Benedict Arnold Father of the United States Navy?

Benedict Arnold was a general in the Continental Army who changed sides for personal reasons rather than any ideological conviction and has gone down in American History as a traitor. He is less well known as a naval commander who built a fleet on Lake Champlain and although being defeated at Valcour Island was able to delay the British advance.

Suppose instead of being threatened with a court martial, it had been decided to get him out of the way by placing him in charge of the United States Navy? The idea isn’t completely absurd. Cromwell’s generals at sea Blake and Monk proved to be effective naval commanders. However Blake devised the line of battle formation, which was only of use when there were effectively balanced fleets facing one another. The United States Navy was greatly outnumbered and was only able to fight individual actions and indulge in commerce raiding at sea. It largely fought in the manner of the Elizabethan Sea Dogs like Hawkins and Drake although they were legitimate privateers whereas Drake and Hawkins were initially pirates. The United States Navy also fought individual battles and indulged in commerce raiding in the War of 1812 and only began to become involved in fleet battles in the Spanish American War. However there were fleet battles on the inland waterways of the Great Lakes and Lake Champlain in the War of 1812, which the United States won. Could Arnold have been given an overall command of the United States Navy based largely on shore and developed a fleet of schooners to fight on the Great Lakes launching an attack on Canada as he did on land at the start of the war and maybe gone on to successfully press to retain a fleet after the war was over? Would this have kept him out of mischief?
 
An interesting POD could be the Battle of Valcour Island had Arnold grasped the tactical situation better. The British squadron was ship-rigged(big square sails)which mean it could sail easily with the wind but had a hell of a time sailing against the wind. Arnold knew that the British would have to sail with a strong southerly breeze to sail down Lake Champlain. Arnoold thought that by positioning his fleet near Valcour Island he could force the British to sail into the wind and take a pounding in doing so as they attempted to engage his fleet. But things went wrong when Arnold attempted to lure the Brits into the trap when his bait ships ran aground and alerted the British to the ploy. What Arnold failed to grasp was the formation in which the British came down the lake. The British led with their warships followed by gun boats then transports. Had Arnold decided to let the warships pass by and wait for the transports he could have wiped out a large portion of the British invasion army possibly scoring a Saratoga like victory.
 

Art

Monthly Donor
Valcour Island WAS a Victory...

If you look at the real force strength Arnold had, including the fact that most of his cannon had to be fired by officers firing pistols over them, and that they had 3-4 brigs and sloops, he had 2, and a VERY mismatched assortment of cannon, from 3 pounders to 18s. The whole point of his fighting off Valcour Island was bring to bear all cannon and mutually support his ships, and to keep the British from invading in 1776. He engaged in a naval arms race he lost, but in doing and in fighting Valcour Island he tied up the British so long in the arms race and repairing the damage the battle cost them that winter came and they couldn't invade that year. So it WAS a victory in the real sense, and Arnold doing any better would require other officers starting to build more vessels when he wasn't there. I really don't think that would happen.
 
I'm glad I'm not the only one who knows about Valcour Island: the most crucial battle in American History that nobody's ever heard of.
 
Top