"British musketry" Topic

Hi all,
How highly was British musketry rated during the SYW period? Would, for example, French military observers have rated British infantry as having been as good or even better in terms of musketry than the Prussians? Or is this an Anglophile myth?
Any thoughts?
cheers all,
Redcoat

I am sure there are a lot of people out there who know more than myself but I would argue while British musketry was more devastating the Prussians were better drilled. There are also a lot of variables you need to add in as well such as the declining quality of Prussian recruits and training later in the war and the fact that not many British were involved on the mainland during the SYW in comparison to their German allies.

I think you have to measure them against who they were fighting and go from there. IIRC, the French did not battle the Prussians as much as the Austrians and Russians did, and the English army fielded with many German allies fighting against the French. Soooo, compare them to their opponent, that way you have something to measure against.

nobody was ever ever ever better than the Prussians

Except the guys that beat them :P

Cardinal I tend to agree with you but why is it that we never hear of a Prussian "Fontenoy" style first volley against someone? Even Brent Nosworthy stated in one of his books about how the Royal Irish met a French Irish regiment and quickly routed them with disciplined platoon fire after a crashing first volley. The Plains of Abraham is another example of smashing British fire.

Most of what I have read shows Prussians outmanuvering their opponents ala Leuthen then turning their flank. I was always under the impression that the battles where the Prussians went head to head with the Russians or Austrians they tended to really tend to struggle. Prague and Kolin as well as Zorndorf come to mind.

Is the reason why we think British musketry was superior because most of the books published focus on the British aspects of the war? Even look at most rules sets out there. They tend to give the British a plus to shooting while giving the Prussians initiative and manuvering bonuses.

Interesting though that in just a few decades the French so completely destroyed the Prussians, and when the British tried to emulate them early in the war they got crushed by the French as well. Also interesting to note how the German allies during the AWI faired using Prussian tactics as well. The British regarded them as slow and cumbersome. Too bad they forgot that after the war.

My general impression from much reading is that most everyone was better than the French except the Reichsarmee. The Russians infantry could take a lot of punishment but did not out shoot the Prussians. If they had then they would have always won given their stubbornness

because they didn't deliver one..Frederick actually allowed them to deliver fire at relative long range..they were disciplined enough to do this and then resume moving. Even beating Prussians was a very dangerous past time.
Frederick s rule ot thumb was six rounds of fireing by platoon, supported by regimental guns did it for everybody, except the Russians. Frederick's losses tend to be down to his reckless assaults, seeming to believe his infantry were supermen, rather than being just very very good. It is frightening taht in outr M&R group our main Prussian behaves in exactly the same manner..and in one really nasty game he baulked, while a subordinate player assaulted fixed positions frontally, took terrible casualties and massacred those in front of him..it was , dareI say it…realistic
as for a first volley I think it is a myth. superior fire control expressed in platoon fire would be more likely. and the Prussians did that, and more.
the French really only had one battle against the Prussians and that was a total slagging for the French, mostly delivered by Prussian cavalry..which is another story..
Prussians shot like demons!!!1

Much as I hate the idea of National Characteristics in a wargames setting, this is an area that covers it well.

The difference in British troops is that they are very controlled until you slip the leash and then they are harder to drag back, whereas the Prussians could be reigned in.

because of this, different tactics to make use of the sttrengths evolved, neither was 'better' as each applied their own doctrines well.

they just had different doctrines.

Prussians were more afraid of their officers and NCOs than they were of the enemy.All this talk of Brits, most of the army was German

actually you can't have both a volley and platoon fire. Platoon fire is much more preferable.. volleys are sort of impressive but then everybody is unloaded.. and that was WSS the Royal Irish thing..wooden ramrods and other things.
platoon fire is continuous.. no quiet bits..two of the eight platoons are always firing..

The firings of a battalion could get quite complicated, and probably didn't last much beyond the opening firings. Houlding covers that quite well in his book, "Fit for Service."

Depends on how many firings really. The 16 specified in Kane's camp discipline probably didn't work in action, but reducing it to 8 firings was probably doable, and, interestingly enough, That is what is specified in Wolf's instructions in 1758. 8 companies, in 4 grand divisions, each grand division told off into two platoons, although Wolf says that they may be considered as one platoon "…if their numbers or circumstances require it."

So, that implies either 8 or 4 firings depending on the circumstances.

The Hessian regulations of 1767, specify that the entire battalion is to give fire before attacking with the bayonet--perhaps an echo of the 'ga-pa' attack of the Swedes, which might have been something picked up from the period when the Landgraf was also the King of Sweden in the 1730's.

So apart from blowing away the French cavalry at Minden and shattering Montcalm's infantry columns at Quebec, where else did British infantry's musketry play a decisive role on the battlefield in the SYW?

Frederick actually allowed them to deliver fire at relative long range

What would be considered relatively long range in the SYW? Duffy has contemporary sources stating that the Prussians did not open fire until they were within 70 or 80 paces of the enemy – which doesn't sound very far away at all.

I suspect Wolfe was among that group who, having previously seen action, realised that the whole idea of "platoon firing" went to hell in a handcart pretty quickly after the first volley (one officer wrote about men not wanting to be "knocked over" before they had even had a chance to fire their own muskets at the enemy).

SM

Wolfe was at Dettingen where the whole edifice of platoon firing fell apart pretty quickly as in this extract

link

By the time of Fontenoy the army had been on campaign for much longer and was more practiscd at the practical application of platoon fired. This is pretty much what Houlding says in Fit for Service. As Lt Col of the 20th (who later served at Minden) Wolfe was noted for his professional approach to training and drill.

I attribute the British infantry's better volley firing to them not wearing moustaches!

Prussian ranges.
It's true, during exercise 300 paces was the distance for the first discharge.
A contemporary veteran of IR 3 states often they fired quite mindless at even greater ranges. Looked awesome and was the best Angst-releaver next to boose. The wing closest to the enemy started and the rest of the line felt compelled to join the party anyway, even if no enemy was in sight at the other end of the line.
During the 7YW Prussian infantry fired battalion salvos when opposing infantry in a large scale engagement. The flanking bats where ordered to see off opposing cavalry with platoon fire instead (8 or 10 firings).

Regarding British fire performance during the 7YW, most is legend, I would guess, rather then hard fact, as with so many other legends such as the enormous fire rate of the Prussians. A myth it is. I have read an account from an observer of the Allied army by around April 1761. He notes Kingsley's 20th went boasting around the camp that they shoot faster then the Prussians. They claimed they had managed to reduce the number of manuals of the prussian drill, by leaving out the one or other bit. No joke. I'm serious. Now, if you accept the precondition Prussians are the fastest shooting infantry, then this account gave them the decisive edge for the award of fastest shooting bataillon of all Europe :-)
As I see the story, general Kingsley had managed to buy himself a copy of the Prussian drill (available in French from 1759 on) and at same time also the neat illustrations published by a Swiss born Prussian veteran who made a fortune with his illustrations. They spread all across Europe at around the same time with the result that most European armies adapted to the Prussian manuals.
I hope general Kingsley's set of illustrations arrived complete and wasn't missing the tempo to charge the priming pan :-)
Skipping this one sure saves you some time – but at what price!

Cheers,
Christian

You may be confusing the SYW with anecdotes of British steadfastnes in earler conflicts. The British had very little involvement as far as the fighting in Europe is concerned (other than funding it), they were off stealing various lands from natives and colonies from the Frenchies

A volley whether fired by platoons, ranks or pea shooters en masse is still a volley. It is important to remember that fire discipline quickly broke down once both parties were engaged in a fire fight and this includes the Prussians. In fact I was reading two examples today from first hand accounts related in Christophers Duffy's (groan) "Russias Military Way West" What is interesting is it was observed the Russian peasants loaded and fired faster than the overdrilled Prussians, and yet neither side maintained fire discpline past the first instance at effective musketry range.

Back to the Brits, from my understanding of historical sources the British had a certain steadfastnes as far as fire disciplne was concerned partcularly in correctly loading and aiming their muskets which prevailed further into a firefight than others. You could try modelling that into your rules

We often overlook the fact that the Prussian would deliver two to four volleys outside of effective range while advancing, effectively to steady their own troops and unbalance the enemy. Effective up to a point although by the SYW not so much so.

regards
dave

and what do the Prussians say?

An old Prussian Officer writes about the Prussians in the 7YW :

One started to fire with pelotons, two, three fired well, but then a common burning started and the usual fire where each who finished loading pulls the trigger, files and ranks are intermingling, the front rank is not even able to kneel down, even if they intended to, and the officers from below up to the generals cannot do anything any longer with this mass, but have to wait till they will move forward or backwards.
(Jany, page 47)

Gaudi, another eye witness writes about the Prussians of the 7YW :

Who will think back will have difficulties to remember that in a battle or action to have witnessed that at firing the first rank will have knelt down or did do this constantly, despite such a thing happens constantly on the drill ground, but they kept standing as the rear ranks. There one witnessed this at those troops who rightly were classed as being the best taught and disciplined, so the thought to kneel down in action must be un natural.
(Jany, page 47)

Tempelhoff another veteran writes :

The Bataillenfeuer (feux de bataille) as the fire at will was typically was called replaced in the hitherto battle in the end the drilled art. Then everybody fired who could fire and wanted to and everybody as often as he was capable without giving a damn about his neighbour or front man.
(Jany page 46 / 47)

Controlled fire fights are a myth, for that reason Frederick tried to avoid them.

A British officer wrote about the 1st Foots Guards at Dettingen,

They were under no command by way of Hide Park firing, but the whole three ranks made a running fire of their own accord. … The French fired the same manner, without waiting for words of command and Lord Sinclair [the allied commander] did often say he had never seen many a battle, and never saw the infantry engage in any other manner."
Muir page 77

There weren't many stand up battles during the F&I to compare to. Braddocks' below average regiments stood under fire for hours, but were in a military mess of a formation. The British stood firm at Fort Niagara, but not a lot of vollies there either. How many vollies at Quebec? Not many before the French (inferior troops at that point) broke. AWI did not see a lot of units standing in line either, continuously volleying. Waste of powder and men.

As far as the drill manuals or motions of any side giving them advantage – that is bunk. The commands in battle were, "Prime and load." No counted out motions, just load the musket at your own speed. The quickness of that would depend on practice and experience more than a specific manual.