"Operational Art American Revolution" Topic

Hello,
What campaign/battle would be the best example of operational during the American Revolution?

Can you try that again, please?

Cowpens and the movements that surrounded the campaign.

Eric

Obviously he left out "art"…..as in the title….

I am sorry, (art)

I would suggest two other campaigns:

1. Saratoga – which illustrates the difficulties of managing a campaign through an undeveloped "wilderness" (British advance through northern New York) and the luck of the Americans in having Arnold and Morgan leading most of the American fighting instead of Gates.

2. Washington and Rochambeau's advances from New York and lower New England to tidewater Virginia, coupled with the timely intervention of the French fleet.

Jim

@Dave: I realize that; I don't understand the question.

I have been confused by the term since Strategy and Tactics nag in its heyday.

I would definitely nominate Saratoga

Greene's Southern campaign. The operational art outweighing tactical success.

Definitely Saratoga campaign!!

Green's southern campaign making much with very little.

I think an under appreciated AWI campaign that included some interesting elements was the campaign in Virginia in 1781 between first Arnold, then Phillips for a short period and finally Cornwallis on the British side and Muhlenberg/Nelson and then Lafayette on the American side. While not involving large forces on either side to begin with both sides grew over the course of several months, with the initiative shifting from one to the other. The operational challenges required both sides to minimize their exposure while at the same time attempt to cripple the enemy.

While the period December, 1780 to April, 1781 is interesting with Arnold raiding across the Virginia countryside, the period from May until August pits Cornwallis and Lafayette against one another until Washington and the French show up.

It would be more accurate to describe the American forces as commanded by Steuben prior to Lafayette's arrival.

Steuben had traveled south with Greene in the fall of 1780 and was left in command of forces in Virginia when Greene took command of the southern army. These forces included continentals being raised by Muhlenberg and certain militia units. At some point early in Arnold's invasion Steuben was recognized as commander of the Virginia militia. Steuben was physically south of the James River. Nelson and others were north of the James.

"It would be more accurate to describe the American forces as commanded by Steuben prior to Lafayette's arrival."

If you read the history you'll find that von Steuben was both despised and ignored by the Virginia authorities. While he did nominally command a small group of Continental recruits he had no real impact of the Virginia campaign from December until Lafayette arrived. The bulk of what opposition there was to Arnold and then Phillips was Virginia militia, commanded by Muhlenberg and Nelson.

Steuben did command at the Point of Fork action against Simcoe and the QRs.

I have read a number of relevant accounts on the Virginia campaigns ONS. These are in part what I base my conclusion that Steuben was in charge on. It includes correspondence between Greene, Jefferson, Washington and Williams which indicate Greene had left Steuben to command in Virginia. Steuben's January 1781 report of Arnold's raid indicates he was exercising command of most of the defensive efforts, including those by militia. Most sources indicate Steuben commanded the defense of Petersburg against Phillips. His report to Lafayette of his plan to capture Portsmouth gives the impression that Steuben is still commanding the militia forces in Virginia several months later.

There probably is something to your "despised" remark. I haven't seen it in primary sources, but secondary sources indicate there was a growing belief among Virginians that Steuben was simply interested in raising a large force which he could in lead south to provide him with a command in Greene's army. Given that the state had been raided in 1779 and 1780, and that there were British forces in the state from 1781 on, this would not have sat well with Virginia authorities.

My read is significantly different…I agree he had been "officially" designated to defend Virginia but he had little actual control over much on the ground. For example, while he did try and defend Point of Fork he was disgusted that the Virginia authorities would not order the militia to improve the fortifications…and of course he had no power to order anyone to fortify anything. So much for being in charge.

You may be mistaking Point of Fork with Hoods Point ONS. Point of Fork occurred after Lafayette took command in Virginia, and it was located west of Richmond. I believe the only militia with Steuben at Point of Fork were troops slated to march south with Steuben's continentals to reinforce Greene. Hood's was downriver from Richmond, and was taken during Arnold's raid while Steuben was still in command of Virginia.

Based on the criteria you are using to argue Steuben was not in charge in Virginia in 1781, I don't think you can argue anyone was in charge. Virginia was falling apart in 1781. Lafayette's control probably came from having a larger force of continentals and a mandate to use them to defend Virginia. However this may be a point on which we have to agree to disagree.