"Square Formation in SYW" Topic

Hi all,

I recently read that the first mention of the use of the square formation in drill books appeared at late 17th century. However almost every battle of the SYW era I read so far did not mention that the infantry fought versus cavalry with something else than the usual line formation. Do you know if the square formation really used as the standard (not occasionally) infantry formation vs cavalry attack during the SYW? If not what maybe was the inhibiting factor against its use?

Thanks,

Vaggelis

I think battalions formed more closely than they did in the Napoleonic Wars, making flanks much less vulnerable. At Mollwitz Frederick had two lines of infantry with battalions of grenadiers in the gaps at either end who could turn to form a square at the brigade/army level; so the Austrian cavalry who swept away their opponents could not take advantage of their posiiton.
Perhaps the troops were more professional, so that in 3 ranks they could see off cavalry to their front – though I don't know how well that 'professionalism' would have been maintained given the casualties throughout the war.

At the rout of Rossbach the 4 battalions of Swiss regiments Planta and Diesbach are said to have formed squares and partially covered the retreat of their comrades.

No expert here but our game group does not allow a square for this period. Neither do any of the rule sets we use.

My guess would be that steady, professional infantry can see cavalry off in line. The British did it in a number of occasions, on at least one by reversing the rear rank.

Age of Reason allows for square formation but it is so infrequently used. You are generally better off receiving the charge in line with the potential to loose off a devastating volley at point blank range than take the risk of failing going into square and not causing any casualties and getting run down.

Squares were used in the SYW – the Irish Brigade did at least once that I know of – but they were uncommon because as noted unshaken steady professional infantry in line are pretty hard to beat

Out of curiosity, if as mentioned above professional steady infantry in line can see off cavalry, what changed in the Napoleonic Wars that makes infantry form square at the sight of cavalry? Many infantry units of various nations were steady and professional.
Or was it as noted also above that the flanks were more fluid?

It was based on a few things(from my view)

1. Less steady infantry with only british beeing profesjonals all others concripts while some where good concripts very few has the number of years under their belt as a SYW soldier. Also I'm not sure anybody botherd to tell infantry that they could shoot apart a cavalry attack. It seems infantry became very unsteady when cav was close by.

2. More spaced out formations(I think the AWS and SYW are kinda uniqe) If you read about say WSS or GNW battles they "feel" more more like Napoleonic battles. When I read about SYW battles they feel very diffrent from WSS, GNW or Napoleonics. When you don't have a complete line of infantry to give steady fire. There is a bigger chance of been flanked.

Up through the SYW armies tended to deploy in one single formation. This started to break up late in the SYW. By the French Revolution, armies were routinely broken into divisions and later corps, with many more flanks open on the battle field. Drill also kept increasing over the whole period, so squares could be formed faster. Drill continued to improve after this period until improved firepower rendered close order drill suicidal.

Add in the inevitable decline in standards as armies were increased in order to keep up with the French levee en masse and you have different conditions, no more small professional armies.

Not quite SYW but two reasonably well documented instances of infantry in square-

WSS large skirmish/small battle at Elixhem 1705. After the rout of the Franco-Bavarian cavalry, the French infantry are reported by some contemp sources as leaving the field in good order in a large multi-battalion square to deter any pursuit by the British and allied cavalry.

In the WAS at Dettingen in 1743, the British infantry are reported as forming square in the early stages of the battle during the first charges of the Maison du Roi. One account has Gen Huske's Regt (32nd Foot) almost caught whilst forming square but that Huske himself (serving as a Brigadier) took charge of the Grenadiers of the regiment to hold the French off with close range fire while the rest of the unit completed its manoeuvre.

Both of these accounts are slightly anecdotal but certainly do reference the forming of squares.

Interesting stuff, looks like there could be a good study of the employment of the square in the horse and musket period.
Another side note, as the rifle age came on, the square was no longer needed, such as the thin red line during the Crimean War, but is this again more of a case that if confronted face on, steadfast infantry could repulse a cavalry charge to the front ( horses don't like sharp pointy bayonets ), to being if the cavalry got on your flank zone or threaten to, the best bet was to form square just in case?
So in the earlier period due to linear tactics this was much more unlikely, but in later periods with lighter more manoeuvrerable cavalry and more spaced brigades the opportunity to flank required forming square much sooner?

Thanks all of you for the piece of knowledge you offered me!

Vaggelis

Weren't there Russian infantry squares at the battle of Poltava in 1709?

Maybe worth pointing out two things--the Napoleonic British are almost always a two-rank line, which is too thin to discourage cavalry, so now even the good professional infantry need squares. And remember--though few rules do--how much faster you can form square from the ubiquitous Napoleonic column of divisions than from the 18th Century line. So now it's more necessary AND quicker and easier, which is a pretty good combination.
I also suspect--can't prove--that forces which were seriously out-skirmished used squares to cope with infantry. Certainly done later in a colonial context.

First, we need to face an uncomfortable fact: the idea of forming squares purely against cavalry is a wargamerism. Squares were formed – and practised regularly – in order to deal with attack from more than one direction, by anyone. Peebles' journal, from the AWI, mentions the practice of forming square during marches into the countryside. There are about a dozen occasions when squares were formed during the AWI; whilst cavalry was often involved at some point, infantry were usually the main protagonist. Cavalry was at something of a premium during the conflict, and there would have been little or no need to do this if that was the only threat that required it.

What happened during the FRW and Napoleonic Wars was that (a) the battlefield became bigger and more fluid – for example, the attachment of light cavalry to what had previously been exclusively infantry formations, became the norm; and (b) the quality of infantry deteriorated as armies increasingly became conscripts.

Prior to this, WSS/WAS/SYW infantry fought in continuous lines, the ends of which were "sealed off" with more units in columns (FtG used battalions of grenadiers), so you essentially had a moving rectangle. Forming square tended to be the preserve of the rearguard (see the example above concerning the Swiss regiments at Rossbach) and, as other posters have suggested, was to thwart all troop types – not just cavalry.

Here are David Dundas' on the response of infantry in line to cavalry from 'Principles of military movements: chiefly applied to infantry'(1788):

"Fire alone certainly ought not to stop the progress of a determined cavalry, and it is hardly credible how few men and horses are at the instant brought to the ground, by the most steady and well directed fire; therefore it seems eligible in some situations to prepare openings, towards which the cavalry will naturally swerve, and through which perhaps the whole will find their way.

But undoubtedly, there is much danger in allowing the line to be pierced, or in altering a disposition at the instant of being threatened by cavalry: and therefore in line of battle, where the flanks of the army are covered, where the getting round them would be a considerable and critical operation, and where the uniform front is to be maintained, the attack of the cavalry is at any rate to be opposed by steadiness, supporting corps, and a heavy constant well directed fire of musketry and artillery—Notwithstanding these, should a part of the enemy break through the line, it is an event that ought by all to be expected, but not without its remedy— When the troops are thus prepared, they will be the less surprised to see cavalry in their rear, who cannot long remain to advantage between the lines, under a fire in all directions (if the infantry are steady) and who also are liable to be attacked when in disorder by the supporting cavalry." From 'Of The Retreat' p.180

Previous discussion on 18th Century squares:-

TMP link