In their unceasing efforts to get me to buy things, Amazon have suggested The Battle of Königgrätz: Prussia's Victory Over Austria, 1866 by Gordon A. Craig. Has anybody read it, and if so, is it any good? I note that its was originally published in 1964 by the University of Pennsylvania and at a tenner seems good value.
My dad bought me a copy in 1968 (which I still have). It was very inspirational and is a great intro to the whole Bohemian campaign, not just the Battle of Koniggratz. I would snap it up. Like Michael Howard's Franco-Prussian War it's a classic which has stood the test of time.
DP is right - it is brilliant - and still commands the field. It is really a history of the whole war, not just Koniggratz, and it is a great read. Buy, buy, buy!! :-bd
Mollinary
After a bad day at work I've just ordered this for some retail therapy. Sounds like a great read and a good gaming period that is not the ACW or the FPW, the latter which may yet get a visit from me :D.
That seems pretty conclusive. Many thanks, gents.
It is an unusual gaming period Steve, as the Austrians changed their doctrine from defence to attack as a result of the 1859 war against France. Poor buggers were up against the Prussians armed with the Needlegun whereas the Austrians had gone with the Lorenz muzzle loader. In a two month war there were many battles and the Prussians made enough mistakes to give the Austrians a fighting chance. Furthermore the Prussians also fought against many of the other German states (with a notable tactical defeat against Hanover), and the Austrians fought against the Italians, where they were much more successful. Might I suggest Bruce Weigle's 1866 rules as, whether you play them or not, contain a great deal of information on tactical doctrines, OOBs and a summary of the war. Ralph Weaver, of the Continental Wars Society, has also produced a couple of good books for the period on Custozza, Austria v. Italy, and Langensaltza, Hanover v. Prussia.
Thanks for the info Dour :).
The Western Theatre is also worth a look with
the Federal and Bavarian Corps
Chad
Be warned, though, the Bavarian corps is four divisions strong - if you were thinking of doing them all. Lots of different pretty uniforms in the Federal corps however. ;)
I might have enough stuff do this in 2mm, but really want to field 10mm forces. I'll wait until I've read the book, done some research etc. before deciding upon the units I want to field.
HB
True, but the regiments only seem to have fielded
2 btns and more often than not all 4 Divisions were not
present at one time. Divisions of 8th corps often fought
In isolation. On the Prussian side again there was often
Only 1 Divn in action.
Chad
For some ideas of the challenges of the period and the rules fixes needed to produce historical results in a Wargame you may wish to look at Wargaming in History Vol 8 which covers the opening battle. Mollinary is my co-author and did all the deep thinking on tactics how to portray them on the wargames table. 10mm is absolutely the scale for the period as the forces are so large.
Holdfast
It's on my list Holdfast, have no fear :).
Quote from: Steve J on 01 June 2013, 04:15:51 PM
I might have enough stuff do this in 2mm, but really want to field 10mm forces. I'll wait until I've read the book, done some research etc. before deciding upon the units I want to field.
Steve,
A very sensible approach. Whatever scale you choose, and whatever rules you decide to use, I think you will find the basis for refighting historical battles is about a "generic" corps for each side, or about 20-30,000 men. In organisational terms this is about 20-30 battalions of infantry, 12-18 batteries of artillery and two or three regiments of cavalry. More cavalry if you attach a cavalry division. For rules, I started with the Real Time Wargames rules which, for 1866, have been added to with a campaign system under the title "Trapped Like a Fox". These have the advantage of having been designed with Pendraken figures in mind. On this forum Bernie can fill you in on them, as he is the author! Bruce Weigle's 1866 rules have a lot going for them, not least the fantastic scenario information, tactical excursions and amazing bibliography. Holdfast and I ended up with producing a variant of Rich Hasenauer's Regimental Fire and Fury for a couple of reasons. First we had got very familiar with it in ACW games, and liked its mechanisms and the flexibility of the basic mechanics. Second it offered the chance of reflecting the tactical detail which makes this war so special, while still doing a full corps on corps battle. But I recognise that doing it as we did requires a lot figures (not that Leon will complain!). It would still be possible using fewer figures per base, or compromising on number of bases per battalion. I know many people who use 10mm figures for the ACW version use one base equating to two in the rules. Anyway, as Holdfast intimates, we have set out our ideas in the WiH book, but don't claim it as a complete rule system - we are still working on it. If anyone has any questions regarding the variant, I will be happy to try and answer them on the forum. Good luck with this fascinating period, and beware - it can be addictive!
Mollinary
Thanks for the info Mollinary. With my 2mm stuff I can easily field 20-30 bases per side, if 1 stand counts as a Battalion, so nice to know that I can do the large battles on a 6'x4' table (probably!). When the book arrives and I get into it I'm sure more questions will crop up!
Part of the problem with using the one base equals one battalion format is that battalion formations then become irrelevant. It can be argued that at corps level this is possibly correct, since one is then in the realm of grand-tactics and brigade/divisional formations. The problem then is how to replicate intangibles like superior training and initiative - not to mention that old bogey, the effects of the needlegun.
I think what I'm trying to say is that the period works better with some sort of battalion flexibility, even if it's only company bases. Whatever solution is adopted it will only be a crude approximation of the plethora of forces acting on corporate bodies composed entirely of individuals. But that's wargaming.
As Hertsblue says, you pays your money you take your choice. I have played this period using multi-based battalions and single base battalions. If I want a large action then it's the single base, but if it's a divisional action I'll play it in 15mm using Field of Battle 2 or something similar. With a big battle many bases can slow the action right down and anyway 10mm look great on larger bases. Take a look at some of Mad Lemmy's Prussians, on even bigger bases than my stuff; but they do look good don't they!
:-[ Thanks!
:-[
Agree totally, DP 8)
Book arrived safe and sound today, so can't wait to start reading it :).
Oddy enough, mine arrived yesterday. Having seen it I have a feeling that I have read it somewhere back in the dim and distant past. :-\
Really enjoying reading this book, but suprised that the battle is now referred to as Konigratz, as when I was at school it was known as Sadowa. At least the book explains why to a certain extent.
Anyway, the main reason for the post is a question to Holdfast and Mollinary:
Would your Wargaming in History book be suitable as a reference material for gaming the period with the Black Powder rules? The OOB etc I take it as given that they will be, but I'm not sure if the amendments to the F&F rules will transfer across as it were. All info greatly appreciated :).
Steve J.
Black Powder works brilliantly in this period, when the lads down our club are not fighting 10mm FrancoPrussian they are using it for 1866 in 42mm!
Hi Steve,
I am going to take a fence-straddling position on this one (ooh, matron!). What the book provides is a look at the war, the armies, the tactics and equipment, as well as examination of the early, corps on corps, battles. These include detailed OOBs (not just for RF&F, but with actual numbers where available), maps largely taken from Lettow-Vorbeck's pre WW1 study, together with wargame maps. The refights are described, and contain a lot of detail on how the battles developed and why. We also try and explain the reasons behind our mods for RF&F, and our conclusions on the relation between our games and reality. And if you are into battlefield walking (which I highly recommend in this instance) it includes a chapter on the fields today. Having said all that, a forum member who has both read the book and played Black Powder (if one exists) would be better placed to comment on the read across between the two. I have Black Powder, but have not played it, or tried to adapt it to this period, so am not really best placed to help. Sorry!
Mollinary
Thanks for the feedback, which is very useful :).
Have played Black Powder in an FPW game and it played well.
Having now got approximately two thirds of the way through the book I find myself worrying about a few detail inconsistancies. Craig describes the Prussianinfantry in at least two passages as a"grey-clad mass", or words to that effect. Now this may have been because they were wearing their great-coats, but later on he recounts how they stowed their packs and greatcoats on the transport wagons before advancing into action. I had been led to believe that the Austrians fought the campaign in their black greatcoats, but Craig quotes eye-witnesses on more than one occaision as stating that they were dressed in white.
This is all trivia, of course, but I always have this nagging feeling that an author that gets the small facts wrong may have blundered elsewhere.
Notwithstanding that, the narrative is clear and easy to follow and the diagrams (they're hardly maps in the true sense of the word) make the course of the battle relatively simple to understand - much more so than the comtemporary maps.
HB
I think the coats are a dark grey as opposed to black. Stuart Sutherland describes them as 'graumelierte'.
Chad
Quote from: Hertsblue on 14 June 2013, 10:47:19 PM
Having now got approximately two thirds of the way through the book I find myself worrying about a few detail inconsistancies. Craig describes the Prussianinfantry in at least two passages as a"grey-clad mass", or words to that effect. Now this may have been because they were wearing their great-coats, but later on he recounts how they stowed their packs and greatcoats on the transport wagons before advancing into action. I had been led to believe that the Austrians fought the campaign in their black greatcoats, but Craig quotes eye-witnesses on more than one occaision as stating that they were dressed in white.
This is all trivia, of course, but I always have this nagging feeling that an author that gets the small facts wrong may have blundered elsewhere.
Notwithstanding that, the narrative is clear and easy to follow and the diagrams (they're hardly maps in the true sense of the word) make the course of the battle relatively simple to understand - much more so than the comtemporary maps.
The kittel was white though only worn by the officers; the men wore an unbleached linen under jacket which at a distance would also look white however all ranks wore the grey greatcoat as the outer garment, so in fact it would be the Austrian infantry that would have appeared as a grey mass not the Prussians ... and yet Hohenloe Inglefingen describes the Austrian infantry drawn up at Koniggratz as 'white'; perhaps the greatcoat, washed out and bleached by the sun appeared lighter at a distance. Craig's maps are pretty bad however his narrative is generally good and he gives a good account of the campaign. If authorial inconsistencies worry you then best take a valium before reading Geoffrey Wawro's history of the 1866 campaign, its full of them, infuriating really as with a bit of decent editing it could have been a good read.
Cam
What do you think of Quintin Barry's 'The Road to Koniggratz'
Chad
Well to be honest I found it a bit dull; he's not particularly good at communicating overview and there's no original research (as far as I remember) however, every contribution to 'our' period is to be welcomed. Put it this way, I bought it and don't regret it but its not as readable as Craig.
Agree with Cameronian. A good effort, but sadly it does not bring the characters to life. No bodices were ripped when I read it.
Holdfast
I though it had rather more detail than Craig, although I would agree with the consensus that it's not as readable. I found the maps difficult to read, probably because they were scaled-down from contemporary full-sized documents.
Pretty much finished this book and what a great read :). This is a period I will definitely be visiting, so now I need to start swatting up on the units involved (all of which had great names so what's not to like?), the various uniforms worn and the tactics involved. In short a happy man :D.