"Question about Franches de la Marine Units" Topic

Does anyone here know? Would Franches de la Marine units during the FIW fight strictly in open order as irregular units? Or were they capable of fighting in close order as well, therefore obtaining more of a Light Infantry designation?

Just in case they didn't fight in close order, my follow-up question is this: Then what is difference between them and, say, your standard Canadian Militia?

Thanks!

They observed the appropriate drill and in theory could function in close order, at least on Sunday parade. But that was never their intended function so it is highly doubtful their captains spent much time on drill as opposed to functional activities they would actually use. Certainly Montcalm's attempt to create two battalions of "marines" is rightly judged a failure. They were at their best fighting "le petite guerre."

They used the French Army drill manual. Due to the small size of their detachments, they probably did not have much operational opportunity to function as line troops, but the drill would have been part of their training. A large number of marines were assigned as replacements for depleted regular army line battalions after the French surrender and, a large percentage of French (but Canadian born) marine officers went to France to carry on with their military careers in the regular army. I am sure they were more comfortable fighting Indians on their own terms as opposed to going toe to toe with a British line.

I seem to recall that at the siege of Quebec and the Battle od St.Foy Franches de la Marine companies were combined into their own battalion.

For the record, they were not marines according to our modern understanding. Their title translates as "the Independent Companies of the Navy," and they should be understood as colonial infantry operating under the jurisdiction of the Minister of Marine (Navy) and Colonies, rather than the Minister of War. So they should definitely be regarded as regular troops and surely capable of fighting in close order if the situation called for it, but they would have had very little opportunity for training at anything higher than company level. They were called independent companies for a reason, and would normally have been widely scattered in small detachments throughout the vast Canadian wilderness.

I would also point out that they were largely garrison troops, not field troops. Their garrison duties took up a large amount of their time – improving the fortifications, water/wood call, hunting, farming, sentry duty, patrols, etc. I am not aware of them getting any special woods training. At least some/many of the Colonial Marine soldiers were not from North America. I have read they had Dutchmen in their ranks, and one famous journal is by a soldier from Paris, France.

Being a garrison soldier on the frontier does not impart any special knowledge or ability to fight in the woods or with the Indians. Again, going by the one journal, this man could read and write, so they used him for the artillery. It is not clear if he transferred from the Colonial Marines to the Colonial Artillery, or simply served with guns at different posts as a Colonial Marine. While serving at Fort Duquesne (and elsewhere), he was often tapped to work with the Quarter Master and the fort's stores. He was talking into going hunting with and Indian, who then disappeared on him. Some other Indians just happened to come along (wink, wink) and they tried to kidnap him and hold him for ransom back to the fort. Rather erstwhile allies if you ask me. One of the things that really comes through when you read his journal is that the French did not trust the Indians at all.

There is another account in his journal that while at the post at Detroit, when the commandant met with a large group of Indians – outside the fort – they made sure all the cannon were loaded in case trouble broke out with them.

While the Marines are often credited (especially by wargamers here) with exceptional woods fighting ability, I'm not sure what that conclusion is really based upon. While I would give much more credit to that ability to many of the French Canadian officers who led them (and even then, not all the Colonial Marine officers were French Canadian – some were from France), I would tend more to credit the Indians they often served with in some of the more famous battles of the war.

I would cite the post-battle at Lake George as an example showing the Colonial Marines were not so good on their own without their Indian allies.

You also have to take into account that many of the Colonial Marines serving in these remote outposts often spent a lot of their time getting to their new post, or going back to larger winter garrisons, and shepherding supplies back and forth as well. Point being – that takes away from drill time and also means the fall/winter/spring garrisons were smaller and even more of the mundane garrison work fell on those few that remained out on post.

I know Chartrand mentions an initial lack of woodsman skill (pre F&IW), and an increase in such skill as the years went on (to include the F&IW). While they may not have been experts, it might be safe to assume that they were better prepared for the wilderness than regular army line troops from Europe.

Perhaps marginally, but I would give more credit to their Indian allies and their Canadian born officers that led them.

As the war progressed, the British and their colonial allies fielded some pretty effective forces of their own. I'd give the edge to the French early in the war, and shift that edge to the British as the war went on. Just my take based on my readings.

I suspect that a lot of the frontier experience the Colonial Marines got was acquired in just their normal back and forth to the various posts. Hard work made hard men.

Having read that excellent book on the VA frontier and the experiences of that young man Washington, it is hard to identify just how many French and/or Canadians went out with the Indians on raids – thus getting a chance to acquire woodland skills.

The Virginians often referred to the French and Indian raids, and in one instance a French officer was captured (thus showing that a.) there were white men along at least once in a while, and b.) he may have not been that good at woodland skills since he got caught). However, it is not clear, at least on the VA/Western PA frontier, how many white men went out on said raids. Cubbison's book on the Forbes campaign notes that until Grant attacked the fort in mid-September, the French and their Indian allies had no idea Forbes was not coming at them via the old Braddock road. Point being – doesn't seem like anyone was out scouting, at least in that direction – red or white.

Thanks, guys. I knew I'd come to the right place!

I feel like I told you how the clock worked, but didn't give you the time.

Recruits received the normal training of soldiers and were shipped off to their posts. Marines seemed to have served, more or less, at the company level. How much time they spent on drill vs all the other duties is a matter of speculation. Those stationed in or near the big cities, probably more as there was less work maintaining their post – unlike the forts. Those at forts likely had little time to do the required manual exercises due to their other duty requirements. I am not award that Colonial Marines received any special woods training, other than that acquired on patrols – which apparently did not go very far from Fort Duquesne.

In regards to the militia, it was called up for service in times of emergency or during normal drill cycles (once or twice a year). It ranged from city dwellers to those living on the frontiers. Likely they drilled a lot less than their Colonial Marine companions. They certainly had no training program on woodland fighting, though their personal experiences may have varied.

It is interesting to note that in Preston's book on the Braddock campaign, he states that the more experienced frontier militia were left at posts above Fort Duquense, and that the militia that went all the way to the fort were largely from the St. Lawrence river valley, making them likely farmers. A big part of the militia's job was to provide muscle and rowers for getting supplies and troops back and forth to the outposts. How they really should be rated is rather subjective, though at Braddock's defeat they ran, and they got whomped at the post Lake George battle.

To talk about the militia a little bit I have read that the militia from Montreal were the best at woods/indian fighting by the time of the FIW.
Mark

What is that based upon and where did they fight?

By the time of the FIW, the French had 150 years of experience in Canada. I've read all of Parkman's books and would rank Pioneers of France my favorite. Quite a number of engagements recounted here (interesting French/Spanish/Indian conflict in Florida too). So I don't doubt the denizens of Montreal knowing a thing or two about woodcraft and indian fighting.

Can you tell us where they were employed? I don't doubt some French Canadians had frontier experience, but I doubt they did as a whole. I would point out that using that logic you could say the same thing about the British colonials as well.