Talk:Battle of Tippecanoe - Misplaced Pages

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Cryptic (talk | contribs) at 17:18, 22 May 2024 (Reverted edits by 2A00:102A:401A:5D36:1:0:97F7:ED53 (talk) to last version by Cewbot). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

Revision as of 17:18, 22 May 2024 by Cryptic (talk | contribs) (Reverted edits by 2A00:102A:401A:5D36:1:0:97F7:ED53 (talk) to last version by Cewbot)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Battle of Tippecanoe article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 3 months

Battle of Tippecanoe is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Misplaced Pages community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 7, 2011.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 1, 2009	Good article nominee	Listed
March 27, 2009	WikiProject A-class review	Approved
April 4, 2009	Featured article candidate	Promoted
January 21, 2021	Featured article review	Kept
Facts from this article were featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on November 7, 2007, November 7, 2008, November 7, 2009, November 7, 2010, November 7, 2013, November 7, 2018, November 7, 2020, and November 7, 2022.
Current status: Featured article

This article is rated FA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: North America / United States

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

Associated task forces:
/
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Additional information:
/
	This article has passed an A-Class review.

United States: Indiana Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.

United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by WikiProject Indiana (assessed as High-importance).

Indigenous peoples of North America Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Pritzker Military Library Mid‑importance

	This article is related to the Pritzker Military Museum & Library WikiProject. Please copy assessments of the article from the most major WikiProject template to this one as needed.Pritzker Military LibraryWikipedia:GLAM/PritzkerTemplate:WikiProject Pritzker-GLAMPritzker Military Library-related
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

WP:URFA/2020

I have cleaned up a considerable mess of MOS:SANDWICH. Hog Farm might you have a look at this older FA in terms of WP:URFA/2020? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:30, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

I see some uncited text and a bunch of uncited notes. I think my War of 1812 books touch on this at least slightly, do I'll see what I can clean up after I get off work. If I can't, I'll see if another MILHIST editor can. This should be fixable without FAR. Hog Farm _Bacon 21:08, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
- After reading some of the old talk page comments, this might need spot checks. I'll try to dig out my copy of Langguth for verification. Hog Farm _Bacon 21:10, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Spot checks

"a second charge by the dragoons forced the Indians to flee" - Langguth only mentions one charge by the dragoons, possible WP:OR or WP:SYNTH comparing to other sources?
"The battle lasted about two hours and Harrison lost 62 men, with 37 killed in action and 25 mortally wounded; about 126 were less seriously hurt" - Don't know what Owens says, but Langguth says as least 62 dead, and 120 wounded, with no mention of two hours.
"The Yellow Jackets suffered the highest casualties of the battle, with 30-percent of their numbers killed or wounded. The number of Indian casualties is still the subject of debate, but it was certainly lower than that of the American forces. Historians estimate that as many as 50 were killed and about 70 to 80 were wounded." - Don't have Funk or Owens. Langguth doesn't mention any debate more than 50 slain, agrees with 70 to 80 wounded.
"Fearing Tecumseh's imminent return with reinforcements, Harrison ordered his men to fortify their camp with works for the rest of the day. As the sentries moved back out, they discovered and scalped the bodies of 36 warriors" - Langguth does not support the fortification after the battle part. Does mention scalping 36 dead warriors.
"The following day, November 8, Harrison sent a small group of men to inspect the Shawnee town and found it was deserted except for one elderly woman too sick to flee. The remainder of the defeated Natives had evacuated the village during the night. Harrison ordered his troops to spare the woman, but to burn down Prophetstown and destroy the Native Americans' cooking implements, without which the confederacy would be hard pressed to survive the winter. Everything of value was confiscated, including 5,000 bushels of corn and beans stored for winter" - Langguth does not say this was on November 8th. The relevant sentence is When they reached Prophetstown, they spared the life of one old woman who had been too sick to flee with the rest. So that only that one woman was there is only implied. The order to spare her is not attributed to Harrison. Cooking implements are not mentioned. Langguth says that the 5,000 bushels of corn and beans were burned, not confiscated.
"It is implied that Harrison feared the Native Americans would dig up his dead soldiers to avenge his men having desecrated the Prophetstown graveyard. (See: Cave, p. 122 and Langguth, p. 169)" - Don't know what Cave says, but not in Langguth that I can find. Langguth doesn't mention the burial of the American dead.
"Tecumseh's warriors made up nearly half of the British forces that captured Detroit from the United States in the War of 1812, and it was not until Tecumseh's death at the 1813 Battle of the Thames that his confederacy ceased to threaten the Americans" - This is cited to Langguth p. 214. I appear to have the same edition of Langguth as the article writer did, as it's also the 2006 edition at the p. 169 stuff matches up okay. p. 214 contains none of this information and is about the Battle of Queenston Heights.
"The remaining Yellow Jacket officers were Lieutenants Nuge and Klaus, but they were also shot and killed and the Yellow Jackets began to fall back from the main line, retreating with the sentinels. The Indians followed the retreating unit and entered the camp, but Colonel Bartholomew requested a detachment of 25 regular troops and led a bayonet charge which repulsed them. During that charge, Bartholomew was shot through the lower arm, breaking both bones, but he was still clutching his sword when he was treated hours later. He was later promoted to brigadier general in recognition of his leadership during the battle. The soldiers regrouped under the command of ensign John Tipton with the help of two reserve companies under the command of Captain Robb, and they sealed the breach in the line" - Cited to Owens, Funk, and Langguth. None of this is in Langguth.
" The Yellow Jacket company was posted on the southern end of the camp perimeter, with Captain Spier Spencer in command, and the rest of the militia established a rectangular formation along the edges of the bluff surrounding the camp. Lieutenant Colonel Joseph Bartholomew commanded the Indiana militia units guarding the steep bluff on the eastern side of the formation, and the regulars and dragoons were kept in reserve behind the main line, commanded by Major Floyd, Maj. Joseph Hamilton Daveiss, and former congressman Capt. Benjamin Parke" - Cited to Langguth and Owens, can't find any of this in Langguth.
"Most of the militia regiments had formed by mid-September and Harrison had returned, accompanied by a small force of army regulars, and he took command. He had already communicated with his superiors in Washington, D.C., and he was authorized to march against the confederacy in a show of force in the hopes that its members would accept peace" - Cited to Langguth p. 168 and Owens. Langguth p. 167 says that the secretary of war authorized him to make peace, but none of the rest of it is there.
"In August 1811, Tecumseh again met with Harrison at Vincennes, Indiana, and he assured Harrison that the Shawnee brothers meant to remain at peace with the United States" - Langguth mentions an August 1810 meeting between the two at Vincennes, and another one at an unspecified place and month in 1811.
"Tecumseh then traveled to the Southeast on a mission to recruit allies among the "Five Civilized Tribes". Most of the southern tribes rejected his appeals, but a faction of the Creek people answered his call to arms and became known as the Red Sticks. They led the Creek War, an internal war among factions that were divided over adoption of some American ways. This became a part of the War of 1812, as the Red Sticks opposed the United States" - Cited to Langguth and Owens. Can't really tell what exactly in this Langguth is suppose to support, as the Creek's aren't mention, and Tecumseh's 1811 trip that's mentioned is to Illinois Territory and Michigan Territory, neither of which were in the southeast.
"Harrison left the territory for business in Kentucky shortly after the meeting with Tecumseh, and secretary John Gibson was acting governor. Gibson had lived among the Miami tribe for many years and quickly learned of Tecumseh's plans for war. He immediately called out the territory's militia and sent emergency letters calling for the return of Harrison" Harrison going to Kentucky doesn't seem to be mentioned. Gibson is not mentioned at all.
"William Henry Harrison was appointed governor of the newly formed Indiana Territory in 1800, and he sought to secure title to the area for settlement. In particular, he hoped that the Indiana Territory would attract enough settlers to qualify for statehood. He negotiated numerous land cession treaties with American Indians, including the Treaty of Fort Wayne on September 30, 1809 in which Miami, Pottawatomie, Lenape, and other tribal leaders sold 3,000,000 acres (approximately 12,000 km2) to the United States." - Cited to Langguth and Owens. Don't know what Owens says. Langguth says Harrison served one term as a representative from Ohio Territory starting in 1799 before coming Indiana Territory governor, doesn't give an exact year. Mentions the 3,000,000 acre land sale, but only attributes it to Harrison and the Miami; doesn't specifically identify it with the Treaty of Fort Wayne. Doesn't mention the enough settlers bit.
"Tenskwatawa was known as the Prophet and had been leading a religious movement among the northwestern tribes, calling for a return to the ancestral ways. His brother Tecumseh was outraged by the Treaty of Fort Wayne, and he revived an idea advocated previously by Shawnee leader Blue Jacket and Mohawk leader Joseph Brant, which stated that Indian land was owned in common by all tribes, and land could not be sold without agreement by all the tribes" - Bit about the Prophet is okay. However, Brant and Blue Jacket are not associated by Langguth with Tecumseh's common ownership of land idea. In fact, a land sale to the US government opposed by Tecumseh is attributed to Blue Jacket. Don't know what Owens says.

SandyGeorgia - I have serious source-text integrity concerns based on this check of Langguth. We need to find someone who can access the other sources, particularly Owens, Funk, and Cave, because I have real concerns here. Hog Farm _Bacon 06:12, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Wow, thanks for the in-depth look. CJLippert is the best person I can think of to have a look here, but he is semi-active lately; hopefully he will log on and see this. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:08, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

SandyGeorgia - Do you think we ought to update this to a notice? Looking at the references, if we find someone with an Internet Archive login, they could check the Prophets of the Great Spirit source. But I wouldn't be surprised if there's errors there too, especially judging by all the old talk page messages on this page about refernece errors. Hog Farm _Bacon 18:03, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

I think that a three-week to one-month period of no engagement is probably adequate to update to "Noticed"; I will go do that now. (I was holding out hope that CJLippert would pop in.) Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:09, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Back in 2012, I noted above that this article was dubiously footnoted using false citations to weak sources. Looks like you're repeating that process. My bad, I should have done something else back then to save you some time. This article should have never been promoted to Featured because the "research" behind the footnotes was only simulated, not genuine. Can we save future effort by just demoting it? I'm no longer familiar with the process. Best wishes. —Kevin Myers 16:37, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Kevin Myers, we are each restricted to one nomination at WP:FAR per week, and Hog Farm and I are at that limit. Hog Farm raised concerns here on 30 November; per the wait period, you should be able to initiate a FAR, but you will need to follow the instructions at FAR-- let me know if you need help. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:43, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

I think most of what you are looking for is in Funk. I do have access to Funk, I would encourage you get that book, as it will address most of your concerns. Good luck! As to the quality of Funk as a source, I cannot speak. At the time I wrote the article I thought it was a reliable source. I would support rewriting the article with a better source than Funk. There are not a tremendous amount of sources available on this battle in great detail though. Funk was the most detailed I have had access to. It has been so long since I worked on this article, I have to confess I am not fresh on the sources. I am confident though that you will find support the content of the article in the sources. I think perhaps the issue is that Funk may not be a quality source. If you can suggest a way, I could scan the pages from Funk and share them with you for your review. I don't have time to dedicate to that myself though. —Charles Edward 17:34, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

I've got access to a couple other sources that give some info about the subject: Amateurs, to Arms by John Elting, and I think The War of 1812 by Donald R. Hickey includes some stuff. Rewriting this one may be a project of mine eventually. Hog Farm _Bacon 17:53, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Those sources won't get you very far, since they're tertiary and barely mention this battle. If you get serious about it, these are the ones you'd need: Jortner, The gods of Prophetstown: the Battle of Tippecanoe and the holy war for the American frontier, Edmunds's The Shawnee Prophet, Sugden's Tecumseh, Owens's Mr. Jefferson's Hammer, probably Winkler's Tippecanoe 1811. You could make a Featured article using those. Best wishes. Kevin1776 (talk) 18:24, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Out of my realm, then, most likely. My area of expertise is American Civil War. Battle of Caulk's Field is my only real significant effort from this time period. Hog Farm _Bacon 18:49, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Understandable. I'd love to do it as well but time is too damn limited. Kevin1776 (talk) 18:56, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

I might have some time to work on this a bit, I still own a few of the sources. The reason I liked Funk is because it was wrote by a local historian who was primarily writing about the Yellow Jackets (Indiana). He had access to their firsthand accounts of the battle and was related some of their stories. —Charles Edward 15:30, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Indiana counties named for American participants killed in battle

This article states: "A number of counties in Indiana were named for American soldiers killed in the battle: Bartholomew, Daveiss, Spencer, Tipton and Warrick." Actually, a quick check finds that Daveiss, Owen, Spencer, Warrick, and White Counties are named for personnel killed during the battle. Bartholomew, Dubois, Harrison, and Tipton counties are named for individuals who were in the battle but not killed nor even necessarily wounded. Col. Bartholomew was indeed wounded during the battle, but survived and later fought in the War of 1812, reaching the rank of Major General before ultimately dying in 1840. However, there is no evidence that Harrison, Tipton, or Dubois were even wounded. Of course, Harrison was more than just the commander at this battle, being the first territorial governor, a general during the War of 1812, and ultimately elected President of the United States - so not sure Harrison County was named for him solely for his role in this engagement. The same is true for John Tipton who was also important for other roles in Indiana history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:801:4280:A710:0:0:0:B25 (talk) 19:35, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Yes that's a good catch; I've reworded. Victoria (tk) 23:52, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Tippecanoe and Tyler Too

This article states: "he used the slogan 'Tippecanoe and Tyler Too' to remind people of his heroism during the battle." While possible, doubt that Harrison came up with or even personally used this slogan as this statement infers, suspect it would be more accurate to say the Whig party or Harrison supporters used it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:801:4280:A710:0:0:0:B25 (talk) 20:30, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Anther good point; thanks for posting it. I've reworded accordingly. Victoria (tk) 00:33, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Native Americans?

Would it be more correct to refer to “the Shawnee”, or even the equivalent in their language, rather than use a modern artificial name? Weren’t Americans the enemy? So would they have consider themselves to be native Americans? There don’t seem any Shawnee sources in the article to check. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 04:07, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Do we have a source for the composition of Prophetstown? I was under the impression that there were far more than Shawnee who resided there. The article Tecumseh's confederacy says that Tecumseh was popular among many different nations, but that doesn't mean that they all had people who moved to Prophetstown. Canute (talk) 16:20, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

You are correct. The peoples represented probably varied, depending on whether we consider the Confederacy, Prophetstown, or those actually involved in the battle. For example, I think there were Miamis in the battle, but they weren’t part of the Tecumseh’s Confederacy. Then there is the problem of endonyms and exonyms, plus transliterations etc. Indigenous seems to be the term accepted worldwide now, so perhaps Native Americans could be replaced with “indigenous peoples” and “indigenous warriors”. It doesn’t seem to be covered in the manual style; it should be.

As an aside, the article Order of Battle seems unbalanced to the point of insult. But I don’t have a solution. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 22:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Is there anything wrong with simply referring to them as Tecumseh's Confederacy, or the confederation? It's more of a political designation, rather than a racial one. Your original point is a good one; there were Native Americans who supported the United States, and we don't refer to the United States as the White Americans.

I've honestly never seen Tippecanoe order of battle until you mentioned it. I don't know how to fix it, either, unless we can find a good article about the peoples who were present. It's a difficulty we have with many articles like this one, unfortunately. Canute (talk) 19:56, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

There were various tribes involved if I remember correctly off the top of my head but I don't have the sources available at the moment. When I get a chance I'll revisit them. For now I've reworded here. RE Tippecanoe order of battle, not sure why we need that article. It might be a good idea to turn it into a redirect to here, but someone should raise it on talk there first. It only has two sources, one of which is very dated. Victoria (tk) 20:09, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

I have raised it. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 00:27, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

I added some additional info in the prelude section. Does that help? Canute (talk) 18:20, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

proposed deletion of order of battle article

I have suggested deletion on the talk page of the article “order of battle for Tippecanoe”. There is a document on the Internet archive containing all the information for those that want it. So it just needs to be mentioned explicitly in the article Battle of Tippecanoe: https://archive.org/details/DTIC_ADA350167/page/n135/mode/1up I can start the ball rolling but can’t take it any further. Thank you, editors, for your understanding of the issues. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 00:26, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Categories: