"Just How Accurate Is That ........" Topic

Illustration of the 71 St Highlanders firing on some NC Militia, formed behind a snake rail fence in the Osprey Guilford Courthouse book?

It shows the front rank kneeling firing, a second rank standing firing and the officers and musicians located behind the ranks.

It's a lovely picture, but is it correct?

AFAIK it's totally incorrect.

I'm not sure what you are asking is correct? His outfit? Him kneeling and firing? Everything?

I was told that the two-rank line, for movement and for fire, was standard for British regulars serving in North America in the AmRev. That the practice had developed during the F&IW and continued during the AWI. The Hessians retained the three-rank line. I think Steuben's regulations for the Continentals also required two ranks.

Two ranks was considered too 'weak' a formation for theaters where cavalry was likely to be encountered, but well-suited for North America, where there was no cavalry to speak of, since it extended the battalion over a wider front and made movement faster.

And then the line became even more extended with the adoption of 'loose files'.

Did British troop kneel to fire in the front rank?

Officers and musicians to the rear--definitely.

The 1764 Manual Exercise called for a unit (platoon, grand division etc) to be drawn up in three ranks. In order for all the ranks to fire in a volley the first rank had to kneel. The following pages show what each rank had to do during the firings (see this and the following page on the following link)

link

and

link

When the number of ranks was reduced to 2 then both ranks could fire at the same time so there was no need for the front rank to kneel. Likewise the the von Steuben 'Prussian' regulations call for continentals to form up in two ranks and both stand to give fire.

The two rank system seems to have been adopted unversally by 1777 (although IIRC there was discussion elsewhere on TMP which suggested it was in use as early as 1775 in Boston but have been unable to find a reference to that):

33rdfoot.org/open-files.html

So by GCH in March 1781 the 71st would be drawn up in two ranks and would not have needed the front rank to kneel to fire. The Adam Hook plate in the GCH Osprey is just plain wrong.

It is hard to add Anything to what Thomas wrote. Well written and throughout. There are references in the General Thomas Gage papers and Howe's orderly book to changing to two ranks. Most probably before April 19 and definitely at Bunker Hill. Ltd Mackenzie 23rd RWF mentioned learning new light infantry drill just before April 19 raid.

The article on Howe's light infantry discipline is very well done. It is especially nice I was one of the people thanked for providing Information and they spelled my name correctly. Neither happened too often.

Hesse Cassel troops adopted two-rank line during the New York campaign; what they did not do was open up the files like their British colleagues (they were specifically prevented from doing so by the Elector himself).

In line, for all nations, only the company commanders would be visible; subalterns and sergeants would either be to the rear of the rear rank (one sergeant would be "covering" the company commander, ie immediately behind him). Commanders of companies to the right of the colours would be on the extreme right of their company; those to the left of the colours, on the extreme left.

Regardless of which "order" the line adopted, the men operated in "files" and the rear rank man would always be behind the front rank man.

I've been reenacting AWI for almost 20 years,and doing all sorts of drill. NONE,have the front rank kneeling that I know of.
I believe the French did use it though.

Bob

One-hundred years later:

YouTube link

Look at the 1:00 mark

I did a search online for Charles T. Kamps, Jr., FILE SPACING REVISITED, and came upon the following PDF paper (which I assume is a researched, currently prepared field maneuver manual for contemporary day AWI reenactors). (?)

PDF link

On page four the following paragraph is written:

"The basis for the spacing under this premise is on the light infantry's motions in "firing, advancing." In this, the men are in two ranks at open order. The front rank fires, and the rear rank then passes between front rank men, to the right of their file leader, kneeling and firing in turn when the front rank is ready. The front rank then advances between the rear rank men, to the left of their file follower, kneeling and firing in turn when the rear rank is ready. This can be continued as long as necessary."

This manual is nicely illustrated, and warrants a look just for the diagrams and detail included. I certainly can't make a judgment on the validity on the written paragraph above, but there seems to be differences in opinions within the available sources.

FlyXWire

An interesting find, pity it is not sourced. The section to which you refer seems to be based on Townshend's instructions for light infantry companies which introduced firing by pairs. With Zeal and Bayonets Alone pp 246 and 247 has some discussion of this and it seems, to me at any rate, to refer to single light companies skirmishing rather than whole battalions operating in line. However see for yourself

link

link

Thomas,

That may indeed be the case. Here's perhaps the complete "Orders on the Irish Establishment" by Townshend:

PDF link

Interesting what is advised if Lt. Infantry chances to encounter enemy cavalry – if not into woods, or to a strong defensible position – disperse, rather than attempt to form up in the open.

FlyXwire

Thanks for the link to Townshend's 'Orders'. From the 40th Light Bobs website no less, a first rate re-enactment unit. I shall enjoy reading it later.

I always love it when re-enactors claim some sort of special insight or knowledge…. (now running for cover!!!)

The Manual of Arms does not call for kneeling. I have a copy printed in 1775.

PVT641

Intriguing, it would be great if you could give some further information beyond publication debate.

However the two links I gave in my earlier post concerning what the three ranks should do come from an edition of the 1764 Manual Exercise published in Philadelphia in 1776 (sadly the copper plates are not included in the online edition).

link

No front rank kneeling! Besides, it's harder for us older reenactors to "spring to our feet" anymore…:)

Three ranks was the standard in both wars n N. America, but modifications were made. There has always been some question whether the first or third rank were done away with. Amherst's orders were to do away with the third rank in 1759 – though it could be used when needed. And there is some question on the formations Wolfe used at Quebec. The Doolittle drawings show ranks of three at Lexington and Concord

link

Howe went back to ranks of two, starting in 1776. The formations used at Bunker Hill are not clear.

All version of Blands (including the 1759 revision), Cumberland's, and the '64 drill call for ranks of three.

It could be the commander of the battalion or brigade made that decision based on circumstances prior to the battle.

For a re-enactor experience, the front rank kneeling is somewhat impractical (beyond the knees of the re-enactors).

This is why it was necessary for the first rank to kneel when in three ranks illustrated by an extract of a painting of the Black Watch exercising on Glasgow Green prior to embarkation in the FIW:

link

and some re-enactor footage:

Remove one rank (be it third or first as was done in the British Army in North America by at least 1777) and the remaining two can fire with both ranks standing, there is no need for a kneeling front rank.

Spring in "With Zeal and With Bayonets Only" outlines Gage's revision of the standard battle formation in the weeks before Bunker Hill- "The troops will draw up two deep on their regimental parades…" and this was reported by observers on the day of Bunker Hill: "The troops were drawn up two deep on the beach in one line.." (Capt. Hon. Charles Stuart); "Our disposition on the 17th was one long straggling line two-deep." (Maj. Gen Henry Clinton).

Nonetheless, the British infantry at Bunker Hill appear to have been formed in close order, providing a solid target for American musketry and unable to negotiate obstacles in their path without breaking formation and losing momentum. Neither fish nor fowl.

Post script: The question of whether the first or third rank was subtracted would seem to be redundant. Is not the relevant detail that one rank of three was dispensed with, leaving the same number of troops to form up in two ranks instead?