Talk:Battle of Paoli

Bias?

Though the first sentence clearly explains that the title "massacre" was bestowed by Americans, does anyone else think that the title represents a clear anti-British bias that may cause misconceptions about what really happened? --queso man 18:30, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I am going to say that if the Americans suffered over 200 casualties and the British suffered only a half dozen that it is not "biased" to leave Massacre in the title.108.52.237.79 (talk) 02:51, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Do we know what the British call this battle? Whatever is decided here, it would also apply to the Baylor Massacre. That article is flagged with {{Globalize/USA}} because of the name issue and because all of the sources used to write the article were from the American side. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 20:30, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I would like to propose renaming this article to Battle of Paoli and tag the secondary names (Paoli Massacre and Battle of Paoli Tavern in the first sentences as AKAs, and also setup as redirects. Alphageekpa 10:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Rename done. Will work on migrating references to old, to avoid redirects. Alphageekpa 12:32, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I am not clear why "Battle of Paoli" is favoured over " Battle of Paoli Tavern." Despite common usage, there is no place called Paoli and indeed, no longer any Paoli Tavern to explain the reference. Would it not be more appropriate to use the correct geographical reference used at the time and tag the abbreviated "Battle of Paoli" as a secondary?JF42 (talk) 08:09, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

I am unclear why you would say their is no place called Paoli since I grew up there. The British were encamped there prior to the attack. Malvern is the area the site is in now, but if the reason it was named for the tavern then that should be its name.108.52.237.79 (talk) 02:51, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Light Companies

The light companies of the other two British regiments may well have been "attached to" the 2nd Light Inf. for the purposes of this attack, but that would not truly make them "part of" it.

Terry J. Carter (talk) 21:52, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

In that sense, nobody was truly "part of" the 2nd Light Infantry but in fact everybody was "attached". The wording of the article has been changed now but perhaps it is worth pointing out The 1st and 2nd Light Infantry battalions with Howe's army were composite units created in North America from light infantry companies detached from their parent regiments and brigaded together to form 'flank battalions.' Originally there had been up to four such LI battalions as well as four grenadier battalions formed on the same basis. By the time of Howe's campaign in Pennsylvania these had been reduced to two each. In November 1778, they were reduced to one LI and one Grenadier battalion, though by Yorktown the number had increased to two again with ad hoc Light battalions being formed in Georgia and the Carolinas. While command, discipline and logistical supply was the responsibility of the composite battalion, the component companies, in theory at least, relied on their parent regiments for manpower, pay and replacement of uniforms and equipment. JF42 (talk) 01:51, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

British casualties

As of today, 22 November 2009, the article indicates that the British incurred nine casualties, including five wounded. The partial list of casualties of the Battle of Paoli provided by Independence Hall Association indicates at least eight British wounded. What is the source of the figure of "5 wounded"? –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 01:36, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Red Feathers

"To show their defiance, the Light Companies of the 46th and 49th Foot, who were both part of the 2nd Light Infantry, dyed their hat feathers red so the Americans would be able to identify them."

This is a tradition for which there is no contemporary evidence, nor is there any evidence for the next fifty-six years that a red light company feather had either been adopted by or authorised for either of these regiments, although company feathers were only recognised officially in 1800. In 1833, on their return from India the 46th Regt were asked by the Adjutant General, why their Light Company were wearing red cap distinctions as opposed to the regulation green for Light Infantry. Their answer has not survived but it was presumably the basis of the account recorded in an official regimental history published eighteen years later,A Historical Record of the Forty-Sixth Regiment by Richard Cannon. This brought to the public's attention the story of red feathers being adopted after Paoli by the men of the 2nd Light Infantry Battalion, including the light infantrymen of the 46th and 49th Regts. In 1858 Light Companies in infantry regiments were abolished and thenceforth the 46th and their successors, through numerous amalgamations, commemorated the Paoli action with a red headress distinction for all ranks until 2006, although since the late 19th century it had tended to be associated more in the popular imagination with the battle of Brandywine Creek.

The 49th Regiment did not claim a tradition of wearing red feathers after the American war but ca.1842 a 'Digest of Service', compiled to replace lost Regimental records, made garbled reference to their light company being ordered to wear a red feather during the AWI. It was not until 1934 that the Royal Berkshire Regt, inheritor of the 49th Regt's traditions, was granted the right to wear a red distinction in their head dress. No doubt influenced by the way the 46th tradition had mutated, this was expressly "to commemorate the part played by the light company of the 49th Regt at Brandywine Creek", although an accompanying narrative in the Regimental magazine shows the action at Paoli Tavern had not been forgotten although it was not named. Thenceforth the Royal Berkshires and their descendants wore the 'Brandywine distinction' or 'Brandywine Flash' in their headress until 2006. There is no clear explanation why out of thirteen regiments represented in the 2nd L.I. Bn, these two regiments alone ended up commemorating the Paoli Tavern action in this way. The 'red hackle' of the Black Watch (42nd Royal Highland Regt) has also been dated to this period by one problematic source but never associated with Paoli or the 'red feather tradition of the 46th and 49th Regts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JF42 (talk • contribs) 12:59, 14 April 2010 (UTC) --JF42 (talk) 13:03, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

The General Paoli Tavern is located in Paoli.

"At 10 p.m. on September 20, British commander Major General Charles Grey marched from the British camp, and launched a surprise attack on Wayne's camp, near the General Paoli Tavern, from which the battle takes its name, located near present-day Malvern."

The battle took place in Malvern or in Paoli or somewhere else. Can't it be more closely located than near Malvern.

Nitpyck (talk) 17:08, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

'No-flints' Grey

"To ensure that the Americans were not alerted, Grey had the flints removed from his troops’ muskets"

This anecdote is part of the folk-lore that has grown up around the battle.

As reported by Major John Andre, General Grey ordered that the troops should attack with unloaded muskets, or, in the case where the loads could not be drawn, that flints should be removed from the weapons.

JF42 (talk) 10:38, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Confusion Over Text

In the opening paragraph it reads:

"Although there were relatively few American casualties, claims were made that the British took no prisoners and granted no quarter,"

However later in the article it mentions over American 200 casualties, and only nine British ones. Does it not stand to reason thet the first descriptor was a misprint and meant to read - "Although there were relatively few BRITISH casualties, claims were made that the British took no prisoners and granted no quarter,"?108.52.237.79 (talk) 02:57, 9 January 2020 (UTC)