"Could infantry and cavalry charge into streams and fords?" Topic

Gentlemen, please help me figure it out.
In Napoleonic Wars, when a unit was crossing a shallow stream or fording a river, could it be charged by enemy infantry or cavalry from another bank in the process?

By the unit I mean any unit (infantry,cavalry, artillery) and command groups.

Yes of course. Why not?

If you think about it, it is actually a great time to charge – the opposing unit is very likely to be at the least disordered

There are some tactical factors that need to be considerd, such as the width of the body of water, the strength of the current, what "shallow" means, the slope of the bank, etc. The answer is, "It depends."

I think an infantry unit would be more likely to fire into the crossing troops rather than try to enter the water themselves.

It's possible. But why not wait and attack them on dry land, when the troops making the crossing are at their most vulnerable, while the defenders remain organised?
Infantry would just fire on the troops crossing; cavalry would hover somewhere further back, giving themselves room to manoeuvre before sizing their moment.

Woods I said no, but a horse through a stream seems no problems as long as it's below its belly

Thank you for your replies!

I'm with 79th. Like river crossings generally, it's the sort of thing which ought to be specified in game conditions rather than something subject to an absolute rule.

Yes of course, equally they could jump off cliffs, fling themselves into dense woods etc. The actual thing to consider is, dors this have an militarily significant impact on what they are trying to achieve? So, define "stream" and "charge" in relation to the level of game you are considering, go from there. I would normally penalise units crossing defended obstacles in some way.

A good example might be Palmes' famous action at Blenheim when he defeated a superior force of Gendarmes. Palmes led his squadrons across a stream, the French horse waited deliberately until they had crossed, then charged, but were routed by Palmes' countercharge. Perhaps one can put this down to French arrogance as to their assumed superiority, but equally it does mean that Palmes was evidently not daunted by having to ford the stream to get at his opponents.

In addition to 79th's criteria you need to consider the stream bed, sand, mud, gravel, rocks and the bank, it may be a 2 inch deep stream but if the banks are 2 feet high that's the obstacle; so I'm with Robert this is a scenario specific criteria.

Two additional observations, horses can wade when men can't and infantry would not want to risk getting their powder wet, which limits their wading further.

That happened a number of times. For example, outside of Benevente, December 1808, British cavalry charged squadrons of the Imp.Guard Chasseurs a Cheval as they attempted to cross the Rio Esla. The French had their lunch handed to them. Note that the Esla was fairly shallow at this time.

In addition to the actual banks there are often banks at the edge of the flood plain. When I put a river down in anything larger than skirmish games I assume it includes the flood plain, which can be marshy and overgrown in addition to the banks.

Recreating 7YW battles with Napoleonic era armies, one I did had creeks with swampy banks that was impassable, yet another was in summer and same sort of terrain was charged over by Prussian cavalry

During the Creek War of 1812, several battles took place while US Army troops were in water features. Swamps, Creek crossings and rivers were locations of such actions. The British conducted several charges as well at canals, creeks and woods.

The battle of Wagram sees the French charging across the Rossbach in several places, with mixed results. Perseverance won out.

The condition of the Rossbach stream today varies significantly down it's length. another consideration a stream/river isn't a canal thirty yards further down it may be different.