The Battle of Znaim 1809

 This is John Gill's detailed study of the final battle of the 1809 campaign between France and Austria. I have gamed it a couple of times, largely because it appeals to me for the key role my favourite French Marshal, Marmont, plays. It also tends to get forgotten, as many histories end the campaign at Wagram. 

The Battle of Znaim (Znojmo) was fought on 10–11 July 1809, between Napoleon Bonaparte’s French army and the Austrian army under Archduke Charles. It followed the major French victory at the Battle of Wagram (5–6 July 1809). Austria was retreating toward Bohemia, while Napoleon pursued it, albeit slowly at first. The fighting began on 10 July and continued into the next day. The Austrians made a determined defensive stand, particularly around the town and nearby crossings of the Thaya River. Neither side achieved a decisive battlefield victory. However, the Austrian position was increasingly threatened, and Archduke Charles requested an armistice. The armistice effectively ended major fighting in the War of the Fifth Coalition. It led to the Treaty of Schönbrunn in October 1809, under which Austria made substantial territorial concessions to Napoleon. These included Austrian territories in the Balkans that Marmont governed.

I tend to read more strategic studies of the Napoleonic Wars, so it was a change to read a largely tactical study of a single battle. Gill writes very well, and there are many more maps than you usually get, which enables the reader to follow the flow of the movements up to the battle itself.

Marmont and Massena led the pursuit after Wagram as their troops were fresher. Marmont commanded the Army of Dalmatia, which sounds impressive, but was actually only two weak divisions (8,322 infantry and 259 cavalry). They may have been fresh at Wagram, but they had marched a huge distance from Dalmatia, fighting several actions. Napoleon gave him the 2nd Bavarian Division (5,461 infantry and 566 cavalry), and most importantly, Montbrun's Light Cavalry Division, which had three brigades and 4,400 troopers. With this force, he crossed the river and pinned the Austrian left, giving Napoleon time to arrive. Clever limited assaults and effective use of terrain kept Charles guessing about how many men he had, forcing him to detach troops to defend a flank rather than make his planned retreat. 

The Austrians were not broken after Wagram and were generally in good order. Napoleon also needed to recover his losses, and he wasn't sure where Charles was planning to go. This led to a genuine meeting engagement, something the Austrians were never very good at, and Charles wanted to avoid. Strategically, historians often fail to recognise the importance of the Russians, who were technically allied to the French, but didn't intend to intervene. However, Charles didn't know that, as being caught between both armies would have been disastrous. Peace, even with heavy territorial losses, was better than the destruction of the Habsburg state.

This is a really interesting battle, brilliantly described by John Gill. Highly recommended.

Some of my Army of Dalmatia

Some of my Austrians, albeit for the 1812 campaign.

British intervention in Sweden 1808

 I was listening to the Age of Napoleon podcast on Sweden in the Napoleonic Wars, which reminded me of Britain's intervention in their war against the Russians in 1808-9. We were planning to have another go at General d'Armee 2 rules this week, so this was an opportunity to dust down my Swedes, with new allies.

The little-known Swedish–Russian War of 1808–1809 (often called the Finnish War) was fought because Sweden resisted Russian pressure to join Napoleon's trade blockade against Britain. Russia was allied to France at this stage, but enforcing Napoleon's Continental System wasn't Russia's primary reason for attacking its old enemy. 

Russian forces quickly occupied much of southern Finland. Swedish and Finnish troops were poorly prepared but, led by commanders such as Johan August Sandels, won several local victories, including the Battle of Koljonvirta, yet could not stop the overall Russian advance. Russia had larger forces and better logistics, gradually forcing Swedish troops to retreat northward. The war ended with the Treaty of Fredrikshamn in September 1809, which ceded all of Finland and the Åland Islands to Russia. This article by Goran Frilund is a good overview.

Britain got involved because Sweden was resisting the Continental System. In 1807, Admiral Gambier had intervened in Denmark, destroying the Danish navy, but it also ensured that Denmark would remain a French ally. The British retained a Baltic fleet, and when the war broke out between Sweden and Russia, Admiral James de Saumarez was sent to the Baltic Sea. The Baltic command was established and effectively protected the coasts of southern Sweden from a Franco-Danish invasion, as Marshal Bernadotte of the French army had arrived in Denmark with an army to invade Sweden. On May 17 1808, General Moore arrived outside Gothenburg with a British expeditionary corps of 10,000 (some sources say 12,000) troops bound for Sweden. The troops were never landed in Sweden because King Gustav IV Adolf protested strongly. Moore was sent to Portugal instead, with well-known consequences. The Royal Navy remained on station.

10-12,000 men was a large force for Britain at this stage of the war, and it was therefore a bold move to send it to a remote conflict in very tough terrain. And while they didn't land, our game assumes they did.

Sadly, as this was only our second game with General d'Armee 2, and it's not a simple set of rules, we didn't make as much progress as we hoped. The Russians got across the table, as the Allies floundered a bit. The Russian left made a charge on the British line but was rebuffed. They didn't reach the Swedish line, but did a lot of damage with firepower. We will return to the game and rules, although I am finding the rules hard work. Not ideal for a wargames butterfly like me.

Napoleonic Open Day

My wargame club, GDWS, runs an annual Napoleonic Open Day, funded by a bequest from a former club member who was a serious fan of the Napoleonic period. We mostly run Napoleonic games, invite other clubs, and make it open to the public to encourage interest in the hobby. It is an opportunity to play longer games as the hall is open all day.

I ran the big 28mm game on a 12 x 6 table based on the interesting French 1814 campaign. A surprise to many in the club, as it wasn't in the Balkans! However, there was a link, as the French commander was Marmont, the Balkan Marshal, and the Austrians had several regiments of Grenzers. The Austrians, with a Russian division, were defending a river line, and Marmont's job was to destroy them. Part of Napoleon's interior lines strategy in this campaign. He didn't quite destroy them, but did manage to roll up the Austrian right flank. The rules were Black Powder.

Then we had Eylau in 1807, fought in the snow. The Scottish weather was unseasonably (well, maybe not😏) wet, but not quite that bad. Nevertheless, the guys put on a good version of the battle using Blucher rules.

Next up was Sagunto 1811 using the Empire Bataille rules. Suchet's French army against the Spanish commanded by Blake during the Peninsular War. Nice to see a Spanish army on the tabletop.

Then the Soldiers of Napoleon rules using the 18mm WoFun miniatures, which look pretty good in this scale. 

Finally, Black Seas, which, as ever, had a happy band of participants. They make what used to be a complicated period to game very simple. 

Hopefully, there was something for everyone, and I was particularly pleased about the range of different rules played.

Most of us will be meeting up again next Saturday at the Carronade show in Falkirk. We will be putting on a participation game based on the Battle of Banja Luka in 1737, using Lust for Glory rules. Back to the actual Balkans!

The Star Captains

 ITVx is currently streaming the old Hornblower series. It provides a handy backdrop for my painting, as my usual poison, Turkish TV, requires me to read the subtitles. It's a cracking series, first shown in 1998. They used three actual sailing ships and eleven scale models for the bigger battle scenes. It inspired me to start a book that has been languishing on my to-read pile for some time, which I picked up in a second-hand bookshop. This is Tom Wareham's study of frigate command in the Napoleonic Wars.

I read a lot of books about the Royal Navy, particularly frigates, while researching my book on HMS Ambuscade. The first British-built HMS Ambuscade, a 32-gun frigate, fought in the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars. It had a mixed war, being captured and then recaptured. The frigate in the age of sail was the Royal Navy’s glamour ship, big enough to carry significant firepower but fast enough to evade larger enemies. They were the light cavalry of the seas, patrolling, scouting and above all, fighting. As Admiral Nelson said, they were ‘the eyes of the fleet’. 

There are many books about frigates, but most understandably focus on the frigate actions. Individual frigate-versus-frigate actions were actually rare; more typically, they were involved in capturing smaller ships and merchantmen. Battles between frigate squadrons were even rarer, one exception being the Battle of Lissa, which I covered in my book on the Napoleonic Wars in the Adriatic.

This book is somewhat different. The author has done an exceptional job researching the data on frigates. Mostly using the Admiralty List Books, supplemented by Steel's Navy Lists and Pitcairn Jones' List of Commissioned Sea Officers. I had to scour the National Archives for just one ship, so covering all the frigates is no mean feat. The result is a fascinating breakdown of the officers who sailed frigates. For example, frigate captains (670 of them in the Napoleonic Wars) were promoted more quickly, suggesting that they displayed the qualities that enhance promotion prospects. By the end of the wars, they could also be very young, between 23 and 26 years old. 

The median length of service was 3 years and 6 months, although this hides enormous variations, and the Admiralty appears to have had a policy of limiting the length of time a captain could serve on frigates. The dangers of the sea and disease were more likely to kill you than the enemy, but frigates were more likely to suffer from natural weather hazards given their service, and this partly explains the shorter service periods. There was no shortage of applicants, as although frigate captains were paid less, they were more likely to get prize money and had more freedom to operate independently. More than half would command more than one frigate.

This is just a sample of the data analysed in this book. If you are looking for the stories of naval actions, this is probably not the book for you. However, if you want to know more about how frigates were commanded, this is an invaluable source.

It also reminds me to play more Black Seas.

General d'Armee 2

'I need a new set of Napoleonic rules like a hole in the head' was my first reaction when a couple of GDWS members were trying out David and Chris Brown's General d'Armee 2 rules at the club. I hadn't played the first iteration, but like the hopeless wargames butterfly I am, the mechanisms looked interesting. At the York show the following weekend, I gave in.

This is a division-sized game that can be scaled up to corps and, for me, might plug a gap between scuffle games like Rebels and Patriots and big battle rules like Blucher. I typically use Black Powder for this size of game, but it's not without its problems, and I am open to trying something else.

In our first game, we appreciated the rules layout, which includes plenty of examples and tips without overdoing the eye candy. I particularly liked the laminated QRF that comes with the rules, rather than the usual download-and-do-it-yourself approach. No rebasing is required, and unit/figure sizes are flexible. Anything from 12 to 36 figures per battalion. My 28mm figures are mostly based for 18 figure battalions, so that's all good. There are some unusual features. You will need separate skirmisher bases, as they play an important role, rather than being abstracted as in other rules.

The troop types have some original names, but are pretty standard. Casualties are shown by a marker rather than figure removal, and the strength levels are quite high, representing a more attritional game. Initiative is limited by the number of ADCs the commander has. This depends on the number of brigades, the ability/national classification, and a dice roll. Again, the nomenclature differs, but the mechanisms are similar to those in other rules. Unusually, there is a role for caissons in replenishing ammunition and supporting artillery more generally. I will need to dust mine down.

The deployment stage is more complex than other rules, with dummy deployments, hidden brigades and scouting rules, but it adds something to the game. The game turn starts with initiative, which is determined by dice, then charges before normal movement. Firing and combat are after that. Initiative is determined by the number of ADCs, and the tasks they can order have different costs. They are not just movement tasks; they can also strengthen the fire and combat capabilities. It allows the commander to focus on a particularly crucial part of the battlefield. Firing and combat rules are fairly conventional, as are discipline (morale) tests. A double six throw introduces the Destiny rule, which introduces some exceptional, but not overpowering, additional effects.

There are some national characteristics that are always much debated. However, they look generally fine to me. The focus is on Europe, ignoring the Ottomans, Persians, and others. There are a few army lists and an introductory scenario, but the book focuses on the rules. My initial reaction is that the rules add more complexity than necessary. This includes playing stages that could be abstracted and numerous modifiers. However, the rules are well laid out, and we found everything quite quickly. I am not yet sold on these, but I am prepared to persevere. The Napoleonic crew at Irvine were giving them a go last weekend, French v British. Again, mixed views, but they will also give them another go.

Our trial game was a small divisional battle with three brigades on each side. The War of 1812, in which the US invaded Canada. The US left flank collapsed, giving the Brits a marginal win by the end of play.

The Battle of Quatre Bras 1815

 Last weekend, I was playing a multiplayer game of the Battle of Quatre Bras at the Veterans Hub in Glasgow. We essentially followed the scenario outlined in the Black Powder: Albion Triumphant supplement. The game was played on a 12' x 8' table, which enabled more approach moves, though it posed a few challenges in reaching the units around the centre of the table where the key actions were fought. The terrain base was a printout from a map drawn using Inkarnate.

The Battle of Quatre Bras was fought on 16 June 1815. It was an early clash in the Hundred Days Campaign in which Wellington’s Anglo-Allied forces held a crucial crossroads against repeated attacks by Marshal Ney’s French army. Though the Allies were initially outnumbered and pushed back, steady reinforcements allowed them to stabilise the line and prevent the French from seizing the position. The battle ended without a decisive tactical victory. Still, Wellington’s successful defence kept his army intact and able to retreat in coordination with the Prussians, making Quatre Bras a key prelude to the Battle of Waterloo two days later.

This was the initial setup, with Bylant's Dutch-Belgian Brigade holding the crossroads, including a small Dutch militia battalion at the Germioncourt farm in the foreground.

This peaceful scene was soon ended when Ney arrived with Bachelu, Foy, and Pire's Divisions. Picton's Division starts to come on the Allied base line.

I was playing Jerome Bonaparte, and my division arrived on the next turn (bottom right). We agreed, most unhistorically, that I would force my way through the woods and advance on the Allied right flank. Given the Allied reinforcements, a flank attack wasn't going to succeed, but it should drag Allied units from reinforcing the crossroads. The problem was that there was no cavalry, and you couldn't take the guns through the woods. 

The Dutch militia didn't run away from Germioncourt farm and held on for most of the game. They also held up two batteries of guns that were sorely needed elsewhere.

The French were in dire need of competent military police to clear the many roadblocks, as finding space to deploy the divisions became challenging. Too many troops ended up in the woods fighting an inconclusive skirmish. However, significant forces managed to fight through the first Allied line and engage in a grim battle of attrition over the crossroads and the Allied left flank.

The arrival of the French cavalry stretched the Allied line even further.

Jerome's Division got through the woods and made a bold advance, aggressively taking on the Allied line. Sadly, the dice gods abandoned me at this stage (or instead, they switched allegiance), and the attacks were repulsed. However, they kept Alten's Division busy and a chunk of the Brunswickers.

By the end of Day 2, both sides had reached the crossroads, and on the victory points, it was a narrow Allied victory. The French were running out of steam, so pretty much as the historical battle went. 

We used Black Powder with some house rules, which the Veterans Hub uses. In Glasgow, we don't use the disordered rule (hit on a D6), as it slows the game and, as happened to me several times, French columns end up disorganised without losing a casualty. Otherwise, it worked well, and a good time was had by all. 

Apsley House

I am in London today on a work trip. With a spare hour or so, I decided to visit Apsley House, the Duke of Wellington's London pad. It is a magnificent building near Hyde Park Corner, which Wellington bought in 1819. It is crammed full of Wellington's massive art collection, which comprises nearly 1,000 items.

Impressive though the Reubens and Goyas are, the military paintings and memorabilia were the target of my attention.

There are several of the Duke himself, with this being the most recognisable. 

And his primary foe is not forgotten, with a couple of recognisable classics.

The Battle of Waterloo is depicted in several classics, including the Highlanders' squares fighting off the French cuirassiers.

Wellington wasn't big on delegation, but his divisional commanders are represented, including Graham, Padget and Beresford.

As are the allies, including a flattering painting of Tsar Alexander and a less-than-flattering one of Francis.

It's not all paintings. Wellington's dress uniforms, several French eagles, a room full of presents, and a pair of wellies!

Well worth a look if you are in London.