"British Battalion" Topic

G'Day Gents,

Does anyone know when the British battalion first had a light company added to it?

Best Regards
Art

According to Mike Chappell in the Osprey 'Wellington's Peninsula Regiments (2) The Light Infantry', from 1758 all British battalions were ordered to train one of their companies as light troops. The light companies were disbanded at the end of the Seven Years' War and weren't re-established until 1771.

IIRC the Guards were the first to raise a light inf company in some cases more than one…. As to the date, I am away from my books but defiantly post Jacobite rebellion, maybe during or as part of the learning curve during AWI…..?

I am sure one of our learned colleagues will have the ans in a minute….
*smile*

Edit: There you go that's where I would have looked! Well done SD

G'Day

Thank you for the information. How common was it to organize the grenadiers into a reserve and group the light infantry into battalions prior to the creation of the light battalions?

Best Regards,
Art

This is the general (very basic) information that I have:

"Light infantry had been introduced, largely through the exertions of Sir William Howe, shortly before the American Revolution, to provide each regiment with a corps of skirmishers. Good marksmen of light build and active temperament were required for the service. Thus the grenadiers and light infantry had come to constitute the picked men of a regiment.

During an engagement they were usually placed in the flanks, and hence were known as the "flank companies." In an army it was customary to form them into one or two special battalions in order to make their united strength available for work requiring the highest courage and skill. For example, it was the flank companies of the garrison of Boston that Gage dispatched to Lexington and Concord on that memorable April night in 1775.

At the battle of Bunker Hill, the grenadiers flanked the British line on the left and the light companies, on the right. When Howe landed at Staten Island in 1776, he organized the grenadiers into a reserve and grouped the light infantry into three battalions. During Burgoyne's expedition, 1777, the grenadier and light infantry companies were formed into an "Advanced Corps" under General Frazer. At Freeman's Farm, 7 October, 1777, the grenadiers and light infantry were disposed on the flanks of the British line. Lord Rawdon set out for the relief of Ninety-Six in June, 1781, with six flank companies of the 3d, 19th, and 30th Foot."

G'Day Gents

If I understand correctly, it was only through General Orders that a single combined battalion was formed, and remained in place until General Orders were issue to disband it?

Therefore a player could not suddenly in the middle of a game create a combined battalion…is this a safe assumption?

Best Regards
Art

G'Day Gents

Next set of questions:

The British also formed Combined Grenadier Battalions…such as at Maida.

Were there any formed in the Peninsular?

Are there accounts of a grenadier company being detached from a battalion to skirmish?

Does the rules you are using, permit a battalion to detach grenadiers to skirmish?

Best Regards
Art

I can't recall off-hand that the British formed combined grenadier battalions in the Peninsular. However, they did form 'Flank' battalions, which included both grenadier and light companies and these took part in the Battle of Bussaco, see here: link

The account of the battle indicates that the grenadier companies could take part in the skirmishing along with the light companies and rifle companies. link

Regards

G'Day

Thank you for the information.

Do you think that a line battalion would / did detach grenadiers to skirmish?

It would seem that any combined battalion / flank battalion had to be created through General Orders…

Therefore a player could not create a combined battalion / flank battalion in the middle of a game…does this seem to be correct?

Best Regards
Art

As the war progressed more and more companies of a british Bttn would skirmish or be expected to skirmish…… Not just the specialist Light companies or light inf bttns….. I will get some ref. once I am home…
Chris

I definitely don't think you could create a combined battalion in the middle of a game. It would be an organisational nightmare trying to create a new unit in the middle of a conflict. You could possibly allow it at the start of a game if you are feeling generous but I don't think it was common practice.

G'Day Gents

Once again thank you for the information provided…

As mentioned… 'as the war progressed more and more companies of a British Battalion would skirmish or be expected to skirmish '…would you think this is something that mainly occurred after 1808…and just how much of a battalion could it dedicate to skirmishing…one…two…three…or more companies at once?

As for combined battalions / flank battalions not a common practice…historically why were they created…so that it may be considered in a game?

Best Regards
Art

In answer to the first, here are a couple of instances of the grenadiers of the 28th doing skirmish stuff:

link

link

(in this latter, it seems clear that the grenadiers were out with the light company, but the light company took the lead).

Regards

As for combined battalions / flank battalions not a common practice…historically why were they created…so that it may be considered in a game?

If you notice the OOB for Barrosa, the flank battalions in general consist of the flank companies of units mainly not present in the main force. To my mind, this resembles in miniature the reasons for creating Oudinot's elites – to add new but temporary solid units whilst maintaining necessary strength elsewhere.

OTOH, the British use of combined light and grenadier battalions at Maida resembles Junot's use of composite elite company battalions at Vimiero – the formation of ad hoc 'elite' units.

Regards

Therefore a player could not create a combined battalion / flank battalion in the middle of a game…does this seem to be correct?

No, don't think so. But given a bit of time before a battle, then it should be freely available. Personally I'd make sure there was a cost to the efficiency/morale of parent units if you do this.

OTOH, if you like a lot of detail in games, you could detach one or several companies for specific tasks.

Regards

I hope Major Snort is still knocking around TMP after the latest diapora: he knows this kind of stuff inside-out.

The Light Companies of several divisions were grouped under Lt Col Cadogan of the 5/60th (iirc?) at Fuentes de Onoro. This was very much a tactical grouping, based on the ground to be fought upon that day rather than something more permanent.

Art,

I have a recollection that the light companies of a division would regularly be formed into a flank "brigade". Whether this is a General Order or SOP I am not certain.

With the settled divisions in the Peninsular I see no problem in making a decision to form the flank brigade when the division commander deemed it necessary as long as the division was not actively engaged at the time.

Not managed to find references to this unfortunately.

See here for previous discussion of British brigade light infantry battalions, including links to the relevant general orders: TMP link

Regards

@Whirlwind

Thanks to all the links, in case A Boy in the Peninsular War, seemingly the light company wasn't detached but fought along with the regiment, page 100

@vW,

Yes, I take the logic of Wellington's General Orders and the account of 'A Boy…' to indicate that the use of a 'Brigade light infantry battalion' was a choice made by Wellington, but Moore discontinued it in his period of command, and was then re-instated by Wellington on his return.

Regards

G'Day Gents,

Now that I am back, first let me thank all of you for the information presented. Now one more question.

On a one to ten scale, how would you rate their competence when detached to skirmish:

1797 Flanders:
detached flank companies

Battle of Madia:
detached flank companies

Peninsular:
detached flank companies
detached line companies

1815:
detached flank companies
detached line companies

Best Regards
Art

I'll give it a go.

If we're talking British Line battalions and we are judging them on a scale of 1-10 where 1 is newly-formed militia, unused to handling firearms and 10 is the 95th Rifles then I would say:

1797 detached flank companies: 3

Battle of Maida detached flank companies: 5

Peninsular
detached flank companies: start at 6 rise to 8
detached battalion companies: start at 4 rise to 6

1815
detached flank companies: 6 to 8 (depending on the number of veterans) so call it 7
detached battalion companies 4 to 6 (depending on the number of veterans) so call it 5

Art,

I am not sure if this will help, but it is from something I put together some time ago:

Regarding the skill of British skirmishers when compared to those of the French, the overriding opinion amongst British officers was that while the riflemen were superior to the French tirailleurs, the other British light infantrymen were normally at a disadvantage when it came to fire and movement tactics, but it is interesting to see how they coped with this supposed inferiority. This is mentioned in several memoirs:

John Blakiston of the 17th Portuguese Regiment wrote of two actions in 1814:

Certainly I never saw such skirmishers as the 95th…They could do the work much better and with infinitely less loss than any other of our best light troops…They were, in fact, as much superior to the French voltiguers, as the latter were to our skirmishers in general.

And:

The Brigade of Guards was on this occasion brought forward to bear the brunt of the action, during which their light companies received a terrible mauling from the French voltigeurs. The great John Bulls had no notion of screening themselves from the fire of their more cautious adversaries, and suffered accordingly.

Incredibly, even after this "mauling", Blakiston concluded his account of this particular action with the following: "This days work terminated as before, in the retreat of the French", so despite their lack of skill, the light companies of the Guards held their ground.

Harry Ross Lewin, who served with the 32nd Regiment in the Peninsula and at Waterloo, explained a similar reason for the perceived French superiority in skirmishing and also mentioned the way in which the British light companies compensated and generally beat their opposite number, and that was by closing in on them and forcing them to retire:

Our men, particularly in the beginning of the war, entertained very generally the absurd notion that the taking advantage of any sort of cover which lay in their way, when skirmishing, was an act of cowardice, and some of our commanders, strangely as this assertion may sound, seemed desirous to encourage them in this way of thinking. When we consider our soldiers, as such, we cannot approve of their yielding to this sense of shame; but we cannot fail to admire them, as men, for preferring danger to what they considered dishonour. How differently the old Germans thought! They were always to be seen dodging from tree to tree, or ensconcing themselves between rocks and fences, with admirable method and steadiness, while the British skirmisher would step out sturdily on the open space, and make a target of himself for the enemy. Still, in this irregular fighting, our men generally beat the French, and particularly when an opportunity presented itself for pressing forward rapidly, which their determination never suffered them to lose; and the French infantry were never
fond of coming to close quarters with our men, who, when they did, usually compelled some of them 'to shrink under their courtesy'.

Andrew Leith Hay was present amongst the skirmishers at Salamanca and noted that when the time for a decisive result arrived, the skirmishers closed in with their opponents and drove them away:

The ground between the advancing force and that to be assailed was also crowded with light troops in extended order, carrying out a very incessant tiraillade. The general desired me to ride forward, make the light infantry press up the heights to clear his line of march, and if practicable make a rush at the enemy's cannon. In the execution of this service, I had to traverse the whole extent of the surface directly in front of the 5th division; the light troops soon drove back those opposed; the cannon were removed to the rear; every obstruction to the regular advance of the line had vanished.

George Hennell wrote about the action at Vera, showing that even skirmishing British riflemen would sometimes use the same tactics of closing rapidly to drive away the enemy, despite their more accurate long range weapons:

A company of the 95th opened the business. About 20 men with 20 supporting them marched coolly up the hill. The French, who delight in a long shot, began directly our men showed their heads. However, the 95th moved regularly (I do not mean in a line) up the hill to within 30 yards of the top without firing and then, by way of breathing, gave a volley, loaded and advanced to the top, the support close behind them. The French did not attempt to defend it but moved to their left, not without music, in quick time.

James Campbell wrote about the engagement of the British 3rd Division at Vic Biggore, describing the French fighting "in their own favourite manner – skirmishing on a large scale" noting again how the British skirmishers were ordered to close in and force the issue:

Besides the 5th battalion of the 60th, a battalion of Cacadores, and our own light infantry companies, whole regiments, (and here we felt the want of knowledge of light infantry movements in all corps) only retaining some companies in reserve and for support, were engaged as sharpshooters. They were however, constantly pushed forward upon the French, and recommended not to throw away their fire in long shots, but rather, as much as possible, to endeavour to close with them; and if a halt was anywhere perceived in any part of the advancing skirmishers a staff officer was invariably sent to thepoint to ascertain the cause. The French, therefore, invariably gave way, and in their confused retreat they became exposed, in running from one enclosure to another, to the fire of our troops…but had we stood and fired, as usual on such occasions, this brilliant feat of the 3rd division would never have been heard of.

This last passage also illustrates that centre companies would also be called on to skirmish if the need arose. There are literally dozens of examples of these non-specialists being used in this role:

At Vimiero, the 71st (not yet a light regiment) threw out one section per company into the skirmish line. At Busaco, the 88th used the grenadiers and 2 centre companies to skirmish with the French voltigeurs in what is now known as the "Connaught Rocks". At Vittoria, the whole of O'Callaghan's brigade (all line regiments) was deployed successively in the skirmish line a few companies at a time. At Orthez, the entire 45th regiment was employed as skirmishers. The 50th Regiment fought in skirmish order defending a copse at St Pierre. At Quatre Bras the 79th Regiment used one of the centre companies and also "sharpshooters" drawn from other companies in the skirmish line. At the same battle two companies of the 44th Regiment also took their turn skirmishing.

These non-specialists were obviously not the equals of the light companies who normally performed this role. Speaking of O'Callaghan's action at Vittoria, Moyle Sherer, who commanded a company, noted that it was difficult to make the soldiers preserve their extended intervals and not waste their ammunition. At Fuentes de Onoro, the 79th and 24th regiments had been called upon to perform the duty of light troops. One observer commented that the 79th "instead of covering themselves by the walls and houses, chose to stand on top of the former, and were consequently knocked down very rapidly by the enemy", and in a footnote to the same passage: "The folly of not accustoming our regiments at home to the light drill occasioned in this affair not only a great disadvantage, but the loss of many valuable lives." Perhaps in recognition of the fact that all soldiers could find themselves in the skirmish line at some point, the 1824 Regulations stated that: "When battalions of the line are in perfect order in all the detail of line movements, it is essential that they should be practised in certain extended formations."

Regarding the "sharpshooters" used by the 79th at Quatre Bras and mentioned in the last post, they were probably trained and organised in a similar manner to these earlier experiments. I am not sure how widespread this practice was, but I have found no instances of flankers or marksmen in action in the Peninsular.

Henry Bunbury described the use of Flankers in the Mediterranean, and presumably this system was still in operation at Maida (note that these are in addition to the light company, who were detached from most battalions):

These were soldiers taken from the battalion companies in each regiment, and placed under the command of picked officers. They were trained to act as sharpshooters; were not told off in line with their battalions (except at review, parades) and in the field were kept in rear of the flanks of their respective battalions or brigades, ready to act either to the front or flank as occasion might require. This was a plan of Sir James Craig's and introduced in Malta in 1805. It was discontinued when Sir John Moore took command of the army.

From "Life of a Regiment", the information taken from the order book of the 2/92nd Highlanders, 16th November 1810.

Agreeable to general order, twelve men per company were selected as marksmen, size and appearance not to be considered in choosing them, but activity, intelligence, and quickness of sight. A subaltern and two sergeants from each wing to be selected to command them when ordered out. Only eight of each company to be ordered out at a time, the rest to remain as supernumeraries to supply casualties. The marksmen of a battalion to be employed for its protection when in line or column from the annoyance of the enemy's skirmishers. They are to have half the practice ammunition of the battalion allotted to their use. Targets to be five feet in diameter, each shot to be pointed out so that the man may correct his fault. First practice at 100 yards, to be increased by degrees to 200 yards. Men to fire standing and kneeling, and may use a rest; always to bring the piece up to the object. Men to learn to load without halting, and laying on the ground. Marksmen's station in battalion to be on flanks of sub-divisions. When battalion is three deep, they are to be on flank of front and rear ranks only.

Note that the 2/92nd were on home service at the time and did not serve abroad.

Oh come on guys, art asked for numbers and all you gave him was words.

Well I would mostly agree with the assessment from SJD but I would add Peninsular Light Division 8-10.

For Waterloo the Guards companies detached to Hougoumont deserve a high rating.

G'Day Gents

Once again…I want to thank all of you for the information submitted.

As for:

"Marksmen's station in battalion to be on flanks of sub-divisions. When battalion is three deep, they are to be on flank of front and rear ranks only"

This is the equivalent to the French detaching skirmishers en peloton-compagnie.

"SJDonovan"…thank you for the numbers…they seem valid…

Once Again
Best Regards
Art

Now that I am back, first let me thank all of you for the information presented. Now one more question.

On a one to ten scale, how would you rate their competence when detached to skirmish:

Art: Given 'the words' the Major supplied and what I know, assuming the defense is stronger, particularly in BUAs and not all line and flank companies are equal in skill and experience, I would say:

1797 Flanders:
detached flank companies
French 5-7 British 3-4

Battle of Madia:
detached flank companies

French 6 British 5

Peninsular: [not the 95th]
detached flank companies 4-6
detached line companies 4

French 54-7 depending on the troops

1815:
detached flank companies 4-7 depending…
detached line companies 3-5 depending…

French 4-7

Given equal numbers and quality, defensive skirmishers will most often win.

Best Regards
Bill

On a one to ten scale, how would you rate their competence when detached to skirmish:

1797 Flanders:
detached flank companies

Not very familiar with them, but 5.

Battle of Maida:
detached flank companies

6

Peninsular:
detached flank companies

starting at 5-6, ending up 7-8 ((depending on the experience of the unit)

detached line companies

starting at 3-4, ending up 4-6 (depending on the experience of the unit)

1815:
detached flank companies

6-8

detached line companies

4-6

I'd be tempted if forced to evaluate this way to give the French in general the advantage in the shooting, but the British the ability to charge and disperse the French (probably by virtue of higher morale). Unfortunately for the French, Riflemen should get the advantage in both (and so we see why Wellington dispersed them throughout his brigades).

Regards

Re. Flanders… if you expand this range to include the Guards Brigade in 1794 I think you'd have to rate them higher.

The combined Flankers of the Guards Brigade made from the 3 Grenadier Co.s of 1st, 2nd and 3rd Guards along with a combined 4th co. made from the Lights from the 2nd battalions of the 1, 2, 3 Guards all fought in Light Infantry fashion in addition to leading or covering Brigade assaults.

That their success and victories are not lauded is more a result of the failure of the campaign from a political, strategic and logistical point-of-view than a reflection of their ability to manage and overcome the challenges of skirmish warfare.

G'Day Gents,

Once more I would like to thank everyone for their input.

Now if I may shift your attention:

Again using a one to ten scale, how would you rate the following units and their competence when skirmishing.

-I am only interested in their prowess of skirmishing, not that of defending in a built up area or fighting as a formed unit.

Please keep in mind the rating that everyone gave for competence for elements detached at Madia, Peninsular, and 1815.

There are 5 units to rate…

Kings Guard:

1….Stations and Combats – 1st Battalion

1793: February – London; Greenwich; The Hague; Raismes; Famars; Valenciennes; Caesar's Camp; LINCELLES; Rosendael; Dunkirk; Catillon; December – Ghent

1794: Ghent; February – Courtrai; April – Vaux; Roubaix; Mouveaux; Tourcoing; Retreat to Bremen

2…..Stations and Combats – 2nd Battalion

1793: February – London; Greenwich; The Hague; Raismes; Famars; Valenciennes; Caesar's Camp; LINCELLES; Rosendael; Dunkirk; Catillon; December – Ghent

1794: Ghent; February – Courtrai; April – Vaux; Roubaix; Mouveaux; Tourcoing; Retreat to Bremen

3…..Note: The Guards also formed a composite light infantry battalion (combined from flank companies of all three Foot Guards regiments) which existed from July 1794 to April 1795. This was re-formed for the raid on Ostend in 1798 and broken up in April 1802.

4…..Stations and Combats – Light Battalion

1794: July – formed from flank companies; Flanders

5…..Stations and Combats – Grenadier Battalion

1793: March – formed from flank companies; Greenwich; The Hague; Raismes; Famars; Valenciennes; Caesar's Camp; LINCELLES; Rosendael; Dunkirk; Catillon; December – Ghent

1794: Ghent; February – Courtrai; April – Vaux; Roubaix; Mouveaux; Tourcoing; Retreat to Bremen

Best Regards
Art