4 ms·
This is the portrayal that is depicted in Turn originally on AMC. One thing that is overlooked by this article is the role of the British military culture. Th
by mattrp 7y ago
This is the portrayal that is depicted in Turn originally on AMC. One thing that is overlooked by this article is the role of the British military culture. They were immensely corrupt and happy to sit ensconced in New York with officer’s commissions while nearly bankrupting the English crown. A man like Arnold was not satisfied to simply beat them on the battlefield. And when they refused to come out to the battlefield, his contempt turned to jealousy of his British counterparts and hatred for his former revolutionary comrades. There’s no question he sought company in a wife and in laws who sympathized with the British because if he were to execute a supreme betrayal he would need solace and comfort at home. Ultimately what he wanted was the spoils of war and he went to any length to get it - so much so that his behavior disgusted even the corrupt British military. Arnold was no hero. He was simply a sociopath.
- burtonator 7y agoI was also reading that one of the reasons might have been his war wounds that were apparently agonizing him ... They probably reminded him constantly of the fact that he didn't get the promotions he expected. It's definitely an interesting case and we won't really ever now for certain what actually happened. Whether he was legitimately scoured by the congress or if he was just a sociopath expecting things he didn't deserve. ... I think the comparisons to Trump aren't valid though. At least Arnold was accomplished and competent. Trump is neither.
- thrower123 7y agoIt's worth remembering that the situation of the colonies was rather grim in 1780. Washington was locked in an extended stalemate around New York, struggling to keep morale up, supplies acquired, and his army from melting away. The British southern strategy was off to a smashing start, inflicting a series of bad defeats through the Carolinas. Then Gates, who Arnold hated and thought got the credit he deserved for Saratoga, was given command in the south, and immediately disgraced himself. There were also a whole series of other debacles around Newport, RI, and the disastrous Penobscot campaign. Not long after Arnold's defection, there were several major mutinies by formations of the Continental Army over extended enlistments, lack of pay and poor conditions. The whole situation was much more touch and go than it appears in hindsight.
- sushid 7y agoReading the Hamilton biography, I was shocked to learn just how low the morale was at Washington’s camp. When I learned this in AP US History, I understood it more as disgruntled soldiers grumbling about the lack of good food. Reading the book, I realize it was more like the men were on the cusp of an all out rebellion and it was really Washington’s carisma barely holding it together as the men starved and froze to death with over a year without pay. They also had to periodically execute the most vocal dissedents, which to me was very shocking.
- skybrian 7y agoThe whole era was immensely corrupt. You might try reading Edmund Morgan's American Slavery, American Freedom, which is a summary of one folly after another, even before getting to slavery. After going through all that, it's pretty amazing anything good at all came out of colonial Virginia.