Thursday, 11 July 2024

Infantry frontages for FPPS

A question was raised about whether the four infantry brigades of Essex's army at Edgehill would be better depicted in Fast Play Pike and Shot (FPPS) as double width (or two separate bases).  To consider this we need to do some simple maths and to make some assumptions.  The assumptions are that we only want to depict units deployed in fighting formations.  This means that Essex's men are in chequer board deployment with each brigade forming in two lines of battalia.  It also assumes a frontage of 1 yard per pikeman and 1.5 yards per musketeer. 

Actually, it's not quite that simple though as there are additional spaces in the ranks of musketeers to allow ranks to advance or retire during firing drills.  Musketeers were drawn up as several small 'divisions' of between four and six files (also termed a 'corporalship' as each had it's own corporal to keep things in order).  Rather than the entire rank filing back through the body it was common for the front rank of each of the sub-divisions to use the spaces left between corporalships for advancing or retiring between shots where firing by ranks.  There were also spaces between the two wings of shot and the central block of pikemen.  So those spaces need to be taken into account.

Essex's infantry brigades at Edgehill were all between 2,650 and 2,900 men strong. With average sizes for the constituent battalia running around 640 - 650 men formed up in eight ranks.   To make things easier lets consider a theoretical battalia of 648 men (excluding officers and drummers stood outside the ranks) which gives 81 files (648 divided by 8).  With a ratio of 2 musketeers to each pikeman that gives us three blocks each of 27 files, two of shot and one of pike.  Each block totals 216 rank and file.   Four such battalia would give us a brigade of 2,592 soldiers plus officers etc.  

Our theoretical Battalia

Starting with the pike block in the centre the 27 files need one yard of frontage per pike file so that block's frontage is 27 yards, easy so far.  The shot are a bit more tricky as there are gaps left in the frontage to allow easier exchange of ranks from front to back of the body (or visa versa) when firing by ranks.  In Dutch formations (and probably in all European tactical systems) musketeers were divided into sub divisions of between four and six files, each of which was under the watchful eye of a corporal.  These had different names in different armies but here I'm going to call them a corporalship.

It's tricky to divide 27 files to make the corporalships come out even as it would need a divisor of three or nine.  so we will have to fudge things a bit.  Dividing by 6 would work but only if there were four corporal ships on one wing and 5 on the other, but that helpfully gives us a spare corporalship of 48 men close enough to the number of shot sent as to support a single cavalry squadron.  This brings up a side question do battalia strengths represent a unit before or after shot are detached to support the cavalry wings.  I'm leaning towards the before option if numbers are based upon pay returns, however we will come back to this later.

So lets assume our theoretical battalia has lost a corporal ship of shot to support the cavalry.  It now has four corporalships of shot on each wing and a total head count of 384 musketeers and 216 pikemen plus officers etc.  Each wing of shot has 24 files in four subdivisions.  As a musketeer deployed in fighting formation requires 1.5 yards of frontage that gives us 36 yards for the men plus the space allowed for the gaps between corporalships at ,say, 2 yards each or an additional 16 yards.  I make the entire frontage to be two times 36 yards (shot), plus 27 yards (pike) plus 16 yards for the spacings or a total of 115 yards. 

Horribly out of scale battalia laid out to show the gaps in the formation

The small blocks are the corporalships of shot the larger one is the massed block of pikemen. The gaps are between the sub-divisions of shot and also the shot wings and the pike centre.

Last but not least on the formation aspect, the brigade frontage.  Four battalia as described above gives a frontage of 460 yards without allowing any gaps in the frontage between the battalia, which would make it difficult to exchange or merge the lines if pressed.  I'd estimate that a frontage of around 500 yards is the minimum to deploy one of Essex's brigades.

Four battalia brigade in chequerboard deployment

The only fly in the ointment when it comes to the above calculations is that we really know very little about the way a regiment was broken down prior to deploying on the battlefield so although the above looks nice and precise in reality it is anything but.  Who was included in pay returns, what percentage of dead and missing soldiers were still being claimed, how big were corporalships in a specific regiment at a specific battle, how big were the gaps between them (if they were present at all) etc, etc, etc.  As a wargamer I crave precision so I can have nice neat units of toy soldiers.  As an amateur historian I have to accept I don't actually have the data to allow that precision and that really I'm just dressing up an estimate with spurious calculations and that while some of the neat solutions I spot may be accurate they could also just be my preconceptions colouring the few facts we do have.

All that said I'm coming around to the idea that Essex's brigades need to be broken down into smaller formations to fit the 100 - 200 yard grid concept in FPPS.  Which would match the way cavalry has already been dealt with.  I'd have to calculate a frontage for each 'brigade' for each battle to determine what the break down should be but that's not that big of an ask.   What do you think?

3 comments:

  1. Why are your musketeers spaced out more than the pike? Barriffe only lists 4 spacings: Close, Normal and Open Order (½yd, 1yd & 2 yds) plus Double Distance (4yds!). A yard should be plenty for a musketeer, especially as they are not countermarching but filing off by 'corporalship'. Also, the pike must spend most of their time in normal oder as doing anything while at close order would be a nightmare owing to the cramped ranks, only made worse by everyone wielding a 16ft long weapon. It also seems not unlikely that if in 8-man files the corporalships might also be 8 files wide (I'm just making this up as I go here) as the square nature of that formation could make some evolutions easier. Perhaps 6-man corporalships came in about the same time as 6-man files? I don't know the answer to that one but worth looking into?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Rob sorry for the late response. I base the 1.5 yard frontage for musketeers on Elton (IIRC) and personal experience as a BCW re-enactment musketeer. The frontages given in drill manuals include the width of the soldier and are usually accepted as being measured from the midline of one soldier to the midline of the next (ie from head to head). I'm about 60cm across the shoulders which is just shy of 2 feet and that's without a sword, snapsack, water flask, bullet pouch, powder flask or bandoliers adding width. Kitted out for action I'd guess that I take up over 2.25 feet standing square to the unit frontage. I need space to cast about my musket when loading, for reaching for my powder flask and generally keeping a smouldering match cord away from the black powder I'm playing with! As a result we normally deploy at around 1.5 yards per musketeer when firing to allow a certain amount of arm waving about space. For pike I used a yard per man on the assumption that it is a formation closed up ready to fight but not yet at 'closest order' with pikes charged and bodies offering the smallest target cross section by standing 'sideways on' which I always assume is what the half yard frontage covers.

      The width and number of aisles between corporalships is anyone's guess, while the number of files per corporalship is based on thirty years research and drill manuals. There is also a certain amount of fudging as solid cast blocks of model soldiers are not the greatest tool for showing how unit level formations changed frontages, and to be honest I was constrained by my choice of ground scale to weapon range to grid size. If I hadn't been asked the question about the brigade frontages I would probably ignored it.

      Delete
    2. I just spotted a typo in my reply. Thirty years research should read thirty years WAR research. Soz.

      Delete