# Talk:Cherry Valley massacre

I reverted multiple changes made by user:76.180.225.19, the de facto effect of which was to change the article from Cherry Valley massacre to Battle of Cherry Valley. The changes were accompanied by a request to have the actual title changed. The request was rejected by another editor, with a recommendation to bring the issue to this talk page. There may be a good case for the title change, but the issue should probably be discussed before all the related changes are applied. Fat&Happy (talk) 21:41, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

The use of the term massacre is not neutral and typically biased against Native Americans. Almost none of the military actions against the Native Americans are termed massacres yet the only thing the Native Americans are said to have done are typically considered massacres?  I guess the phrase "the victors write the history books" applies in the Native Americans fight with the European invaders.  That does not mean that Wikipedia cannot set the story straight without undue bias.
Even the depiction of the painting used in this article of the action by the Native Americans at Cherry Creek, is entitled incident and does not use the non-neutral term massacre. —Preceding unsigned comment added by  User:76.180.225.19  (talk • contribs)  00:53, 20 September 2009 (UTC) 
Strongly disagree with the unlisted user above (76.180.225.19). Most scholarly works refer to the event as the Cherry Valley massacre. For example, the Smithsonian describes it as “one of the most horrific frontier massacres of the Revolution.” (See article footnote). Certainly “massacre” is an appropriate description of the fate of the thirty civilians, including woman and children, who were brutally murdered. These innocent civilians did not die in battle; they were massacred. Per dictionary.com, "massacre" is 1. the unnecessary, indiscriminate killing of a large number of human beings or animals, as in barbarous warfare or persecution or for revenge or plunder. 2. a general slaughter, as of persons or animals: the massacre of millions during the war. 3. Informal. a crushing defeat, esp. in sports.
Quite the opposite to the unlisted user above, I contend that an attempt to rename the massacre would be “non-neutral”, i.e., to describe the massacre as simply an event or incident. A massacre is a massacre. If and when the majority of [highly regarded] scholars reach consensus on a new name for the Cherry Valley massacre, Wikipedia can follow suit. Until then, Wikipedia is not the place for historical revisionism. Regards, ColWilliam (talk) 23:32, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Yep, Wikipedia is not the place to "set the story straight"; that's original research and is not permitted. All we do is report what the historians say. I checked Graymont and Williams (listed in the References), as well as Boatner's Encyclopedia of the American Revolution and Walter Butler's entry in the American National Biography. They all call this the "Cherry Valley Massacre". Unless someone finds some scholars who challenge this label, what Wikipedia editors think of the title is irrelevant; we just follow the sources. And of course, the charge that all attacks by Native Americans are called "massacres", while no other attacks are labeled as such, is seriously mistaken, as anyone familiar with modern historiography will know; see Gnadenhutten massacre, for example. —Kevin Myers 01:12, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
As a resident of Cherry Valley and a History Professor, I want to bring up two salient points on this discussion. First, it was a massacre. Most of the dead were women and children. Second, many of the atrocities that day were committed by Tories under the command of Walter Butler. The Mohawk Chief, Joseph Brant, did his best to limit the bloodshed and save some of the families of the village.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.162.19.65 (talk) 13:27, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Removed POV/neutrality tag. —ColWilliam (talk) 17:07, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
I know this question has been settled for some time, but I truly do feel that the Iroquois got the negative side of the question. (The great majority of people who give any thought to Cherry Valley at all think that Brant and his Iroquois killed those people. The use of the word "massacre" seems to underscore this.) In the example above, the murder of Christianized Moravian Lenape, the incident is called the Gnadenhutten massacre, perhaps because they were Christianized, but the nauseating Sullivan Expedition gets a absurdly pablumized title. The force killed all Indians they came across including infants (nearly all neutrals), burned about 40 neutral villages to the ground, and destroyed their fields (an estimated 160,000 bushels of corn), orchards, and animals. This was in spite of Washington's orders to direct action against hostile villages and to capture as many people as possible. The destruction of the food led to further deaths from hunger. At least Alan Taylor, in The Divided Ground: Indians, Settlers, and the Northern Bounderland of the American Revolution, calls it an "Invasion". Anyhow, I hope that historians in the future will give more serious weight to incidents where Indians were unjustly harmed. Control of your TV set is now returned to you. Wordreader (talk) 01:21, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I’ve recently added footnotes and added a number of books to the bibliography. There is still room for significant improvement via the addition of more substance, particularly regarding the historical lead-up, the major players and their interactions and friendships before the massacre, details of the attacking force, details of the inhabitants and the defensive force, a description of the prominent Cherry Valley families and the involvement of some of the men in the Battle of Oriskany, details of the massacre, details of the prisoners and eventual prisoner exchanges, and the aftermath. —ColWilliam (talk) 16:44, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

The article relies too heavily on early historical sources and primary accounts.  We're supposed to be using scholarly, third-party sources, and there has been much historical writing more recently which puts events like this in context.  The American colonists certainly destroyed many Iroquois villages and their crops, which led to starvation for many that winter, including women and children.--Parkwells (talk) 16:06, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm not saying scores of people died during that winter, but they were experienced with this sorta style after 50+ years of warfare with French semi-armored fusileers. 208.96.66.213 (talk) 21:53, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
Some mention should be made of Major Daniel Whiting.  He took charge of the defense of the Stockade after Col. Alden was killed and Col. Stacy was captured.  Daniel Whiting was also at Lexington and Breed's hill.  For more information about Daniel look at Frank Smith's book "The Deeds of Our Fathers".  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.69.182.84 (talk) 03:41, 4 February 2022 (UTC) 

I wrote the edit as native or non-native since the author of the book and diary didn't make the distinction. At a time when there was no real consensus with being called 'native', or 'American Indian' from both parties of communication. |Sorry to redirect but I feel it's best to discuss this in this link as administrations might be able to help soon.] Thank you for your time. 208.96.66.213 (talk) 21:53, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

[1] Link doesn't work in cite web. Reference pertaining to the commander in charge of the raid. 208.96.66.213 (talk) 04:06, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Well, it's the same thing with me in Canada. I have a diary explaining that not only did the Seneca fight as a vanguard and scouting missions (bait), but Brant wasn't even there. After burning our Houses in the Beaver Wars, little Madeleine was a hero from it. "You Burned our Houses, so we destroyed Men women and Chidlren at CherryValle." I guess it's why I'm going to Mongolia for my vacation? 216.223.90.33 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 21:59, 12 March 2018 (UTC) 

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Cherry Valley massacre. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101212221203/http://home.roadrunner.com/~nlecompte/regiment/index.html to http://home.roadrunner.com/~nlecompte/regiment/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:31, 4 August 2017 (UTC)