"How many sections were in a Prussian Zug?" Topic

I'm working on some 3D printable company bases for all the major belligerents in the Napoleonic era. I've got the French, British, and Russians, and Austrians down. I've got a less-well designed diagram for the Prussians, so I thought I'd ask here.

Also, was there a file left empty between the sections? Thanks!

Prussians – when? New – or Old Prussian Army?

How detailed are you going with stands smaller than a platoon?

Prussians (and many others) had 4 companies in a battalion and each company was made up of two Zug. Terms often don't translate well, but it looks like a Zug is the same as a "section"= half company. See diagrams in the following document.

link

I think I figured it out:

The individual bases are zugs. Only one zug has a company HQ, which is why they are two colors. Two zugs in a company, 4 companies total. There is also a battalion HQ and a regimental band.

Compare that to the French system:

These are all available for download and 3D printing at forwardmarchstudios.com.
I'm working on proper tactical formations finally. 3D printing has become so cheap recently that units like these cost a buck or two.

Zug is a platoon, 2 platoons to a company.
The Prussians firing by platoon went 2,4,6,8,7,5,3,1

link

14Bore- I've seen that diagram; it's the 18th century formation. The one I modeled is the post 1807 battalion.

I ordered a division of French infantry already, as well as a division of French cavalry. I may follow up the order with some Prussians, Russians,and Austrians. Interestingly, the Russian company formations are almost identical to the Prussian ones.

Post 1807 a Prussian battalion had 4 companies, each of it was devided in two Züge (Zug = singular, Züge = plural) – the Züge had subunits called Sektionen / sections, they could be at the maximum 6 files (a file of 3 men, 3 ranks) strong.

In this context Zug is the tactical formation, in older times a Zug could be a quarter of a company as well, for manoeuvring for example, to make matters complicate.

The firing by pelotons was changed during the times of the French Revolution and they fired alternately, in 1806 it was hardly used and the most common fire was fire at will.

con Winterfeldt-
Do you think that there was a gap between the sektionen, or did an NCO stand in it?
This is precisely the question I've been trying to answer. Diagrams show French infantry companies deployed in platoons and sections, but even the original Prussian material shows an unbroken line of 30 files for a full strength zug. I'm beginning to think that the zug really were a monolithic formation. You can see what I'm talking about in the pictures above.

Interestingly, the French also seemed to have less NCOs standing behind the ranks compared to other armies.

There was no gap between Sektionen. The Zug was the element of manoeuvre, and related to other nations' companies, in a similar system to that used by the Russians. Only having 4 Kompanien meant that the King only had to pay 4 Captains. In the 1812 manual, a Sektion was half a Zug. Column by Sektions might be used to pass a defile.

Snapper69- great, good to hear it! So I got it : )

@snapper69

Can you direct me to the regulation of 1812 – and tell me where it is stated that a Sektion was half a Zug, checking the regulations I find

Die Züge werden in Unterabtheilungen getheilt, welche man Sectionen nennt, sie dürfen nicht über sechs und nicht unter vier Rotten stark seyn**).

23**)Sectionen zu vier Rotten dürfen nur da Statt finden, wo keine andre Abtheilungsart möglich ist. Ein Zug z.B. von 16 Rotten wird nicht in 4 Sectionen a 4 Rotten, sondern in einer zu 6, und zwei zu 5 Rotten abgetheilt.

I agree that there was no gap between the sections, but a section as seen above was smaller than half a company

How weird that this has somehow got confused with another post about a British Company set up.

But I will say it again. You are all wrong.

A Zug is a train. I travelled across Europe in 1971 with two friends on one of these Europe Rail card things. A month of sleeping on trains and railway stations, starving and broke. But I still remember that a Schnellzug was an express train!

deadhead- is it possible words have changed in meaning? No trains were used in 1813. The French use he term peloton for bike race main grouping.

How can you say this?

"No Trains were used in 1813"

There was a Train of the Imperial Guard!

Every army had a train. OK, they needed horses and were maybe a little slower than modern German railways (not so British local rail services though)

OK seriously, of course I understand that Zug is nowadays probably the best way to get from Rome to Paris (even after a volcano, with no flights, it would have been cheaper than the taxi we took). I am sure there was something like a Zugunteroffizierbefehlshaber rank back in 1815 however, or, if not, they would have created one, knowing the German language

@von Winterfeldt

You are perfectly correct in your criticism, despite the snide manner of presentation.

I will refrain from directing you to the Regulation, as your quote shows that you already have it.

The extrapolation of the text shows that the Zug would normally form 3-4 Sektionen.

Sorry for any confusion caused by my errant memory!

Zug has many meanings, like in chess – move – you would use the word Zug, also like an air draft, a Luftzug, nevertheless the plural is still Züge – and not plätone

ISTR that the German language has the fewest words of any European language. Zug is a great example of how the same word can repurposed by the context.

I never knew that about German language. It has some of the longest words, but perhaps therefore the fewest! I suspect von W has some personal advantage over most of us in interpreting the Zug of 1815

Ah, well, you see what German does is to string related words together into one longer one. So the very long words are simply several words with the spaces removed.

This has the great advantage of removing ambiguity. In English, if you talk about a black cab driver, you could be talking about the driver of a black cab, or about a cab driver who is black. If English instead assembled compound words like German does, the former would be "blackcabdriver" and the latter would be "black cabdriver". The actual construction we use – "black cab driver" – is ambiguous in a way it couldn't be in German.

My favourite example is the German word Geschlechtsverkehr. This word is compounded from Geschlecht which separately means "gender" and Verkehr which separately means "traffic". Put them together as "gender traffic" and you get the German word for s*xual intercourse. Personally I think "gender traffic" is a lovely word, although to use it gets you funny looks outside Germany.

Brilliant. Love it…next time I am in Hamburg, I will have a better idea of what is on offer.