Sieges, Sowars and Sepoys - The Fierce and the Guns

 

Today, we are back in India 1857. The job is to produce amendments that make Charge of the Light Brigade (COTLB) rules work for India.

There is a mechanism in COTLB to replicate the impact of a dashing British Cavalry Charge. Here it is:

“ (a) Plus 3 British Cavalry in line or double line attacking Russian Cavalry.

“ (b) Plus 2 For cavalry charging  or counter charging in double line (lines within 4” of each other). Russian attack column striking infantry or artillery straight on.

Very good, you can see what the author wants. How about India?

Let’s simplify:

“ (a) Plus 3 Lancer Cavalry in line or double line attacking  Artillery, Cavalry, Infantry in first round only.

(b) Plus 2 For cavalry charging  or counter charging in double line (lines within 4” of each other). Fierce infantry in line or  attack column striking infantry or artillery. First  round only.

Above we capture the temporary advantage conveyed by the lance. Captain Nolan advised that lancers post first contact should leave their lances embedded in the foe or on the ground. The extra reach of the lance was a real initial advantage. Read Captain Temple Godman's near escape in the Crimean War. Lancers could be found on both sides in India 1857.

Right so. Who are the Fierce? To a degree this is subjective. Meaning you must make your choice on the basis of the best information you have.

Consider the Highlanders. Sir Colin Campbell continually used them in highly aggressive actions. Some say that was because Campbell was a fierce Highlander and so were the lads. Others point out that the Highlanders were fully up to strength. Many British units were not. A good reason they were not chosen. 

I'm not labouring the point above with the underlining. I cannot get rid of it. Imagine it is not there if you will.

Some like to designate the Sikhs and Gurkhas as Fierce. I would qualify both as so in open battle. In City Fighting the Sikhs had other priorities.

On the Indian side of the lines we have Sadhus, Ghazi and Wahabis. Religious motivation is compelling. I’d say all of these could be Fierce. 

Although note there were never many militant Sadhus or Ghazis even. My Sadhus below, half the strength of a Regular unit.

Consider the evangelical British Colonels who had been preaching the concept of the Elect of God to their men for months and years. Then came Cawnpore and a subsequent storm of Atrocity Propaganda. Such formations might well qualify as Fierce.

We had British Officers telling W H Russell that the reason Sepoys fought to the death was that they were fanatics. That sound Fierce too.

Decisions should be made pre game. There should not be more than a few such Fierce units on each side.

The Guns next.

In the Anglo- Sikh Wars and in 1857 British officers noted a curious phenomenon.  Indian gunners got 3 shots off to every 2 the British managed. Why? Don’t know. The Indian genius for mathematics? It is recorded that the Indians were more accurate too.

Therefore I’m amending COTLB from:

“An artillery battery consists of three stands each of two men plus one piece.”

To

An artillery battery consists of three stands each of two men plus one piece for British and three stands each of three men plus one piece for Indian regular artillery.

Why so? In COTLB artillery fires by throwing one dice for each crew figure. There’s our 3 for 2. It is not often so easy.

Another easy hit is the advantage of the Enfield Rifle. The British had it the Sepoys didn't. Mind you at the start some British units didn't have it either.

More of this COTLB amending to come. Not too much I think. Next the all important higher command. Quite often the Sepoys had none.

I think this is going to work.

Meantime I have a copy of Mad Dogs and Englishmen by Jon Sutherland. These are not new Indian Mutiny rules (2018) but they are interesting.  I might even review them just to tease out the concepts more. Mainly I like aspects of the author's approach. Other's think he made a mess of it. See Ralph Astley's review on You tube for that.

I bought a copy of course. Some of the things that vexed Mr Astley are there alright. All the same I'm interested enough to make the cards. It is a Card Driven Game, mainly.

A final thought. I need a bit of this kind of thing. It is a British Official Residence about 1860. Big enough but not palatial. They varied in size according to the gig.

Further down the social scale. The Opium Agent's and similar ranks cottages. Note the European tiles and chimney pots.

It strikes me as an "Indian" version of a row of English rural cottages. There would have been servants galore. Yet it was very much the lower middle class version of gracious living. Akin to the English mini villas that so many of them retired too. I have been to such and find them fascinating. It's like being 28mm scale and living in a 20mm scale house.

Note the heavier European clothes. It cannot have been very comfortable. Caste Marks in a way I suppose.

We are back in the Crimea next week.