Loyalists in the Revolutionary War

[Riverkilt]

Most of my ancestors were rebels in the Revolutionary War, but I have a branch of Loyalists too. They were banished from Pownal, Vermont (Bennington County) and their lands were confiscated.

Apparently angered them enough to serve in the King's Royal Regiment of New York - Second Battalion and in the King's Loyal Americans/ Queen's Loyal Rangers.

I've done a lot of poking around and while there is much information on uniforms they wore, I've found no mention of tartans associated with either regiment. Makes sense since they were Americans fighting with the British.

Just wonder if I may have overlooked something our history experts know?

Kind of a reluctant question since I'd guess the most probable tartan would be the Black Watch - if any applied.

[Nick the DSM]

Only if it was a Highland regiment would they be wearing it as uniform. Even so, some of the Highland regiments wore trousers because of short supply.

[davidlpope]

The 84th Regiment of Foot, the Royal Highland Emigrants, is probably what you're looking for. It was a Loyalist regiment, raised in the Colonies. There is a reenactment organization that has done much research regarding their uniforms. Tartan, when it was worn, was the government sett.

[ThistleDown]

Just a question from a non-American, but Ron you said Makes sense since they were Americans fighting with the British.

Were they Americans at that stage of that civil war , or were they still colonials?

[hkjrb623]

The history records show that most Scottish immigrants of that era fought on the side of the British Empire. Scots were brought here prior and during the war as prisoners for various reasons, but mostly as debtors. I don't know anything about a tartan, just the usual British issue for that period. Good luck with your search.

[Sir William]

The history records show that most Scottish immigrants of that era fought on the side of the British Empire. Scots were brought here prior and during the war as prisoners for various reasons, but mostly as debtors. I don't know anything about a tartan, just the usual British issue for that period. Good luck with your search.

There were also a number of Highlanders in the Carolinas who were sent there after the '45. When the Revolution began they usually sided with the British. One theory is that having been defeated in the '15 and the '45, they decided to be on the winning side for once.

Lowlanders, most of whom came to the colonies as merchants, seemed to have been more split, with many on both sides of the argument.

On the other hand, most of the Ulster Scots, joined the rebels. They didn't like or use the more modern day term of Scots-Irish as the Irish were looked down upon even in the colonies.

[Red Stag]

The history records show that most Scottish immigrants of that era fought on the side of the British Empire. Scots were brought here prior and during the war as prisoners for various reasons, but mostly as debtors. I don't know anything about a tartan, just the usual British issue for that period. Good luck with your search.

A couple of towns over from where I live is the resting place of General William Maxwell, a Scot who fought for America. His brother was a Captain in the Revolution. My sixth great grandfather, Col. Joseph Beavers, is buried next to them.

[Tobus]

Just a question from a non-American, but Ron you said Makes sense since they were Americans fighting with the British.

Were they Americans at that stage of that civil war , or were they still colonials?

From the reading I've done of that period, many of the colonials referred to themselves as Americans. Whilst they may still have been British subjects, they did not enjoy the same rights and privileges of those across the pond in the mother country. By the time the Revolution occurred, they had developed their own unique culture and dialects. In many ways, they considered themselves as a different people - even the ones who may have still felt loyalty to the Crown. But yes, they were very much Americans (as distinctly separated from what later became a "citizen of the United States of America").

[creagdhubh]

From the reading I've done of that period, many of the colonials referred to themselves as Americans. Whilst they may still have been British subjects, they did not enjoy the same rights and privileges of those across the pond in the mother country. By the time the Revolution occurred, they had developed their own unique culture and dialects. In many ways, they considered themselves as a different people - even the ones who may have still felt loyalty to the Crown. But yes, they were very much Americans (as distinctly separated from what later became a "citizen of the United States of America").

Precisely, well said.

[MacBean]

Just a question from a non-American, but Ron you said Makes sense since they were Americans fighting with the British.

Were they Americans at that stage of that civil war , or were they still colonials?

The battles in South Carolina are indeed often referred to as a civil war in that both sides were mostly colonials.

As a point of interest, archeologists working in Valley Forge near my house have recently unearthed some buttons from the War of Independence with USA clearly stamped on the buttons, as per Washington's directives. I believe that this is the first use of the term USA. I wouldn't say from my reading that we thought of ourselves as British at all. The population was already of quite mixed origin.