John Trumbull: The death of General Warren at the Battle of Bunker Hill (1786)

            John Trumbull was an Adjutant serving the 1^st Connecticut regiment during the American Revolutionary war. As an Adjutant his primary job was to serve as the personal assistant to the general, and as a result he only witnessed combat, never taking part in the fighting itself. (AmericanRevolution.org). But during his military campaign, he graphically documented the many of the battles and events of war. Best known for his painting of the “The Declaration of Independence,” Trumbull is also famed for paintings such as “The Battle of Trenton,” and “The death of General Warren at the Battle of Bunker Hill” (AmericanRevolution.org). Being an eyewitness at the battle of Bunker Hill, Trumbull tried to accurately and vividly summarize the key events of the battle, but at times produced a rosy picture of war. Despite the fact that Trumbull was on the American side of the war, in his painting, he depicts the battle from an almost “pro-British” perspective, clearly showing the British as the victors of the battle (AmericanRevolution.org). This does not show that he is a traitor, but instead that he is dedicated to the role of the artist: The depiction of the truth. The battle was described by soldiers: “And now ensued one of the greatest scenes of war that can be conceived” and as “The whole a picture and a complication of horror and importance beyond any thing that ever came to my lot to be witness to” (Burgoyne). But despite his intentions, Trumbull lacks in many areas as far as the truth of war is concerned and ends up showing war more idealistically than realistically. While he focuses on the honor and nobility of battling troops “showing respect” to one another, he ends up ignoring the chaos and sacrifice of war. Notice the harmony and balance present in the picture. The soldier in white holding the musket (middle left) is balanced by the soldier with the hat (far right). Also, the blue flag on the left seems to balance the British flag on the left. And lastly, the generals body is balanced by the dead infantryman in the foreground. Through his use of harmony, balance, and the theme of gentlemanly war, Trumbull depicts war as organized and chivalrous, making his image far from the stark reality of war.

In this oil painting, Trumbull uses “fluid brushstrokes” and “subtle glazes” painting much in the neoclassical manner of Jacques-Louis David (Columbia University Press). Expressing the determination and grit of the founders of the new American nation, Trumbull paints looks of Perseverance and dedication on the faces of the Americans. But on the other hand, if we look at the Red Coats complexions, they seem almost worried or frightened, especially in the face of Lord Rawdon (Center Right). The black smoke in the background almost sets a gloomy tone to the battle, one of despair. The main event of the painting can be seen a bit off center to the left, where the two men in white lay on the ground. American General Warren has just been wounded and is about to die, but to the left of him British Major Small is holding him in his arms, preventing a British soldier from bayoneting Warren's body (Wikipedia). This act of camaraderie shows that war at the time had not yet developed into “total war” or “modern warfare.” In this picture, we see the antique practice of gentlemanly conduct in the face of battle, something that will soon disappear as time progresses.

            At the end of this bloody battle, a total of 366 men had been killed (Wikipedia). To put that number in perspective, throughout the entire revolutionary war, a total of 7,200 men were killed (World Book). Compared to later casualty counts for war, this number would seem very small due to the fact that at the time, weapons were technologically inaccurate, unreliable, and inefficient. The primary infantry weapon used at the time was the flintlock musket which required 13 steps to load, malfunctioned in the rain, and a soldier could only fire one shot every twenty seconds (The Military Channel). The musket was also highly inaccurate due to the fact that it was uncommon to “rifle” the inside of a gun barrel at the time. Cannons had were also inefficient, requiring up to 14 men to operate, and fired very slowly due to the fact that the barrel had to be cleaned between each firing. (World Book) (Military Channel). Guns were so inefficient that in medium to close quarters, men would use their bayonets instead of firing their guns, a tactic that won the British this battle (Massachusetts Society of the Cincinnati). Due to a lack of decent weapons and technological advancement, the Battle of Bunker hill and the Revolutionary War as a whole, yielded relatively low casualties for both the British and Americans.