Traitor Arnold’s Murdering Corps

Benedict Arnold’s Colonials captured an entire British army at Saratoga in Oct 1777, convincing France to militarily support the American cause. On Sep 6, 1781 the ex-Patriot officer Arnold, who four years earlier delivered the turning point of the Revolutionary War, overwhelmed his former counterparts in Connecticut. The final Redcoat victory of the war featured a Black Patriot bludgeoning a British officer to death, American wounded left baking in the sun, and resulted in a new nickname given by local residents: Traitor Arnold’s Murdering Corps.

Portrait of Benedict Arnold, Fort Griswold O.R.s (public domain)

When Continental Commander George Washington reprimanded Arnold after a court-martial in Dec 1779, the cranky Connecticut-born officer decided to give away West Point. Washington and his staff discovered the plot the following April, the Commander in Chief lamenting, “Arnold has betrayed me. Whom can we trust now?” Arnold received 6,000 pounds, a lifetime pension for his children, and the lasting enmity of Redcoats who blamed him for the death of their friend John Andre, executed for his involvement in Arnold’s plot. In Norwich, an American mob destroyed the gravestones of Arnold’s father and infant brother.(1)

After a middling campaign commanding British operations in Richmond that mostly involved burning tobacco warehouses, the-hated Brig. Gen. Arnold struggled to secure a meaningful command. With the meaningful theaters of war in New York and South Carolina by Sep 1781, British Gen. Henry Clinton dumped Arnold in the mouth of the Thames River outside New London. The Connecticut seaport provided safe harbor for American privateers who captured British merchant ships.(2)

Fort Griswold Battlefield State Park interpretive sign, author’s photo

Arnold’s fleet of 1700 landed on both sides of New London harbor the morning of Sep 6, splitting into columns. One quickly took Fort Trumbull at New London and another Fort Griswold at Groton after heavy resistance from 178 local militia. In the latter fight, militia claimed British forces bayoneted wounded Americans. Official records disagree, but both sides agree that Colonial wounded were left outside the fort in the sun while Redcoats were buried in the shade of parapets.

Fort Griswold diorama at Monument House Museum; top of photo is water-side, author’s photo

While Arnold’s column at New London set fire to the town’s ships and warehouses, British Col. Edmund Eyre’s column was driven back twice at Fort Griswold by Col. William Ledyard’s determined militia. In their third assault, Eyre’s Brits scaled ladders entering the fort and overwhelmed its defenders with 16-foot pikes used to board naval vessels in close combat.(3) Ex-slave Jordan Freeman speared British Maj. William Montgomery to death as an American prize, but the Colonials lost 145 killed and wounded (81.5% casualty rate). Freeman was himself afterwards killed by a bayonet thrust.(4)

Jordan Freeman Marker, author’s photo

Some Colonial narratives account for the lopsided casualty total with claims of a general massacre by the British. However, American Veteran Thomas Hertell’s account of 70 “badly wounded..Americans collected and laid side by side on their backs and brutally bayoneted” also includes this 1832 footnote: This account of Hertell contains many statements that are not in agreement with other accounts, but it serves to show the town talk of the time, and its recollections by him fifty-one years later.(5)

A reliable Colonial account, including correct details about American casualties being laid out on the sunny parade ground while the British were buried in shade outside the fort, does agree with one example of British atrocities. Wounded Americans were loaded into a wagon by a bumbling British burial party who then launched them down the hill from Fort Griswold. After coming into contact with an apple tree, the wagon ejected tens of Colonial militia, killing them from the shock.(6)

The hill sloping down from Fort Griswold where American wounded were ejected from a wagon, author’s photo

Benedict Arnold spent the evening dining at the house of a Loyalist friend in New London before his meal was interrupted by undisciplined British soldiers who burned the home after misinterpreting orders.(7) Though Arnold claimed in his after action report that British forces made every effort to prevent the “unfortunately destroyed” town from burning, the Connecticut Gazette reported that Arnold’s men rioted until residents had nothing but the clothes they were wearing.

Works Cited

Harris, William W. The Battle of Groton Heights: A Collection of Narratives, Official Reports, Records, Etc., of the Storming of Fort Griswold, the Massacre of Its Garrison, and the Burning of New London by British Troops Under the Command of Brig.-Gen. Benedict Arnold, on the Sixth of September, 1781

  • Brig Gen. Arnold’s Official Report to Sir Henry Clinton, Plum Island, Sept 8th, 1781
  • Narrative of George Middleton (1781)
  • Narrative of Thomas Hertell, New York (1832)

Powell, Walter L. (2004) Benedict Arnold, Revolutionary War Hero and Traitor.

Footnotes

  1. Powell, 2004, p. 90-91
  2. Powell, 2004, p. 92
  3. Arnold’s Official Report, p. 101
  4. Narrative of George Middleton, p. 91
  5. Narrative of Thomas Hertell, p. 73
  6. Middleton, p. 92
  7. Arnold’s O.R., p. 100

Honoring Enemies: Confederate statues and enemy memorialization abroad

Most of America’s Confederate statues were erected after Reconstruction, therefore critics view them as a white supremacist response to advances in civil rights. Beyond that, as memorials to a traitorous enemy. A longtime critic of Rebel statues myself, my arguments heavily relied on this talking point: What nation memorializes its enemies? It turns out some do. Let’s take a look at notable examples:

Cuba: Memorial to U.S. Soldiers Who Died at San Juan Hill

An unremarkable tomb behind iron bars in Santiago memorializes U.S. soldiers killed in the Cuban-Spanish-American War (official name in Cuba). Though the memorial may have been installed during U.S. occupation (1906-1909), Fidel Castro’s Communist regime and successors (1959-present) continue to display the tablet crediting the U.S. Army’s Second Division, Fifth Corps.

2019 photo of memorial to U.S. soldiers in Santiago, by John McAuliff, included with permission

The U.S. Second Division was responsible for attacking the Spanish outer line of defenses during the Battle of San Juan Hill, succeeding after a 10-hour battle on July 1, 1898 (p. 8 of link). The names and ranks of every U.S. soldier killed during those 10 hours are listed on the Santiago memorial, even though First Secretary Fidel Castro viewed the United States as an “imperialist Government..of genocide and decadence” that had colonized Cuba.

South Korea: Statue of Brothers

A war that killed 137,899 South Korean soldiers, up to 520,000 of their North Korean counterparts, and segregated Koreans into these separate classifications to this day, is commemorated in Seoul by the Statue of Brothers. The War Memorial of Korea’s signature statue promotes a reconciliation narrative between the divided peninsula similar to controversial narratives associated with Confederate statues in the United States.

Statue of Brothers, Nov 2005 photo by Danleo, Creative Commons 

While generally agreed upon in the U.S. that Civil War monuments incorporating themes of reconciliation between North and South are anachronistic, the Statue of Brothers ignores this logic. The 11-meter high statue depicts a Republic of Korea (South) soldier embracing his younger brother, a North Korean Army soldier. The brothers of the opposing nations embrace on the battlefield to “express reconciliation, love, and forgiveness” according to the monument’s translated text.

Mexico City National Cemetery

Since 1946 the federal government of Mexico has permitted the American Battle Monuments Commission to maintain the oldest known burial ground for fallen American servicemembers outside the United States. Mexico City National Cemetery contains the remains of 813 American servicemen, including 750 unidentified American dead from the Mexican-American War.

Known as Intervención estadounidense (United States intervention) or Invasión Yanqui in Mexico, the successful invasion was marred by American atrocities. While U.S. regular army soldiers conducted themselves in line with the Mexicans, U.S. volunteers regularly committed larceny, murder, and rape. If a Mexican civilian protested the theft of their possessions, like a blanket or livestock, U.S. volunteers routinely shot them. 

The army’s highest-ranking officer Gen. Winfield Scott wrote to the Secretary of War: “if a tenth of what is said is true, [the volunteers] have committed atrocities–horrors–in Mexico, sufficient to make Heaven weep, & every American, of Christian morals blush for his country.” Mexican newspaper Diario Del Gobierno lamented American soldiers having “sacked our homes, taken our daughters from their families…kicking over the body of Jesus Christ and getting drunk from our sacred chalices” concluding, “May they be damned by all Christians, as they are by God.” 

Despite these atrocities, for almost two centuries a country whose instability was aided by an American war of occupation has permitted a military cemetery in its capital containing the remains of that occupying force. As a result of the war, Mexico ceded California, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, most of Arizona and Colorado, and parts of Oklahoma, Kansas, and Wyoming to the U.S., cutting its territorial size in half.

Vietnam: John Sidney McCain Memorial

When U.S. Navy pilot John McCain parachuted into Truc Bach Lake in Hanoi after ejecting from a missile-downed A-4E Skyhawk on October 26, 1967, local residents angry over U.S. bombing campaigns dragged him from the wreckage, eventually memorializing the capture in a lakeside statue.

McCain Memorial on Truc Bach Lake in Hanoi, author’s photo April 2018

McCain, who traveled to Vietnam often as a U.S. senator to promote reconciliation between the former enemies, joked on one visit: “it’s always nice to check on the condition of my statue. It’s the only one I got.” The text of the monument initially contained the Vietnamese pejorative prefix Tên before McCain’s name, a classifier for despicable individuals such enemies, thieves, etc. 

Vietnamese has language classifiers that can be added or dropped before an individual’s name to show how the speaker feels towards the subject. In May 2015, the U.S. Ambassador to Vietnam brought McCain to view revised text on the monument, with the pejorative prefix replaced by phi cong, meaning pilot. The change was requested by Secretary of the Hanoi Party Committee Phạm Quang Nghị as a gesture of reconciliation between the two nations. 

In a further symbol of reconciliation, when McCain died in August 2018, 50 years after they pulled the Navy pilot out of Truc Bach Lake, Hanoi residents left flowers at his memorial. One man said, “He was among those Americans who support Vietnam the most in normalizing relations with the U.S.”

James Longstreet: a Confederate general whose racial views evolved

Maybe it’s irrelevant if other nations commemorate their enemies. Notwithstanding this talking point, the selection of Confederate statues was clearly political, lending credence to critics’ view of these monuments as a white supremacist response to advances in civil rights. Historian and Reconstruction expert Eric Foner writes in The New York Times that most Confederate monument building took place in the 1890s, with figures selected based on their association with the Confederacy’s Lost Cause idealization then taking shape.

“If the issue were simply heritage, why are there no statues of Lt. Gen. James Longstreet, one of Gen. Robert E. Lee’s key lieutenants? Not because of poor generalship; indeed, Longstreet warned Lee against undertaking Pickett’s Charge, which ended the battle of Gettysburg. Longstreet’s crime came after the Civil War: He endorsed black male suffrage and commanded the Metropolitan Police of New Orleans, which in 1874 engaged in armed combat with white supremacists seeking to seize control of the state government. Longstreet is not a symbol of white supremacy; therefore he was largely ineligible for commemoration by those who long controlled public memory in the South.”

Foner is correct that Longstreet is divisive among Confederate sympathizers due to his postwar support for Black rights and actions at the Battle of Liberty Place. But the renowned Civil War historian is incorrect in one way. A statue of Longstreet does exist, tucked away at Gettysburg National Military Park. And perhaps an appropriate middle ground can be found in its example.

James Longstreet statue at Gettysburg, photo by Judson McCraine (Creative Commons Attribution)

Unlike Robert E. Lee’s equestrian statue that towered over Monument Avenue in majority-Black Richmond or the Lee sculpture in Charlottesville that served as a white supremacist rallying point, at Gettysburg Longstreet is perched on a horse at ground level. Eye to eye with his countrymen, all of whom now enjoy equal protection of the law.

Author’s photo of graffitied Robert E. Lee statue behind barriers in Richmond, VA after summer 2020 protests. The statue was removed by the state on September 8, 2021 and donated to the Black History Museum and Cultural Center of Virginia. The traffic circle is now a patch of bare grass.

The Battle of Palo Duro Canyon: From emancipation to annihilation

Eagle-faced Army officer Robert Carter dedicated an American Indian Wars memoir to his commander Ranald Mackenzie, a fellow Civil War Vet who fended off Confederates attacking Washington D.C. in July 1864, helping save the nation’s capital at 23 years old.

Still soldiers as young men 10 years later in the Southwest, Capt. Carter credited Gen. Mackenzie’s command for doing “so much to make civilization possible on the borders of far Western Texas.”(1) At The Battle of Palo Duro Canyon, September 28, 1874, Mackenzie’s 4th U.S. Cavalry soundly defeated a larger force of Kiowa, Comanche, and Cheyenne warriors, opening the Southern Plains to white settlement.

The Red River War battle resulted when the Federal Government ordered all Southern Plains Indians to return to their reservation agencies by August 1, 1874.(2) 400 Federal cavalry successfully forced the holdout tribes onto reservations in a series of raids between June 1874-spring 1875, ending American Indian life in the canyons of West Texas.(3)

Palo Duro Canyon 25 miles SE of Amarillo, TX, author’s photo (unless otherwise specified

10 years after Capt. Carter and Gen. Mackenzie fought in the U.S. Army under the banner of emancipation, the soldiers of that same Federal Government completed a campaign Carter predicted would be one of “either driving these hostile Indians into their reservations or one of subjugation and annihilation.”(4)

Capt. Robert G. Carter’s grave at Arlington National Cemetery inscribed with thank you message for “attacks on hostile Indian camps”
Fighting ForceCommander(s)Size
CheyenneStone Calf, White Shield1500 across 3 tribes
ComancheMowway, Quanah, Isatai
KiowaLone Wolf (Guipago)
4th US Cav Southern ColumnCol. Ranald S. Mackenzie400 men in 8 companies

Holdout Tribes Strategy

Preferring the mesquite roots and ample game of Palo Duro Canyon over the thin soil and arid reservation region in Indian Territory (modern Oklahoma), bands of Southern Plains Indians attacked bison hunters and American travelers throughout summer 1874. “Determined to keep whites from their favorite hunting grounds”(5) the tribes angered the Bureau of Indian Affairs enough that the agency granted the Army permission to pursue Indians onto reservations.(6)

Visitor Center viewing station at sunrise, Palo Duro Canyon State Park

The holdout tribes sought to use defensive advantages offered by the 800-foot deep “Grand Canyon of Texas”(7) that now constitutes a sprawling state park 25 miles southeast of Amarillo. In 1874 there was a single route in and out of the canyon. The warriors hoped to lure Federal cavalry into a trap by concealing themselves behind rocks looming 800 feet above the canyon, then cut off a U.S. retreat. Though inferior in firepower to the Federals, the warriors were equipped with pistols and rifled muskets. Various leaders held command in the inter-tribal force but American primary documents most mention Lone Wolf. The sinewy 54 year-old Kiowa chief was a longtime Federal foe who could not be given any slack according to noted Indian fighter Phil Sheridan.

United States of America Strategy

A multiracial force of Black Seminole scouts, Tonkawa guides, and 400 cavalrymen of the 4th U.S. blitzed across the Texas panhandle in late summer 1874, fighting 14 engagements between August and November.(8) Aggressively using their permission from the Federal Government to pursue holdout tribes, the cavalrymen armed with Winchester repeating rifles embarked on a war of attrition. The Federals hoped to surprise warriors camping in villages along the Red River in Palo Duro Canyon, raid and destroy their camps, then beat a hasty retreat out of the canyon.

The Battle

At 4:00 AM, September 28, 1874, Tonkawa scouts uncovered a fresh trail to Palo Duro Canyon, and the 4th U.S. began advancing from the southeast after skirmishing with a vanguard of holdouts at Tule Canyon. Federal cavalry completed a single file descent down a narrow zigzag path into the canyon. Their use of this path previously occupied by buffaloes and ponies surprised the holdouts, setting the warriors in flight shortly after sunrise.

postwar illustration of 4th U.S. fighting Lone Wolf’s bands of hostile Kiowas, Deeds of Valor p. 162 (public domain)

4th U.S. Cavalry Company H, the raiding party, formed in line in the abandoned Indian camps and took inventory of their stock of 1,400 captured ponies. The company was soon fired upon by warriors using boulders as breastworks high above U.S. forces in the canyon. The Kiowa’s small arms fire briefly forced the Federals to fall back from their only exit out of the canyon around 12:00 PM. 

Around noon Gen. Mackenzie reported a movement of warriors attempting to block this exit. In a race to safety, Mackenzie’s 4th U.S., who covered 60 miles a day on campaign, reached the finish line first. Finding no warriors blocking their way, Cos. D, I, and K returned to the abandoned camps and traded small arms fire with scattered bands of warriors. The desultory fire had little effect, as the 4th U.S. suffered a single casualty compared to the warriors’ 60 killed. Accepting their grim situation, the Cheyenne, Comanche, and Kiowas left Palo Duro Canyon for good between 3:00-4:00 PM.(9)

Without horses and supplies, the Southern Plains Indians who had been in the canyon had little chance to escape the cold of the coming winter.(10) The Federals were content to let the warriors slip away since the cavalry regiment had accomplished their goal of forcing the holdout tribes off non-reservation land.

Aftermath

After marching overnight, the cavalrymen reached a Federal wagon supply train near Tule Canyon 70 miles southeast. The following morning, September 29, U.S. forces ate their first meal in two days then rounded up thousands of captured ponies into a canyon and shot them. Capt. Carter said “it seemed a pity…but there was no other alternative. It was the surest method of crippling the Indians and compelling them to…stay upon their reservations which they had fled from. Many were the best race ponies they had and many pesos had been waged upon them.”(11)

Gradually each holdout tribe accepted reservation life in Indian Territory. In February 1875, Lone Wolf led Kiowas to their reservation, was found guilty of rebellion, and sentenced to confinement in a military prison off the coast of Florida. A month later 1,600 Cheyennes reported back to their BIA agency. The last domino of American Indian life in West Texas fell in June 1875 when the final 400 holdouts returned to Fort Sill in modern Lawton, OK with 2,000+ horses.(12) According to military historians, in the end, “exhaustion, not defeat in battle, forced the tribes to accept reservation life.”(13)

South of the Kiowa Trail at Palo Duro Canyon State Park

Works Cited

Beyer, W. F. & Keydel, O. F. (1906). Deeds of Valor, Vol. 2. Detroit: Perrien-Keydel Company.

Bradford, J. C. (2003). Atlas of American Military History. Palgrave Macmillan. 

Carlton, P. H. (2003). The Buffalo Soldier Tragedy of 1877. Texas A&M University Press

Carter, R. G. (1935). On the Border with Mackenzie, or, Winning West Texas. Pickle Partners Publishing.

Hinckley, J. (2022) The Backroads of Route 66: Your Guide to Adventures and Scenic Detours. Motorbooks Publishing.

Endnotes

  1. Carter, 1935, p. 3
  2. Carlton, 2003, p. 43
  3. Hinckley, 2022, p. 103
  4. Carter, 1935, p. 755
  5. Carlton, 2003, p. 42
  6. Ibid, p. 43
  7. Hinckley, 2022, p. 102
  8. Carlton, 2003, p. 43
  9. Preceding 3 paragraphs summary of Carter, 1935, p. 779-788
  10. Carlton, 2003, p. 43
  11. Carter, 1935, p. 789
  12. Carlton, 2003, p. 43
  13. Bradford, 2003, p. 96