"French Cavalry Charge during the WSS?" Topic

Did the French Horse Charge at the trot using pistols or just Charge out right? or either? Did the British and Dutch horse use pistols or not?

My understanding is that the French delivered what was called a caracole which was a kind of rolling volley with pistols and I'm not sure if they even got up to a trot. It is said that Marlborough ordered the British to charge with the sword only and I think the Dutch followed suit.

I seem to recall that at Fontenoy at least Chevert got his dragoons up to something more like a gallop than a trot when he successfully delivered his charge… so my guess would be both, especially with a more spirited commander. I also seem to recall that it was much harder to get the Dutch and Austrian horse on the move let alone at anything more than a sedate trot… although it is true that earlier the Dutch had adopted the British charge and this may have stuck around – again.. depends probably a lot on commander and circumstances.
There is an excellent quasî-animated depiction of Fontenoy in the Invalides well worth taking the time to look at several times if you get the chance (and are not running around mesmerised by all the surrounding artefacts…)
C

French cavalry charged at the gallop but in relative disorder. They could fire a pistol before they charged but usually didn't. British and Dutch charged at the trot & were not supposed to fire, although they did sometimes.

Neither of these were what we usually think of as a charge. That was only being done by the Swedes at the time.

As far as I can remember, by reading Nosworthy book I learned that the real problem of WSS french cavalry was the lack of unified training procedures. So there were some regiments which fired before attacking, others which fired without contact, others which attacked at cold steel. However it seems that none made a full-tilt charge in the swedish fashion-

Apologies – I misread – I thought we were in WAS – ignore my comments.

Alt Fritz is generally right. But realize that the French cavalry performance was generally better than thought since most history we read especially Chandler is Anglo centric. So, a mix of tactics depending on the regiments colonel's preference. Remember sometimes, the regiment was ordered not to charge but to receive charge at halt with carbines since the risk of charging was a financial risk to colonel since regiment was his investment. I have not found a good source on these tactics of French after extensive research, only the primary biographical accounts of Merode Westerloo and De La Colonie along with a few accounts of Irish or other English speakers in French Service who make passing comments that fell into the contemporary scholarship/record.

British Cav only uses swedish cold steel tactics if Marlborough is present.

Or if commanded by Overkirk or Wurtemburg.

The French army in the WSS performed well up to Regiment and Battalion level, it is above that that the issues they had hit until Berwick takes command.

At Ramilles the French Cavalry did nothing wrong, they were just swept away without a chance by superior tactics on the day.

A mixture of tactics was used by all and not just the French. We are talking here of 'usual' tactics and actual tactics would vary in all armies & depending on circumstances.

No one else is using Swedish tactics of this era, although some use the Swedish tactics of the 1640's or variants. Swedish tactics of this period were copied by Frederick the Great from the 1740's. They were then copied by others and replaced the obsolete tactics used by both the British and French in the WSS.

British tactics in the WSS were the same/similar everywhere, i.e. in Spain as well. They got mixed results in both Flanders and Spain. Victory usually going to the side with more cavalry or that was better able to concentrate it.

Thanks everyone for your help. New to the period I am look at rules and was confused by seemingly contradictory views on how the Cavalry of these particular Armies behaved. I can see now that it is complicated and varied quit a bit.

The whole French charged using pistols was largely a myth brought on by the closing actions of French Horse at Blenheim. During the initial phases of Blenheim, the French Gendarmes charged with cold steel and checked the the Allied advance. Toward the end, the French center was hopelessly outnumbered and outclassed. The most of the horse fled after firing shots from the saddle.

At Oudenarde, Ramillies and Malplaquet the French cavalry acquitted themselves very well against the Allied cavalry. They used cold steel.

They were every bit as good as the allied cavalry but were often outmatched and out maneuvered.

*outmatched = outnumbered.

Not sure about Chandler being so Anglo-centric. If you read the cavalry chapters in say his 'art of warfare in the age of Marlborough' you will see that he actually devotes much of them to the exploits of the French cavalry not the British, and concludes that for for much of the period up to 1700 "there was no stopping the French cavalry".

Participant accounts by non-British senior cavalry officers on both sides at Blenheim- Jorgen Rantzau of the allied side and the Marquis of Westerloo on the French- give a clear view that much of the French cavalry's difficulties were caused by stopping or moving slowly in order to give fire before the two sides met. The Dane Rantzau went on to implore his Sovereign to revise standard Danish cavalry regulations to match the sword only tactics he had been ordered to use (pres by Marlborough but not explicitly stated iirc) on the day of battle.

That doesn't mean of course that the French lost every cavalry fight at Blenheim or elsewhere- they obviously didn't. But it tended to put them at a disadvantage on the whole against troops using a fast(er) sword only approach.

Another problem with the French cavalry even at this early period, was the relatively poor quality of their horseflesh, and their bad horse management. Captured french cavalry horses were generally given to allied Dragoon regiments if used at all, and they although both armies suffered from outbreaks of glanders and similar equine diseases, these hit the French cavalry much worse. The pre-Blenheim epidemic which dismounted about 15 sqns worth of French cavalry is only the best known of several such incidents. The horses which survived these epidemics were often chronically weakened, reducing effectiveness.

Nonsense. All British troops get +1, Imperial troops no modifiers and French and Dutch all get -1.

British cavalry because they charge with swords at a good round trot, infantry because they fire platoon volleys, artillery because they eat roast beef.

The French cavalry get -1 because they fire pistols and caracole, the infantry because they eat garlic, and the Dutch just because they are not British.

I would take issue with that.

But since we have the same name, I must agree wholeheartedly! Vincents: presenting a united front against a hostile world! : )

vtsaogames- well that's a balanced input clearly drawing on identified historical material.
I'm sure that's just a piquant taster to something much more substantial, and we all look forward to the sourced contribution you're presumably about to make.