William Dawes
American militiaman (1745-1799)
William Dawes Jr. (April 6, 1745 – February 25, 1799) was an American soldier, and was one of several men who, in April 1775, alerted minutemen in Massachusetts of the approach of British regulars prior to the Battles of Lexington and Concord at the outset of the American Revolution. Dawes' role in this action – as well of that of Samuel Prescott – has long been overshadowed by the attention given to Paul Revere.
Childhood
Dawes was born in Boston, Province of Massachusetts Bay, on April 6, 1745, to William and Lydia Dawes (née Boone), and baptized at Boston's Old South Church. He became a tanner and was active in Boston's militia. On May 3, 1768, Dawes married Mehitable May, the daughter of Samuel and Catherine May (née Mears). The Boston Gazette noted that for his wedding, he wore a suit entirely made in North America. At the time, Whigs were trying to organize a boycott of British-made products in order to pressure the Parliament of Great Britain into repealing the Townshend Acts.
Role in Boston's militia
On April 8, 1768, Dawes was elected as a member of the Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company of Massachusetts. He was appointed as the company's second sergeant in 1770.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “William Dawes” is american militiaman (1745-1799). The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through William, Dawes and American, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “american militiaman (1745-1799)” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 23, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q2700750. VIAF identifies the subject as 13648387. The Library of Congress control number is n82020019. 3 of 3 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1745, 1799, 1775 and 1768.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “William Dawes”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow William Dawes primary sources, William Dawes archive and William research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “William Dawes”?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “William Dawes” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.