Benedict Arnold was one of the most talented field commanders in the war, he was very popular with his men, and he was instrumental in several key victories for the patriots (such as the pivotal battle of Saratoga).

Unfortunately, his commanding officer, general Horatio Gates, received most of the credit for Arnold's victories. In reality, Arnold was vastly more talented than Gates (and saved his rear on more than a few occasions), but as Gates was the one who reported to the congress, it was Gates who was hailed as a hero.

Imagine being treated like a child, patted on the head by adults (the congress) when obviously it was your older brother that built that model car (or whatever). And this went on for years. Victory after victory, but no recognition. Still just a lowly colonel.

And then there was the issue of his wife. As she was from a distinguished background, she liked to have certain amenities, which Arnold provided. Now, was it possible he was too focused on kicking the British in the ass to keep air-tight financial records? Possibly. But when the congress heard of his treatement of his wife, did they consider that? NO, HE MUST BE A TRAITOR!!! A SPY!!!

And the allegations weighed heavily on Arnold. He never got any stars on his shoulders, and while the governor of Pennsylvania, he pleaded with General Washingtion for a field command, to get back in the action where he was most valuable.

George Washington gave him command of West Point.

Arnold, after being kicked around endlessly by the bureaucratic colonial government, constantly the butt of jokes, and tormented by his unused potential, he sent a letter to the British...

"For the right price, and a brigadier general's commission..."

Without a doubt, Benedict Arnold is the most tragic character in the story of the American Revolution. It is doubtful we could have won the war without him (no victory at Saratoga, no French aid)... Yes, Arnold became a villain in the end, but his story is so much more complex than that.

*Minor correction: He was a BG in the continental army, but he wasn't in a combat role.

If I may ask an additional question: To what extent did the alliance with France affect his betrayal?

Growing up I had read a series of books by an author named Kenneth Roberts that told the story of a couple of friends who end up "Forrest Gump-ing" it through several key points of the American revolution, and they ended up serving under Arnold, who was portrayed as a popular hero among his men.

This has always colored my views of Arnold, so I find I am just unable to whip myself into a patriotic enough fervor to dislike the man. As a matter of fact, I often find myself wanting to spit when confronted with one of the many memorials to Gates I may discover in my travels around the area I live in [not too far from Saratoga Springs, NY].

All in all, his story has mostly made me question the accepted versions of history we were fed as children. I think I can safely say reading about Arnold led me directly to reading the works of Howard Zinn.

Can any of the actual historians here tell me how far off, or close, Mr. Roberts views of "what went down" are? I believe he MUST have been a historian of some note himself.

As a matter of fact, now I am going to have to find those books again and reread them.

Follow up: How close was Arnold to being captured by American forces and what would they have done to him?

The Revolutions podcast covered this and related material excellently and entertainingly. Others here have already answered the question but if you're looking for more, I recommend a listen!

I find it distressing that no top-level comment has done the obvious thing here, and link to Arnold's Letter to the the Inhabitants of America, in which Arnold does exactly what you ask.