Indian Mutiny - Skirmishers

[paulr]

From my reading it appears that the HEIC & British army were in a state of transition when it came to the use of infantry skirmishers

The main Infantry line was using more open order formations but were still firing controlled volleys 

Battalions still retained light companies and some HEIC battalions had rifle companies as well but I've also read references to large numbers skirmishing with other companies in support

So my question is how much of a battalion at this time, 1857, would deploy as skirmishers and how many would be retained formed as supports?

I also assume, perhaps wrongly, that units that had mutinied would act similarly

[sultanbev]

I've consulted with a colleague who knows more about this era than me, and in general by the 1830s onwards all British line battalions/regiments could form skirmish order quite competently. Any light company or regiment distinctive was purely historical vanity, all units could do close order volleys then switch to skirmish order, or vice versa.

As far as HEIC battalions, in theory they were the same, and certainly there is a print of sepoys skirmishing in the Mutiny war, but it is reckoned units would not use it as often, or be as well drilled at skirmishing.

As for the sepoys that mutinied, once they had lost all their officers, the drill soon deteriorated and regimental distintives disappeared, along with a lot of the training.

Mark

[paulr]

Mark, thanks for taking the trouble to consult

Very useful to have some confirmation of my understanding

[Raider4]

HEIC?

H____ East India Company presumably?

What's the 'H'?

[sultanbev]

Honourable, although, given their conduct, they missed out the dis- at the beginning...

[Raider4]

Ah, okay, ta. Can't remember ever hearing that before.

[Ithoriel]

The Horrible East India company

[Lord Kermit of Birkenhead]

Honewrable because English gentlemen are always honerable.

[Big Insect]

'The Anarchy' by William Dalrymple will give you a very good idea of just how dis-honourable the company was!
The first 'too big to fail' private company - a bit like an armed version of facebook!

[paulr]

For the avoidance of doubt I was merely using the historic abbreviation, not attributing any particular characteristic to the 'Company'

Unfortunately, as with most wars, there was far to much dishonourable conduct on all sides

[mmcv]

Sounds like someone is revisiting their Indian Mutiny plans.   Does this mean you convinced your club to give them a go?

[paulr]

Well spotted, I am working on my Indian Mutiny plans again

I've not tried to convince our regular group again but I have pretty much decided I need another project

My son's fiancée spotted a copy of British Battles on Land and Sea by James Grant at the charity shop she was managing and bought it for me. I'm not sure when it was published as there is no copyright date. It had been gifted through three generations of a well know New Zealand family, the first time in 1893.

Volume III extensively covers the Indian Mutiny / First Indian War of Independence. I've taken this as a fairly solid hint

[mmcv]

Fair play, sounds like as good a reason as any. A google turns up some copies on ebay - looks to be late 1880/90s the first few volumes were published, so likely you have some first editions.