"Slow Hessians" Topic

So how much slower were Hessian troops on the battlefield than British and loyalist troops? Did they march at 1/2 or 3/4 the British speed of advance or retreat? Were the Hessians slower than American troops on the battlefield?

Were the Brits also faster than American troops?

My understanding was the British and the Americans adopted the two deep line while the Hessians retained the three deep. I'd rate the movement of the Americans nd British the same, while maybe the Hessians at 3/4.

I have enver read of an actual measurement. This is simply some "kentucky windage" on my part.

Is this a philosophical question?

<puzzled smilie>

Hessians were fine mercenaries. I suspect they were no faster or slower than the English speaking counterparts. They may be more cautious but certainly not slow.

They may be more cautious but certainly not slow.

I have read in multiple sources that the Hessians had a slower marching pace than the English. In Bayonets and Zeal, this was one reason cited for the Hessians often forming in the second line of battle. They just couldn't keep up with the Brits.

Which means I am curious just how much slower was the Hessians march pace vs the English.

I just read the Journal of Captain Pausch who was the chief of the Hanau artillery during the Burgoyne's campaign. He said the German gunners were faster at gun drill than their English counterparts. He also said that while in Canada the English and American had adopted a "quick time" march which the Germans thought foolish and caused them to sweat.

He also said that while in Canada the English and American had adopted a "quick time" march which the Germans thought foolish and caused them to sweat.

That may be it. I wonder what is the speed difference between quick time and regular march?

Slower marching paces solely from the standpoint of fun and playable games (not simulations) can irritate some players and actually be detrimental to a game. Plodding Russian Napoleonics is an example. True perhaps. Not fun for the Russian player unless he is a simulationist when the French zoom around like race cars.
-----
Opinion:
Almost every set of rules I've read has slow marching rates when viewed from the sole ideas of completing a game and being able to cover some ground in that game. Four to eight inch movement rates are an example of this.
-----
Idea?
If the Hessians must march slower, don't further reduce the rate for them. Just let the other faster units have a longer movement rate.
-----
Example:
If rules mandate a march rate for everyone at 6",
let the Hessians have that 6" but give a longer rate of oh 9" for faster chaps. Something like that.
-----
Respectfully,
Bill

I agree with Bill--the Hessians were normal! It was the Brits (mostly) that tore around the battlefield like blue arsed flies!!--So what you need to do is make British soldiers quicker…..

Might be that the Brits and the rebels both used an open files formation, where the two ranks could have easily closed up into one close order rank. I think (am not sure) that the Germans were still using close order. That might account for a difference in speed.

Matthew Spring deals with this issue on pp. 146-49 of his study, 'With Zeal and With Bayonets Only'…

link

…in which he says that Howe's Hessians could not keep pace with the redcoats because (i) while they abandoned the third rank in America, they maintained close order; and (ii) hence they had to continue to employ their regulation ordinary and quick steps of 75 and 110 paces per minute (the latter for wheeling). Elsewhere he proves that the British typically manoeuvred much faster than this, often at a trot.

In 1781, when Knyphausen tried but failed to get authorisation to put the Hessians in America into open order, he explained, ‘‘I have found through experience that this method is of benefit here, for our troops, when they are fully closed up, are not able to march in line with the English, but lose thirty paces in every hundred.'

Might be that the Brits and the rebels both used an open files formation

In Zeal and Bayonet, the author states a primary reason for using open ranks was to extend the frontage of their battalions. Often gaps between battalions in line were also larger than in Europe to extend the lines total frontage. The Brits were often outnumbered and thus often needed to cover greater frontage.

The disadvantages of open ranks and larger gaps between battalions was reduced firepower and a vulnerability to cavalry moving between the cavalry gaps. However as the Brits often relied on the bayonet rather than firepower, reduced firepower was acceptable. And since the Americans lacked traditional heavy cavalry, there was less risk to having larger gaps between battalions.

in which he says that Howe's Hessians could not keep pace with the redcoats because (i) while they abandoned the third rank in America, they maintained close order; and (ii) hence they had to continue to employ their regulation ordinary and quick steps of 75 and 110 paces per minute (the latter for wheeling). Elsewhere he proves that the British typically manoeuvred much faster than this, often at a trot.

Very good. I have just received Bayonets and Zeal and haven't read that section yet.

Slower marching paces solely from the standpoint of fun and playable games (not simulations) can irritate some players and actually be detrimental to a game.

Good point and I agree.

PS; Did the Hessians consistently use three ranks or two ranks or both during the AWI?

The Hesse Cassel contingent adopted two ranks from the very start – see Rodney Atwood's "The Hessians". I'm not sure about the small contingents – they may, or may not, have conformed to British requirements but there is little evidence either way. However, the Brunswick/Hesse Hanau corps in Canada certainly adopted two ranks AND loose files for the Saratoga campaign in 1777 (look at the article on German troops on the Perry website and you'll see two quotes from Riedesel's own journal on this).

During the action at Germantown, a Hessian unit had to move off the road to allow a British grenadier battalion moving at the "trot" to overtake them. At Monmouth Courthouse, the Hessian grenadier brigade was left behind when Clinton's rearguard chased Lee back to Perrine Ridge – the brigade's officers ridiculed the British for moving so far and so fast in the heat of that day. Interestingly, the Hessian officers at Long Island attributed the higher casualties suffered by the British to their looser formations and rapid advances (ignoring the fact that the British did much more fighting, especially Grant's wing).

"However, the Brunswick/Hesse Hanau corps in Canada certainly adopted two ranks AND loose files for the Saratoga campaign in 1777"

Good point – Spring also touches on this in 'ZEAL', showing that the Hess-Hanau artillery oficer Pausch complained bitterly that Burgoyne was making the Germans of the Canadian Army train to manoeuvre at the trot, which he thought hugely dangerous.

Riedesel's orders, dated 26 August, also feature on the following webpage:
link
They are esp. interesting, and it's a shame the source is not carefully indicated. Presumably a manuscript orderly book, in Saratoga National Park's possession?

Comments made during the 1776 (probabably by Howe or Clinton – I'm not sure and don't have my notes handy) said that for every hundred paces the English/British marched the Hessians marched 60 and this was due to their closed files as mentioned above and for their habit of frequently halting and dessing their ranks.

Hope this helps.

V/R

Joe