"Chasseurs & Jaegers" Topic

In Scott Holders campaign rules, he has Hesse Cassel Jaeger Corps and Chasseurs. Jaegers in German is Chasseurs in French. Were these the same or two different units> Did they ever fight in line?

Uh, what?

"Jaegers" and "Chasseurs" in the AWI were interchangeable terms when applied to the German units.

"Jaeger" and "Chasseur" both mean "hunter". They were light infantry and not designed for fighting in close order. Many of the Jaegers were armed with rifles with all the benefits and limitations as the American riflemen (though with way cooler uniforms).

What the previous two said.

In late 17th C. and (most of) 18th C. Continental Europe French was the language of the Courts and of the well educated, and a number of French military names were adopted elsewhere: bombardier, carabinier, grenadier, gardes du corps… and indeed chasseurs (and Légion Britannique).
The highest Prussian, then German military award bore a French name and a French inscription 'Pour le Mérite'.

I guess "the bug" wants an Blue Max!

Oops. I missed the point of abdul's comment. Never mind.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I think the point of urbinoprince2's question was… were the Hesse Cassel Jaeger Corps and Hesse Cassel Chasseurs two (zwei) distinct UNITS? Or, were they the same unit with just two different appellations? Its pretty clear he GETS it that Jaegers = Chasseurs.

Jaegers in German is Chasseurs in French. Were these the same or two different units…

In fact, I believe a case can be argued for two TYPES of units serving for pay with the British in the AmRev, based simply on consulting Jean-Pierre Wilhelmy's Soldiers For Sale and Rodney Atwood's The Hessians.

Jager Korps was a regular Hessian unit. They were 2 different units. The chasseus were provisional.

The chasseurs were provisional companies formed from the regiments of the NYC , Newport RI & Charleston garrisonq 's.

"The jagers were the elite of the Hessian troops, usually called "chasseurs" by the British and Americans. Page xxi, Introduction.

Diary of the American War, A Hessian Journal, by Captain Johann Ewald, Translated and edited by Joseph P. Tustin

Tom, I'm not disagreeing with your previous post, but could you provide some documentation to back that up? So far I can't find the term anywhere else in Ewald's journal.

Not sure it's relevant but by AWI times "chasseurs" in the French army were deemed 'elite' -the 'left flank' light company of line infantry units.

I'm not home right now, but IIRC its Wilhelmy's Soldiers For Sale that lists Chasseurs as internal companies of certain (but not all) "Hessian" line infantry units, while Capt. Johann Ewald's Hessian and Capt. ? Roeder's Ansbacher Jaeger companies are the only ones called "Jaegers." This suggests the distinction abdul666lw identifies wasn't confined to the French… "Hessian" BTW includes units from Anhalt, Brunswick, Hesse-Hanau, and Hesse-Kassel…

Exert from my book on the chapter covering these troops. A number of actions and a description of the jaegers is included.

"…Only the first companies that were deployed were actually recruited from professional hunters as volunteers. Very few if any were ‘impressed ‘to serve. They received higher pay than most other infantry troop types. Hesse-Cassel and Hesse-Hanau sent more than 1500 Jaegers to serve in the Americas. They were armed with a short European Jaeger rifle with calibres of .62 or larger and a Hirschfaenger (hunting sword). These rifles tended to be the personal property of the Jaeger. Being shorter, the rifles had less of an effective range than the longer American Pennsylvania rifle…"

"The Chasseur, like the Jaeger, was considered as a soldier that specialized in skirmish and loose combat. However they were not regarded as a superb wilderness fighter. Most Chasseurs were armed with a smoothbore musket rather than a rifle. They received a higher pay than the Musketeer or Fusilier, but less than a Grenadier or Jaeger. .."

I wouldn't characterize jaegers as 'suberb wilderness fighters' in any case. But the use of the word chasseur needs to be treated with caution because you have examine very closely what the author is talking about. As has been noted, Chasseur sometimes refers to the jagers, and sometime it refers to the line infantry drafted off their regiments to support the jagers. It depends on who is writing, and what language they originally were writing in. Sort of the same way that one sees the Leib regiment also styled the 'du Corps' regiment. Or the occasional reference to the "Hessian guard battalion" that is actually the grenadier battalion Linsing which contained the grenadier companies from the 2nd and 3rd Hessian guard battalions (as well as the grenadier companies from the Leib regiment and regiment von Mirbach).

Additionally, I can find no evidence that the ad-hoc Hessian infantry companies received any special or additional training for their mission.

From what I am reading so far in Ewald's Diary, the Hessian grenadiers and 42nd seem to be backing up the jagers so far (and 17th LDs). So far I don't recall any other German troops fighting out there with them in the war of pickets and posts. I'll look again, and keep reading. Great book, worth every penny.

I just read a passage where re-enforcements arrived for the jagers, and they were taken from a hussar unit. He said the men had to wear their cavalry boots and hussar sabres while serving on foot. Interesting. He also didn't think much of the new men either. He said mounts had not been procured for them yet and Howe was upset they had been used prior to that happening.

RNSulentic also says that they were not . So I agree with your assessment.

No special training but their continued tasks of daily patrols did give them more on the job training than Mus-Fus-Gar units who were not conducting patrols.

Perhaps they already had such training prior to serving in N. America. By that I mean serving as pickets, scouts, flank guards, etc. I suspect all soldiers performed this sort of duty as some point. I doubt the Scots had any special training either – other than what was ordered by General Howe.

About the Chasseurs, I agree that the Jäger were sometimes called that, but von Krafft writes in his Journal, that also a company of Chasseurs was found, by volunteers from the line units in 1778

21. July. Tues. In the evening the order came to get up a Company of Chasseurs, for which 2 volunteer privates were to be enlisted out of each Company of the Hessian regiments, and 1 Sub officer per regimten, Von Krafft, p. 55

If I recall correctly from "Pvt. Yankee Doodle", the drafting off of a couple of suitable fellows from each company into special light units was done by the Americans, also. It may have just been one of those things that was improvised to serve an essential purpose when there wasn't a specific light unit assigned to do that work. And calling them 'chasseurs' would make perfect sense.

As I recall, the Hessian battalions had an integral grenadier company, but not an integral light company, correct? So if they found themselves stationed somewhere with no jagers and no Brit flankers, they'd improvise.

Interesting discussion!

RNSulentic's post pretty much nails it – context is all.

A lot of "German" officers would have used French as a common language in their dealings with the British, and in many cases French was the "professional" language of Europe in the 18th Century in the way that English would often be today in business etc between Europeans speaking two different languages.

The "ad hoc" skirmish detachments formed by the German units in America are analogous with the "picket" companies formed from time to time by British and French line units during the F&I War, except that the AWI units seem to have been created for a specific mission rather than the duration of a campaign as the British and French tended to do in the previous conflict.

Given the adherence to Prussian tactical doctrine, most German line musketeers/fusiliers etc would have been familiar with the use of "heckenfeuer" to drive off enemy irregulars and skirmishers (described in Duffy's book on the SYW Prussian army); grenadiers may have been even more adept, as they were often used by both Hesse Caseel and Brunswick formations, to back up the much slower-reloading riflemen with formed bodies of musket-and-bayonet men.

Also, according to Rodney Attwood ("The Hessians") the Hesse Cassel troops, from their arrival in America, formed an extra ninth* "peloton" (again, note the use of a French word) of volunteers to act as an advance guard in wooded or other difficult country.

[* arguably it was a tenth peloton as line units would initially form a "colour guard" of picked men whilst dividng the battalion into the 8 firing pelotons prior to going into battle ]

As far as the Highlanders were concerned, during the WAS and SYW/FIW period, these regiments were considered to be the British equivalent of Croats and were frequently used as light/irregular troops in "petite guerre" operations. This seems to have carried over into the AWI as the 42nd, and even the newly-raised 71st, were included in the army reserve with the Foot Guards, and the Grenadier and Light battalions, rather than as normal line-of-battle troops.

At some point in the AWI, this view seems to have died the death; whilst the 42nd remained one of the elite units used frequently in raids "between the lines" in and around NYC from 1778-1780, and the 71st was used in almost a light infantry role in the South, the other Highland units that came to America were used only as ordinary line infantry.

SM:

Nice to have you back. :-)

History Gamer:
"Encyclopedia of British, Provincial and German Army Units 1775-1783" Philip R.N. Katcher Page 110

Also: "Magazine Military Collecter & Historian Volume XVIII,
Provisional Chasseur Companies of Hesse Kassel During the American Revolution"
Page 11 -13 by P.F.Copeland and A.W Haarmann

The first two provisional chasseur companies were first formed in RI in 1777 from Landgraff, Ditfurth, Bunau & Huyn Regiments. The provisional chasseur companies were formed in garrisons where the Jager Korps was not stationed or available. They wore there regimental uniforms, not Jager green. There were never any internel chasseur companies in Hessian Regiments. The only German unit to have internel chasseur companies was the Brunswick von Barner Light Battalion, it's 1st. 3rd. 4th. and 5th. companiy were chasseur's.

Interesting. IIRC, those were not active field units (hence the garrison title), so perhaps they were just the picked men of lower level units. By definition then, if they just did garrison duty, these are not the chasseurs that are referred to then in field operations of the main forces. Thanks for sharing. :-)

There are no field chasseur units. Ewald in the original German never uses the word chasseur.

I never said he did. But the English generals often referred to the jagers, and perhaps all troops fighting in that manner, as such.

"Also, according to Rodney Attwood ("The Hessians") the Hesse Cassel troops, from their arrival in America, formed an extra ninth* "peloton" (again, note the use of a French word) of volunteers to act as an advance guard in wooded or other difficult country.

[* arguably it was a tenth peloton as line units would initially form a "colour guard" of picked men whilst dividng the battalion into the 8 firing pelotons prior to going into battle ]"

"

History Gamer:
"Encyclopedia of British, Provincial and German Army Units 1775-1783" Philip R.N. Katcher Page 110

Also: "Magazine Military Collecter & Historian Volume XVIII,
Provisional Chasseur Companies of Hesse Kassel During the American Revolution"
Page 11 -13 by P.F.Copeland and A.W Haarmann

The first two provisional chasseur companies were first formed in RI in 1777 from Landgraff, Ditfurth, Bunau & Huyn Regiments. The provisional chasseur companies were formed in garrisons where the Jager Korps was not stationed or available. They wore there regimental uniforms, not Jager green. There were never any internel chasseur companies in Hessian Regiments. The only German unit to have internel chasseur companies was the Brunswick von Barner Light Battalion, it's 1st. 3rd. 4th. and 5th. companiy were chasseur's."

In case to come to grips with a lot of very intereting information:

There existed the Hessian
Feld Jäger Corps (several companies, one also mounted)
The Chasseurs company (made from volunteers from 1778 onwards, but then later abolished again)
And ad hoc units from regiments, either a 9th peleton and or
two provisional companies in 1777 (abolished then in 1778??) ???

maybe of interest :

LETTER OF A HESSIAN OFFICER

to the ruling Landgrave Frederick of Hesse-Kassel,

Long Island, 1 September 1776

(most probably written by Colonel Heringen of the Regiment ‘Von Schenck')
translated by Geert van Uythoven

(…)
The way battle is waged over here is very special. We stay constantly two men strong, and do not fall down. The flankers have to take the brunt of the fighting, and as there are many watches and purses to acquire, the whole regiment wants to act as flanker. I wish to get rid of our caps; we are send into the thickest bushes, in a hot climate as well. Many of these caps of all regiments have already been lost in the bushes. The sabres are carried across the shoulder, so that the men can leave their waistcoat unbuttoned. We must melt in our puffed coats altogether. The English have been clothed according to the hot climate, with very short and light coats and long linen trousers, down to the shoes. The officers are clothed the same as the men, they wear the same distinctions. The latter we have copied, or have ordered to be copied, to secure the officers for the riflemen. These rascals [sic!] climb up trees, lie in the high grass, and lie in wait for the officers. These however march inside the closed battalion, and those that are with the flankers are armed with bayonet and musket, so that the officers cannot be distinguished from the men.(…)

>most probably written by Colonel Heringen of the >Regiment ‘Von Schenck')
>translated by Geert van Uythoven

Some very interesting insights into how the British operated, as well.

there are a lot of other very interesting informations in the complete article.

Wow, way cool. Thanks for sharing that. It also tracks with how the Guards officers were supposedly kitted out in enlisted men's coats. I think this goes to show the extremes between the peace time and wartime forces in North America (it was much the same for the F&I War too).

There was not regiment 'von Schenk'. Colonel Heringen was the Colonel of von Lossberg's fusilier regiment, and died of dysentery in Brooklyn before Trenton. I think before the battle of White Plains, as Lt.Col Scheffer did a good enough job in his stead to get his Colonelcy and the order pour vertu militaire. The mention of caps may also indicate it is von Lossberg, since they wore fusilier caps, not hats.

The translation has issues. The second sentence should probably read something more like "…We stay constantly in two ranks, and [the men of the first rank] do not kneel…"

This letter seems to corroborate Lt. Bardeleben's account of the battle of Long Island where the regiment von Donop threw out men 'to patrol' the woods in front of the regiment, and brought back American prisoners.

Sounds to me like the third rank was being pulled off to do all this flanking and skirmisher duty.

Bardeleben also notes that in some regiments the officers pulled off their distinctions, but note specifically that they did not in his. Go figure.

A whole lot more going on than people generally realize.

Sgt von Krafft of the von Donop regiment recounts his time with the adhoc chasseur companies around New York in 1778. His platoon supported a Jager section serving Amusettes, and he says that he still carried his kurzgewehr, a not a musket. (for you modelers out there)

Note: von Barner's battalion had 4 'fusilier' companies and one jager company or chasseur company, call it what you want, that company had green coats and rifles.

Wow never seen them called fusiliers before. Von Barner 2nd. company was jager. Brunswick fusiliers ?

RNSulentic,

I'd appreciate your opinion on this:-

I have read (I think something written by Claus von Reuter, whom I can't seem to contact any more) that the von Barner musket companies were raised from line troops that remained in Brunswick, and possibly also some from the regiments that did go to Canada, with the express aim of supporting the jaegers. If so, this suggests they were "supposed" to be the best men, or volunteers, but may possibly have been the "bad apples" every CO likes to get rid of whenever the chance occurs.

One thing that intrigues me is that the jaeger company and the musket companies of von Barner's hardly ever worked together as a unit in the Saratoga campaign, with the jaeger invariably being supported by platoons of grenadiers (Hubbardton, Bennington, Bemis Heights – not sure about Freeman's Farm). In fact, the von Barner battalion was not used anywhere near as much as one might have suspected in the type of terrain encountered, which leads me to suspect it was not quite the "elite" unit it was intended to be.

@RN Sulentic

In case you like to read the account in German you will find it in the Militärwochenblatt of 1833 which is available on the net for free.

The translator did an excellent job, here and there maybe some unlucky translations like Gewehr – was translated generally into rifles which is misleading.

Wir stehen beständig zwei Mann hoch und fallen nicht nieder – so a good translation in this case staying close to the original.

I don't think that the Hessian Kassel regiments used the third rank to form those ad hoch units, but used volunteers, for me it seems that they fought in two ranks.
there is also a letter from a Brunswick officer as well in the above issue of the Militärwochenblatt.

@Winterfeldt: The sentence " We stay constantly two men strong, and do not fall down." Makes no real sense as translated literally. One has to take into account idiom, "fallen nieder" is a reference to kneeling. Like wise, "zwei Mann hoch" is much better translated as "two men deep", hoch here being used in the sense of depth, and I have seen it used similarly in Austrian manuals. Now to think this through, there is the whole issue of the usual frontage for a battalion, made up of firing platoons. Is the frontage of the battalion reduced? I don't think so. I don't think any colonel gets to do that. Instead, you pull off the 3rd rank (or take a third rank's worth of volunteers) and go do what ever needs to be done. And even more interesting, I don't think this is 'brand new' for America. I suspect that they came over to America knowing how to do that.

@SuperMax: I haven't seen Claus since the 225th of Hubbardton in 2002. He has to be quite along in years now, as I'm pretty sure he's a WWII veteran. von Barner was newly raised for employment in America, 5 companies, one of which was a jager company wearing green, while the other companies wore blue coats. I think the musketeer companies were basically used as a battalion on their own, while the jagers were told off to do other more jagery stuff. Certainly the battle at Bennington showed this, as all the maps I have seen show Breymann's deployment as von Barner on the left, Grenadier bn on the right, and the jager company either to the right of the grenadiers or slightly ahead of the grenadiers. Claus thinks that they were the 'elite' of the Brunswick contingent, I think they were basically a frei-korp unit raised for the war. The officers and NCO's supposedly came from other Brunswick units, but the men were new recruits. YMMV.

Interestingly, Thomas Barker (yes, that one) compiled a list of equipment lost at Bennington submitted by Breymann, for replacement value.

To give a sense of the losses:
114 grenadier cartridge pouches
146 musketeer cartridge pouches
278 muskets with bayonets
288 sabers and scabards
388 saber belts, (extra were lost in the baggage, along with 32 single bayonets and 7 'reserve' ramrods)

Also lost with the baggage were
523 tournisters (knapsacks)
564 bread bags
129 camp kettles
129 tents with cords

And 1 casserole pan. (go figure)

Also the tack for 6 pack horses, but not the wagons nor horses, were listed as lost, because the Brunswickers would not be on the hook for the cost of replacement, because they would have been obtained from the British in America.

I think the flankers were designated men or volunteers from the line battalions rather than light troops. That was quite common into the Revolutionary wars to have flankers pulled from the line regiments to act as skirmishers, often on the flanks--both in battle and on the march.

There are flanker composite units in the battle of Maida 1807 taken from regiments not at the battle.

About Chasseurs and Jäger

Philadelphia, Dec. 15th 1777

Sir

I cannot leave this country without desiring you to acept my best thanks for your good services during the two Campaigns in which I have had the honour to command the Hessian Chasseurs …

Letter of Cornwallis to Ewald
Militärische Blätter, 1821, p. 298

In this context obviously the Hessian Jäger are meant – so no difference between Chasseurs and Jäger here.

Also in a letter of Howe (written in French)
at Philadelphia at the 19th of Mai 1778

Messieurs …
de votre Conduite distinguée …. La Conduite des deux premières Compagnies des Chasseurs Hessois ..

Militätische Blätter 1821, p. 299

Also here no special Hessian Chasseur coprs but clearly the Jäger – are meant.

As to a third rank of the Hessians in the AWI – I disagree with RN Sulentic, in my view the Hessians were ranged in two ranks, as the cited letter confirms, and that the skirmishers were volunteers sent forward – most likley a certain number of each peloton to remain equal frontage of the line.

In 1806 – the Prussians used as well as volunteers and also in some units – third rank – to increase their numbers of skirmishers.

For me it looks like that the Hessians at first used volunteers, or each unit looked after itself while than later in 1778 a permanent company of skirmishers was formed.

"Ah, here's the money quote from Atwood, on pages 82-83--a letter from Heister to the the Landgraf, 21 March 1777:
"…Old Heister reported to his sovereign that he was unimpressed with the new-fangled ideas of the British. Although the Hessians had deployed in two ranks, the method proposed to him in August-that the men should not be closed up arm to arm, but somewhat more open- had not been employed by any battalion during the campaign. The grenadiers, who formed the advanced corps of the army with the British grenadiers and light infantry, had fought just as the other regiments had done, with close ranks; but despite this, had suffered fewer losses than most units. From the other regiments, detachments had been sent ahead to skirmish, rendering excellent service on all occasions. But the main body of each regiment had followed at a musket shot's distance, always closed up arm to arm. Only when the broken terrain and woods obliged them to, did they break ranks…"

I just read a funny passage in Ewald where he said everyone want to work as a skirmisher since there were a lot of watches and purses (from dead enemies) to be had. Well, that seems right. :-)

>I just read a funny passage in Ewald where he said >everyone want to work as a skirmisher since there were a >lot of watches and purses (from dead enemies) to be had. >Well, that seems right. :-)

You would also be for more likely to get at that sort of thing without interference if you were working alone or with a rear rank man.

Interestingly enough, use of skirmishers seems to have been far more prevalent in supposedly "stodgy" European armies than they've previously received credit for. The same debate has occurred re: the Prussians in 1806 and later.

So just read that most of the troops in the 1778-79 winter were quarters in homes, plantations, barracaded houses, or huts (mainly the later). Many of the huts were built from rebel homes torn down and brought to NY for such use.

I also just read a second passage of the Light troops complaining that HQ was using the line troops too much and they were getting to enrich their purses while the lights were growing poor from not being used. I am guessing this is referring to looting dead, wounded, prisoners, camps, and homes while in the field. It appears this was an important source of income.

Ewald also said that during his time there that 121 Loyalist privateers had been launched out of NYC, with about 6,000 crewmen. Wow. That is a lot of men not serving in the land forces, and I have rarely read these numbers while authors decry the lack of Loyalist support. That is a significant number of men fighting for the Crown.

And that's sea forces. A table in the back of Atwood's book lists rank and file fit for duty for the years 1778-1781. (Not including Canada or prisoners)

Year British German Provincials
5/78 16,199 10,422 4,589
1/79 17,182 12,674 6,371
5/80 14,508 10,338 5,732
9/81 14,528 11,455 5,242

And Ewald's estimate (probably pretty close) was only Loyalist Privateers launching out of NY, so including others, that makes a more impressive Loyalist force taking to the field and sea. Funny how that always seems to be forgotten somehow. I must admit I never thought of it myself, at least in such numbers.