Talk:John Ordronaux (privateer)

Untitled

Hello. I would like to work with other contributors to improve the quality and completeness of this article, which I feel is between START and STUB Class so far.

Would the previous contributors please work with me to establish the primary sources used to research the information on the web sites which are quoted as secondary source references?

I ask this so that the article can achieve a higher quality rating by quoting the primary source references on which it is based.

Many thanks,

Wfm495 (talk) 17:57, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

HELLO Again, I have now added what I think is the primary source reference for the text describing the battle between Neufchatel and Endymion. Please let me know if this is not correct!!

Thanks,

Wfm495 (talk) 21:12, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Between 6 and 9 Feb I added most of paragrahs 3 to 8 and enlarged the final pargraph. I also added all 15 source references at the end which support every statement given in the text as it stands. I then asked for help to put the reference numbering system into wiki style and this was done very quickly and superbly by ukexpat. I was then asked to add any eternal links, and I have selected three very good ones, but as I don't know how to do these in wiki style, I have asked ukexpat to add them to the article. I will then ask advice as to what needs doing to the article next. Cheers Wfm495 (talk) 21:41, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Nigel for adding section haeds and external links. Ref. the long quote I suggest we could add another external link namely: www.jmu.edu/madison/center/main_pages/madison_archives/life/war1812/privateer/endymion1.htm, which contains this whole quote and then summarise it on the Wiki article? Cheers, Wfm495 (talk) 12:04, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

On second thoughts I think it would be a bad idea to summarise the long quote, but instead it could have a new section head " Battle with HMS Endymion" then more sub sections to break it up? Wfm495 (talk) 20:28, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Assessment

This article is much improved from its December 2007 status. I think it is C Class with many issues remaining. The lead should summarize the article, but, for example, the circumstances of his birth belong into the body of the article. The style in often unencyclopedic, and the copyedit tag should definitely remain until the article is improved ("appears to have", "probably", "this clearly proved", etc. should be avoided). The style issues at times suggest original research and should be made more clear and the content should also be edited for flow. The inclusion of a whole essay is unnecessary, I amended the text in the end. It could perhaps be summarized (even though I read here how that would be a bad idea - I don't understand why). Perhaps there are free images that could be included in the article.

Also, just in general, writing sections on the talk page make the reading here easier. I added a banner from the Wikiproject Military history. It needs a task force asigned to it, there is a guide given (also, this Wikiproject doesn't use the C rating). Thanks! Hekerui (talk) 00:27, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Moved Text

From an essay written in 1860 furnished by Ordronaux's log and British parole reports:<ref name="coggeshall2">Coggeshall, George. A History of American Privateers and Letters-of-Marque, Third Edition, New York, 1861.</ref>

"...it was the hardest fought naval engagement and the most conspicuous victory achieved during the war. It was a contest waged against a force more than three times superior numerically; advancing in separate divisions under the cover of night, and assisted by the presence of a heavy frigate, while at the same time, and as a most serious obstacle of a successful defense, Captain Ordronaux was encumbered with thirty-seven British prisoners, who were refractory and all ready for revolt. He was therefore obligated to handcuff his prisoners, and confine them in the hold just before the action.

He had recently manned so many prizes that he had left only thirty-three men, including officers and marines at quarters, when simultaneously attacked by five British barges, manned with one hundred and eleven men, beside the before-mentioned thirty-seven prisoners confined below, who were striving to get loose from their manacles, and unite themselves to their fellow countrymen. Fearing that the British frigate would attack the privateer with her boats, Captain Ordronaux made the following preparation for the contest, beside the usual number of muskets, pistols, boarding-pikes and sabres, belonging to his vessel. He had made a large augmentation of firearms taken from sundry British prizes during the cruise, so that his gunroom was literally filled with these implements of death and destruction. He accordingly took the precaution before night to have some two or three hundred muskets and pistols loaded and placed in a position to grasp at a moment's warning. The loaded pistols were put into baskets and placed behind the bulwarks, so that when the strife should commence, it would not be necessary to reload these weapons. He had also his shot-lockers all filled with heavy shot, to throw into the enemy's boats, and stave in their bottoms, if brought to close quarters, when he could not use his carriage guns.

Being thus prepared, the brave Captain waited with the most intense anxiety for the approach of the enemy: it was about nine o'clock, the night being dark, they heard the sound of oars at a distance, silently approaching. In the obscurity they could not see the boats of the enemy; a few shot were fired from the Neufchâtel in the direction of the sound, to draw a shot from his adversary, with a view to ascertain his position, and how he meant to attack, but the ruse did not succeed. Captain Ordronaux had no intention of running away from the fight, nor did he mean that the enemy should, when once engaged in the deadly strife, it being well understood by all on board that rather than surrender to the enemy the privateer should be blown up. Such was the condition of things at the commencement of the action.

The Neufchâtel, lying at anchor, was now fully prepared to receive the enemy, who approached with five barges in the following order, namely, one on each side, one on each bow, and the other under the stern. A warm action then took place with muskets, pistols, sabres and boarding-pikes. The enemy were promptly met and repulsed, and in about twenty minutes many in the boats cried out for quarters, which were granted to those amidships. The men in the two barges under the bows of the privateer, however, succeeded in gaining the forecastle, when Captain Ordronaux, with two or three of his faithful followers, discharged one of his main-deck guns, loaded with canister shot and bags of musket balls. This gun was trained upon the forecastle, which had the effect of killing and wounding great numbers of the enemy, and of driving the remainder overboard. In this discharge he unfortunately wounded several of his own men.

The five barges which attacked the privateer contained at the commencement of the action one hundred and eleven men, including officers and marines. One barge was sunk with forty-three men, of whom two only were saved. Three boats drifted off from alongside, apparently with no living soul on board; one was taken possession of. She contained thirty-six men at the beginning of the action, of whom eight were killed and twenty wounded, and eight uninjured. The Second Lieutenant of the frigate (F. Ormond, who was not injured), three midshipmen, two of whom were severely wounded, with one master’s mate also wounded, were permitted to come on board. The remainder of the prisoners (fifteen seamen and marines) were kept astern all night in the launch after taking out the arms, oars, etc., the commander being afraid to trust them on board, having only eight men fit for duty.

After the battle was over, it was found that six of the privateer’s crew were killed, and nineteen wounded, beside Mr. Charles Hilburn, a Nantucket pilot who was stationed at the helm during the action; it is stated that he was several times wounded, and finally killed by the enemy. The British in this action acknowledge a loss of thirty-three killed, thirty-seven wounded, and thirty prisoners. During the hottest part of the engagement the prisoners in the hold were loudly cheering their countrymen to continue the fight, and constantly striving to break loose, while Captain Ordronaux and his First Lieutenant, Mr. Millen, were obligated to watch their prisoners, and guard every point to prevent a recapture from the enemy. The brave Captain, though wounded, could not be attended by the surgeon, for this gentleman was also wounded in the fight, and unable to assist those who were suffering; so that through this long and dreary night, Captain Ordronaux and First Lieutenant Millen were forced to keep guard at each hatchway, with pistol in hand, to prevent the prisoners from breaking loose, while his own poor fellows were lying about the deck, suffering, from their wounds, with no one to attend them, or even to give them a drink of cold water.

Thus passed this awful night of painful anxiety. I will leave the reader to imagine the anxious feelings of Captain Ordronaux, and his faithful followers, during the long and sleepless night, surrounded by the dead and wounded, with mingled sounds of groans and curses of those who were wallowing about the deck, while the frigate at a distance was seen burning port fires, and sending up signal rockets for her barges to return. He also feared that at the break of day the frigate would bear down upon them, and thus defeat all that he had gained in this eventful struggle. At last the morning dawned upon these weary, battle-stained watchers, who had passed the dreary night without once leaving their posts. The colors of the Neufchâtel were still flying, though her decks were in an awful condition.

Some thirty or forty men lay dead and wounded in every condition of mutilation, while the broken arms and implements of warfare scattered around told how desperate had been the struggle on that blood-stained deck; and now had arrived the most difficult part of Captain Ordronaux's duty. As has been stated, he had but eight men fit for duty after the termination of the action; all his prisoners were to be paroled and landed under the eye of a numerous enemy. He was, therefore, obligated to employ five or six of his men in a large launch, and at the same time to keep up an appearance of strength to deceive his adversaries. He was, therefore, obligated to resort to stratagem to carry out his plan.

Accordingly, he had a sail hung up abaft the main hatches, to serve as a screen, wherewith to conceal the quarter-deck. After this was done, he kept two boys there, one beating the drum, the other blowing the fife, and tramping heavily about the deck, to make the enemy believe that a large number of men were stationed there at quarters, to enforce his orders. Thus while the attention of the enemy was drawn off from his enfeebled state, sixty-seven of the prisoners were passed over the side into the launch, and transported to the shore, where they were placed in the possession of the United States Marshal. He also landed his own wounded men, that they might be better attended to, and receive more medical assistance than could be given them on board of the privateer. And thus after having landed all his prisoners, except some five or six, who had been paroled, these being young and active he retained on board to assist his crew in weighing the anchor, and navigating his vessel to Boston. "

Many thanks HEKERUI for the reassessment of this article. Also many thanks for copy editing by UKEXPAT. Wfm495 (talk) 18:57, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Ref the request for photographs, I am not aware of the existence of a picture of this man either in or out of copyright. But we have included an external ink to a drawing of his ship Neufchatel which is under copyright in the UK National Maritime Museum. Wfm495 (talk) 18:57, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

No problem. BTW you don't need to add hard line breaks (<br />) to create new lines, just hit the return key a couple times. Using hard breaks just creates unnecessary white space. – ukexpat (talk) 19:05, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Battle

The article looks great, but do you think we could include some of the details of the amazing battle described in that large quote, where he fended off over 100 enemies through ingenious tactics? I'm not confident enough in myself to do that, but I really think that should be mentioned in the article. Remy Green (talk) 18:30, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

The battle may be notable enough for its own article, perhaps the folks at WP:MILHIST can help. – ukexpat (talk) 18:47, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Ack, the links to both articles about that battle don't work now! Remy Green (talk) 03:22, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Jewish

John Ordronaux was Jewish. A Google search backs this up, but I don't know if there are academic sources that say so. But I'm 100% sure he was a Jew because he's a direct ancestor of mine and I'm a Jew, and my mom has been very clear about his Jewishness. If someone could insert that into an early part of the article, I would really appreciate it. I think it's important that the efforts of Jews in the War of 1812 be recognized. Thank you. Remy Green (talk) 03:34, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Please provide links to some of those Google search results. As you know, we cannot rely on your uncited statement because family connections and recollections are not reliable sources. – ukexpat (talk) 16:02, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Here's the best I've found so far: http://bechollashon.org/database/index.php?/article/2838 casually mentions Ordronaux being a Jew. On page 92 of this there's another mention of it: http://americanjewisharchives.org/journal/PDF-back%20issues/2000/LII_1_2_2000.pdf . Remy Green (talk) 02:17, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

I'd appreciate it if somebody more comfortable with editing articles than I am would add his Jewishness to the article. He's one of the most important American Jews of the 19th Century. 96.241.3.231 (talk) 19:17, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

It doesn't sound like his mother, Joanna Hammond, would have been Jewish. Was his father a French Jew? His wife's name was Jean Marie Elizabeth Charretton, which doesn't sound Jewish either. Presumably she was your ancestor also? All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 22:59, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Gah I'll find something. It's a big deal in my family that Ordronaux was Jewish. I'll look. Remy Green (talk) 18:20, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

I came here to ask about this. The author of 'A Green Hand's first Cruise' (which reads like a novel, but was apparently based on the authors real experiences?) describes the captain as being 'a Jew by persuasion, a Frenchman by birth, [and] an American by convenience' (page 41). None of Ordronaux's relatives seem to have Jewish names though. Also notable is he describes this man (presumably Ordronaux) as being captain on the last cruise when it was captured. It's possible the book is a novel and he failed in his research (though this is still useful, as it shows within twenty years of the incident he was well-known enough as Jewish that it would be picked up in cursory research), though it's also possible, as the captain didn't come out on deck much, that the author was genuinely on the ship and wrongly assumed later that the man was Odronaux.2407:7000:899A:CD00:6C52:4194:BFAA:EB28 (talk) 12:34, 8 October 2022 (UTC)