Talk:Battle of Charlotte

Result

When is a victory not a victory? When it is a "Patriot delaying action". The result was the occupation of Charlotte by the British. Clear enough? Humpster (talk) 07:52, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

What was Cornwallis feeling?

We don't know. Nor does any historian. "Sarcasm" is Wickwire's word. "Chided them" is own work.

The quotation from Cornwallis is the only neutral statement.

Pancake doesn't mention Cornwallis.

Tarleton doesn't mention Cornwallis either in describing the attack on Charlotte.

Buchanan, Page 189 has: 'One of those charges, probably the third, was prompted by Cornwallis. He had ridden to the van and was agitated by what he found: Webster's infantry doing the fighting and the fabled British Legion horse in disarray. He ordered them to advance once more. They did not move. He probably grew red in the face, for his Commissary General, Charles Stedman, who was present, reported that he shouted, “Legion, remember you have everything to lose, but nothing to gain.”' no sarcasm; "red in the face" is Buchanan's POV but only "probably".

So, to Stedman who says "The legion was ordered to drive them off; but, upon receiving a fire from behind the stalls, this corps fell back. Lord Cornwallis rode up in person, and made use of these words: 'Legion, remember you have every thing to lose, but nothing to gain.' alluding, as was supposed, to the former reputation of this corps. "

My conclusion is that "sarcastically" is the colourful language of one writer. Cornwallis shouted. That's all.

We can't interpret his statement, but I think it is clear that he wasn't happy. I believe that is what you're trying to get across. I considered a way to indicate that without going too far into assumptions about his feelings. "Concerned" is certain but I don't think it goes far enough. Finally, I came up with the word "perturbed" and have edited accordingly. I hope you find that compromise sufficient for a consensus. Humpster (talk) 22:31, 2 May 2025 (UTC)