"While re-reading Wargamer's Newsletter for March 1976 I came across a letter by Graham Evens which caused me to look into the organisation of my own battalions, although as yet these are few in number. From the Orders of Battle in Ugo Pericoli's "Armies at Waterloo" I have worked out the following: The Imperial Guard infantry numbered 13,026 men divided between 23 Battalions of the Old, Middle and Young Guard Regiments present. This works out at 565 men in each battalion, with a company strength of about 95. These figures are almost identical to Line infantry battalions. Donzelots division of the 1st Corps under D'Erlon contained 5132 men divided into 9 battalions. This gives a battalion strength of 570 men, again 95 per company. The British Guard battalions seem to be much larger. Cooke's Guard Division contained 4061 men in 4 battalions, over 1,000 men per battalion, that is about twice the size of the equivalent French battalion, Company size would be about equivalent (100 men), there being ten companies to a British battalion as opposed to the French six. Figures for British Line infantry are amalgamated with those of Dutch and Belgian regiments in eluding Landwehr units. Numbers of battalions are not specified so it would not be reliable to work out their sizes, even assuming British, Dutch/Belgian and Landwehr battalions had the same complement. It does however state that the size of 2nd Battalion 81st Regiment on garrison duty in Brussels amounted to 470 all ranks. Could it be that British Line and Guard units were of different sizes? This would perhaps explain the variety of numbers in Graham Even's letter. My own cavalry organisation being very sketchy I wonder if any reader could furnish me with numbers and organisation of French and British cavalry down to squadron level?" --Charles King, Farnham, Surrey "Another highly successful meeting of the Victorian Military Society was held at the National Army Museum, London, on September 11th, with a full programme which kept members occupied until the museum closed. An American member, Lynn Bodin of Seattle, gave an entertaining talk on colonial wargaming in the U.S.A., illustrated by colour slides of model armies and gunboats, and backed by stirring and spine-chilling music. This was followed by a debate between Dave Langley, trying to convince members by means of detailed break-downs of the battle and forces, that the British did no lose Isandhlwana because of lack of ammunition, and Ian Knight, who maintained the traditional version, backed by quotes from Zulu sources. The meeting ended with another slide show, this time Zulu War and Boer War battlefields, and an all too brief opportunity to examine model soldiers brought along by Mike Hobart and some rare Boer prisoner of war carvings. The next meeting will be at the National Army Museum at 2 p.m. on December 4th; non-members welcome. Anyone interested in learning more about the Society should contact George Brunckley, 9 Richards Close, Harlington, Hayes, Middlesex." --Terry Wise Press Officer of the Victorian Military Society "I was interested in Mr. Bennett's note in the July issue on Chaturanga and Go. I think I would agree with him that the various forms of kreigspiel are derived from chess. Chess has produced many varieties, including chess kreigspiel. Remembering the remark in "Little Wars" about producing "a kind of kreigspiel" there may well be a line chaturanga - chess - kreigspiel - wargaming. "Go", on the other hand, seems to have come down in a straight scarcely unaltered line from an age much earlier than chess. Incidentally I saw a paperback copy of Edgar Rice Burroughs novel "The Chessmen of Mars" in a shop the other day; I have always intended to try out the rules E.R.B. gave for the Martian game but never got down to it as I think Burroughs never actually tried out his game himself. Penguin Books have just published a paperback introduction to Go, and also a paperback edition of a Japanese novel based on the game "The Master of Go". This is about the umpteenth time I have bought a hard back edition of a book and then soon after found out it is either issued in paperback or "remaindered." It is the American Boorman in "The Protracted Game" who argues that Chairman Mao's political and military strategy is based on Go. Galaxy Books published a paperback edition of this about a year a ago. Seeing how the Russians are stirring up things in Africa it looks as if they have also learned Go as well as chess - even if they do not exactly welcome their Chinese brethren. I fervently agree with Bennett's hope that either chess or Go strategy remains in the area of operational research or confines itself to little (real) wars. What a superb operation the Israelis raid on Entebbe was; it is a pity we haven't a Government with similar guts. The raid has already produced two paperbacks "Operation Thunder" by Yehuda Ofer (Penguins) and "90 Minutes at Entebbe" by Stevenson (Corgi). Incidentally, how much I endorse your remarks about the ingratitude shown by our Government to Rhodesia -- it was a different story in 1940! --W.Thurbon of Cambridge Talking of battlefields, I can claim to live on one of the most historic sites in Britain (my 'home' as opposed to my married quarter in London of course). My mother's house is on the site of the Battle of Hastings, a matter of a hundred yards or so from the spot where Harold fell. I remember when I was home on leave one summer, before I was married, I woke in the night to hear sounds of shouting, crashing steel, etc., - it may have been a dream, or imagination, the wind even but it was quite real at the time. --Sgt. Leslie Watling, RTR Back to Table of Contents -- Wargamer's Newsletter # 176 To Wargamer's Newsletter List of Issues To MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 1976 by Donald Featherstone. This article appears in MagWeb.com (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com