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.

[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").

[Sir William]

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.

I've been studying American Loyalists for years. Most Loyalist units wore British style uniforms: Either a red or green coat, with white wesket and breeches. Late in the war most changed to a red coat except for a few like the Queen's Rangers and Butler's Rangers.

The only tartan clad Loyalist units I'm aware of were the 84th Royal Highland Emigrants and the North Carolina Highlanders. Little is known about the latter but it appears they wore tartan acquired from the 71st Highlanders (Fraser's) with a short blue jacket (or sleeved wesket).

Some Loyalists also joined existing British regiments but I'm not aware of any Loyalists joining Highland regiments such as the 42nd or 71st. Not saying it didn't happen, I just haven't seen any references.

Highland regiments serving in North America wore tartan during the early stages of the war but transitioned into trousers which were better suited to campaigning. Trousers were made from old tents and their great kilts (these were not trews, but a looser fitting garment).

Some Loyalists considered themselves British, especially those who came from the old country, while others thought of themselves as Americans or British Americans, recognizing that they were part of a newly emerging culture. However, most colonists on both sides viewed themselves as Virginians, New Yorkers, Pennsylvanians, Carolinians, etc. The idea of being an "American" grew as the war dragged on.

Many even agreed with their rebellious neighbors and relatives concerning their mistreatment, but they disagreed on how to go about resolving the dispute with Government. There are hundreds of books and articles on the causes of the Revolution (and it seems that these causes varied according to the region or colony) so it would be difficult to neatly wrap up why some rebelled against the Crown and others fought for it, while yet many others ran away (to Canada, Britain, or even the western frontier) to get away from it all.

[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.

[Riverkilt]

This particular branch of my family tree was settled in Pownal, VT in the very S.W. Corner of Vermont. History I've found says the town was split over this "Civil War" The folks who supported the Empire were driven out of town and their lands were confiscated. They went north to Quebec and resettled around Philipsburg, just over the border.

One branch of this bit of family was Palatine German, the other English by ancestry. So no Scots until they intermarried into one of my Scot lines after the war.

Their units were specifically the Kings Royal Regiment of New York 2nd Battalion and the Kings Loyal Americans/ later the Queens Loyal Rangers. I believe both were formed from American colonists who stayed loyal to the King rather than rebel.

Didn't expect any tartan, unless maybe some higher level of command over them had one. Just double checking.

Thanks for all the feedback.

In a bit of famiy irony....the next generation settled very near the border on what they thought was the Canadian side. Considered themselves Canadians from Quebec. When the border was resurveyed turned out they were actually on the American side of the newly surveyed border.

[macwilkin]

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.

Also, religious and political differences; Highlanders were largely Episcopalian and Roman Catholic, which put them at odds against their Ulster-Scottish Protestant neighbors. Duane Meyer, in his Highland Scots of North Carolina, also notes that ex-Jacobites tended to be monarchists in their leanings, and the ideas put forth by their Ulster-Scots neighbors didn't tend to hold water with them -- any king, even one of the Georges, was better than none at all.

Spot on, Sir William, in both your posts.

T.