1866 Hanoverians

[cameronian]

Quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus creditor est.

Now go and do something useful.

[Duke Speedy of Leighton]

Gentlemen,
Play nice!
Wars have been fought for less! 

[mollinary]

We are Gentlemen, therefore by definition we ALWAYS play nice (that is unless we play dirty!  ).  Anyway, in an attempt to bring some "evidence" into this debate, Stuart Sutherland's translation of the Saxon official history describes the initial attack on Diletz being carried out in company column's by the 2nd infantry. The 1st platoon is deployed as skirmishers (Half a compnay or about 100+ men) then an assault column consitingof the 1st and 2nd Companies (now only 3 platoons, so circa 300-350 men. The battalion had approached the village in closed up column of platoons, so probably 24 man deep, with each platoon in 3 ranks.  It seems therefore that the remainder of the 1st and 2nd compnaies in column were probably 9 deep. The other company columns would be 6 deep. In the attack from Nieder Prim during the Kohiggratz battle seems to have been conducted in  ompany columns. Given the organisation of a Saxon company (two platoons) and the standard formation (a three deep line) I am assuming a company column would be six deep, one platoon behind the other. The supports to the first company column are described as in hall battalion, so not clear if the companies are side by side or one behind the other.  The final conundrum, is what is meant by the standard formation being in three ranks. The Prussians form up in three double ranks, the Austrians in two double ranks. A famous engraving of the 10th Saxon Battalion at Problus seems to show it in 3 double ranks (at least). This Obviously has implications for the depth of a company column. Could it really be a standard of 12 ranks deep?  Seriously, I wuld be very grateful for anyone who can cast some better informed light on this question.  The big difference between the Austrians and Saxons would seem to be that they had no requirement to assault, and therefore often didn't, rather than the formation in which they carried out the asssault.

Mollinary

[cameronian]

Good to hear you place such store by references Andrew. I seem to remember you and holdfast standing in the middle of a forest in Bohemia arguing until you were blue in the face that the cleared slopes of the Svib weren't dotted with 'hundreds of piles of cordwood' until I emailed holdfast the translated portion of Heidrich which settled the matter in my favour and closed the debate. An acknowledgement would have been nice, indeed gentlemanly, but none was forthcoming although I understand you have incorporated the cleared slopes and the 'hundreds of piles of cordwood' in your Swiepwald game. In light of this poor and ungenererous behaviour do you really think I'm going to make the slightest effort to adduce a reference at your behest? Look it up for yourself, you have plenty of time, the clue is in the casualties.

[Duke Speedy of Leighton]

Wow! Good info.

No, I'm not rebasing my Saxons!

[mollinary]

Good to hear you place such store by references Andrew. I seem to remember you and holdfast standing in the middle of a forest in Bohemia arguing until you were blue in the face that the cleared slopes of the Svib weren't dotted with 'hundreds of piles of cordwood' until I emailed holdfast the translated portion of Heidrich which settled the matter in my favour and closed the debate. An acknowledgement would have been nice, indeed gentlemanly, but none was forthcoming although I understand you have incorporated the cleared slopes and the 'hundreds of piles of cordwood' in your Swiepwald game. In light of this poor and ungenererous behaviour do you really think I'm going to make the slightest effort to adduce a reference at your behest? Look it up for yourself, you have plenty of time, the clue is in the casualties.

Wow!

It appears that we had a complete missing of minds. No-one disputed the hundreds of piles of cordwood. You disputed what cordwood was.  I don't recall you winning that debate. The main debate was about "dotted" (and how sad are we for admitting that?!).  Our point was that these would be alongside the tracks which had run through the forest before cutting.  You disagreed. Enough. We have exposed our inner childishness to the general public more than is good for ones of our advanced years. 

Mollinary

[Leman]

Anyway.....the Saxons looked very nice in their pale blue uniforms with the natty little cap, apart from the jagers in green. Now, talking of references, the Saxons shown in Flodin's photos of the First Schleswig War are in pale blue, but Ralph Weaver's book states that they fought that war in their old green tailcoats. I wonder who's right on that one?

[cameronian]

Wow!

It appears that we had a complete missing of minds. No-one disputed the hundreds of piles of cordwood. You disputed what cordwood was.  I don't recall you winning that debate. The main debate was about "dotted" (and how sad are we for admitting that?!).  Our point was that these would be alongside the tracks which had run through the forest before cutting.  You disagreed. Enough. We have exposed our inner childishness to the general public more than is good for ones of our advanced years. 

Mollinary

Sorry but not so; I maintained the cordwood (stacks of cut timber, there was no argument) was dotted in chequerboard pattern all over the cleared slopes (see Zimmer print), you (pl)  profoundly disagreed maintaining it was stacked by the trackside basing this on a lot of specious nonsense about what peasant wood cutters would or would not have done. The argument was settled by Heidrich, how you remember/misremember things is your concern. Re childishness, pot/kettle.

[mollinary]

Anyway.....the Saxons looked very nice in their pale blue uniforms with the natty little cap, apart from the jagers in green. Now, talking of references, the Saxons shown in Flodin's photos of the First Schleswig War are in pale blue, but Ralph Weaver's book states that they fought that war in their old green tailcoats. I wonder who's right on that one?

DP I think your assessment of Saxon Uniformsin 1866 is spot on, my sources say they wore tte Green coats until 1862.  But I think you may do Flodin an injustice! As I look at his photos, I see dark green coats with cornflower blue trousers.  I think that is right, do you have any other sources?

Mollinary

[sdennan]

So all I want to know is do I play the Hanoverians in normal line for Regimental Fire and Fury.

[cameronian]

I would echo Dour Puritan's advice "Get yourself a copy of the booklet, Langensalza 1866, by John Pocock. Obtainable from The Continental Wars Society (Ralph Weaver), 37 Yeading Avenue, Rayners Lane, Harrow, Middlesex HA2 9RL". Austria, Hesse and Wurtemburg were the only allied states to formally espouse stosstactik. Their casualties were proportionately huge particularly the Wurtemburgers (Weigle 1866).

[KTravlos]

But Cameronian, permit me to be a bit foolish, but can you be 100% sure that differences in casualties represent differences in tactics, rather than differences in how those tactics were put in practice and by who?

To the orginal poster. Play them as you wish. There seems to be serious disagreement on the matter. I wish I could help but beyond the Quinting Barry claim that they followed the Austrian doctrine, I have nothing else to give.

Why not do both? play some battles using one doctrine and play the same using the other, see which results are closer to history?

And my rule is if the person I am playing with starts giving me grief over uniforms, models, tactics, and this or that, I stop playing. When I play I play to have fun. I have nothing against those who worry about these things more than getting the toys moving. I just will not play with them. I have stopped games in the first turn because the other person behaved in a manner that made it impossible for us to both have fun.

[Leman]

Here's another spanner in the works. I've just read the Bloody Big European Battles' Koniggratz scenario. The stosstaktik is listed as tactically inept. The Austrian army list then states that all Austrian infantry units are tactically inept EXCEPT the Saxons. Make of that what you will.

[sdennan]

I have a copy of th ebooklet.

If it has anything on tactics then I am missing it.

I will take the advice and play them as I see fit to figure it out.

Cheers

[Leman]

Tactics used are discussed in the grey sidebars next to each scenario army list.

[sdennan]

Then I have a different book

There are no scenarios in the continental wars society battle booklet no 1 Langensalza 1866 by John Pocock

[Leman]

Sorry, we're at cross purposes. I was talking about the Bloody Big Battles European scenario book that accompanies the rules of the same name. Unfortunately Langensalza didn't make it into the book as Chris Pringle considers it too small for the scale he uses. However it does feature in Bruce Weigle's 1866 rulebook with an excellent map and OOBs. I will be using these to design a scenario to fit Neil Thomas' C19th European rules.

[sdennan]

Just reading that and he has Hanoverians operating in line while Federal armies are in column only.

[Chad]

I am disappointed that two respected members of this forum should feel it necessary to adopt a tone in their exchanges that is sadly reminiscent of 'discussion' on TMP. Particularly as it moved off the subject. 😢

Chad

[mollinary]

I am disappointed that two respected members of this forum should feel it necessary to adopt a tone in their exchanges that is sadly reminiscent of 'discussion' on TMP. Particularly as it moved off the subject. 😢

Chad

Chad, you are quite correct. i apologise unreservedly  to all, including Cam, for allowing the tone of my posts to become too combative. 

Coming back to the point, I think you are probably entriely safe in allowing Hanoverians (or Saxons for that matter) to enagge in fire fights in line.  If attempting to close assault, my impression is that most armies would form column. The big distinguishing mark between those who followed Austrian practice and those who did not appears to be that the Austrians would seek to close assault at practically every opportunity, often with totally inadequate preparation.  The others would be much more careful about decidng when to attack in column. Saxon practice seems to be that assaults are in company, not battalion columns.  I have a couple of books in German about Langensalza, and will try and find if there is anything definitive regarding tactics, but my recollection is that regrettably they do not contain such detail.

Mollinary

Mollinary