“Bloody Tarleton,” “Bloody Ban,” or “Tarleton’s Quarter” is how Banastre Tarleton is known, if known at all today. Movies like The Patriot, starring Mel Gibson, created a fictional Colonel Tavington loosely (very loosely) modeled on the real Banastre Tarleton. In the film, Tavington earned the epithets “Bloody Tarleton” and “Tarleton’s Quarter.”
In his War at Saber Point, John Knight seeks to set the record straight by giving a far more nuanced view of Tarleton and the British Legion.
Knight describes Tarleton as a libertine, a term rarely used today—libertine acts without moral restraint; a self-indulgent person.
The use of the term fits Tarelton (and other young gentlemen in Georgian London, p7) as he was a gambler with little restraint and a womanizer until late in his life after he married.
Tarleton’s mother, Jane, bailed him out of a gambling debt. She also purchased a commission for him in the 1stKing’s Own Dragoon Guards. The Horse Guards were dominated by aristocrats, which Tarleton was not. A commission purchase would have cost 1600 pounds, of which Tarleton received 800 from his mother.
On the outbreak of hostilities in the American colonies, British officers were allowed to volunteer their services in other units going to the colonies. Thus began a long association with Major General Charles Earl Cornwallis.
The British Army was well-trained and usually well-led but small, with many commitments. For this reason, George III turned to his German connections and hired Hessian, Brunswick, and other Germans for service in North America. These troops are usually described as “mercenaries,” but the only people that made money from them were the German princes who hired them out.
The British also came to depend on Loyalist units, called Tories, by the patriots or rebels, depending on your point of view.
The British sent two cavalry (light dragoons) to America, the 16th and 17th. Lieutenant Colonel William Harcourt was the commander of the 16th. Harcourt, a well-placed aristocrat, would sponsor Tarleton’s career (p.19).
Tarleton did not look down on Loyalists, as did many British officers: his charismatic personality and openness led to the formation of the British Legion in 1778.
A “legion” was a combined arms formation of cavalry: infantry and artillery. The British Legion originally consisted of four infantry companies and three troops of light dragoons. A Royal Artillery contingent would be assigned as necessary and available. Many soldiers who served in the British Legion were deserters from the patriot cause. This is not surprising given the divided loyalties of the time, where it was said 1\3 of the population favored the patriots, another 1\3 favored the crown, and the remaining 1\3 did not care one way or the other.
The use of cavalry in the American Revolution was quite limited, given the nature of the terrain and the expense of raising horse troops. The Americans raised four regiments of light dragoons, but they were tiny.
The British 16th Light Dragoons soon departed back to England, leaving the 17th Light Dragoons and British Legion’s Light Dragoons as the two major cavalry forces on the British side.
Under Tarleton’s leadership, the British Legion fought an action against the 2nd Continental Dragoons capturing its flag. (Chapter: Surrender You Dammed Rebel)
After the northern campaigns bogged down for the British, they turned their attention to the Southern Colonies, where thousands of Loyalists were believed to rally to the crown. In the south, the British Legion would gain fame and infamy.
My 1779, and the fall of Charleston to British forces, Tarleton already had a reputation for being an aggressive cavalry leader. Light Dragoons are not meant to be primarily battle cavalry in the sense of charging home with the saber. They are better suited to scouting, serving as pickets, foraging, escort duties, and skirmishing with their opposites.
While the British Legion horse indeed performed all those duties, under Tarleton, charging home with the saber was the norm rather than the exception.
Tarleton surprised a patriot camp at the Battle of Monck’s Corner by leading a saber charge straight into it. The American General Huger was careless and primarily responsible for the one-sided British victory. Accounts of atrocity followed the success, including sabering soldiers trying to surrender and rape. Contrary to American propaganda, Tarleton was outraged by the rapes, but a higher-up in the chain of command showed leniency to the culprits (pgs. 88-89).
The incidents at Monck’s Corner pale compared to what happened at the Battle of the Waxhaws.
A small force of patriot Virginians under Abraham Buford was on their way to Charleston when the city fell. Aware of this force, Tarleton was sent to destroy them, catching them in an area known as the Waxhaws (pgs. 95-07).
It was not much of a battle. Inexplicably, Buford ordered his men in line of battle to hold their fire until the British cavalry (British Legion and a contingent from the 17th Light Dragoons) were within 50 yards. This allowed for only one volley before the cavalry was upon them.
Predictably, the Virginians lost formation and fled as the dragoons broke through, sabering the fleeing soldiers and causing further panic.
The Americans lost about 260 killed and wounded compared to the British, losing 17 dead and injured. The lopsided ratio was not typical of a battle during this period, giving rise to accusations of atrocity and massacre.
But was it a massacre? Asks John Knight as he carefully unpacks the evidence from primary sources.
From the evidence presented, it was not a massacre in the sense of killing off soldiers trying to surrender or the wounded later. This is not to say things like that did not happen; it was, after all, a brutal civil war with plenty of opportunity for both sides to commit atrocities upon each other.
The Americans lost little time turning the debacle into a potential rallying point. Knight concludes the Battle of the Wxhaws like this:
But Waxhaws turned out to be a poisoned chalice. Although the battle had been a military disaster for the patriots, it galvanized rather than subdued resistance…” Remember Tarleton’s Quarter” became a rallying cry that provoked hundreds into the militia ranks (Pg. 103).
Tarleton and the British Legion would go on to more victories and more accusations until being stopped cold at the Battle of the Cowpens, where American General Daniel Morgan effectively used the militia and his few Continentals as Tarleton failed to appreciate the chosen ground of the Americans.
I have read War at Saber Point twice, relishing the detail in this great book. Knight’s research and use of primary sources make the book a gem. His writing style simply adds to the enjoyment.
Fittingly, I picked the book up at a South Carolina bookstore where Tarleton gained his fame and infamy.
History and Hobbies 
Billy Mitchell was Right (and still is).
I grew up in West Allis Wisconsin-a suburb of Milwaukee.
There was parkway and a well-to-do neighborhood (well-to-do in those days) near my school. Sometimes, rather than go right home after school, my friends and I would walk over to the parkway and imagine “playing army” or otherwise adventure around-all the things young boys would do in the early to mid 1960’s.
To get to the parkway we would travel through the well-to-do neighborhood and it was there that I first learned of General Billy Mitchell.
Mitchell was born in France, the son of John Mitchell, a US Senator from Wisconsin. John Mitchell was a lieutenant in the 24th Wisconsin Infantry Regiment during the American Civil War. He served alongside another resident of Wisconsin-Arthur MacArthur, the father of General Douglas MacArthur of World War Two and Korea fame.
John Mitchell owned an estate in Wisconsin, in the neighborhood we kids traveled through to get to the parkway. By the 1960’s it was not an estate and I think the only thing that was left was the mansion in the middle of the well-to-do neighborhood.
If memory serves me, there is plaque to Mitchell (at least there was) at the intersection of two roads in what was probably the midst of John Mitchell’s estate. Wisconsin clearly wanted to recognize Mitchell for his accomplishments. If you are familiar with Milwaukee you will recognize that the airport is named after Mitchell as well as least one park.
There is an excellent article about Mitchell on Wikipedia. The article will detail Mitchell’s remarkable record and the huge controversy that got Mitchell court-martialed.
Mitchell was an outspoken critic of the “Battleship clique” in the US Navy. During World War One, the battleship was still queen of the seas, whereas air power was in its infancy. As early as 1924 Mitchell began to argue that Japan could attack Hawaii with land based bomber aircraft. That was thought to be ridiculous given the distance, but also because air craft carriers were just being experimented with in 1924. Although some, like Mitchell, recognized the potential, few among the generals and admirals did.
Eventually, Mitchell went beyond being merely out spoken and became increasingly insubordinate-similar to an Old Testament prophet no one listens to. Mitchell was courtmartialed which at the time did not necessarily mean discharged. Mitchell did resign however and dedicated the rest of his life advocating for air power.
It’s interesting to note that later military tribunals said Mitchell’s views were vindicated but it did not matter since he violated the military code. This reminds me a little of Marine Lt. Colonel Stuart Scheller who resigned after publicly criticizing Biden’s unconscionable, bumbling withdrawal from Afghanistan which cost the lives of thirteen American service men and women. You have to wonder how many high ranking officers in the US Military agreed with Scheller but kept their mouths shut?
Mitchell died in 1936 and almost immediately his posthumous rehab began. Two battles in the early stages of WW2 vindicated Mitchell beyond the shadow of a doubt.
The first occurred in 1940 in the Mediterraen when British bi-plane torpedoe bombers flew from the HMS Illustrious (aircraft carrier) and torpedoed the Italian Fleet in Taranto Harbor. The British planes (obsolete Fairey Fulmars) did considerable damage to two Italian Battleships thus taking them out of the war for a considerable amount of time. If you see some similarities to Pearl Harbor you would be spot on.
At that point many realized that the days of the battleship were numbered because the Battle of Taranto did not involve any ship-to-ship action as all the damage was done by obsolete torpedo bombers.
The second “proof” occurred in early 1942 during the Fall of Singapore, which at the time was a British Colony and major base in the Pacific.
Following Pearl Harbor in late 1941 the Japanese invaded the Philippines as well as British possessions in the Pacific. The Battle for Singapore proved to be a disaster for the British as they were ill prepared like we were at Pearl Harbor.
The battleship Prince of Wales and battlecruiser Repulse (and four destroyers) were on station near Singapore. All were sunk by Japanese land based bombers, the British having little air power in Singapore to counter the bombers. What did they have were second rate fighters easily out classed by the Japanese Zero.
The sinking of the Prince of Wales and the Repulse was the final nail in the coffin of the battleship. Aircraft Carriers would become queen of the seas and land based bombers with long ranges would eventually devastate Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany.
Billy Mitchell would be promoted posthumously to Brigadier General for being right. Today, outside of Billy Mitchell Airport there is a B-25 Mitchell Bomber.
So, Billy Mitchell was right but he continues to be right.
I was never a particular fan of Donald Trump but I did recognize the soundness of some of his policies. Compare Trump to the current occupant of the White House and Trump looks like a genius.
Trump sought to establish Space Force probably a take off on President’s Reagan “Star Wars” initiative in the 1980’s that was so widely mocked. Space Force was established in 2019 and became the eighth uniformed service of the United States. I think Billy Mitchell would be at the forefront recognizing the potential.
(Footnote: The biggest threat to our national security is not Putin’s Russia although he is ambitious. The biggest threat to the United States is the CCP-Communist China. The CCP will eclipse the US economy and their technology is not far behind, if at all. Their plans are world domination. Any honest analyst gets that. Someone once said that generals and admirals tend to fight the last war during the current war. What that usually means is the military is slow to plan for the next war. Billy Mitchell was a prophet as he planned for the next war. I hope we learned something, but at present, I doubt it.)