OT aggrieved status?
 

I was watching the Mel Gibson movie "The Patriot" a few nights ago and had a question about some dialogue and negotiations procedures and protocol in the 18th century.

at one point, Mel Gibson's character Benjamin Martin negotiates with Cornwallis for return of captured militia men in exchange for personal effects and correspondence that Martin seized earlier. At the beginning of the negotiations, Cornwallis gives Martin the opportunity to start the negotiations:

"Would you, as the initiating officer, care to begin?"

Martin replies:

" I will, unless you'd like to claim aggrieved status."

And Cornwallis claims aggrieved status.

"Yes I would"

and then goes on to request his personal stuff back.

Anyone know if negotiations back then were this formal? Was there a protocol and procedure? and is "aggrieved status" something that a commander could request or something made up by Hollywood?

From what I know of the particular era, the negotiations were highly formal back then - in fact, they were rather formal even up to the WW1, which could be seen as a turning point in many ways. After all, back during the American War of Independence, the officers were gentlemen first and foremost. Even though it was possible for an enlisted man to become an officer after committing a deed so profondly heroic, his commanding officer decided he deserved it, the other officers (and this was still going on with the British in WW2) usually treated the said "mustang" like an enlisted man, because he was a common soldier, not a gentleman.

If you were enlisted and captured your conditions and hope for reparation back to your own side were bothe horrible and nil, and in that order. Meanwhile if you were an officer your chances for the same were much better. Upto and including receiving your pay from your captors, housing, and even freedom of movement as long as you gave your word not to attempt to escape.

medic and stormlion

very true, and I didn't think about that before posting. social standing and class meant a lot more than they do now. I guess that is part of the American Dream, upward mobility where a commoner can strive to greatness (note, please do not turn this into a political thread, I am sensitive)

It would be very interesting to see the negotiation protocols, must research further on the interwebs.

The aggrieved status line is a one used among officers only thats for sure. But there were also laws the gentlemen of England made up in their hundreds of years at war in Europe that were new to us.

Martin was smarter then most colonists and had earned respect from his enemies on the field of battle.

I think Martin played him, it gave Martin the upper hand. By offering to return his personal things with no hesitation, Cornwallis was forced by honor do to do what Martin wants in return.

The other thing to take into account is that there was a long standing tradition throughout the European countries of treating officers i.e. the upper class men who became officers very well because they could be ransomed back to their families or regiments.
Often enough the capturing officers knew of, or even personally knew the captured officer or his family and they also knew approximately how much a family might pay to get their son back.

Most of how to waring factions would conduct negotiations, is covered in the Geneva Conventions which comprise four treaties, and three additional protocols. These establish the standards of international law for the humanitarian treatment of war.

The treaties also governs the treatment of POW's including parole of POW's

Both the US and Soviet Union have signed all four treaties, and the additional protocols.

However given the state of the world in TW 2000 conduct negotiations would be done by a commander to commander basis.

The Eight Ball story line is somewhere you could see commander to comander negotiations

Unfortunately the Geneva Conventions have no relevance to the original question. The first of the Conventions didn't appear until 1864.

aggrieved

1. wronged, offended, or injured: He felt himself aggrieved.
2. Law. deprived of legal rights or claims.
3. troubled; worried; disturbed; unhappy.

Aggrieved Status
 

I haven't read all the posts, but everyone is correct to a point, so I hope this is not a repeat. More specifically,

Aggrieved Status means you feel shorted, slighted, or used in an un-gentlemanly-like manner. If you were offered Aggrieved Status and accepted, you were afforded the right of getting ONE specific thing you asked for. In contrast, the other party was given an unspoken Aggrieved Status opportunity and the right of claim to whatever they wanted. It was gentleman-like and salutary and only an officer could negotiate in this manner.

Like Benjamin Martin said earlier, he could use pride as a weapon against Cornwallis. And it worked. Martin gave him first choice and right away Cornwallis chose to get his things back, so whoever said above that "Martin played Cornwallis" was nail-on-the-head-correct. Martin had a caveat up his sleave in betting Cornwallis would not honor the negotiations.

This was especially true in the American Revolution, where the Americans had officially been declared traitors by the King; the British therefore sometimes didn't consider themselves bound by the standards of treatment of POWs even for that time, because legally they were criminals, not soldiers. My many-times-great-grandfather was captured at the Battle of Fort Washington and imprisoned at the French Church (the Huguenot Church). He was one of around 800 survivors out of 2,837 soldiers captured at that battle. The official history of the war claims he disappeared while captured, but he re-enlisted and later had a pension from Congress, so we know he didn't die there. As his parole disallowed him from serving on the front lines, he ironically became a POW camp guard for the Revolutionary Army.