INTRODUCTION
The naval battle of Valcour Island took place on Lake Champlain in the fall of 1776. The battle was fought between Benedict Arnold’s small fleet against Sir Guy Carleton’s superior British naval force. After gaining British naval superiority on the Lake Champlain, Carleton halted the British invasion and returned to Canada. Carleton himself cited in a letter to Lord Germain on October 14, 1776, “The season is so far advanced…whether any thing further can be done this year” as a factor for not continuing. He ordered Crown Point to be abandoned and had the invasion force fall back to Quebec to the dismay of British officials in London. The reason sited by Carleton was a valid factor in his return to Quebec. A British military policy …show more content…
The fighting season was predicated on weather conditions and the ability to wage warfare. British officers used this concept of seasonal fighting during warm months and it became standard military doctrine throughout the French and Indian War. The deteriorating weather conditions at Crown Point would have prevented him from moving the remainder of troops from Isle-aux-Noix and supplying an invasion force of over 8,000 British regulars, German auxiliary, and Canadian provisional and Native Americans with enough provisions to stay alive during the harsh and brutal winter. The time spent building larger ships and the over 13,000 American men and improved fortifications at Fort Ticonderoga and Mount Independence would have led to a winter siege entrapping valuable men and committing limited resources from a war stricken Canada by the previous American …show more content…
Lake George Historian Russell Bellico believes, “The real value of the Valcour navy lay in its mere existence” and “Without the naval battle Carleton could not have returned to Canada empty handed, not having engaged the Americans. The naval success was enough to call off the northern invasion in 1776.” While Professor George Daughan gives General Gates more than ample credit for rebuilding and fortifying Fort Ticonderoga and Mount Defiance. He suggests the improvements and size of the force is what ultimately stopped Carleton’s advance. Dr. Eliot Cohen is a military strategist implies conflicts along the Great Warpath, Lake Champlain and Hudson River waterway corridor, transformed traditional European warfare fighting into a unique American style. This fighting persona allowed men, like Benedict Arnold to take bold and aggressive chances. His course of action during the battle of Valcour Island yielded the best possible out come for the American
The naval battle of Valcour Island took place on Lake Champlain in the fall of 1776. The battle was fought between Benedict Arnold’s small fleet against Sir Guy Carleton’s superior British naval force. After gaining British naval superiority on the Lake Champlain, Carleton halted the British invasion and returned to Canada. Carleton himself cited in a letter to Lord Germain on October 14, 1776, “The season is so far advanced…whether any thing further can be done this year” as a factor for not continuing. He ordered Crown Point to be abandoned and had the invasion force fall back to Quebec to the dismay of British officials in London. The reason sited by Carleton was a valid factor in his return to Quebec. A British military policy …show more content…
The fighting season was predicated on weather conditions and the ability to wage warfare. British officers used this concept of seasonal fighting during warm months and it became standard military doctrine throughout the French and Indian War. The deteriorating weather conditions at Crown Point would have prevented him from moving the remainder of troops from Isle-aux-Noix and supplying an invasion force of over 8,000 British regulars, German auxiliary, and Canadian provisional and Native Americans with enough provisions to stay alive during the harsh and brutal winter. The time spent building larger ships and the over 13,000 American men and improved fortifications at Fort Ticonderoga and Mount Independence would have led to a winter siege entrapping valuable men and committing limited resources from a war stricken Canada by the previous American …show more content…
Lake George Historian Russell Bellico believes, “The real value of the Valcour navy lay in its mere existence” and “Without the naval battle Carleton could not have returned to Canada empty handed, not having engaged the Americans. The naval success was enough to call off the northern invasion in 1776.” While Professor George Daughan gives General Gates more than ample credit for rebuilding and fortifying Fort Ticonderoga and Mount Defiance. He suggests the improvements and size of the force is what ultimately stopped Carleton’s advance. Dr. Eliot Cohen is a military strategist implies conflicts along the Great Warpath, Lake Champlain and Hudson River waterway corridor, transformed traditional European warfare fighting into a unique American style. This fighting persona allowed men, like Benedict Arnold to take bold and aggressive chances. His course of action during the battle of Valcour Island yielded the best possible out come for the American