Talk:Battle of Dunbar (1650)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is supported by the Clans of Scotland WikiProject, which gives a central approach to Scottish clans and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Battle of Dunbar (1650), or visit the project page for more details on the projects.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

	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 lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces (nations and regions): British military history task force Associated task forces (periods and conflicts): Early Modern warfare task force (c. 1500–c. 1792)

[edit] indentured servants

and the survivers were sold into slavery.

Was it as indentured servants to the colonies? If so perhaps the wording should be changed. Was it a similar fate for those Scots captured at Worcester? If so a simialr note should be added to that battle Philip Baird Shearer 11:25, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

A guick google later: this source: http://historynet.com/mh/blbattleofdunbar/index3.html says The English government shipped the survivors to the North American colonies of Virginia and New England. Sixteen-year-old John Cragin, an ancestor of the author, was one of those shipped to Massachusetts as an indentured servant. Also http://www.members.tripod.com/graytim/Saugus.htm -- Philip Baird Shearer 11:36, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Was an indentured servant not a slave? These people usually had their right ear chopped off, and were bought and sold into a life of work without pay. Sounds like a slave to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.68.15.21 (talk) 16:22, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Scottish or English

The infobox says Scottish Civil War, the text says Third English Civil War. Obviously they overlap, but this is just flat contradiction. Clarification please? ::Supergolden:: 15:04, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

There is considerable confusion-reflected in Wikipedia-on the proper title to be given to the wars that engulfed the British Isles between 1642 and 1651. Older accounts will refer simply to the English Civil War, although it's now more common-and accurate-to use the term the War of the Three Kingdoms (this still leaves out Wales!) Although the so-called third English Civil War did involve Englishman against Englishman it was largely a fight between the English Commonwealth and the Kingdom of Scotland. The Scottish Civil War should refer only to the conflict between Royalists and Covenanters between 1644 and 1645. Rcpaterson 00:32, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Background or result?

The first sentence under background mentions Charles being crowned in 1651. Then the article purports to give this as reason England chose to invade. But how can the Battle of Dunbar, in 1650, be part of this invasion if it happened BEFORE the coronation? We either have wrong dates or uncorrelated events. More research seems necessary...

--Erc1965 04:50, 29 September 2006 (UTC)