionary military establishment.
Frances Hunnewell later testified that both her father and grandfather practiced masonry.
The records therefore establish a direct occupational connection between Jonathan and Richard Hunnewell, although they do not describe Jonathan’s apprenticeship or the precise manner in which he learned the trade.
By the opening of the Revolution, Jonathan possessed skills valuable enough to attract the attention of an officer responsible for military construction.
Boston and the Imperial Crisis
During the years preceding the Revolution, Boston became a center of resistance to British policies concerning taxation, colonial government, and imperial authority.
The Boston Massacre of 1770, the Boston Tea Party of 1773, and the punitive legislation of 1774 intensified tensions between Massachusetts and the British government.
By April 1775, British regulars occupied Boston while colonial militia organizations prepared for possible armed conflict.
The battles of Lexington and Concord on April 19 transformed political resistance into open warfare.
Leaving Boston in April 1775
In his 1841 pension declaration, Hunnewell recalled leaving Boston on April 20, 1775, the day after the battles of Lexington and Concord.
He traveled with his father to Providence, Rhode Island, where he remained until November.
The declaration does not explain why the family chose Providence or describe their circumstances during those months.
His departure nevertheless places him among the Boston residents whose lives were disrupted by the opening of the Revolutionary War and the military isolation of the town.
Revolutionary War Service
Returning to Roxbury — November 1775
In November 1775, Hunnewell returned from Providence to Roxbury, where American forces occupied positions outside British-held Boston.
He later testified that his intention was to enlist as a soldier.
Upon arriving, he met Captain William Ethridge, whom he had known previously. Ethridge explained that he needed masons and offered Hunnewell employment as an artificer at a higher monthly rate than ordinary soldiers received.
Hunnewell accepted the assignment and entered the company of mason artificers.
Captain William Ethridge’s Artificers
Hunnewell described serving under Captain Ethridge until the captain died in 1776.
Later correspondence associated Ethridge’s death with smallpox during the summer of that year, although the precise date was not established in the transcriptions examined.
Under Ethridge, Hunnewell performed construction duties supporting American military positions around Boston.
His own testimony specifically identifies service at Dorchester Heights in March 1776.
Richard Hunnewell Takes Command
Following Ethridge’s death, Richard Hunnewell assumed command of the company of masons.
Jonathan continued serving under his father.
The company operated within a broader system of artificers and quartermaster personnel. Hunnewell identified Colonel Thomas Chase as the deputy quartermaster general under whose authority the company served.
He also identified Stephen Frost as commanding a company of blacksmiths and Josiah Wheeler as commanding a company of carpenters.
These different trades worked together to provide the army with construction, maintenance, and repair capabilities.
The Organization of the Mason Artificers
In a supplemental declaration, Hunnewell described a company that initially contained approximately twenty men and expanded according to the amount of work required.
He distinguished between men who were regularly enlisted for fixed terms and others whose employment depended upon particular construction assignments.
He identified four men as enlisted for three years: Richard Hunnewell, John Henley or Hendly, George Hunnewell, and himself.
The surviving transcription varies in spelling of some names. The original manuscripts and contemporary records should be consulted before treating every spelling as definitive.
Military Construction Duties
Hunnewell stated that his company built barracks, magazines, and other military structures at Roxbury, Dorchester, Rutland, and additional locations.
Barracks provided housing for soldiers, while magazines were used to store gunpowder and other military supplies.
Such construction required specialized knowledge. Masonry was important in foundations, walls, fireplaces, chimneys, and other durable structural elements.
Hunnewell’s pension records do not identify each individual building he worked on or provide plans for specific structures.
His testimony does, however, establish the general nature of his military construction duties.
Thirty-One Months in the Army Books
A Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth certification dated November 1, 1841, reported that Hunnewell’s name appeared in military accounts for thirty-one months of service as a mason in Richard Hunnewell’s company.
The period was recorded as January 1, 1777, through July 31, 1779.
The certification also stated that Hunnewell was from Boston and had enlisted for three years.
A later certification in April 1852 again identified him in Continental Army books, with slightly different wording concerning the final July date.
These contemporary-account references are particularly important because they provide documentary support beyond Hunnewell’s recollections decades after the Revolution.
Additional Government Work
Hunnewell stated that after his regular period of service ended, he was employed at various times to perform additional work for the government.
He distinguished this later work from the earlier period in which he received regular pay.
The dates and duration of those later assignments are not fully established in the surviving transcriptions.
Battles and Campaigns
The Siege of Boston — 1775–1776
Following the battles of Lexington and Concord, American provincial forces surrounded British-occupied Boston.
British troops held the town and its principal defenses, while American forces established positions in surrounding communities, including Cambridge and Roxbury.
General George Washington arrived in July 1775 to take command of the American army. One of his most pressing responsibilities was organizing the troops into a force capable of maintaining a sustained siege.
Military construction was essential to the operation. American forces needed barracks for troops, defensive earthworks, protected positions for artillery, and facilities for storing supplies.
Hunnewell entered the American military establishment at Roxbury in November 1775 as a mason artificer under Captain William Ethridge.
His service therefore placed him within the American military effort surrounding Boston during the later months of the siege.
Unlike a soldier whose service is documented only through a regimental affiliation, Hunnewell provided a specific account of one important episode during the siege.
Jonathan Hunnewell’s Role
Unit: Captain William Ethridge’s company of mason artificers.
Specialty: Military masonry and construction.
Reported service: Construction work supporting American positions around Boston.
Participation classification: Personally reported in sworn pension testimony.
Source: Declaration of October 23, 1841, image 4159616_00271; supplemental declaration, images 4159616_00336–00337.
Dorchester Heights — March 1776
The fortification of Dorchester Heights was among the decisive operations of the Siege of Boston.
During the night of March 4–5, 1776, American troops moved artillery and construction materials onto the heights south of Boston.
The position overlooked the town and its harbor, threatening the British ability to maintain their occupation.
British commanders considered attacking the newly constructed defenses. American troops continued strengthening the position while preparing for a possible assault.
Hunnewell’s supplemental testimony provides a distinctive account of the role played by the artificers during this period.
He stated that on March 11, his company was ordered to be ready at four o’clock in the morning to march to Dorchester Heights and assist in defending the entrenchments.
Approximately thirty men, led by Captain Ethridge, marched from Roxbury toward the heights.
Hunnewell described British firing from the direction of Boston Neck and stated that men were killed while passing an exposed section of the route.
His testimony does not identify the casualties by name or establish their exact number. This portion of his recollection should be checked against contemporary military reports before being treated as an independently verified account of losses.
According to Hunnewell, the company remained at Dorchester Heights until March 14, when the men were ordered back to Roxbury.
He recalled that they returned safely during the afternoon.
British forces evacuated Boston on March 17, 1776, ending the siege and securing an important early American strategic success.
Hunnewell’s account is especially valuable because it describes a construction specialist being ordered to help defend a military position at a critical moment.
Jonathan Hunnewell’s Role
Commander: Captain William Ethridge.
Unit: Approximately thirty mason artificers, according to Hunnewell.
Assignment: March to Dorchester Heights to assist in defending the American entrenchments.
Departure: Four o’clock in the morning, March 11, as recalled in his testimony.
Return: March 14, 1776.
Participation classification: Personally reported in sworn testimony dated December 30, 1841.
Source: Images 4159616_00336–00337.
Construction Work After the Siege
After the British evacuation of Boston, the Continental Army continued to require extensive construction and repair work.
Military operations depended upon protected storage facilities, barracks, defensive positions, and the repair of existing buildings.
Hunnewell described work at Roxbury, Dorchester, Rutland, and other locations.
The surviving records do not establish that he participated in named battlefield engagements after the Siege of Boston.
His documented contribution was primarily technical and logistical, providing the physical infrastructure required by American military forces.
Jonathan Hunnewell’s Role
Unit: Richard Hunnewell’s company of mason artificers.
Supervision: Colonel Thomas Chase, deputy quartermaster general.
Assignments: Construction of barracks, magazines, and other facilities.
Documentary service: Thirty-one months credited in Massachusetts army books, January 1777–July 1779.
Participation classification: Personally reported duties corroborated by state military accounting records.
Sources: Images 4159616_00271, 4159616_00323, and 4159616_00324–00325.
Military Honors and Recognition
Recognition as a Continental Artificer
Massachusetts military records identified Jonathan Hunnewell as a member of Richard Hunnewell’s company of mason artificers.
The records credited him with thirty-one months of service and identified his enlistment as a three-year commitment.
State accounting records also included his name among artificers eligible for compensation related to the depreciation of Revolutionary War wages.
Compensation for Depreciated Pay
During the Revolution, inflation and the depreciation of paper currency reduced the purchasing power of military wages.
Massachusetts established procedures for calculating compensation owed to military personnel whose pay had lost value.
In October 1780, state authorities considered a petition submitted by Richard Hunnewell on behalf of himself and several artificers.
The resulting records identified Jonathan Hunnewell among the enlisted men in the company and included a settlement for depreciation of wages.
This was financial compensation associated with service rather than an individual decoration for valor.
Federal Pension Recognition
Although Hunnewell’s original pension application was disputed and rejected, later administrative records identify a pension allowance calculated at $144 annually for two years of qualifying service.
His daughter Frances pursued the payment after his death.
The pension records contain inconsistent certificate dates and administrative references, so the sequence of final approval and issuance requires careful interpretation.
No individual battlefield decoration, Badge of Military Merit, or specific commendation for valor has been verified in the supplied records.
Original Military Records
October 2–12, 1780 — Artificers’ Wage-Depreciation Settlement
Massachusetts legislative and accounting records identify Richard Hunnewell’s company of artificers and name Jonathan Hunnewell among the men enlisted for three years. They document the state’s consideration of compensation for depreciated military wages.
Archival images: 4159616_00331–00335.
October 23, 1841 — Original Pension Declaration
Hunnewell described leaving Boston in April 1775, returning to Roxbury in November, entering military construction service under Captain William Ethridge, and subsequently serving under Richard Hunnewell.
Archival images: 4159616_00271–00272.
October 26, 1841 — Peter Mackintosh’s Testimony
Peter Mackintosh, a former blacksmith artificer, identified Jonathan Hunnewell as a member of Richard Hunnewell’s company during the Revolutionary War.
Archival image: 4159616_00325.
October 27, 1841 — Samuel Dow’s Testimony
Samuel Dow, another former blacksmith artificer, stated that Jonathan Hunnewell served in Richard Hunnewell’s company during 1778 and into 1779.
Archival image: 4159616_00324.
November 1, 1841 — Massachusetts Service Certification
The Secretary of the Commonwealth certified that Hunnewell appeared in military books for thirty-one months of service as a mason in Richard Hunnewell’s company, from January 1777 through July 1779.
Archival image: 4159616_00323.
November 18, 1841 — Supplemental Declaration
Hunnewell explained the organization of the artificers, identified men enlisted for three-year terms, and described their pay, rations, officers, and working arrangements.
Archival images: 4159616_00338–00339.
December 30, 1841 — Additional Sworn Testimony
Hunnewell described his recruitment by Captain Ethridge, the march to Dorchester Heights in March 1776, and the military discipline imposed upon the artificers.
Archival images: 4159616_00336–00337.
April 9, 1852 — Certification of Death and Heir
Judge Sherman Leland certified that Jonathan Hunnewell died on April 3, 1842, left no widow, and that Frances Hunnewell was his only surviving child.
Archival image: 4159616_00310.
April 21, 1852 — State Military Records Certification
Massachusetts Secretary Amasa Walker certified that Hunnewell appeared in Continental Army books, served as a mason artificer, and was associated with a three-year enlistment.
Archival image: 4159616_00287.
1850–1852 — Frances Hunnewell’s Pension Proceedings
Frances submitted declarations and correspondence seeking payment and an increased allowance based upon her father’s Revolutionary War service. These records also document disputes concerning certificate delivery.
Archival images: 4159616_00269–00270, 4159616_00289–00293, and 4159616_00346–00350.
Revolutionary War Pension
Applying in October 1841
On October 23, 1841, Jonathan Hunnewell appeared before Judge Sherman Leland of the Norfolk County Court of Probate.
He was eighty-two years old and living in Roxbury, Massachusetts.
He sought a pension under the Act of June 7, 1832, which provided benefits for qualifying Revolutionary War veterans based upon the nature and duration of their military service.
Hunnewell explained that he had not previously sought a pension because he had not considered himself in need of financial assistance.
His declaration stated that he had entered the American military establishment in November 1775 and performed masonry work under Captain William Ethridge and later Richard Hunnewell.
The Question of Military Status
The central issue in Hunnewell’s pension case was whether his work as an artificer constituted qualifying military service.
Federal pension officials questioned whether he had been employed under a civilian contract rather than enlisted under military obligations.
The distinction mattered because the pension law did not automatically treat every person who performed work for the army as a qualifying soldier.
Hunnewell argued that he had enlisted for three years, lived under military regulations, received military rations, and remained subject to the authority of officers.
He stated that leaving without permission would have exposed him to punishment as a deserter.
The November 1841 Supplemental Statement
Hunnewell submitted additional testimony explaining the composition of the artificer company.
He distinguished four men who were regularly enlisted for three years from other workers hired according to immediate construction needs.
He identified himself, Richard Hunnewell, John Henley or Hendly, and George Hunnewell among the regularly enlisted men.
He also described the company’s officers and the arrangement of the different trades under the quartermaster establishment.
His December 1841 Clarification
In a later sworn statement, Hunnewell addressed a phrase in his earlier testimony suggesting that the company had not been under military discipline.
He explained that he had misunderstood the meaning of the term.
He then described regular work hours, regulated meals, military rations, restrictions on leaving work, and the consequences of desertion.
This clarification became an important part of his argument that the company had been a military organization rather than a group of ordinary civilian contractors.
Supporting Evidence from Fellow Artificers
Samuel Dow testified that he served as a blacksmith artificer under Colonel Thomas Chase and remembered Jonathan Hunnewell serving in Richard Hunnewell’s company.
Peter Mackintosh also testified that he had served as a blacksmith artificer and personally knew Hunnewell as a member of the mason artificers.
Their testimony established that Hunnewell’s association with the company was remembered by men who had served in the same broader military establishment.
State Military Accounts
Massachusetts officials examined surviving Revolutionary War military books and certified that Hunnewell was credited with thirty-one months of service.
They identified him as a mason in Richard Hunnewell’s company and recorded his enlistment for three years.
The records also showed that he received compensation connected with military service and the depreciation of wartime wages.
These documents became central to the effort to demonstrate that his service was military rather than purely civilian.
Rejection and Appeals
Despite the supporting evidence, Hunnewell’s pension claim was rejected during the initial proceedings.
His advocates continued corresponding with federal officials and submitted additional documentary evidence.
J. Ballard Lane was among the principal correspondents arguing for recognition of Hunnewell’s service.
Later correspondence also involved public figures including Robert C. Winthrop, Daniel P. King, and Horace Mann.
These communications addressed the classification of artificers, the meaning of their pay records, and the distinction between enlisted service and civilian contracts.
Death Before the Dispute Was Resolved
Hunnewell died on April 3, 1842, while the pension matter remained contested.
The dispute continued after his death because his daughter Frances sought the amount that she believed had been due to him.
Her claim was supported by a court certification establishing that she was his only surviving child and that he had left no widow.
Frances Hunnewell’s Claim
Frances Hunnewell, living in Dorchester, Massachusetts, pursued the pension claim during the 1840s and early 1850s.
She submitted declarations, obtained official certifications, and worked through representatives to secure payment.
Later pension records identify an allowance of $144 annually, based upon two years of service, beginning March 4, 1831, and ending with Hunnewell’s death in April 1842.
The allowance was payable in connection with Frances’s claim as his only surviving child.
Some administrative documents refer to an earlier or lower allowance, and the transcriptions contain inconsistent certificate dates. The precise sequence of adjustments should therefore be verified against the original pension-office records.
The Dispute Over an Increased Pension
Frances also sought an increased allowance based upon the argument that her father should receive the same treatment as other military artificers.
Her representatives cited the military records of Massachusetts and a letter written by Quartermaster General Timothy Pickering concerning the organization and compensation of artificers.
The correspondence demonstrates that the issue extended beyond Hunnewell’s individual case. It concerned the broader question of how specialized military tradesmen should be classified under Revolutionary War pension legislation.
The supplied transcriptions document the continuing dispute but do not establish every subsequent administrative determination concerning the requested increase.
From His Account
Jonathan Hunnewell’s pension file preserves detailed sworn testimony about his military service. The following excerpts are drawn from the archival transcriptions and have not been independently checked against every original manuscript image.
Leaving Boston
“he left said Boston on the twentieth day of April 1775, and went with his father to Providence in the State of Rhode Island”
Source: Pension declaration, October 23, 1841. Image 4159616_00271.
Hunnewell’s account places his departure from Boston immediately after the opening battles of the Revolution.
His Intention to Enlist
“I came from Providence R I. to Roxbury aforesaid in November 1775 for the purpose of enlisting as a soldier”
Source: Supplemental declaration, December 30, 1841. Image 4159616_00336.
He stated that he originally intended to enlist as an ordinary soldier before Captain Ethridge recruited him for masonry work.
Recruitment as a Mason
“if I engaged with him as an artificer, I should receive sixty shillings per month, while as a soldier, I should receive but forty shillings”
Source: Supplemental declaration, December 30, 1841. Image 4159616_00336.
The statement explains the circumstances under which Hunnewell entered the artificer company.
Orders for Dorchester Heights
“we were all ordered to be ready by four o’clock on that day to march to Dorchester Heights”
Source: Supplemental declaration, December 30, 1841. Image 4159616_00336.
Hunnewell identified March 11, 1776, as the date of the march.
His Company’s Movement
“at four o’clock we (about thirty in number) headed by Capt Ethridge marched to Dorchester”
Source: Supplemental declaration, December 30, 1841. Image 4159616_00336.
This is one of the most specific descriptions of an individual military movement in his pension testimony.
Return to Roxbury
“We remained on the heights till the 14th when we were ordered back to Roxbury where we arrived safe in the middle of the afternoon.”
Source: Supplemental declaration, December 30, 1841. Image 4159616_00336.
His recollection places the company at Dorchester Heights for several days before its return.
Military Obligations
“I never considered myself as exempt from military duty or any other which I was called to perform.”
Source: Supplemental declaration, December 30, 1841. Image 4159616_00337.
Hunnewell used this statement to explain why he believed his artificer service qualified as military enlistment.
Life in the Barracks
“we resided in barracks, we were obliged to be at our work at regular hours, and also at our meals”
Source: Supplemental declaration, December 30, 1841. Image 4159616_00337.
His description reveals the structured daily routine of the artificers.
Enlisted Rather Than Civilian
“We were not engaged under a civil contract, but enlisted to serve three years”
Source: Supplemental declaration, December 30, 1841. Image 4159616_00337.
This was the central claim upon which Hunnewell’s pension argument depended.
Service Without a Written Discharge
“When I left the service, I received no discharge in writing but the company was disbanded”
Source: Supplemental declaration, November 18, 1841. Image 4159616_00338.
The absence of a written discharge made state military accounts and witness testimony especially important in his case.
Military Service Record
| Period | Unit or Commander | Reported Service |
|---|---|---|
| April 20, 1775 | Boston to Providence | Left Boston with his father following the outbreak of the Revolution. |
| November 1775 | Captain William Ethridge | Entered service as a mason artificer at Roxbury. |
| March 11–14, 1776 | Captain William Ethridge | Personally reported marching with approximately thirty artificers to help defend Dorchester Heights. |
| 1776 | Richard Hunnewell | Continued in the company after Ethridge’s death. |
| January 1, 1777–July 31, 1779 | Richard Hunnewell’s company; Colonel Thomas Chase | Thirty-one months credited in Massachusetts military accounts. |
| 1779 onward, dates uncertain | Government construction assignments | Reported occasional additional work after his regular service ended. |
| October 1780 | Massachusetts state authorities | Named in artificers’ wage-depreciation settlement records. |
| October–December 1841 | Norfolk County pension proceedings | Submitted original and supplemental declarations concerning military service. |
| April 3, 1842 | Roxbury, Massachusetts | Died while pension proceedings remained contested. |
The service chronology combines Hunnewell’s sworn recollections with Massachusetts military accounting records. The thirty-one-month period is documented in state certifications; his earlier service under Ethridge and the Dorchester Heights episode are described in retrospective testimony.
Later Life and Burial
Life After the Revolution
After his regular artificer enlistment ended, Hunnewell reported performing additional government work at various times.
The surviving pension file does not provide a continuous account of his civilian occupation, business activities, or household during the decades immediately following the Revolution.
His background as a mason suggests that he possessed a skilled trade, but specific postwar employment should not be assumed without supporting records.
Public Life in Massachusetts
A November 1841 letter by J. Ballard Lane described Hunnewell as a respected member of his community.
Lane also stated that Hunnewell had served in the Massachusetts legislature from Boston for twenty-three successive years.
This is a significant claim concerning Hunnewell’s civilian career, but it has not been independently checked against legislative membership registers.
Further research may clarify his dates of legislative service and any additional public offices he held.
Financial Circumstances in Old Age
Hunnewell stated that he had not sought a pension earlier because he had not considered himself in need of assistance.
Lane’s correspondence indicated that Hunnewell had possessed property valued at approximately two hundred dollars until relatively recently.
By 1841, advancing age and infirmity had contributed to his decision to apply for federal benefits.
The records do not establish that he had experienced poverty throughout his adult life.
Death on April 3, 1842
Jonathan Hunnewell died on April 3, 1842.
Judge Sherman Leland later certified the death date in proceedings concerning the pension claim of Hunnewell’s daughter.
The certification also established that Hunnewell left no surviving widow and that Frances Hunnewell was his only surviving child.
Burial
The pension transcriptions examined do not identify Jonathan Hunnewell’s burial location.
No cemetery or grave marker should be assigned to him without supporting burial, cemetery, or vital-record evidence.
Further research in Roxbury and Boston burial registers, Massachusetts death records, and local historical collections may help establish his place of interment.
Family History
Jonathan Hunnewell’s pension records establish his relationship to his father Richard Hunnewell and identify his daughter Frances as his only surviving child. They also name George Hunnewell among the artificers serving in Richard’s company, although George’s exact relationship to Jonathan requires further verification.
Hunnewell — Surname Origins and Heritage
The Hunnewell Surname
Hunnewell is a surname associated with English and New England family history. Variant spellings appear in early records, including Hunewell and Honeywell.
The surviving pension documents themselves use more than one spelling for Jonathan’s name.
Such variation was common in eighteenth- and nineteenth-century records and does not necessarily indicate different individuals.
However, a matching surname alone does not establish kinship. Family relationships must be supported by contemporary records.
His Parents
His Daughter
Other Family Connections
Genealogical research note: Frances Hunnewell was certified as Jonathan’s only surviving child, not necessarily his only child ever born. Additional research in Boston and Roxbury vital records, marriage registers, probate files, and legislative records may identify other family members and clarify George Hunnewell’s relationship to Jonathan.
Original Sources
The principal source for this biography is Jonathan Hunnewell’s Revolutionary War pension file, which contains his own testimony, fellow artificers’ affidavits, Massachusetts military accounts, pension correspondence, and his daughter’s later claim.
National Archives Pension File
- National Archives and Records Administration. Revolutionary War Pension and Bounty-Land Warrant Application Files, Jonathan Hunnewell, pension file S.29919. National Archives Identifier 54961930. View archival record.
- Jonathan Hunnewell. Original pension declaration, October 23, 1841, Norfolk County, Massachusetts. Images 4159616_00271–00272.
- Samuel Dow. Sworn testimony concerning Jonathan Hunnewell’s service as a mason artificer, October 27, 1841. Image 4159616_00324.
- Peter Mackintosh. Sworn testimony concerning Jonathan Hunnewell’s service in Richard Hunnewell’s company, October 26, 1841. Image 4159616_00325.
- Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth. Certification of thirty-one months of military service, November 1, 1841. Image 4159616_00323.
- Jonathan Hunnewell. Supplemental statement describing artificer organization and military service, November 18, 1841. Images 4159616_00338–00339.
- Jonathan Hunnewell. Supplemental sworn testimony concerning Captain Ethridge, Dorchester Heights, and military discipline, December 30, 1841. Images 4159616_00336–00337.
- Massachusetts General Court. Richard Hunnewell’s petition and proceedings concerning depreciation of artificers’ wages, October 1780. Images 4159616_00331–00335.
- J. Ballard Lane. Correspondence concerning Hunnewell’s pension claim and public life, November 1841. Images 4159616_00294–00295.
- J. Ballard Lane. Additional correspondence concerning the organization and enlistment of artificers, November 26, 1841. Images 4159616_00305–00306.
- Sherman Leland. Certification of Jonathan Hunnewell’s death and Frances Hunnewell’s status as his only surviving child, April 9, 1852. Image 4159616_00310.
- Amasa Walker, Secretary of the Commonwealth. Certification of Jonathan Hunnewell’s Continental Army service, April 21, 1852. Image 4159616_00287.
- Frances Hunnewell. Declarations and correspondence seeking payment of her father’s pension, 1850–1852. Images 4159616_00269–00270, 4159616_00289–00293, and 4159616_00346–00350.
- United States Pension Office. Administrative pension records concerning Jonathan Hunnewell and Frances Hunnewell, including the $144 annual allowance and disputed certificate history. Images 4159616_00268, 4159616_00275, and 4159616_00304.
- J. Ballard Lane. Appeal concerning the classification of Hunnewell’s artificer service as military rather than civilian employment, May 26, 1846. Images 4159616_00318–00320.
- Timothy Pickering. Letter concerning military artificers and their compensation, October 23, 1780, preserved as a later certified copy in the pension file. Images 4159616_00351–00357.
Transcription Collection
The Yost Post research collection, RevWar-Transcriptions-Final.xlsx, records associated with National Archives Identifier 54961930.
The transcriptions form the basis for the narrative, archival quotations, service chronology, and discussion of the pension controversy. Original manuscript images should be consulted to resolve ambiguous wording, inconsistent dates, and administrative notations.
Historical Research Note
Identity: This biography concerns Jonathan Hunnewell, a Boston-born mason artificer who served the American military establishment during the Revolutionary War and later lived in Roxbury, Massachusetts. His pension file is preserved under National Archives Identifier 54961930.
Birth: Hunnewell was eighty-two years old in October 1841, suggesting a birth approximately 1758–1759. His exact birth date has not been verified.
Family: Richard Hunnewell is established as Jonathan’s father. Frances Hunnewell is identified in court records as his only surviving child. George Hunnewell appears in the same artificer company, but his exact relationship to Jonathan remains unverified.
Military specialty: Hunnewell served as a mason artificer rather than primarily as an infantryman. His duties involved construction of military facilities, including barracks and magazines.
Initial enlistment: Hunnewell personally reported entering Captain William Ethridge’s company in November 1775. The surviving state accounts examined chiefly document the later period under Richard Hunnewell.
Dorchester Heights: Hunnewell’s sworn testimony specifically describes marching with approximately thirty artificers to Dorchester Heights on March 11, 1776, and remaining until March 14. This is personally reported participation, not independently verified by a contemporary muster roll for those exact days.
Reported casualties: Hunnewell recalled British fire and deaths along the route to Dorchester. The original testimony should be compared with contemporary military reports before treating this description as independently verified.
Service duration: Massachusetts military accounts credited Hunnewell with thirty-one months between January 1777 and July 1779. Other testimony describes a three-year enlistment beginning earlier. These statements should not be silently combined into a single precisely documented enlistment period.
Military status controversy: Pension officials questioned whether Hunnewell had served under a civilian contract. Hunnewell argued that he was regularly enlisted, subject to military discipline, and obligated to serve for three years. The dispute was central to his pension case.
Military discipline: Hunnewell clarified an earlier statement that appeared to deny military discipline. He explained that the artificers lived in barracks, received rations, followed orders, and faced consequences for leaving without permission.
Original records: State military accounts, wage-depreciation settlements, and sworn testimony from Samuel Dow and Peter Mackintosh provide evidence supporting Hunnewell’s service in Richard Hunnewell’s company.
Pension: His original claim encountered rejection and appeals. Later records identify an allowance of $144 annually for two years of service, effective March 4, 1831, and ending at his death. Administrative entries contain inconsistent certificate dates and references to other amounts, requiring further examination of the original pension file.
Death: A court certification establishes April 3, 1842, as Hunnewell’s death date.
Burial: His burial location has not been established from the pension transcriptions examined.
Public office: An 1841 correspondent stated that Hunnewell served in the Massachusetts legislature for twenty-three successive years. This claim has not been independently verified against legislative records.
Portrait: The accompanying portrait is a modern artistic interpretation created for The Yost Post. It is not an authenticated likeness of Jonathan Hunnewell and should not be understood as evidence of his actual appearance, clothing, uniform, or military equipment.
Research status: This biography is based on the supplied National Archives pension-file transcriptions. Direct quotations have not been independently verified against every manuscript image. Additional research in Massachusetts legislative records, Revolutionary War artificer rolls, quartermaster accounts, Boston and Roxbury vital records, and cemetery registers may clarify his military service, public career, family, and burial.