Was and is the hatred towards Benedict Arnold justified?

**IlluminatiRex** · October 21, 2012, 04:54 PM

This is an interesting part of American History, the one who is now synonymous with the word "Traitor" and has entered our daily lexicon. Benedict Arnold.

Going to school right down the road from where he lived as a child and where his mother is buried (visited the grave once, it is quite a cool graveyard) I've always pondered whether or not the backlash towards him is justified.

I believe it is not justified. After all, we were not yet a full country, just colonies in a state of rebellion with a loose sense of unity. What was there other than a rebellion to be a traitor to? He was mad that credit was being taken from him, even though they were his actions and that he was being passed over for promotions, who instead went to people who had taken credit for his actions.

So I believe that the backlash that Benedict Arnold has gotten over the years is not justified, we can not change what his name and reaction to him has become, but we can change our perspective towards it.

**Pyrrhus the Molossian** · December 18, 2012, 07:19 PM

Well the fact is he was a traitor. The next fact was he did it for money not some change of heart. His wife was hugely expensive to maintain and the army pay was crap. Another point away from him was the fact the British didn't even trust him afterwards. So basically he betrayed his country, comrades, and friends to their enemy for cash to pay for his wife's favors.

**Black John** · December 18, 2012, 07:26 PM

The only good thing to come from Arnold was his boot!

**I WUB PUGS** · December 21, 2012, 05:25 PM

To be fair, without Arnold's gallantry at Saratoga making up for the abysmal leadership of Gates the Revolution may have been lost at there.

Its interesting how the failed British campaign of 1777 that Arnold was so pivotal in secured the West Point forts (even though they fell to Clinton) and then Arnold tried to sell it out later. Wouldn't make a very good movie today. A smart traitor would have sabotaged the war from the beginning.

I think Arnold is one of those guys you have to put an asterisk next to his name. Something like:

Benedict Arnold. Arguably one of the finest commanders in the Continental Army. Great Patriot whom the United States owes a debt for his gallant actions at Fort Stanwix and Saratoga. *Also a scoundrel and traitor.

**TheNasoRomaLost** · December 22, 2012, 11:31 PM

Originally Posted by Pyrrhus the Molossian

Well the fact is he was a traitor. The next fact was he did it for money not some change of heart. His wife was hugely expensive to maintain and the army pay was crap. Another point away from him was the fact the British didn't even trust him afterwards. So basically he betrayed his country, comrades, and friends to their enemy for cash to pay for his wife's favors.

That is a misconception. His wife was a loyalist and easily arranged for friends of hers to arrange the change of sides. Arnold's change of heart happened when Washington reprimanded him. He did however live the rest of his life under a cloud.

**TheDarkKnight** · December 22, 2012, 11:35 PM

Unless I'm mistaken, I believe his colleagues on the British side never really trusted him either...Which to be perfectly honest is justified.

I believe the reason he is so vilified was because he was by definition an American hero, who betrayed the people he was fighting for. If he had just been another high ranking American it probably wouldn't be a big deal, but because it was the "Hero of Saratoga" it stung.

**Lord Oda Nobunaga** · January 05, 2013, 10:21 PM

Why did Washington reprimand Arnold?

I think calling Arnold a traitor is like saying that the United States was actually a country back then.
The Americans can be considered traitors, so Benedict Arnold is betraying British traitors.

**torongill** · January 06, 2013, 11:37 AM

Originally Posted by Gen. Chris

Unless I'm mistaken, I believe his colleagues on the British side never really trusted him either...Which to be perfectly honest is justified.

I believe the reason he is so vilified was because he was by definition an American hero, who betrayed the people he was fighting for. If he had just been another high ranking American it probably wouldn't be a big deal, but because it was the "Hero of Saratoga" it stung.

Emm, he was by definition and action an All-American hero, but IIRC was passed over for promotion time and again and others took credit for his accomplishments due to better connections. Enough to cause someone change sides? On its own maybe not, but throw in his wife and it reaches critical mass.

Compare this to Paul Revere, the most famous of the forty messengers sent to announce that "The Redcoats are coming out" after stopping at an inn for a drink. Apparently the cause of liberty wasn't that important to postpone the burning need for a pint(considering the quality of American beer, you begin to wonder just how important was the cause of liberty for that guy). Aand then he was captured by the British. And didn't finish his ride. But still, the guy's a hero, right? Longfellow says so!

Oh and then he caused the greatest naval debacle in US history until Pearl Harbor, but let's not dawdle on details.

**Lord Oda Nobunaga** · January 07, 2013, 07:40 PM

Oh Penobscot.

**MariusHealth** · January 19, 2013, 03:48 PM

So first he betrays king and country and then he betrays his fellow traitors? What does that make him - an arch traitor?

Seriously though, he does seem rather opportunistic.

**Roma_Victrix** · January 20, 2013, 04:54 AM

Is there an existing portrait of his wife? I've never seen one (then again, I've never bothered to look). I'll only be willing to forgive the hero of Saratoga postmortem if his wife was super, super hot.

**torongill** · January 20, 2013, 05:35 AM

if we accept that the little girl in the portrait is five, then Peggy's age was 30 and by that time she had given birth to six children.

**Roma_Victrix** · January 20, 2013, 12:32 PM

Hmm. Not so bad for popping out six kids. Alright, screw it, I forgive him.

**torongill** · January 20, 2013, 02:19 PM

yeah, MILF for shoo

**NRohirrim** · January 22, 2013, 02:53 AM

Originally Posted by bdd458

I believe it is not justified. After all, we were not yet a full country, just colonies in a state of rebellion with a loose sense of unity. What was there other than a rebellion to be a traitor to? He was mad that credit was being taken from him, even though they were his actions and that he was being passed over for promotions, who instead went to people who had taken credit for his actions.

Not really. Benedict Arnold's betrayal happened in 1780. And the colonies had declared independence before that in 1776.

So I believe that the backlash that Benedict Arnold has gotten over the years is not justified, we can not change what his name and reaction to him has become, but we can change our perspective towards it.

Is it worthy? There are plenty other generals and soldiers deserve to honor.

**Col. Tartleton** · January 23, 2013, 01:06 PM

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, you won't get fooled again.

He betrayed Britain, then he betrayed betraying Britain.

His bad choice was being on our side in the first place, not betraying the Americans. That worked out pretty well.

The revolution was justified, but being loyalist wasn't exactly damning to one's character. George III's government was discourteous, not evil.

**Roma_Victrix** · January 24, 2013, 02:30 AM

The revolution was justified, but being loyalist wasn't exactly damning to one's character. George III's government was discourteous, not evil.

It's okay to be partisan, so long as you acknowledge the other side is just that. I suddenly recall reading about the wives of American revolutionists and loyalists getting together to have tea in controlled comfortable settings even as the war was raging on.

**Merchant of Venice** · January 28, 2013, 02:50 AM

I don't think the backlash against is justified. Yes what he did could of put the whole revolution in great peril but without him it would already be gone. It is easy for us to hate on him while we are in a state of peace, but war is very much a different monster. He was mad at being over looked for countless promotions and having credit taken away from him. It is even possible that he was a better battle commander than George Washington(even though all Americans will discrad this idea). Washington was not a great battle commander, but what made him great was is political skills. Benedict Arnold was a good commander who definitely deserved the promotions he never got. I definitely find it ironic that he was never trusted after his defection. "Once a traitor, always a traitor!"

**╬Ritterbruder╬** · February 02, 2013, 07:20 AM

I've always found it fascinating how the leaders of the American revolution have been able to remain so gloryfied.
From what you hear and read about people like Benjamin Franklin and George Washington: they look like nearly-divine people with unmatched intellegence and enourmess political insight.
For me the American Revolutionary war is just a war where one political unity disagrees with another, not a struggle between good and evil