"Best Commander of the French & Indian War?" Topic

Which officer, on either side, would you rank as the best commander?

Wolfe and Montcalm saw success. Rogers seems to have been a good leader of irregulars

William Johnson.

Sayenqueraghta. The White Men tended to match each decent decision they make with a subsequent disaster.

William Johnson? He sure fathered a lot of half-Indian children. I'm not so sure about his military skills. Though he did win two battles.

Amherst. He was the Eisenhower of the war.
And he survived it too!

Washington. Told Braddock not to be stupid.

Howe, killed outside of Carillon in '58.

Maybe not the best, but Washington had to have been pretty good for his age & rank at the time.

I would put Johson towards the top also -- not necessarily for military tactics or leadership but for a host of other smaller reasons that played into the big picture.
regards
Russ Dunaway

Jeffery Lord Amherst, Conqueror of Canada.

Amherst or Wolfe

Montcalm was pretty good but he paid hard for one little mistake

Howe or Wolfe.

Wolfe

Wolfe got lucky in my opinion at Quebec and Montcalm is over-rated by English authors to ease the pain of the defeats. Wolfe was a good brigadier however, just over his head as an army commander. Amherst is the "conqueror" of Nouvelle France, but what did he really do on the field? Washington was a bit player and it is hard to say how history would remember him had the American Revolution turned out differently or hadn't happened. William Johnson definitely contributed significantly to the French defeat as well as being the victor twice. Howe I think would have made Carillon in '58 a British victory had he lived. Beyond that it is hard to say but he was certainly an innovator and progressive.

Chingachgook

Washington isn't even in the running IMO. It was his blundering that started the war in the first place. Howe is a very tempting "what if".

Best commander?

William Pitt the Edler. While not strictly a military commander he made the astounding disovery that Victory in the Frendh and Indian War was going to be won in North America and not in the plains of Germany.

for direct commanders

Hawke, Victor of Quiberon Bay. The man who attacked on a lee shore in the midst of a gale, an enemy in its own harbor. He enused there was not going to be any more reinforcement fleets for the Indies, for America, for Anywhere.

François de Gaston, Chevalier de Lévis

Second in command to Montcalm and the victor at Ste Foy. He was a competent commander and kept on good terms with both Montcalm and the Canadian governor Vaudreuil. He knew how to use the Canadian Militia and (imo) would have done better then Montcalm if he had been in command on the Plains of Abraham.

link

François de Gaston, Chevalier de Lévis

Je suis d'accord!
I agree.
Votre serviteur,
Bill

I agree with Mapleleaf and Bill.

Actually, if Levis had been in command at Quebec, instead of Montcalm, my guess is he wouldn't have marched out to the Plains. Just because Wolfe got up there, doesn't mean he could have taken the city.

My two shillings.

Eric

Another vote for de Levis. He led a remarkable comeback to win the second battle on the Plains of Abraham and it was only the supremacy of the Royal Navy that prevented him from re-taking Quebec.

Best commander of what? Men on the field? Or an army/theater? Two very different things.

For instance, in Rev War you could say Cornwallis or Arnold on the field, but choose Washington or Howe for overall or theater. I am using these names as examples, not to start a tangent. I could just have easily used Rommel or Patton, if you get my drift. :-)

I originally threw Washington out as a joke, to make fun of Braddock.

Yes, he was a bit player in this war. But managed to salvage things somewhat after Braddock's monumental screwup.

How did Washington's blundering start the war in the first place? Unless you mean that he was ordered to go and build a fort out in the middle of nowhere, near the enemy and far from friends, against a numerically superior and better supported foe? Not a screwup, in my book, but a guy handed a really bad assignment who managed to at least pull his troops out alive, even if he had to surrender his 'fort'.

Oh, and for a more serious answer, I like Wolfe. He got Montcalm to come out and play, which was a mistake I think we can all see with the advantage of 200+ years of hindsight.

Forbes. Amateurs study tactics; professionals study logistics.

Hmm, Forbes: the man who taught Washington that he who stays in the field longest wins, even after hard defeats.

An interesting choice, Nighthawk.

Ooooh. Forbes. Good one. That is something to think about.

Eric

J Womack, I mean his blunder by attacking Jumonville's party when no state of war existed in the first place. Then he picked the worst possible place to fortify (Fort Necessity).

Well he was just 22 years old, with no prior military experience.

J Womack, I mean his blunder by attacking Jumonville's party when no state of war existed in the first place.

This is a bit misleading. The phrase "no state of war existed" implies that a state of peace existed. This was not the situation in the Ohio country.

An armed conflict was already going on when Washington attacked Jumonville's party. Around 1752 the French attacked a group of Miami Indians who had allowed an English trading post to be opened up at their village. In early 1754 a small force of Virginia troops started building Fort Prince George at the forks of the Ohio. A few months later they were chased off by a much larger force of French who then proceeded to construct Fort Duquesne at the same site. Each side was trying to close down the other's trading posts and secure strategic points.

Well, based on actaul days of battles, the most successful would be Dumas(Braddock's Defeat), Wolfe (Quebec) and Montcalm (Fort William Henry), followed by Massey (La Belle Famille).

All very true, but his actions were the spark that finally lit the fuse.

Moncalm for the french and Amherst for the British. Both Johnson and especially Rogers were shameless self promoters.

For forest fighting which their was much of Langy,Marin and Langlade for the French.Even though Langy was only an ensign in the French Marines he commanded French captains of the regular army.One of only a very few colonial officers respected by Montcalm.Bested Rogers in every encounter between them.
Mark