Talk:Banastre Tarleton - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Isomorphic (talk | contribs) at 14:01, 4 May 2021. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 14:01, 4 May 2021 by Isomorphic (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Politics of the United Kingdom Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Biography: Military / Peerage and Baronetage / Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the military biography work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Peerage and Baronetage.
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group.

Military history: Biography / British / European / Early Modern / American Revolution

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military biography task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	Early Modern warfare task force (c. 1500 – c. 1800)
	American Revolutionary War task force

Waxhaw Massacre

Isn't the claim that he fired on surrendering Continentals, rather than American loyalists (i.e. allied with the British), as it currently reads? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cwenger (talk • contribs) 17:34, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

"On May 29, 1780 Tarleton, with a force of 700, overtook a detachment of 350 Virginia Continentals led by Abraham Buford. Facing much larger numbers, Buford nevertheless refused to yield."pie

At the time, Tarleton led a force of 270 men: 130 Legion dragoons, 40 17th Light Dragoons, and 100 British Legion infantry (who rode with the dragoons). Of those, only about 150 British soldiers in an advance party were engaged in the massacre. The number 700 comes from a letter Tarleton sent with a Captain, in which he greatly exaggerated the size of his force in the hopes it would cause Buford to surrender. Buford's forces, at 350 to 380 men, greatly outnumbered Tarleton's.--Ryan! 02:39, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Article on Banastre Tarleton

appears to use the term "matriculated" when it should read "graduated."

TRushing208.27.203.124 23:18, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Church Massacre

The church massacre in the film was not based upon something the Nazi's did two hundred years later on another continent, but I contend is based upon and closely resembles an actual event during the American Revolution. It is based upon an infamous event where American militia under the command of Colonel David Williamson massacred the peaceful Moravian Indians at Gnadenhuetten in the fall of 1781. BradMajors 15:57, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Any cites for that having been the origin of the event in the film? Otherwise, it's just OR. --Orange Mike 16:05, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

To be fair, the current article does not have any cites that this event is based upon Oradour-sur-Glane. Yes, there do exist references which state this event is based upon Oradour-sur-Glane and other references which state it is based upon Gnadenhuetten. However, I believe this event more closely resembles Gnadenhuetten. There is currently no article in the Wiki on Gnadenhuetten, but I will eventually add one if no one else does. There do exist articles elsewhere on Gnadenhuetten. BradMajors 17:51, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages has an article on the Gnadenhutten massacre; you may have missed it because of the tricky spelling. In my opinion, the church atrocity in The Patriot doesn't closely resemble Gnadenhutten, where the victims were bludgeoned to death rather than burned alive. I would be surprised if the filmmakers of The Patriot ever heard of the Gnadenhutten massacre. Some film critics, like at salon, obviously felt that the scene resembled the Nazi atrocity, which is why we can report it here. Our own analysis of what the scene most closely resembles has no relevance on Misplaced Pages. Personally, I think it far more likely that the scene was simply borrowed from a nearly identical one in First Knight, because Hollywood hacks don't study history; they study other movies. But this is just my guess, and of course it cannot go in the article unless a reliable source has published the theory. —Kevin Myers 16:28, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I think it is important to point out that locking people inside a building and burning it has been used extensively for tyrannical military commanders in other works. This doesn't make them "Hollywood Hacks" necessarily. It is just a good way to make people look evil through symbolism (fire, imprisonment) and deed (massacre of innocents). Similar scenes are in Disney's Hunchback and the book Everything is Illuminated. 68.48.164.97 (talk) 15:36, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Well there are churches in South Carolina listed as having been burned during the Revolution. https://www.amazon.com/Churches-Carolina-Burned-American-Revolution/dp/1502305275 I don't know how long that link will work but it is an Amazon page for a book written by a pair of men who collected a list of churches burned during the Revolution in Southg Carolina. They contend there were no women burned in churches.

And there is Rebecca Motte who offered American soldiers the means to burn down her house when it was occupied by the British. Accounts vary as Misplaced Pages says her house was destroyed and other accounts that say the fire was extinguished by combined American and British soldiers after the Brits had surrendered.2600:1700:6D90:79B0:D88F:3FE6:8B17:FB6A (talk) 12:49, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Moving entire trivia section to talk

This article contains a list of miscellaneous information. Please relocate any relevant information into other sections or articles.

The Hollywood movie The Patriot (2000) portrayed a character (Colonel William Tavington played by Jason Isaacs) based on Tarleton as a cruel, sadistic commander who massacred prisoners of war and innocent civilians. Although the character in The Patriot dies during the American Revolution, the real life Tarleton did not. "Tavington" is shown burning an American church with the villagers locked inside, an atrocity based on an infamous Nazi war crime from World War II. This controversial portrayal prompted Edwin Clein, the mayor of Liverpool, to demand an apology from the filmmakers for what he regarded as a misrepresentation and vilification of a Liverpudlian hero.
Tarleton is also portrayed in the 2006 film Amazing Grace (played by Ciarán Hinds) as the main opponent in the British Parliament to the abolitionists, led by William Wilberforce.
Tarleton is additionally mentioned in the Bernard Cornwell novel Sharpe's Eagle, and is represented as being "related" to Sir Henry Simmerson, colonel of the South Essex Regiment.
Tarleton was portrayed as the primary nemesis of Francis Marion in the Disney Swamp Fox series, although the fictional Tarleton was a middle aged man rather than the young man the real Tarleton was. The dress of the dragoons was also incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.213.92.109 (talk) 05:01, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Toddst1 (talk) 11:44, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

"Tavington" and Tarleton

The character "William Tavington" in The Patriot most closely resembles Tarleton, in name and billet: but that character is a composite, incorporating other actions etc committed by or attributed to other notorious British and Loyalist officers in the Carolinas: Maj James Wemyss, Maj Patrick Ferguson, and Capt Christian Huck. The latter two were killed in action with rebel militia, Ferguson at King's Mountain and Huck at Brattonville.--Solicitr (talk) 20:40, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Francisco's Fight

I've edited the punctuation on this and left it in place for the moment, but is there any particular reason to mention this rather forgettable incident here? If it happened at all, it was a tiny skirmish, in which Tarleton was not materially involved. If anything is to be added, one might add a sentence on his participation in the battle at Gloucester Point, where he was unhorsed. Winterbadger (talk) 18:05, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Name pronunciation

Should we not mention how his first name is pronounced (stressed as in "canister" IIRC)?

Also, should we not mention that he gave the British army the "Tarleton" hat as worn by the Light Dragoons and Horse Artillery for the next 50-odd years?

Tirailleur (talk) 18:12, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

The first point, if it is uncontroversial, should be done in IPA. The second would need a reliable source linking the two, which is likely not hard to come by no? Sadads (talk) 19:32, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

The family (i.e. the descendants of his brother Thomas) pronounce the name Ba-NAH-ster. There is, however, ample contemporary evidence that he and those around him pronounced it BAN-is-ster. So, in that respect, it is controversial.Rannaro (talk) 21:21, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

War Disability (when, where?)

I have added at tail end of the section of his career during the American War the fact he lost two fingers in battle, mentioned in his article in the History of Parliament Online (volume for MPs who sat in period 1790-1820), quoting to its words it was "an electoral asset". If someone can put a more precise time and place for their loss they are welcome to do so, even if it means moving the reference to suit the chronology. Ciaran Hinds' portrayal of Tarleton in the film Amazing Grace is true to life in that respect.Cloptonson (talk) 15:55, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

I have located an account of the wounding in an online essay by Janie B. Cheaney, which I have used as citation. It occurred at the Battle of Guilford Courthouse, late in the war. For the moment I have decided to leave it where I put it rather than try to move it into the paragraph where the battle is summarily mentioned.Cloptonson (talk) 06:54, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Banastre Tarleton/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Good, could be GA with a few inlilne refs. Lampman 20:11, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Last edited at 20:11, 18 December 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 08:55, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Banastre Tarleton. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081217201035/http://www.rsar.org/military/sherm055.pdf to http://www.rsar.org/military/sherm055.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:59, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Banastre Tarleton. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:39, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

War crimes

User:Brough87 is disagreeing with the fact that part of Tarleton's actions were called "war crimes". He denies it, with as argument "How can one commit a war crime before the concept of war crime even existed?"

I disagree with that argument but do not want to start an editwar. Please give your opinions. The Banner talk 22:53, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

The idea that you hold historical figures to the standards of modern-day international law seems to be silly; the fact that hundreds of years have passed since the events occured adds further complexity to the matter. To assert that Banastre Tarleton is guilty of a war crime, not only means that you believe guilt is determined simply by accusation, but also that you are in favour of Ex post facto law. For the sake of your own editorial consistency, what other historical figures are you going to declare a war criminal? Saladin for his execution of Raynald of Châtillon when he was a prisoner (in breech of the Geneva convention)? What about Shah Ismail I for his various conflicts with the Ottomans? For the sake of WP's intellectual credibility, let us apply contemporary law to contemporary figures. Brough87 (talk) 00:07, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

The point about accusation vs proof is valid but the ex post facto argument is absurd. killing men who have surrendered has been understood to be wrong for millenia. Rape of women during war has earned prosecutorial attitudes for just as long a time.2600:1700:6D90:79B0:D88F:3FE6:8B17:FB6A (talk) 12:54, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:04, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Dragoon-illustration.jpeg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot (talk) 16:37, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Robert Bass biography

The lead mentions a biography of Tarleton by Robert Bass which refers to Tarleton as "butcher" and "Bloody ban," yet it should either be deleted, or made more clear that these nicknames were invented by Bass in the 20th century, and not attributed to Tarleton in his lifetime. I don't think the bias of someone writing a hundred eighty years later should be included in the articlePolkadreamer (talk) 17:32, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

I will again point out that the Robert Bass biography is laden with insults that are not historically accurate. This article should reflect facts on the subject(Tarleton), not latter day opinions from those who were not present or alive at the time.Polkadreamer (talk) 01:41, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Military service history

This article could use some loving attention from someone who understands the organization and practices of the British military in that era. There seem to be errors and inconsistencies and misleading statements that are rooted in a lack of this background.

I just corrected a bit of the promotion history - the article said he was “promoted” to brigade major, which is not a rank. The archived newspaper linked as the source for his promotion to captain shows that he was promoted directly from ensign to captain, skipping lieutenant. How unusual was that? Does it deserve comment?

The article says that he purchased his commission in 1775, then did not have to purchase higher commissions thanks to his abilities. However, I don’t think that’s correct, because purchase of ranks was abolished in 1771 in the Cardwell Reforms. Most likely, either he didn’t purchase his initial commission at all, or he was one of the very last to do so, and the reason he didn’t purchase his higher ranks was not his ability, it was that the system had been abolished. I’m not correcting the article because I don’t know which explanation is the case. Isomorphic (talk) 13:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

The Cardwell Reforms came in the late nineteenth century. The purchase system was alive and well in the American War of Independence and for almost a hundred years thereafter. Binabik80 (talk) 14:58, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

You are correct regarding his apparent jump in rank. The Gazette states that Cornet (not Ensign) Tarleton became a Captain. I don’t think it was unusual for an officer with money to pass through a rank on paper only. But there would still be a record.

Since he joined as a gentleman volunteer, it is possible that his rank prior to becoming captain was unofficial, but I am speculating. Someone needs to read the sources: British sources by British authors, to find facts, not smearing. Somewhere I saw a reference to him having kept a journal.

I propose one change: remove the qualification “Lieutenant” in parentheses. His rank was Cornet. While the modern equivalent would be Sub-Lieutenant, that is the subject of a different article.

As for the helmet, it is covered later in the article.

Humphrey Tribble (talk) 17:11, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I feel pretty silly about mixing up the 18th and 19th centuries.

I’ll defer to the judgment of others on the rank questions, I just wanted to flag that it needed attention. Isomorphic (talk) 14:01, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

The Legendary sexual assault

Previously, the article about Banastre Tarleton included a paragraph saying that “a soldier of the British Legion was involved in an attempted sexual assault that entered legend.” The diarist, Allaire, says only that a few women had been “abused”, and describes cuts and bruises. He does not say that the “villain” was a member of the British Legion or that this was a sexual assault. The word “legendary“ might be a clue that the incident is a popular myth that lacks authentication.

I have no doubt that something took place, but based on the diary cannot be sure of anything more than some women being roughed up by an unknown assailant, although his use of the word “plunderer” suggests the motive was theft. There is no firm connection with Banastre Tarleton or the British Legion. In fact, the apparent cordial relations between the women and the British soldiers leads me to think they were loyalists. If that were all, it couldn’t be ruled out that the assailant was a vengeful “rebel”. However, Allaire’s statement that Mrs. Fayssoux came to the (presumably) British camp to testify, and that the villain was sent to Headquarters for trial, indicates that the villain was probably serving in some capacity with the British forces.

Allaire says “... three ladies came to our camp in great distress: Lady Colleton, Miss Betsy Giles, and Miss Jean Russell. They had been most shockingly abused by a plundering villain. Lady Colleton badly cut in the hand by a broadsword,and bruised very much. After my friend, Dr. Johnson, dressed her hand, he, with an officer and twelve men, went to the plantation, about one mile from camp, to protect Mrs. Fayssoux, whom this infamous villain had likewise abused in the same manner. There he found a most accomplished, amiable lady in the greatest distress imaginable. After he took a little blood from her she was more composed, and next morning come to camp to testify against the cursed villain that abused them in this horrid manner. He was secured and sent to Headquarters for trial.

“My friend, Dr Johnson, and myself had the happiness of escorting the ladies to their plantation. Before we got there we were met by a servant informing us that there were more plunderers in the house. This news so shocked Lady Colleton and Mrs. Fayssoux, who were some distance before us, and the young ladies in a carriage, that I am not able to describe their melancholy situation, which was truly deplorable. After their fright was a little over we passed on to their house; but the ladies fearing to stay alone, Lady Colleton and Mrs. Fayssoux got into the carriage, Miss Giles behind me, and Miss Russell on a horse, which I led for fear he should make off with my fair one; they passed on with us four miles to a plantation called Mulberry Broughton, and here we bid adieu to our fair companions with great regret, they thinking themselves out of danger of any insults.”

By all means revert it if you can add information connecting the incident with Tarleton. If someone had been tried for the offence, there would be a record. Please also cite the source of the legend. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 07:29, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Categories: