"The British didn’t use light companies from 1809 onwards" Topic

As (boldly) stated in the title Imho the British didn't use light companies as all light companies were, by orders of commanding officers in the Peninsular or in the Waterloo campaign, combined into comined (light) battalions.
Up to now I haven't found any evidence at least that battalions had them. Any suggestion.

As (boldly) stated in the title Imho the British didn't use light companies as all light companies were, by orders of commanding officers in the Peninsular or in the Waterloo campaign, combined into comined (light) battalions.
Up to now I haven't found any evidence at least that battalions had them. Any suggestion.

Yes – Wellington issues instructions to form combined light battalions within each brigade. It's certain it happened as he issues a near identical instruction on three occasions. To these were also attached some rifle troops (e.g. from the 5/60th) to form part of the combined battalion.

In which case, British battalions would be without a light company.

With thanks to Rod MacArthur – the details are;

Extract from General Order issued at Lavos on 3 August 1808
The Lieutenant General requests the General officers commanding brigades will, on all occasions of march and formation of the line of their respective brigades, place the light infantry companies belonging to the several regiments under their command in a separate corps under the command of a field-officer. In the ordinary formation on parade, and in route marches, these corps of light infantry will be on the left of the brigade. In formation in front of the enemy they will be in front or in rear, according to the circumstances; and in marches of columns to take up a position, they will be on the reverse flank of the column. The light infantry companies will, however, encamp and do all duties with the regiments.

Extract from General Order issued at Coimbra on 4 May 1809
3. The light infantry companies belonging to, and the riflemen attached to each brigade of infantry, are to be formed together, on the left of the brigade, under the command of a Field Officer or Captain of light infantry of the brigade, to be fixed upon by the Officer who commands it. Upon all occasions, in which the brigade may be formed in line, or in column, when the brigade shall be formed for the purpose of opposing an enemy, the light infantry companies and riflemen will be of course in the front, flanks, or rear, according to the circumstances of the ground, and the nature of the operation to be performed. On all other occasions, the light infantry companies are to be considered as attached to their battalions, with which they are to be quartered or encamped, and solely under the command of the Commanding Officer of the battalion to which they belong.

Extract from General Order issued at Bruxells on 9 May 1815
1. The light infantry companies belonging to each brigade of infantry, are to act together as a battalion of light infantry, under the command of a field officer or captain, to be selected for the occasion by the General Officer commanding the brigade, upon all occasions on which the brigade may be formed in line or column, whether for a march, or to oppose the enemy.
2. On all other occasions, the light infantry companies are to be considered as attached to their battalions, with which they are to be quartered or encamped, and solely under the command of the commanding officer of the battalion to which they belong.

I'd say the difference tactically isn't likely to be as significant as the title makes it sound. They used them but in a different way.

Effectively the light companies are combined to screen the brigade rather than their individual battalions. Probably a more effective way of employing their (supposed) specialist skills.

Though evidently, when required to form square, they returned to their parent battalions.

It's a helpful bit of documentation. If you have six or battalions you may well want to detach the figures who represent the light company and make a separate unit of them of them along with any attached riflemen. This would be actual historical practice.

Scott (Rod)

Thank you. Those excerpts are just what I was after.

Cheers.

4th Cuir

Are you sure?
That might be a long run back to daddy while being chased?

My units operate as skirmishers and supports. They will fall back and form up in the same way as a regular light infantry battalion.

Have fun.

Thanks for all the answers esp Scott for the given orders.
4th cuirassier; imho that seems very difficult to do. Firstly it is against the given order, secondly I cannot imagine that a light battalion (who can form square) would disperse in various companies who all run back to their parent battalions while attacking cavalry is thundering against them. And thirdly, what happens with the combined riffle company (from 60th, 95th, KGL etc). They are left alone?

Except the light companies would be spread across the brigade front, so they might be close to the parent battalion after all.

the Prussians did this in 1806.

eh? did what?

Interesting information, Scott.

4th, that sounds impractical as well as virtually impossible.

"Are you sure?
That might be a long run back to daddy while being chased?"

That was my thought.

This would be SOP going even farther back noting the flank battalions (including grenadiers) in each brigade in Flanders 1793-5 and the more permanent battalions in the AWI in a separate brigade under Cornwallis.

My follow on question is what did they do with the grenadiers since they AREN'T included in this order?

In the Low Countries 1793-5,formation of light companies into battalions was very much ad hoc formed for certain operations, this was not least because that a proportion of the infantry battalions in York's army had been ordered to detach their flank companies for service inthe West Indies.

To make up for this, Hessian and Hanoverian battalions in British pay were deployed as light troops in the British area of responsibility.
In that campaign, the Foot Guards were the only corps that formed their grenadiers and light infantry into separate battalions

It may sound difficult but that what's the order says.

1809:
Upon all occasions, in which the brigade may be formed in line, or in column, when the brigade shall be formed for the purpose of opposing an enemy, the light infantry companies and riflemen will be of course in the front, flanks, or rear, according to the circumstances of the ground, and the nature of the operation to be performed. On all other occasions, the light infantry companies are to be considered as attached to their battalions

So not when in square.

1815:
The light infantry companies belonging to each brigade of infantry, are to act together as a battalion of light infantry…upon all occasions on which the brigade may be formed in line or column, whether for a march, or to oppose the enemy.
2. On all other occasions, the light infantry companies are to be considered as attached to their battalions

Presumably they are expected to operate close enough to a parent battalion to rejoin it if forced into square.

4th Cuirassier – I reckon the statement "…all occasions on which the brigade may be formed in line or column, whether for a march, or to oppose the enemy" just means they billet with, and draw life support through, their parent units as they are no doubt still administered by them. If required to form a square they would "…act together as a battalion of light infantry…" and form a square as would a light battalion..

Depends on the interpretation of that order, I suppose.

To me, a square comes under the category of "formed for the purpose of opposing an enemy".

The adjutant of C.Halkett's Light Battalion at Waterloo submitted a reply to Siborne, which gives great detail about how things were supposed to work.

link

In case of cavalry attack, the Light Bobs were expected to sprint for the nearest square behind them, 'without any reference to Regiments or Nations'.

@ Musketballs

Quite so. As we know, light battalions did not normally deploy wholly into skirmish order; part would remain formed as a rally point and to feed forward replacements. It would make no sense for Wellington to converge his light companies into a battalion, and then have them operate in that way as a normal battalion. If they did so, instead of having eg six companies in the screen there'd be two with four as a reserve (or whatever). If the light bobs simply deployed individually from their parent battalion, these latter would be the reserve. In other words, deploying and acting like a normal battalion would have resulted in fewer skirmishers in the screen rather than more. That cannot have been the idea.

During the AWI light battalions were also formed but the line regiments who lost their light companies would form new ad hoc detachments of "flankers" or "marksmen" from within their own ranks. Perhaps something similar was practiced in the Napoleonic period? Also, I've read that by the end of the Napoleonic Wars line companies were expected to act as skirmishers but I'm not sure when that became common practice.

I think the test is to look at the actual use of light companies in combat. Certainly, there are many cases of the light battalions being formed and used as such. Then again, there are a number of recorded uses of companies and groups beyond either their parent units or any formed light battalion. It all depended on circumstances and flexibility is an important skill for combat units. For example,

At Bussaco in 1811 and at Salamanca in 1812, companies were detached from parent units [including the light battalions], even those not engaged in the second line and sent out to skirmish ahead of the whole army.

Certainly light battalions were formed and operated as such, but not exclusively with no exceptions. It all depended on circumstances, which the sections quoted by 4th Cuirassier above.

"My units operate as skirmishers and supports. They will fall back and form up in the same way as a regular light infantry battalion."

If this were a quote from a Napoleonic British officer it would carry more weight :~}

The source Musketballs gives (and thanks for that) shows that light battalions were formed (as the general order were). It also shows that these skirmishers took refugee when attacked in the nearest square and NOT with their parent unit as 4th C stated (although accidently this could be as they could be the nearest).
I think also that by creating light battalions there was more skirmishing potential available then when companies stay with their parent battalion. Also it probably give a commander more freedom of using light troops as he sees fit.
If commanding generals give expliciet orders for forming light battalions from the light companies in various years it must be good practice and it is imho better to try to find the tactical reasons why they did this this then to deny that it was the habit of doing.
Of course as McLaddie stated; there would be circumstances when flexibility demands otherwise.

I don't think anyone's denying it happened, the discussion's about how it worked.

The general orders say that when operating in line or column against the enemy, the light companies were to be detached and converged. Nothing is said about squares. This could be because what skirmishers did when threatened by cavalry was within the realms of the bleedin' obvious: they always ran for the nearest square, whether it was their parent battalion's square or not.

What I am suggesting they did not do was operate, converged, as a 'normal' battalion. If they had done so, they'd have had to keep their own formed reserve. The upshot would have been fewer muskets in the skirmish line, not more. Instead of eg eight battalions each pushing forward a light company, with the other nine companies forming the reserve that would form square against cavalry, they'd have formed a ninth battalion of those eight light companies. This would then have pushed forward some of its companies to skirmish keeping some back formed up. So in the first approach there'd have been eight companies out skirmishing, and in the second, fewer.

I imagine a converged battalion could have been trained to form square in extremis but if it did so routinely it defeats the point of the order, which was surely to give each brigade / division its own light battalion. Instead of one company screening nine others, your six-battalion division drawn up in three lines would have a two-battalion front screened by six companies, which is a bit more like a screen.

@ Glengarry – the force Sir John Stuart took to Calabria in 1806 included a number of ad hoc companies of 'flankers' as you describe. They weren't the elite companies. The grenader companies were detached and converged and the light companies had been left behind in Sicily. To replace them, flanker companies were formed.

It brings me back to my perennial question of why, if line infantry could skirmish, there were still light infantry training schools. If skirmishing could be taught by line infantry NCOs to line infantry what was the point of places like Shorncliffe?

I assume there was some difference in proficiency, but I'm not sure how it was expressed. One rule set I have seen, I forget which, has a proviso that if non-light infantry go into skirmish order they can't reform into close order for the rest of the game.

I thought light companies would have a local formed reserve made of part of the company that the skirmishers fell back upon?

Imho 4th C isn't correct in his assumption that a brigade of 8battalions would also has 8skirmishing companies as a brigade of 8 battalions would operate in 2 or 3 lines and afaik only the front battalions would deliver skirmishing companies so max 4 maybe only 3. A combined light battlalion would deliver all 8 companies in the front line.
Also, line battalions will not deliver a direct reserve; the light company itself would have a part of them as reserve (as murvihill already stated).
As always, there will be sometimes exceptions but these are, as the term imply, exception.

@ johannes

That's not what the orders quoted above directed.

1808 directive: …General officers commanding brigades will…place the light infantry companies belonging to the several regiments under their command in a separate corps under the command of a field-officer

1809 directive: The light infantry companies belonging to, and the riflemen attached to each brigade of infantry, are to be formed together

1815 directive: The light infantry companies belonging to each brigade of infantry, are to act together as a battalion of light infantry

Nothing there about "only the front battalions would deliver skirmishing companies". Brigades were to concentrate their light companies and any attached rifle units into a light battalion. If only the front line battalions contributed, they would not have created any sort of converged battalion at all.

Important to remember that the converged light battalion were under the command of a field officer who would have determined the response to all situations.

4th C "It brings me back to my perennial question of why, if line infantry could skirmish, there were still light infantry training schools. If skirmishing could be taught by line infantry NCOs to line infantry what was the point of places like Shorncliffe?".

To provide employment for LI Officers and 'maintain the traditions of the light division' or similar b*****ks. Never underestimate the capacity of a career army to create pointless jobs for the jobs not the output.

Interesting debate gentlemen.

I've always been under the impression that the the Light Companies were not used the same as in the AWI. That is to say formed into permanent units and neither were the Grenadiers.

Rather that the other alternative mentioned of grouping Light Companies under a Major or Senior Captain, at Brigade level, was the way it was done. This only happening when action looked likely. Otherwise the Companies were on the Ration and Pay strength of there individual Battalion.

The situation of the individual rifle detachments included with the Brigade, probably needs thinking about as part of this too.

As for running for Squares, I would have though that if the cavalry hadn't been spotted beforehand the nearest one was as good as any. That's certainly where I would have gone!

Does raise some interesting questions about what the residents would have done with you when you got there though. Maybe you were allowed to hang around inside until a "Vacancy" occurred in a Face somewhere and a Kindly NCO shoved you in it!

" 'maintain the traditions of the light division' or similar b*****ks."

!809-1815 perhaps a bit early for talking about 'traditions of the Light Division' or a pool of Light Infantry officers, given that 4 out of 6 of the official LI regiments were only converted in 1809.

The other thing to be considered were the Light Infantry Battalions, outside of the two in the Light Division (43rd & 52nd).

The 51st, 68th, 71st, 85th and 90th all operated as such and could fight in line, or be sent out as skirmishers, along with Portuguese Cacadores and the rifle detachments from the Brunswick Owls, 5/60th. Not to mention the two KGL Light Battalions.

This lot, along with the Light Companies of the Line Regiments ensured that their French counterparts were generally outnumbered in major actions.

For what its worth, the 43rd, 68th, 85th and 90th were not at Waterloo.