5th Division at Salamanca

[Last Hussar]

A Black Powder force suitable for 1 player - the British 5th Division at Salamancahttp://lasthussar.wordpress.co.....salamanca/

[NTM]

Very useful and well done list, we need more like this added to the forum.

[Rod MacArthur]

I would mention that Orbat of the British 5th Division at Salamanca is not entirely correct. The light companies of each brigade belonged to their parent battalions for administrative purposes but always formed a small converged light battalion prior to all combat, in accordance with Wellington's General Orders on the subject (as below):

Extract from General Order issued at Coimbra on 4 May 1809

The light infantry companies belonging to, and the riflemen attached to each brigade of infantry, are to be formed together, on the left of the brigade, under the command of a Field Officer or Captain of light infantry of the brigade, to be fixed upon by the Officer who commands it. Upon all occasions, in which the brigade may be formed in line, or in column, when the brigade shall be formed for the purpose of opposing an enemy, the light infantry companies and riflemen will be of course in the front, flanks, or rear, according to the circumstances of the ground, and the nature of the operation to be performed. On all other occasions, the light infantry companies are to be considered as attached to their battalions, with which they are to be quartered or encamped, and solely under the command of the Commanding Officer of the battalion to which they belong.

The Black Powder problem is that if you include the Brunswick Jaegers in this then you will have light battalions with a mixture of rifles and muskets. It might be better to have a small musket armed battalion of converged light companies plus a separate tiny jaeger rifle armed company.

It is interesting that this makes the British Brigade structure identical to the Portuguese, with their four line battalions and a cazadores battalion, the latter containing one company of atiradores riflemen.

Wellington issued a similar General Order before the Waterloo Campaign.

Rod

[Greenjacket]

Really cool Last Hussar. I am doing the 4th Division at Salamanca for Blackpowder.

I’d rate some of the units differently though. The 3/1st Royal Scots and 1/4th King’s Own, for example, were ‘crack’ units.

I wouldn’t use ‘mixed units’ for British – like Rod has written, in this period, the battalion Light Companies were removed from their parent battalions to form, with the rifle company, a brigade (or divisional) light corps. We also don’t allow British to form ‘attack column’ as the formation was unknown to the British (who only fought in line in this period), and allow infantry to choose not to form square against cavalry.

Supporting the 5th Division was Le Marchant’s brigade of heavy dragoons – I use Front Rank miniatures heavy dragoons in bicorne, which look awesome.

Have you read Rory Muir’s ‘Salamanca’?

[Invisible officer]

It's an often repeated mistake that the British used no columns at all for attack. They used the column to move and sometimes for attack too. The attack column against a breach is the most logical exception. The only way to bring many men through the hell of a breach is the column. With a forlorn hope in front. In open order or in line you would lose control. They also charged in column against villages. There is no use in charging a village with a line that will lose the impetus at the first buildings. Same with bridges.

The line is the British formation of choice on the open battlefield. But if you have to move your line troops through a village or on a street through a wood they will form a column automaticly. And if there is an enemy they fight. In column formation.

The British used the column of sub divisions and the close column, both are described in the Horse guards 1807 manual.

Not to form squares against cavalry sounds like the Prince of Orange's way of fighting. Good way to destroy your own force.
Success in this formation was so rare, it will get your regiment a back badge.

[Greenjacket]

It's an often repeated mistake that the British used no columns at all for attack. They used the column to move and sometimes for attack too.

British infantry fighting in column was incredibly rare and contrary to the 1792 regulations. It happened, but the circumstances were highly unusual. I can only think of four occassions in the entire war.
The 29th Foot was in column of companies when it was rushed forwards during a French night attack - the battalion ran into a French unit coming up from the other side of the hill before it deployed.
The 1/88th was in column when it attacked the French aqt Bussaco - the terrain and friendly units prevented it from deploying before its attack.
The 1/88th made an attack in column of sections when they attacked at Fuentes d'Onoro, but this was because of the narrow lanes.
Brisbane's brigade at Orthez was moving up a very steep track at the double while in column when they came under fire from the French. Pakenham arrived and berated Brisbane for his f0ck up and immediately ordered the 1/45th to move forwards and deploy.

So while the British did sometimes fight in column in battle, it was very unusual and because the terrain prevented deployment.

Not to form squares against cavalry sounds like the Prince of Orange's way of fighting. Good way to destroy your own force.
Success in this formation was so rare, it will get your regiment a back badge.

Though in the Peninsula, driving off enemy cavalry while in line was done quite a few times...

[Last Hussar]

The British were known to have quite a dense skirmish line - there are accounts of the French breaking through the skirmishers, and believing they had broken through the 'first line'. Allowing just a couple of light battalions per Division would mean the amount of skirmishers were too few.

Mixed also allows the use of 'Reverse slope' far more effectively, allowing Bns to have the skirmishers on the forward slope, while the majority shelters behind the crest. This is one place where BP actually does better than you may think - the fact that the final move the chargers must be able to see the target, so if the distance is, say 18 (2 moves) you actually need 3 moves to charge - 1 to 12, 2nd to sight, third to charge - the 2nd move cant be used to charge if no LoS at the start of the move (not order, the individual 12" move). The skirmishers will then hold up the french, allowing Welletonian tactics.

[Greenjacket]

Last Hussar wrote: "The British were known to have quite a dense skirmish line - there are accounts of the French breaking through the skirmishers, and believing they had broken through the 'first line'."

I am only aware of one French account off the top of my head - at Bussaco, and that was against the Light Division (who needless to say had a very strong skirmish screen!)

Have you read Arthur Harman's article on British light infantry in the Peninsula in Paddy Griffiths (ed) 'History of the Peninsula War vol.IX'? Rory Muir's more recent work on 'Salamanca 1812' (which incidentally is a MUST READ for anyone interested in the battle of Salamanca!!)- seems to bear out Harman's analysis. At Salamanca the British infantry fought by launching rapid and decisive attacks with the bayonet rather than "bickering" between skirmishers.

[Big Al]

Mixed also allows the use of 'Reverse slope' far more effectively, allowing Bns to have the skirmishers on the forward slope, while the majority shelters behind the crest. This is one place where BP actually does better than you may think - the fact that the final move the chargers must be able to see the target, so if the distance is, say 18 (2 moves) you actually need 3 moves to charge - 1 to 12, 2nd to sight, third to charge - the 2nd move cant be used to charge if no LoS at the start of the move (not order, the individual 12" move). The skirmishers will then hold up the french, allowing Welletonian tactics.

How does that work then? If you have a mixed unit behind a hill with the skirmishers on top of the hill, then the enemy has LOS to the skirmishers and declares the 2 move charge and in they go...in two moves. The skirmishers are part of the Mixed unit, so the enemy has LOS to the whole unit, even though most of it is behind the hill. The enemy moves as far as the skirmishers, who are then forced to withdraw back into the unit lines and if the enemy has enough movement left (which he will have at 18" away and he has 24" of movement) it can complete the charge into the target unit. The skirmishers in a mixed unit are not a seperate unit.

[Invisible officer]

The British often had one officer who commanded all the skirmishers of a Brigade. Under this circumstances I think it should be possible to rate them as a seperate unit.
A rule that attacks on the skirmishers affect the battalion in any way would convert the tactical concept of the light infantry screen protecting the centre companies against the enemies light infantry (and inflicting some loss on columns) into something totally contrary. This way sending out skirmishers would be a risk, not an advantage. But that's only my opinion.