Dn Jackson | 06 Apr 2010 4:38 p.m. PST |
Does anyone know how this unit was fielded tactically? I haven't been able to find much on them other than a very odd organization. They had: 8 companies of Rifles 1 company of Light Infantry 1 company of Grenadiers later added 1 company of Highlanders This just doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Normally I'd expect the grenadiers and lights to be brigaded with other units in converged battalions, but that leaves 8 companies of rifles and one of highlanders. Of course even if the lights and grenadiers were kept with the battalion that makes for an odd battalion on the field. Did they keep the lights and higlanders around to give the rifles some staying power verses musket armed troops that had bayonets the way the Americans did later? But from what I've read they carried German rifles which should have come with bayonets. Just curious as I can't figure this unit out. |
historygamer | 06 Apr 2010 5:11 p.m. PST |
I don't have the exact configuration in front of me, but first off, the 8 companies were hatmen, carrying muskets – Long Land pattern, IIRC. I think they had one company of rifles added at some point. I think the same of highlanders, but I am not sure all these companies ever served together either. The grens and lights of Loyalist battalions were not brigaded together with other flank companies. They usually operated with their parent battalion, or perhaps on special mission of scouting, etc. No rifles mounted a bayonet at this time, at least that I can think of, nor did the German Jaeger rifles, as they were too fragile. Riflemen were usually issued with a hatchet, or sometimes perhaps a sword, in lieu of a bayonet. Whatever rifle the QR rifle company carried, it had to be English issued, not German. The Germans brought their own rifles (don't they always?). For the most part, this regiment fought like any other units of the time, though they may have done a bit more picketing and scouting than some of the British line regiments, especially during the northern deployment. I don't think they got their distinctive headgear till about 1780, as I believe the hat companies were cocked hats initially. |
Greenryth | 06 Apr 2010 5:37 p.m. PST |
The Queens Rangers acted similarly to other legion troops of the time being generally a mounted and infantry arm working in combined operations. The QR foot fought throughout the war in the North and South but Simcoe really made his name in the South particularly in the Virginia raids under Arnold, Phillips and later Cornwallis. They were A grade soldiers, probably the best at what they did on both sides with only Lee's Legion possibly their equals. Simcoe was a better soldier than Tarleton but gets less press. A detachment of Dragoons of the Queens Rangers were sent south to Charleston after the city capitulated and for a time the unit operated out of the Georgetown area but never reached more than about 65 men. The mounted detachment in Virginia was about 100 strong and consisted of the Hussar squadron that you seem to have omitted from your above post. The entire legion pretty much served together on the 26th June 1781 at Spencers Ordinary. I think tactically the unit pretty much served as one coherent battalion with the lights skirmishing and the highland and grenadier companies acting as the flankers of the regiment. |
Sundance | 06 Apr 2010 5:41 p.m. PST |
Simcoe wrote a book about the battalion as it operated under him – there was at least one commander before him, and I believe his memoirs are in writing as well, but can't remember who it was. Don't recall how much it cost me for the book, but a Google search should fetch up the title and a quick search on Bookfinder will give you a range of prices. |
Adam D | 06 Apr 2010 5:49 p.m. PST |
Here is the link to Simcoe's book. Most out-of-copyright books can be found in their entirety through Google Books or achive.org link |
John the OFM | 06 Apr 2010 8:01 p.m. PST |
They had an odd organization because they were an amalgamation of several Loyalist units. Several company sized units were combined to field this "regiment". That is how the Highlanders made it in, for one. You forgot to mention the Light Dragoons and Hussars! Their organization is no stranger than some Patriot Legion "reginments". They were ad hoc amalgamations also. We usually only see the final product, and make up our wargaming units to match them, without really considering how they were formed, and from what. The original Colonel was Rogers, of Rogers Rangers fame. Odd that the US Rangers would adopt him as their patron saint, considering that he sold his services to the highest bidder, the British. He also captured Nathan Hale, by the way. |
Supercilius Maximus | 07 Apr 2010 3:30 a.m. PST |
Dn Jackson, The "rifle" companies were a mistake by the uniformologist Charles Lefferts, who mixed up the AWI-era Queen's Rangers with a 1790s unit of the same name raised in Canada from Loyalist refugees (and an example of whose uniform is now in a museum in Canada). Here's some detailed info on the regiment – known properly as the Queen's American Rangers (there are other Queen's ____ Rangers units and it's easy to confuse them). link The original unit was formed by Robert Rogers as a straight infantry battalion with two flank companies (grenadiers and lights) and eight centre companies, all armed with musket and bayonet. Over the war, these were supplemented by:- 1777 – a Highland company, which functioned as a second light company and may have acted as Simcoe's personal escort in action; 1777 – a hussar section that expanded to a full troop by 1778, and eventually had over 50 personnel; 1780 – one, later three, troops of light dragoons, mostly formed by absorbing small Loyalist cavalry and mounted rifle units – one of these served alongside the Hussars in the South; 1780/81 – a genuine rifle section of up to 16 men (but more usually around a dozen), probably the two best shots in each centre company, which was mounted while in the South; 1780/81 – a small artillery section that included a 3-pdr and an "amusette" (probably 1.5-pdr or 2-pdr) with a trained artillerymen and crews drawn from the QR itself. In addition, Ewald's Hesse-Cassel jager company served with the QRs in the South, as did a company of mounted rifles from NY. Simcoe was the fourth CO after Rogers, a Major French of the 22nd Foot, and a Major Wemyss (pronouned "Weems") of the 40th Foot. Simcoe had commanded the grenadier company of the 35th Foot at Bunker Hill; he commanded from late 1777 onwards, and was twice absent through being wounded in action. |
Gnu2000 | 07 Apr 2010 4:31 a.m. PST |
The grens and lights of Loyalist battalions were not brigaded together with other flank companies. In Cornwallis's southern campaign, loyalist and regular light companies were brigaded together. |
Dn Jackson | 07 Apr 2010 4:34 a.m. PST |
Thanks for the response. I couldn't understand how such a unit would have worked. I understand that 'small-war' is different from normal combat but it still didn't make sense. I have two sources that say they had the rifle companies, (one of which also says Jaegers were carrying sword bayonets at this time). Knowing that is a mistake makes much more sense. I didn't really forget the mounted parts of the unit, well I did after spending all day yesterday at Bush Gardens with the family :), but they weren't germain to the deployment of the foot section. I also was not aware that the light and grenadier companies of Loyalist units were not converged, I could have swornm I had a TO&E somewhere that showed that, but that could be bad memory on my part or just an assumtion on my part
and you know what they say about assuming. Again, thanks very much for the information. |
Greenryth | 07 Apr 2010 7:05 a.m. PST |
the loyalist lights were converged with the regular battalions but the Grenadiers were not. I dont think the lights of the QR were but certainly the lights in Cornwallis' army were mixture of ligths from the regulars and lights from the provincial light infantry and units like the POW Volunteers and Volunteers of Ireland. |
historygamer | 07 Apr 2010 7:43 a.m. PST |
It may depend on which Cornwallis army you are refering to. |
Dn Jackson | 07 Apr 2010 8:08 a.m. PST |
Ah that explains my memories. Thanks again all. |
Supercilius Maximus | 07 Apr 2010 8:24 a.m. PST |
<<the loyalist lights were converged with the regular battalions but the Grenadiers were not.>> Actually, even this was very rare, and only happened where very small forces were involved. Other than the QRs, not many Loyalist units had grenadier companies. <<I dont think the lights of the QR were but certainly the lights in Cornwallis' army were mixture of ligths from the regulars and lights from the provincial light infantry and units like the POW Volunteers and Volunteers of Ireland.>> The light infantry "battalion" at Cowpens comprised the companies of the 16th, 1/71st and 2/71st Foot, and that of the Prince of Wales' Volunteers; this is the largest unit I can find that had a "mix" of Regulars and Provincials. In every other case, it was just one of each. Ferguson's Rangers at King's Mountain (often confused with his Rifle Corps at Brandywine, who were all Regulars) were "picked men" from several of the Loyalist regiments in NYC. The Volunteers of Ireland were in Rawdon's command (he was their CO) at Hobkirk's Hill. |
roughriderfan | 07 Apr 2010 9:01 a.m. PST |
The Queen's American Rangers – British Legion – and for that matter Lee's Legion and the late war American Continental Light Dragoon Regiments were all designed for the "war of the posts", the "petit war", the "war of the lines" – the war over the contested ground between the two sides in the field. The tactical skills needed for such a contest were seen as different then those needed to stand in line of battle. Legions first show up in Europe in the 1740's and were seen as formations to be raised and used in wartime – and then disbanded when peace came – de Saxe was one of those who pushed for their use in Europe – and helped give them the title of"legion" as a reminder of the old Roman legion which often had mounted troops added in support. The tactical advantage of the Legion was it put all elements of a command under a single command structure – which could be an issue if one wanted to send out a couple companies of infantry and a troop or two of light horse to do the same job. In the case of the Queen's American Rangers they started life as a standard British Infantry Regiment – with eight line companies, one light infantry company and a grenadier company. They picked up along the next five years a highland company, a Hussar troop, several troops of light dragoons, and an artillery section if a 3# gun and an "amusette as mentioned. Under Simcoe – who proved to be a master of warfare between the lines – they earned a great reputation doing the screening duties – raids on enemy units or stores. Tactically for my rules they are organized into two command, with Simcoe serving as overall commander. The infantry element has the ability to skirmish as well as a sharpshooter component – and a shock element – grenadiers and highlanders. The mounted element has a troop of hussars as well as three troops of light dragoon. There is a gun section of either the 3# light gun My .02 |
Greenryth | 07 Apr 2010 11:33 a.m. PST |
its almost the C18th equivilant of a ww2 Kampfgruppe. A mini corps able to deal with almost any tactical situation. |
historygamer | 07 Apr 2010 2:10 p.m. PST |
I think the Legion idea has limited application. Note the 16th and 17th LDG both tried it, with mixed results. There was not much of a call for it beyond what already existed. I also seem to recall that there were Legion units raised in the ACW period, but were quickly dispensed with. |
huevans | 07 Apr 2010 4:22 p.m. PST |
Interesting thread. I'm not an AWI fan, but I served briefly in the "Queen's York Rangers" militia unit when I was a teen and there are references to Simcoe all over Toronto. (I had lunch on Simcoe Street this afternoon). |
WildGeese | 07 Apr 2010 4:45 p.m. PST |
Great book on the Rev War Queen's Rangers is H.M. Jackson's 'The Queen's Rangers in the Revolutionary War'. You can still find it on ABE, but it can be pricey to say the least. |
roughriderfan | 08 Apr 2010 6:48 a.m. PST |
Several thoughts In the world of 18th Century Professional Armies – light troops were not needed in peacetime unless you were Austria or Russia with their long frontiers with Turkey and ungoing border warfare. Those counties with their Cossacks and Croats had ready made formations for the "war between the lines". In theory dragoons were to be able to carry out these tasks – but over time they tended to move more into the realm of battlefield cavalry and away from their roots as light troops – and what self respecting horseman wants to dismount and her his uniform dirty in the dust?? So with budgets always an issue for all of the European states – why keep formations on hand that could be raised as needed in wartime – and disbanded once peace broke out. The ACW legions raised 80 years later were an attempt to imitate the AWI units like Lee's Legion – but were broken up into their seperate arms when it was realized that such small multiarm formations had no place in the world of modern mass armies My .02 |