Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
American Revolution Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: October 7, 1780
longrifle    10/8/2006 5:50:32 PM
Sharpshooting backwoodsmen from the southern Appalachian region met and killed a highland officer named Patrick Ferguson, and many of his loyalist militia, at Kings Mountian, South Carolina. Ferguson commanded about 1000 loyalist militia. Many of them were from the North Carolina low country and decendents of highland Scots. The patriot forces numbered around 900. Most of them were from western North Carolina/eastern Tennessee high country and were decendents of Ulster Scots or "Scotch-Arsh" as they typically called themselves. During the course of the battle Ferguson launched three bayonet attacks against the backwoodsmen. In each case the patriots fell back, they had longrifles without bayonets, but returned to the base of the hill and resumed accurate shooting after the bayonet attacks spent themselves. Most of the loyalists surrendered when Ferguson was killed by rifle fire.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
CJH       10/13/2006 5:04:11 PM
I have read that this battle led to the turning point in the war in the south. Evidently, Kings Mountain delayed Cornwallis' advance towards Virginia and thus may be thought to have contributed materally to the outcome at Yorktown.
 
 
Quote    Reply

CJH    Battles of Kings Mountain and of Cowpens   10/13/2006 5:10:48 PM
 
Quote    Reply

Carl S    Correct Me if I am Wrong Here   10/16/2006 3:42:58 PM
Looking at the maps it appears that the battles of Cowpens & Kings Mountain removed the small light force covering the inland flank of the main British column.  In each case the defeat of Ferguson & Tarleton opened the flank and rear of the British to to raids on the lines of communication.
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy       5/1/2007 1:08:10 PM
I don't mean any offence by this, as it is just a matter of curiosity - but what is with the whole "Patriots", and "Founding Father" thing?
 
It comes across (to me at least), as a popular attempt to reduce modern history into myth and legend.  It seems to be a form of propoganda of sorts through terminology, almost making the founding of America into a religious event.
 
Quote    Reply

longrifle       5/4/2007 5:54:10 AM

I don't mean any offence by this, as it is just a matter of curiosity - but what is with the whole "Patriots", and "Founding Father" thing?

 

It comes across (to me at least), as a popular attempt to reduce modern history into myth and legend.  It seems to be a form of propoganda of sorts through terminology, almost making the founding of America into a religious event.



This might be like asking why many Americans volunteered for Vietnam.  You won't get the same answer from every veteran.  I suspect if we could go back in time the same thing would hold true.

Generally speaking, a patriot is someone who loves and is loyal to their country.  But at the time of the American Revolution some Americans did not consider Great Britain to be their country or King George to be their King - even if all of Europe considered North America to be a British possession.  Then again, some did.  They were "loyalists," so to speak.  The two sides just had different ideas about people and place, kin and kind.

Taxation without representation was a big issue.  Some probably thought of it as a matter of principal.  Some were probably just pragmatic and thought it made economic sense.  I'm not saying one side was more "morally" right than the other.

Founding Fathers is a term used for the leadership of that era.  Here's a wikipedia definition:

Founding Fathers
are persons instrumental in the establishment of an institution, usually a political institution, especially those connected to the origination of its ideals. The term is most often used in more reverential treatments of national history.

Sure, there's always a little bit of an extra reverential attitude associated with the idea.  As there is with many institutions.  The British regimental system sort of does the same thing in a military sense, doesn't it?
 
Quote    Reply

ens. jack    Mythism   9/11/2007 1:01:36 PM
I would say that say that the patriots term is used to create a feeling of legend. How do you expect a person to care about there history if it was accomplished the exact same way as every other nation on earth? Terms like that have to be used otherwise people won't give a rip about there history.
 
Quote    Reply

CJH       9/23/2007 1:28:19 PM

I would say that say that the patriots term is used to create a feeling of legend. How do you expect a person to care about there history if it was accomplished the exact same way as every other nation on earth? Terms like that have to be used otherwise people won't give a rip about there history.


I don't believe such terms will make any difference with people who don't care about history anyway.
The issue which precipitated the war for independence was that so many colonists believed that the British government was witholding from them their legitimate rights as Englishmen and that it was determined to persist in doing so over their protests.
 
Many spoke and acted in a way which could be punished as treason against their king. They risked having their property seized and themselves being executed for what they thought was right. They were the patriots.
 
Today, our prominent people would simply sell the country out to keep their wealth and position. Our present culture does not allow for understanding who these "Founding Fathers" and "patriots" were.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics