"British Grenadier Bunker Hill Scenario" Topic

In the above scenario in the rule book it has the "fleches" as V shaped, is this correct as the old maps I have do not show any V shaped "fleches". I have a copy of the Hyde map and another old one which were drawn not long after the battle, they show a line of sorts of a kind of defense but not v shaped. Would this be a sort of earth works or piles of logs or fence rails as I have read else where.

I know the rail fences at Bunker Hill were apparently stuffed with straw.

Also saw the Bunker Hill model at the Bunker Hill Museum and it does not show the V shaped fleches if I remember correctly.

any help appreciated

hi --I played Bunker Hill using Piquet Field of Battle a while ago---Yes the fleches were there but in reality they were just logs piled on top of each other to form a v shaped defence open at the back..So just get some twigs from the garden and stick them together!!!
In the battle I refought the Americans failed with all bar one of their volleys and so the great redoubt was quickly cleared!! Although they did a bit better on the rail fence!

Old Smokie

As to the fleches you have raised an interetsting question. None of the old/contemporary maps show the fleches. I have tried to run down the sources for the presence and construction of the fleches but to no avail. I am accordingly suspicious as to whether such features were actually present at the battle. I would be happy to learn of contemporary evidence to the contrary.

A map attributed to Ensign de Berniere of the 10th Foot (same handwriting as his Concord map apparently) shows one fleche slightly to the north of the main redoubt. A later version supposedly has all three – I've never seen this one though. He has omitted other details which are known (and IIRC he was not actually at the battle), so it is possible that there were some sort of impormptu defences between the main redoubt and the rail fence. Both the Grenadier Battalion and the 5th/52nd Foot reported being fired on from behind works in this area; there was also a fenced road/track running east-west in this part of the battlefield and the fleches are supposed to have been built from materials taken from these fences.

There is a watercolour of that part of the battlefield (giving the view the British would have had as they advanced), which is often cited as evidence of British soldiers wearing uncocked hats at this time. If anyone has access to a copy of this, it might show something.

Hi Thomas,

I agree there is nothing in the old maps, and I have never read of any sources which confirmed the fleches being there. I have read but cannot remember where or what source that the defenses were just a line of either fences rails or logs hurriedly piled up anchoring one end on the redoubt.

I think some sources say the fleches were removed by the British to shore up their defenses after the action, if that's the case then the people or person who drew the old and contemporary maps after the Battle of Bunker Hill would have known this.

My club did a lot of research when we were setting up our Bunker Hill game. There isn't a single first person account that the fleches existed that we could locate on either side. In checking extremely detailed engineer maps that were made immediately after the battle there is nothing there. These maps even indicate the difference between fences and rock walls.

SM:

I know the water colour you mean. But I want to say that the works were perhaps the ones they threw up on Bunker Hill instead of the Breed's Hill ones. Perhaps Tory Gamer can check my leant magazine (hint, hint) and tell us as the picture was in a CMH issue a year ago.

There are lots of maps of Bunker Hill on the Boston1775 blog. The nature of the fortifications in that area are unknown, but they have been a subject of recent archaelogical work:

link

There are also questions about the exact shape of the redoubt on Breed's Hill.

link

know the water colour you mean. But I want to say that the works were perhaps the ones they threw up on Bunker Hill instead of the Breed's Hill ones. Perhaps Tory Gamer can check my leant magazine (hint, hint) and tell us as the picture was in a CMH issue a year ago.

Yes, yes…I have your CMH…

The picture showing the earthen breastwork is in Vol 60, No. Spring 2008 issue of the Company of Military Historians magazine, per an unsigned watercolor that was possibly done by Captain Thomas Davies, RA.

Highlights that the Breed's Hill works were simply earthen fortifications and not all that sophisticated. The work running down the hill from the main redoubt does not appear to be "V" shaped; looks more like a berm.

Adam D

There is pretty much an agreement of the shape of the redoubt based on the contemporary maps drawn up by Lt Page and Captain Montresor (see the map section of the American Memory website at the LOC).

memory.loc.gov/ammem/index.html

The one that Boston 1775 from the Gentleaman's Magazine is I think something of a red herring. It bears no resemblance to any of the British depiction of the 'Bunkers Hill' redoubt nor does it resemble the British fortifications erected after the battle to seal off the Charlestown peninsula ( see the map drawn in Dec 1775 by a lieutenant in the 23rd again viewable at LOC. The conclusion has to be it was made up to satisfy a public demand when no information was availbale.

The Boston 1775 seems to to be equally sceptical about the Gentleman's Magazine plan. The problem is that having been siezed on by C19th authors the plan has been trawled through a rnage of secondary works whose authors were too indolent or unscrupulous to resort to primary source materials.

sarcasm101

Thanks for posting that, it seems your club has come to a similar conclusion about the lack of contemporary evidence for the fleches.