"1809 French Infantry ratings" Topic

I have been putting an orbat together for the French forces at Aspern Essling 1809. I ave already assigned quality ratings to the majority of the troops but I struggling with some of the French line units. I use the following system of Guard, Elite, Veteran, Trained, Raw and Militia. I have designated the majority of the french ligne as Trained with a smattering of Veteran units and I have rated the 57th as Elite. Would any of the french 3rd battalions be rated as raw? Are there any other stand out units that you would expect to be higher than average. I have also added the Young Guard as Veteran rather than anything higher… thoughts would eb appreciated.

Essentially, III Corps veteran – 57th possibly elite, the rest of the line trained.

Most of the provisional and 4th battalions raw, maybe some of the composite grenadier/voltigeur battalions could be a grade up.

Young Guard as veteran? Possibly rather depends what that means in your rules – ordinary with above average elan is what you're looking for I think.

The other stand out units were the Hessian brigade and the Wurttemburg light brigade.

Veteran is just a grade between trained and elite. The rules focus on grand tactical battles with the battalion being the smallest unit represented. Its not important in the rules to differentiate between elan and training, its just a representation of battalion effectiveness. better than trained seemed the obvious choice with elite being a little too much imho so i just opted for veteran. Most of the demi brigades would be raw then?

Crisis on the Danube by James Arnold has an appendix that discusses the troop ratings for both sides together with the commanders and is aimed at wargamers.

link

My copy is currently is storage so I can di it out.

EWJ

This is regarded by many as the high point of the French Empire. As a result many rules have a high percentage of the army rated as high (veteran, elite ). There is some discussion about this when the designer includes reduction of forces after the invasion of Spain in 1808.

Interesting, I would respectfully disagree that it was the high point, I would suggest instead that it was the first major campaign fought AFTER the high point had been passed.

In my reading the Campaign of 1806/1807 was the high point and the experience of the Grande Armee through the Winter in East Prussia and the terrible battles around Eylau with their resulting attrition of the veteran rank and file plus the officer casualties saw the the start of the decline.

Next, of the veterans that are left, Napoleon picks a fight in Spain and sends another large contingent off to fight there.

When 1809 comes around only Davout's veteran III Corps is still intact BUT it too suffered 30% casualties at Auerstadt.

I think if you break it down into the various arms you could say that the cavalry were still at their height in 1809, they recovered quicker from 1806/1807 but the infantry "peak performance" had been passed. The 1809 Campaign, specifically Aspern and then Wagram, knocked the edge off the cavalry, especially the heavy regiments and they never fully recovered their peak confidence and elan. The artillery was the one arm pretty consistent throughout the whole period.

The Grand Armee was never as good after 1807 in my reading and this is reflected in 1809 and especially at Aspern-Essling and Wagram.

My thoughts, massive generalisations of course, Nick

Zippee's formulation is more or less how I do it, though of course it is a simplification. It is also (more or less) what Arnold recommends in Crisis on the Danube. It is a bit of a simplification.

Oudinot's II Corps was made up of 4th battalions, and would be Raw in your system, apart from Tirailleurs Corse and du Po – veteran. Davout's III corps are veterans apart from Demont, who are raw. I don't hold with giving special status for the 57 Ligne or 10 Leger – the accounts of their series of brilliant defeats rather reeks of propaganda than cool analysis. They had also suffered somewhat in the early battles of the campaign. Messena's IV Corps (except St-Hillaire borrowed from Davout – veteran) and the army of Italy (not at Aspern Essling, of course) is best treated as Trained, though I am sure they were quite variable, having been pulled together in an ad hoc way. Individual units were capable of heroism, but the performance at Sacile, for example, was, to be generous, nothing special.

Young Guard veteran, Middle Guard elite and Old Guard guard. Confederation troops trained, except as Zippee suggests the Wurttemburg lights (not at Aspern Essling) and (perhaps) the Hessians. The Saxons (not there either) were still a bit 18th Century but I wouldn't rate them as raw.

Thanks for your help chaps.

Many do consider the creation of the Young Guard by drafting veterans and elite troops as the reason the quality of french Line regiments declined. So was the high point the year before the Young Guard was created?

I suggest this is two things – Spring 1809 is the high watermark of empire, domination from Atlantic to Pacific barring a few outlaws in Spain and the Tyrol. Pax Napoleonica.

Militarily for the French Army, the pinnacle was Spring 1805 – war and casualties take an inexorable toll from thereon in.

The restructure of 1808 and creation of an expanded guard and 4th battalions, etc is all a recognition of the fact that the old army needs to be replaced with a new one.

Don't conflate the pinnacle of the army with the pinnacle of empire.