'Aussie Rick'’s Comments (group member since Jun 13, 2009)

'Aussie Rick'’s comments from the THE NAPOLEONIC WARS group.

"Tactics and the Experience of Battle in the Age of Napoleon" - Just finished the chapter; "The Role of the General" and marked out this story which I think a few of us have read before in regards to the Coalition of 1813:

"When the Czar pressed his claim to be given the supreme command of the allied armies, Metternich threatened to withdraw from the Coalition, and the honour went to Schwarzenberg, who excelled in patience and diplomatic tact rather than strategy and tactics, but who fully earned Blucher's toast to 'the Commander-in-Chief who had three monarchs at his headquarters and still managed to beat the enemy'."

Karl Philipp Furst zu Schwarzenberg:
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/...

"Tactics and the Experience of Battle in the Age of Napoleon" - In conclusion, part 2, on the cavalry of the Napoleonic Wars:

"At Albuera Colborne's brigade of William Stewart's division was sent forward in line - against the wishes of its commander, who wanted the flanking battalion in column, but was overruled by Stewart. The brigade advanced against a heavy French column which was already engaged with Spanish infantry. The French moved a brigade of cavalry (including a regiment of Polish lancers) to support their infantry just as a rain squall swept across the battlefield. Out of the rain the unseen cavalry suddenly charged down on Colborne's unprotected flank. Three of the four British battalions were rolled up and destroyed in the space of a few minutes, only the fourth managing to form square in time. These three battalions entered the battle with 1,648 officers and men, and lost 1,258 casualties in all or 76 per cent: 319 killed, 460 wounded, and 479 missing (mostly prisoners). Five of their six colours were captured and a battery which accompanied them was overrun, though all but one of its guns were recovered when the cavalry were finally driven off by the arrival of the British cavalry. Of the 800 men in the French and Polish cavalry some 200 fell in the charge and subsequent fighting."

The Vistula Uhlans at Albuera:
http://www.napolun.com/mirror/napoleo...

The Battle of Albuera:
https://www.britishbattles.com/penins...

https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/202...

"Tactics and the Experience of Battle in the Age of Napoleon" - In conclusion on the cavalry of the Napoleonic Wars:

"Almost all cavalry's greatest successes occurred when their opponents were caught by surprise, or were already engaged with other troops, or were already wavering. But it took a good leader to recognize the fleeting opportunity and to seize it. At Marengo, it came late in the day, Desaix's counter-attacks had faltered, and the Austrians were advancing, tired but confident of success. The French line broke, the Austrians rushed forward 'in all the disorder and security of victory', when suddenly Kellermann, at the head of 400 dragoons, burst from the cover of vines and into their flank. Panic spread throughout the Austrian lines: some were cut down, others fled, and many surrendered. With an exhausted army and no remaining reserves to counter the sudden threat, the Austrians could not avoid defeat."

The Napoleon Series - Marengo: Kellermann’s Charge and the Forgotten Brigade by T. E. Crowdy:
https://www.napoleon-series.org/milit...

"Tactics and the Experience of Battle in the Age of Napoleon" - Now reading about the cavalry of the Napoleonic Wars:

"All cavalry were armed with a sword or sabre, but many were dissatisfied with it. One British officer declared that 'A Light Dragoon's sabre was hardly capable of killing', while another stated that the sword of the heavy cavalry was 'too heavy, too short, too broad, too much like the sort of weapon with which we have seen Grimaldi cut off the heads of a line of urchins on the stage'. Most modern authorities agree, but Captain Parquin put the blame on British lack of skill:

they [British cavalry] found us very dangerous when we attacked with our sabres. We always thrust with the point of our sabres, whereas they always cut with their blade which was three inches wide. Consequently, out of every twenty blows aimed by them, nineteen missed. If, however, the edge of the blade found its mark only once, it was a terrible blow, and it was not unusual to see an arm cut clean from the body.

Yet the French heavy cavalry were equally unhappy with their 'long cumbersome swords' which 'were virtually useless in hand-to-hand cavalry fighting, and whose power of penetration was not improved by having the point on the upper edge of the blade. Most cuirassier colonels had them re-ground until the point was in the centre.

There are many reports of individuals surviving multiple sword and lance wounds: one man of the Royal Horse Guards at Waterloo is said to have suffered no fewer than sixteen such wounds, including a fractured skull, and still recovered! Andrew Leith Hay saw 'wounded dragoons and captured soldiers ... arriving from the front in rapid succession, the former exhibiting, in the cuts they had received, the comparatively harmless effect of sabre encounters, when contrasted with the more deadly working of musketry, or thrusts from the straight sword of the French dragoon."

Napoleonic Cavalry:
http://www.napolun.com/mirror/napoleo...

Sir William Robertson was a pretty amazing bloke. I am sure I read a book on him recently but I can't recall the title. I will have to do some digging around in my library.

That's a great story Betsy and raises a very valid if often overlooked point in regard to the rest of the family when a ranker is promoted with an officers commission.

I really had a good laugh over this statement: "Gould declared, no doubt with feeling, that he would prefer to drill ten clowns than one philosopher."

😂😂😂

Very interesting Betsy, 109 motions to remember and act upon as ordered!

Scott wrote: "In this matter nothing has changed over the centuries, the gigantic military arms industry still influences political decisions regarding conflicts..."

Indeed, sadly so!

Either way, it sounds like that a whole lot of lead was used to create one casualty during this period which would have made ammunition manufactures rich!

Scott wrote: "Thanks AR, I have placed Guibert's biography on my 'to read' list for a later date; maybe even August's theme read..."

Perfect :)

Very interesting post Scott!

I read this book on Jacques-Antoine-Hippolyte, comte de Guibert, and the development of the French army prior to Napoleon:

Guibert: Father of Napoleon's Grande Armée by Jonathan Abel

"Tactics and the Experience of Battle in the Age of Napoleon" - Some interesting statistics from the chapter on Infantry Combat:

"The impression that much infantry firing was at long range is supported by the fragmentary evidence of the ratio of ammunition consumption to casualties inflicted. There is far less evidence for the expenditure of small arms ammunition in battle than for artillery, and one of the most frequently cited figures - Henegan's calculations for Vitoria - contains faulty assumptions which make it almost worthless. Nonetheless a wide range of authorities accept estimates that for every bullet which caused a casualty between 200 and 500 had been fired, and their view is supported by contemporary comments on the high consumption of ammunition for the results obtained. At the battle of Saalfeld in 1806 the French infantry is said to have used 200,000 cartridges. The Prussians suffered 900 casualties: if we boldly assume that two-thirds of these were caused by French musketry, this produces a figure of 600 casualties, or one for every 333 rounds fired. This is encouraging, but obviously further examples would be needed to establish the estimate securely.

A very rough check of these figures can be made by comparing them to the results of actual battles. If we say that Wellington had 50,000 infantry at Waterloo who each averaged eighty rounds (both figures are deliberately on the high side), they would have fired a total of four million rounds. At 200 rounds per casualty that would have produced 20,000 casualties - which is rather too high, being about 80 per cent of all the French losses in the battle, including those caused by the Prussians. At 500 rounds per casualty it would produce 8,000 casualties, which is probably too low, especially given the high assumptions behind the figures. A third estimate sometimes quoted - that 10,000 rounds were need to produce a casualty - would mean that all of Wellington's infantry inflicted only 400 casualties through their fire in the entire battle, which is obviously absurd. Waterloo is perhaps not the best example, but other battles produce similar results, supporting the range of 200 to 500 shots fire per casualty, and with a hint that the lower end of the scale may be more accurate. But the assumptions on which these calculations are based are too arbitrary for the results to have any precision."

Tactics and the Experience of Battle in the Age of Napoleon by Rory Muir

Excellent review Elliot, thanks for sharing your thoughts on the book with the rest of the group.

Betsy wrote: "Redcoats discusses all phases of army life, including lodging while on the march. Those who did not wish to lodge in inns where they would receive meals along with a bed could make their own arrang..."

The British soldier, always thinking of how to make a quick bob! :)

"Tactics and the Experience of Battle in the Age of Napoleon" - On the discussion of Napoleonic artillery - I loved this description:

"Horse artillery had dash and glamour: its uniforms were modelled on those of hussars and other light cavalry, while the gunners 'rapidly developed something of the panache and elitism of the cavalry, and would regard their companions of the foot artillery as boring stick-in-the-muds'. Nonetheless the great bulk of artillery was normally foot, not horse. They were unromantic, plodding slowly into battle, doing their work, then plodding on or back again as the fortunes of the day dictated. They produced few memoirists or diarists to preserve their fame, but one contemporary authority compared them favourably to their mounted comrades: 'these troops are more patient in their duties and works, more careful of their equipages and implements, and the effects of their efforts are more certain'."

Napoleonic Artillery:
http://www.wtj.com/articles/napart/

http://www.napolun.com/mirror/web2.ai...

https://www.napoleon-series.org/milit...

"Tactics and the Experience of Battle in the Age of Napoleon" - From the chapter titled; 'The Eve of Battle':

"A Westphalian officer, Captain von Linsingen, reveals a more dour, and perhaps a more realistic outlook, in his description of the night before Borodino: 'I could not escape the feeling that something huge and destructive was hanging over all of us. This mood led me to look at my men. There they were, sleeping around me on the cold, hard ground. I knew them all very well ... and I was aware that many of these brave troops would not survive until tomorrow evening, but would be lying torn and bloody on the field of battle. For a moment it was all too easy to wish that the Russians would simply steal away again during the night, but then I remembered how we had suffered over the last few weeks. Better an horrific end than a horror without end! Our only salvation lay in battle and victory!' "

Tactics and the Experience of Battle in the Age of Napoleon by Rory Muir

Scott wrote: "The Art of Warfare in the Age of Napoleon
My choice this month is 'The Art of Warfare in the Age of Napoleon', from here ..."

This sounds like it will be quite an interesting read!

In the book "Tactics and the Experience of Battle in the Age of Napoleon" the author has a Bibliography Essay at the back of the book in which he discusses numerous books covering his research. This one grabbed my attention:

History and Campaigns of the Rifle Brigade 1809-1813 by Colonel Willoughby Verner

This is the second volume of a two book set.

Very good discussion Scott and Betsy! I would suggest that you stick to books and a glass of a fine red wine if you want to enjoy some longevity :)