Colonial Campaigns Club (CCC)

Does anyone want to discuss the role of Fraser's Column at Saratoga? In studying the battle has anyone noticed that at the Battle of Freemans Farm on Sept. 19, 1777 that Fraser's column hardly suffered any casualties? If that is so what exactly did Frasers Column do? Of course he was protecting Burgoyne's right flank, but from what? It seems to me that the centre column virtually fought the battle alone which accounts for its very high casualties. Fraser apparently is an officer of high calibre. But did he fail on Sept. 19th? Comments?

An army (or navy) always has two choices when teaching their officers how to obey orders. It can emphasize the importance of always obeying orders to the letter, on the generally sound assumption that the superior is more likely to have a good overview of the general situation than the subordinate, so that cases where a subordinate may be better able to judge if the order is appropriate for the situation at hand, or not, are very rare, and also on behalf of the general idea that an army works best when superiors can count on their orders being obeyed.

Or it can emphasize the need for superiors to communicate their intentions to their subordinates in a way that will enable the latter to judge the local situation they are facing in the light of these general intentions and decide which course of actions serves these intentions best. This calls for directives being given by the superiors, rather than orders, and for subordinates being educated in a way that warrants placing such a heavy responsibility on their shoulders.

Generally, the British army is known to have chosen the former course, while the Prusso-German tradition leans heavily towards the latter.

In the British army, therefore, a subordinate who finds himself with an order that makes no sense in the situation he faces will know he has two choices, and four likely outcomes.

1. He obeys the order and succeeds - all is fine.
2. He obeys the order and fails - at least no-one can blame him for anything else than having had no luck.
3. He disobeys the order and succeeds - history may do justice to him, but his superior will still blame him for insubordination, and if this superior himself has failed in his overall conduct of the battle, he will try everything within his means to take his revenge on his insubordinate, but lucky, subordinate.
4. He disobeys the order and fails - that means courtmartial.

Note that of the two possible outcomes for obeying the order, one is very desirable and one about neutral, while neither of the outcomes for disobeying the order is exactly desirable especially on the short run.

This is the penalty armies who place obedience to orders above everything may incur in certain - rare - situations.

There are other traditions of course - both the (imperial) French army and the Prussian army encouraged officers always to march to the sound of the guns, a general principle placed higher than any specific order to the contrary. There is also that famous quote by Prussian Field Marshal Prinz Friedrich Karl, "dear Sir, the King made you a field officer so that you would know when <b>not</b> to obey an order".

Worth a footnote is also the imperial Austrian army - its highest decoration was explicitly dedicated to officers who conducted acts of gallantry <b>without</b> orders - which of course meant not <b>in violation of explicit orders</b> but <b>in absence of such orders</b>, which of course could amount to acting in violation of <b>implicit</b> orders. In the battle of Sadova, 3 July 1866, two Austrian corps commanders moved forward from their assigned positions on Benedek's right flank, most likely in search for some acts of gallantry they could commit <b>without orders</b>, and thus opened a gap in the line through which the Prussian guard charged and decided the battle. Which I think shows that generally obedience to orders is a good thing - had the corps commanders, on the other hand, not been left in the dark by Benedek about his intentions, and his intelligence about the enemy, they might have been able to judge the likely results of their deviation from orders.

I've not done much reading on Saratoga, but another thing that enters in is that it's easy for historians and wargamers to have excellent hindsight. What really was going on at Fraser's column? What reports was he getting from his own subordinates? One feature of the battlefield is that it has alot of features that obstruct sight, and as such, intellegence.

To my mind, historians and wargamers tend to be rather hard on the generals involved because of these matters of hindsight. Sure, there were examples where the errors by the generals were so blatant that anyone can condemn then (leaving a known drunkard in charge of the initial attack at the Petersburg crater for example), but still, sitting in our chairs can be too easy at times.

So then, as Al points out, doesn't the blame lie with Burgoyne? Does anyone know if he attempted to ask for Fraser's aid?

I will admit to only knowing scant details of this, one of the most important battles of the war (and I have seen others argue that it was one of the most important of the last 500 years.) Ketchum has a book on the subject. Has anyone read it? Review?

Ok, looking into it a bit more, Fraser's column is credited with turning back some of the initial attacks by Arnold and Morgan. They could not, however, abandon the advantageous terrain that they held.

It appears that they made tentative attacks on the flanks of the attacking Americans, easing the pressure on the center, but always falling back to their heights. It did however by time for Riedsel to come to the center's aid and drive the Americans from the field.

So Fraser did his duty, held his position and supported his flanking column.

Mike and Al - bingo you got it. Fraser's role was to seek a way to turn Gate's left and then help drive him into the river. It must grieve some of the British historians to read of his fine legion being left unused for the main battle but from what I have read most battles usually only involve about 33 percent of the army anyway.

For instance the river column was not used either. I suggest a good reading of John Tiller's scenario description. Long and full of insight into the use of the British army.

Fraser turned back Arnold but who in their right mind would go charging into the New York wilderness half cocked after a retreating foe. And probably Fraser made the right decision there.

So some thoughts on this battle:
1. The terrain negated proper command control. Burgoyne could have sent a detachment of cavalry up that west road instead of Fraser to check out his right. They could have sent a rider back the instant a foe was sighted. Better yet send out cavalry pickets on all fronts to determine the approximate location of the Continentals.
2. Burgoyne and Fraser should have established communications at some point. I dont think that the latter needed his entire command to hold the right. He could have sent along some lights to help out Johnny.

Gary's point is well made. I think that an "orders" rule would be nice for alot of these battles. A roll of the dice to see whether the commander even moves would be nice too. I point out the example at Germantown where Washington's columns each went their own way and never did link up. Something about the fog. Has anyone ever created a proper PDT file for Gemantown to properly represent the fog effects?

Good topic.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Morgan</i>
<br />
For instance the river column was not used either.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Actually it was the arrival of the river column that finally sent Morgan and Arnold reeling. (They arrived with buckets of river water to bathe Morgan's men in.)

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
I point out the example at Germantown where Washington's columns each went their own way and never did link up. Something about the fog. Has anyone ever created a proper PDT file for Gemantown to properly represent the fog effects?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

To be really effective, it would have to be handled similarly to Jutland, (I know, a fantasy engine improvement, but actually practible for TCP/IP games) where you can only see the units that you control and what they see. Easily the best feature of Jutland.

Wow, the more I think of that, the more I want it. What an enhancement for MP!

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Mike Cox</i>
To be really effective, it would have to be handled similarly to Jutland, (I know, a fantasy engine improvement, but actually practible for TCP/IP games) where you can only see the units that you control and what they see. Easily the best feature of Jutland.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

To hell, yeah.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Al Amos</i>
<br />"Easily the best feature of Jutland." - Mike

You mean even better than the 3d icons? [:p]
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Well the little sailors bobbing in the sea after a ship goes down are pretty good....[:p][:D][}:)][^][:0][xx(][8)][:o)]

(Sometimes I miss Ernie (and for that matter Eugene)[?]

Moi?[:o)]

The Morgan's Rifles Bathing song:
(sung to the tune of Row, Row, Row Your Boat)
"Scrub, scrub, scrub away
Scrub away the filth.
Put it in a bucket quick
Sent it off to Phil. (Natta of course)
Rub, Rub, Rub the clothes
Rub them on the rocks.
Pack them up, tie them up.
Send them to Mike Cox!

<font face="Comic Sans MS">How did a discussion of Fraser's actions or inaction at Saratoga turn into one about the bathing habits (or non-habits!) of Morgan's men?

Has any British player ever let Fraser sit inactive in the Saratoga scenario? Why not? You know the answer. Too much knowledge.

To come closer to reality play blind scenarios.</font id="Comic Sans MS">

My Germantown mod game is on the Scenario design Center. Visablity is limited to 4 hexes throughout the game to mimic the fog and smoke present during the entire battle. It also has the correct numbers and locations of regiments, as far as I could determine. I believe the ranges on muskets might be less as well.

I've read a lot on the Saratoga campaign. Fraser fed men in small amounts when needed and kept communications between his and Burgoyne's men open. From the hill he was on, he could see some if not all of Burgoyne's action. If you visit today, the distance between the two is only about a 1/4 mile. Maps done by participants show the area as lightly wooded and farmland between the two wings. Trees may have hidden some of the troops, but the smoke and noise would have been a clear indication of how the fighting was going to an experienced officer such as Fraser. It is not known what communication was passed between commanders. Those records have never been found. The action was fairly sporadic until after three.
When the Americans pushed sizeable numbers into the center. They were coming out of heavy woods in Burgoyne's front. To Fraser's front and right, the woods were also thick. Fraser had to hold the right, or the Americans could have rolled the British off the field had they attacked from the right or Fraser's right rear. He was on a hill. Guns could have been place on the hill to enfilade the British center, if he was not there. Fraser's lights and the 24th did fight off several attacks to his front. He also sent some British and German lights to bolster the center's right wing, keeping the gap between clear of Americans.

Two things helped the British. Gates was not on the field, and no American commander had overall control, until Arnold appeared late in the day. The Americans pretty much just followed the roads into battle, which opened out into the center where the British could be ssen. Secondly, Frasers men were in light woods, so their disposition and numbers could not be determined easily. A few probes were quickly repulsed, so the Americans were blind as to his true strength. They contented themslves with keeping Fraser occupied. Both Fraser and Burgoyne were aware of the strategic importance of holding that hill. Not knowing what was in front of them, caused them to fight defensively once contact was made. The uncoordinated, but constant attack of American troops which was focused on the center forced the British to hold their ground. Morgan stands out as he used his riflemen in small groups to neutralize the British artillery advantage by picking off the artillerymen. If the Americans had brought artillery into the battle, the British might have been defeated.

One final thought. The British were in the middle of the wilderness weeks from their supply base in Canada. They had lost about a quarter of there original numbers to combat and detachments by the time they reached Saratoga. They were blind to their front, a diversionary force sent to Ft. Stanwyx had been turned back. They were short on rations, and knew there were no reinforcements. So they had to be conservative with their forces. Burgone has been faulted for holding out too long before requesting help. However, his aides arrived at the river just as Reidesel determined to come to his aid and was organizing a relief force. Burgoyne could have sent to Fraser, but instead sent to the river for help. This is indicative of the importance he placed on his right.

I made a modified version of Saratoga, but as Lt. Glankler pointed out, we have too much knowledge. The best way to play it would be as a blind battle. I could make a few versions up where a) Most Americans are fixed, b) some Americans are fixed, c) The British have the 53rd and Prince Frederick's regiment added. etc. Then send out the files to two players. If you did not know what you were facing, and had all the possibilities in mind, you might find the game closely follows the historical battle. Let me know if there is any interest. By the way, Gilbert Collins (Xlegion) and I are play testing a version he designed for Saratoga at this very moment.