1. Received a convention notice from CRUSADES 2000, to be held the end of September, this year, in Connecticut. On the first page of the notice was a listing of several games to be presented, such as DBA, CARNAGE & GLORY, EASY EIGHT'S BATTLEGROUND, and so on.
But what caught my eye was a notice on the cover that a presentation of the naval game FIRE AS SHE BARES! would be given. I must report that, inside the program booklet, the title of the game was given in its correct format, and the bare guns were truly brought to bear.
2. The Horse Artillery Caper. Several months ago, three distinguished gentlemen gathered for a seminar centering on Napoleonic horse artillery. There were Professor Frederick Haub, Professor Robert Hurst, and Professor Walter Simon, each well versed in Napoleonic warfare. I had called the panel together to see if we could settle some of the myths permeating the atmosphere concerning the use and function of horse artillery.
Over the years, I had heard wonderful things about Napoleonic horse artillery... the crew swiftly rode up on their limber horses to a position near the enemy, they dismounted and set up their guns in the blink of an eye, they went BANG! several times, catching the enemy unaware, then they limbered up again before the enemy (still asleep) could catch them, and they rode back to safety. Wotta wonderful way to do business!
These are the thoughts of a number of wargamers and the approach taken by a number of wargame rules. The horse artillery have wonderful powers... they move faster, they fire sooner, they are assigned more 'actions' than the remainder of the troops on the field.
"if ya play Napoleonics, ya gotta have horse artillery!" I've heard this so many times I've learned to ignore it. But to settle the issue once and for all, the three professors cited above each took a reference text or two, and we read and read and read, and combined notes. The texts we used were (A) The Art of Warfare in the Age of Napoleon, by G Rothenburg, (B) The Campaigns of Napoleon, by David Chandler, (C) Swords Around a Throne, by J Elting, (D) Armies at Waterloo, by S Bowden, and for good luck, I even tossed in Brent Nosworthy's book, The Anatomy of Victory, which discusses tactics some 50 years before the Napoleonic era.
Look first at Text (A). Page 107: 'true' horse artillery were introduced in 1792 in the Austrian army. But what did they do? Page 75: Wellington armed his horse artillery batteries with 9 pounders (9 pounders?).
Page 181: a troop of horse artillery in Wellington's army consisted of 5 guns, 6-to-12 pounders, plus one light howitzer. Page 183: the horse artillery troops were organized as independent units so they could operate independently. But what did they do? Page 107: In France, in 1795, 8 horse artillery regiments were established. Page 142: Normally, French cavalry charges were preceded by a heavy bombardment and supported by horse artillery. Page 143: Each French horse artillery battery had 4 guns and 2 howitzers.
And so, here, we learn that Wellington had some pretty large guns in his horse artillery (9 pounders!)... and before a French cavalry charge, there was an artillery bombardment... but what did the horse artillery do?
Page 25: Frederick the Great, to keep pace with cavalry movement, developed horse artillery that moved rapidly along with the mounted troops.
Page 190: a Prussian horse artillery battery, circa 1806, had six 6-pounders and two 7-pounder howitzers. But what did they do? Page 201: Alexander 1, in 1802, had horse artillery with light guns in his Russian armies... but what did they do?
Text (B). Chandler is not at all helpful. Page 362: As the pre-cursor to the main attack against the selected weak point of the enemy's line, the greater part of the artillery reserve would be rushed to the front (led by the horse batteries at the gallop) to lay down an intensive bombardment to batter a breach.
Page 363: At the opening of an action, corps and divisional artillery would often ride out in front of the infantry and, unlimbering at less than 500 yards range from the enemy, commence fire with canister shot. What did the horse artillety do?
Text (C). Page 251: Because of its mobility, horse artillery could react faster than foot artillery to changing situations on the battlefield.
Text (D). According to Bowden, the French cavalry divisions at Waterloo had horse artillery attached, while the Prussians had a separate artillery division (?) for each of its armies at Waterloo (there were 4 Prussian armies). Horse artillery were attached to the artillery division. But what did they do?
Also, according to Bowden, horse artillery units, evidently, were not solely confined to the cavalry. The Anglo-Allied force at Waterloo had horse artillery attached to some if its infantry divisions (9 pounders), and to some of its cavalry divisions. But what did they do? There's no specific mention of how they took part in the battle.
Essentially, our research came up short... we know there were horse artillery units around in all Napoleonic armies, but no specifics about their particular functions. The texts, on occasion, seem to indicate that they would "support' a cavalry attack... what's the definition of "support"? And exactly how would a horse artillery battery "support" an actual cavalry attack? How could they unlimber, right in mid-field, and not get in the way of the cavalry? Or, for that matter, how could their line of fire not be blocked by the cavalry itself? And when the cavalry drew back, did the horsemen mill around, waiting for the horse artillery to limber up and withdraw?
One assumption that might be made is that the cavalry would ride up, the enemy infantry would form square, and the "supporting" guns would then bang away at a very tempting target, the enemy infantry square. But that's not artillery "supporting" a cavalry attack. That's the reverse. That's an artillery attack "supported" by cavalry.
And if horse artillery was so great and so adaptive, what happened to it during the ACW, 60 years later? Surely the great ACW tacticians would have kept the concept alive if it was so valuable. A quick check in the Battles & Leaders series of the history of the ACW indicated there were lots of 9 pounders and 10 pounders and 13 pounders around, but no mention of horse artillery as such.
And so, we came away no smarter than when we started. My thought is that until some one can straighten me out, and key me in on the role horse artillery played, I'll keep on omitting horse artillery in the Napoleonic rules I generate. I know all you history buffs out there will want to join in on the discussion.
Back to PW Review August 2000 Table of Contents
Back to PW Review List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List
© Copyright 2000 Wally Simon
This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com