Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => Colonial Adventures => Topic started by: OB on August 22, 2022, 02:24:26 PM
-
So far as I can tell this was the default tactic of Sikh Gorchurra cavalry. Groups of riders rode forward and fired from the saddle at their opponents. They rode away again to reload and to be replaced by the next group. Who did the same. When the enemy was sufficiently weakened the Sikhs charged home as a body.
That is not to say that Gorchurra couldn’t simply just charge the foe. They could and did. That though required a specific intent and order. Normally they seem to have opened with musketry in the manner described above.
Does anyone have any evidence to the contrary?
-
I think, and I'm willing to be corrected, that the gorchurra cavalry were tribal irregulars - very skilful individual horsemen - with lance , sword and in some cases firearms. I feel they would use wherever tactics they felt the situation required. As such, ascribing them a caracole style tactic as a default tactic is limiting.
The probably could fire and attempt to break up their enemy's formation or by retiring, draw the enemy out by means of a feigned retreat, but these are quite normal things do do for light cavalry and especially asiatic types.
A colonial rule set should allow this sort of skirmishing as well as a charge home.
-
I agree with your description and I'm sure they could employ a range of tactics as you say.
With a few exceptions, like the Kurds who simply charged, all Eurasian cavalry employed missilery to open the fighting. I see the Gorchurra as very much as part of that tradition. What I'm looking for is any evidence that they were not, as the Kurds were not. So far I have not found any.
I agree with your point on colonial rules too. You might have guessed I'm currently writing some.
-
The helicon books on the Sikh Army and Sikh wars may be worth a look? I don't have them sadly but they may have more clues.
-
Yes, I did wonder about getting that one. I may have to get a copy.
-
Just ordered the book in the hope it will answer my question. I did a picture search that seems to tell a story. I think I might be on the right lines.
-
Reading through the summary descriptions of the battles from both Sikh wars seems to suggest that the Sikh cavalry was ineffective against the British and sepoy regular cavalry and that a charge by these seem to have dispersed the Sikhs.
Add to this that the illustrations you have show matchlocks I'd suggest that repeated firing isn't their chosen tactic. They could "skirmish" and "evade" but if regulars caught them they were normally at a disadvantage and suffered accordingly in most cases.
Individually a Sikh tribal cavalryman was probably a better horseman and fighter than an individual regular trooper and better mounted too....but as a unit the regulars have the edge with training and discipline to win the encounter in most cases. I recall reading that sepoys found their swords were not as strong and sharp as the Sikh versions, but again this doesn't seem to have been a decisive factor either.
In one battle the British cavalry suffered at the hands of their opponent when their attack carried in them into scrub, which broke up their formation and they were counterattacked and suffered for it. The gorchurras could therefore charge, but only when favourable to do so.
So as long as your rules are flexible enough to allow this fire and evade you'll be fine.
-
My working hypothesis is that the compact charge of British cavalry in close formation pretty much always dispersed the Gorchurra. That is pretty much all they did. Gorchurra casualties were mostly slight, near invisible. Given Generals who intended to win it would have been a simple matter to rally them.
There was one notable exception. A unit of British Bengal irregular cavalry caused absolute carnage among the Gorchurra. An investigation duly followed and it was discovered that the Bengalis all carried razor sharp swords. The British issue swords were much inferior bouncing off turbans. I suspect the troopers didn't keep them sharp. The Gorchurra tactic when assailed was to bend over their horses neck presenting their turbans and the shield on their back as the most available target. It did the trick.
Loading machlocks from the saddle isn't too difficult. You just need time to do it. An enemy who rapidly closes will deny that time. Then it is skirmish and evade.
Actually the Gorchurra would always charge, even against odds. What they needed was someone to tell them that was what was required. No one seems to have done that in the First Sikh War.
I'm going to use Barry Hilton's order system. That means British cavalry can be ordered to charge and they will do so subject to the usual caveats. Gorchurra will need two orders, one to form and another to attempt a charge. Absent that they will skirmish and evade.
That said who knows what The Rise of the Sikh Soldier will reveal. I already have Amarpal Singh's two volumes so a bit of re reading needed there too.
-
Look forward to seeing what you come up with.
-
Thanks, its another part of the hobby I enjoy. You never know where the research will take you.
-
Thank you both for this thread. Very interesting to read.
I was also of the impression they were Irregular "Men on Horses" rather than horsemen. (From a European description IIRC)
So I imagined them to be primarily skirmisher troops in large bodies.
-
Hi OB,
Do you have any references for the Bengal Irregular Cavalry/Goracharra skirmish and subsequent investigation? I have seen an account put the relatively poor performance of the Bengal Light Cavalry down to them carrying standard British Light Cavalry sabres when the author believed native tulwars (like the Local Horse had) would have been better, but nothing formal.
Peter
-
Hi Peter,
From memory I think it is in Brent Nosworthy when he considers cavalry. Again from memory it is part of the relative merits of regular and irregular cavalry. He also notes the ineffectiveness of British cavalry swords against the thick coats of their Russian counterparts in the Crimean War.
The Bengali irregular cavalry incident might also be in Amarpal Singh Sidhu's First Anglo-Sikh War. Or, I might have read it there. It was certainly a First Sikh War incident rather than the second one.
Sorry not to be able to give you chapter and verse-it is a while since I read either book. If I come across it again in the course of my re reading I'll post the reference here.
The British sabre v tulwar issue seems to have been well enough known. It turns up in the Flashman Afghan novel too.
-
I thought I would have a look at the books to answer your question. Struck lucky first time.
Pages 292-293 Nosworthy Battle Tactics of Napoleon and his enemies. It was the Second Sikh War, source Captain Nolan. Now I'm wondering if there were two similar incidents.
And I see Nolan will be shortly republished. That's one I wont miss.
https://www.pen-and-sword.co.uk/Cavalry-Paperback/p/18679
-
My working hypothesis is that the compact charge of British cavalry in close formation pretty much always dispersed the Gorchurra. That is pretty much all they did. Gorchurra casualties were mostly slight, near invisible. Given Generals who intended to win it would have been a simple matter to rally them.
There was one notable exception. A unit of British Bengal irregular cavalry caused absolute carnage among the Gorchurra. An investigation duly followed and it was discovered that the Bengalis all carried razor sharp swords. The British issue swords were much inferior bouncing off turbans. I suspect the troopers didn't keep them sharp. The Gorchurra tactic when assailed was to bend over their horses neck presenting their turbans and the shield on their back as the most available target. It did the trick.
Loading machlocks from the saddle isn't too difficult. You just need time to do it. An enemy who rapidly closes will deny that time. Then it is skirmish and evade.
Actually the Gorchurra would always charge, even against odds. What they needed was someone to tell them that was what was required. No one seems to have done that in the First Sikh War.
I'm going to use Barry Hilton's order system. That means British cavalry can be ordered to charge and they will do so subject to the usual caveats. Gorchurra will need two orders, one to form and another to attempt a charge. Absent that they will skirmish and evade.
That said who knows what The Rise of the Sikh Soldier will reveal. I already have Amarpal Singh's two volumes so a bit of re reading needed there too.
I would have thought that loading a matchlock in the saddle would be very challenging - control the horse, keep the match away from everything else, break out the powder and ball, physically load the gun.
Difficult to load one round, let alone keep up a steady fire, I would guess!
-
More Mongol than Sassanian I think in terms of shooting. You rode forward shot and retired. Someone took your place. You then reloaded in safety.
There does seem to have been a move to flintlock often using Brown Bess musket locks.
-
Thanks for checking OB. I've never read Nosworthy and wouldn't have thought to look there. With you on the Nolan reprint!
Cheers, Peter
-
Cheers Peter, 30th September for Nolan. It should be a treat.
-
The helicon books on the Sikh Army and Sikh wars may be worth a look? I don't have them sadly but they may have more clues.
https://www.casematepublishers.com/the-rise-of-the-sikh-soldier.html?fbclid=IwAR1TUsaHHa2nDkpJ9px5qsmgYm3f7axOyLZNST2lrcTf4VvHQZ_tt47gSZ0#.YwvH3xzMK3B
This book?
Any reviews?
-
Yeah, that's the one huevans. The only review I could find was on Up the Dale blog who liked it. My copy should arrive this week. I'll likely do a review.
-
Yeah, that's the one huevans. The only review I could find was on Up the Dale blog who liked it. My copy should arrive this week. I'll likely do a review.
I'd love to read a review. Thanks!
-
Happy to oblige. It hasn't turned up yet.
-
I now have it and have had a glance for Gorchurra info'. No doubt a thorough read will reveal more.
For the moment there is confirmation of firing from the saddle in a skirmishing fashion and for committed charges. It looks like an either or tactic. Interestingly there seems to have been a preference for blunderbuss type weapons by some Gorchurra by the time of the First Anglo-Sikh War.
The evolution from bow to matchlock- to firelock -armed Gorchurra is outlined.
I found the stuff on Ranjit's regular cavalry very interesting.
My initial impression is that there is lots of new information in this book-not all of it military. Sikh internal politics gets a good airing.
It is a hefty volume for one of its type and speaking of type it could do with being a size bigger or so. I'll do a review once I have read it.
-
https://www.sukerchakia.com/history-of-misl/
Stumbled over this brief description of Sikh cavalry tactics.
-
Sorry for the late reply Huevans. I just got to see your post. Currently the link is triggering a security alert. I'll try it again in a couple of days.
-
I now have it and have had a glance for Gorchurra info'. No doubt a thorough read will reveal more.
For the moment there is confirmation of firing from the saddle in a skirmishing fashion and for committed charges. It looks like an either or tactic. Interestingly there seems to have been a preference for blunderbuss type weapons by some Gorchurra by the time of the First Anglo-Sikh War.
The evolution from bow to matchlock- to firelock -armed Gorchurra is outlined.
I found the stuff on Ranjit's regular cavalry very interesting.
My initial impression is that there is lots of new information in this book-not all of it military. Sikh internal politics gets a good airing.
It is a hefty volume for one of its type and speaking of type it could do with being a size bigger or so. I'll do a review once I have read it.
Cheers for the info!
Did the transition to flintlock happen all at once, or gradually? And was it complete by the time of the First Anglo-Sikh War?
-
https://www.sukerchakia.com/history-of-misl/
Stumbled over this brief description of Sikh cavalry tactics.
Just remember that these tribal tactics were used well before the Khalsa Raj was taken over under Ranjit Singh. Moreover, tactics really changed after the end of the Napoleonic wars, as more foreign mercs were hired to upgrade the Sikh military. The Sikh Wars didn't take place until the mid-1840s, so there was indeed a lot of changes. It is also reasonable to expect that some of these changes to tactics permeated the Irregulars, as they looked to emulate the regulars in some respects.
All that said, my knowledge of Sikh Irregular cavalry was that they preferred to attack but during the Sikh Wars often these attacks were beat back by much smaller British forces.
It must also be remembered that after Ranjit Singh's death in 1839 the Sikh Confederacy lost the glue that had bound it together. The downfall of the Khalsa forces demonstrated this by adopting defensive tactics throughout most of their subsequent conflicts with the British/HEIC. If the Khalsa forces had been more disciplined and better used, they had a chance of repelling the British/HEIC invasion of the Punjab (which the British/HEIC had planned in advance). Yet, the Sikh leadership was conflicted, with many seeing the unruly Khalsa forces as a direct threat to them (their lives), so having them go off and fight a war against the British/HEIC was a means to an end, regardless of the outcome.
Some good resources on the Sikh military forces are as follows:
Bajwa, Fauja Singh (1964) Military System of the Sikhs During the Period of 1799-1849. Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi, India.
Kumar, Raj (editor)(2004) Military System of the Sikhs. Ajay Verma (for Commonwealth Publishers): New Delhi, India.
Lafont, Jean Marie (2001) Maharaja Ranjit Singh: The French Connection. Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, India.
Mansingh, Gurbir (2006) French Military Influence in India. United Service Institution of India, Knowledge World, New Delhi, India.
You can find these sources if you look, as India offers a lot of reprints for sales. There is also the NAM and British Library.
Hope this helps.
-
That's an interesting looking book list ARKOUDAKI, thank you.
I continue to poke about on the topic. Here is a British combatant.
“Our English cavalry with their blunt swords were most unequally matched against the Sikhs with tulwars so keen of edge that they would split a hair… I remember reading of a regiment of British cavalry charging a regiment of Sikh calvary. The latter wore voluminous thick puggries round their heads, which our blunt swords were powerless to cut through, and each horsemen had also a buffalo hide shield on his back. They evidently knew that the British sword was blunt and useless, so they kept their horses still and met the British charge by laying flat on their horses’ necks, with their heads protected by their thick turbans and their backs by their shields; and immediately the British soldiers passed through their ranks, the Sikhs swooped round on them and struck back-handed with their sharp, curved swords, in several instances cutting our cavalry men in two”.
Sgt. William Forbes Mitchell (93rd Sutherland Highlanders).
He seems to be talking about Gorchurra judging by the mention of shields. I wonder what he had been reading?
-
the answers to those querries about the possibility of this indian cavalry to charge is quite straightforward:
- starting from gunpower era how many European Cavalries were capable and had the will to charge? very few and with sparse success
-How many native cavalries were capable and had the will to charge? absolutly none
- On wargame tables which cavalries of that very period had good chances to charge home and, unrealistically, even produce some casualties/tactical success? every one
As an example: thanks to my beloved TSTAF Colonial rulebook and some specific amendments i got the idea to purchase and paint a full unit of very exotic Savanah type african knights resplendent with their lances and padded armour/horses..in practice i fielded vs my poor Tirailleurs Sénégalais a sort of 19c. Panzer unit that was able to charge and squeeze my Tirailleur's line even if equipped with modern rifles...totally unrealistic when i get back to the sources (and i can assure you that i have a great library on French Colonial)..not only that kind of noble cavalry never charged home during the many battles in Tchad or French Soudan but usually after a lot of gesticulation and timid caracolade they joined the fight only after having dismounted.
-
Cheers for the info!
Did the transition to flintlock happen all at once, or gradually? And was it complete by the time of the First Anglo-Sikh War?
I don't know yet. I've not really started reading the book. I'm intrigued by the blunderbuss reference. That is a close range weapon.
-
@OB
“Our English cavalry with their blunt swords were most unequally matched against the Sikhs with tulwars so keen of edge that they would split a hair… I remember reading of a regiment of British cavalry charging a regiment of Sikh calvary. The latter wore voluminous thick puggries round their heads, which our blunt swords were powerless to cut through, and each horsemen had also a buffalo hide shield on his back. They evidently knew that the British sword was blunt and useless, so they kept their horses still and met the British charge by laying flat on their horses’ necks, with their heads protected by their thick turbans and their backs by their shields; and immediately the British soldiers passed through their ranks, the Sikhs swooped round on them and struck back-handed with their sharp, curved swords, in several instances cutting our cavalry men in two”.
Sgt. William Forbes Mitchell (93rd Sutherland Highlanders).
He seems to be talking about Gorchurra judging by the mention of shields. I wonder what he had been reading?
You realize that the 93rd only arrived in India in 1857 (in time for the Indian Mutiny) and returned back to Scotland in 1870. So the reference of 'Sikh Cavalry' is probably erroneous, and more likely local India cav, as the Sikhs pretty much sided with the British/HEIC forces during the Mutiny.
@Italawars
How many native cavalries were capable and had the will to charge? absolutly none
Really....ask General Custer about those pesky Indians at the Little Big Horn. Try not to make generalizations without understanding history better.
In terms of the Sikh Wars, the regular Sikh Cav was trained in European tactics by General Allard (French Nap Merc), which included the charge. In fact, the Sikh Khalsa Army was well trained in offensive ops and demonstrated that in Afghanistan. Unfortunately, by the time of the Sikh Wars the foreign officers were all gone and the training regime had gone to pot and the leaders of the army adopted almost purely defensive ops...whereas with a little initiative they could have probably defeated their British/HEIC adversaries.
-
The quote from Forbes-Mitchell is from his book about the mutiny, but is from an appendix dealing with a swords, in this part is about the Sikh wars, beginning "I remember reading of..."
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/33426/33426-h/33426-h.htm#Page_286
OB does mention F-M as reading this.
This is a great discussion folks, with lots of information, references, discussion and opinions (mine included from earlier). Looking forward to more of both.
:)
-
Thanks for the link Emir. So this is just a Highlander recounting a tale from something he read about the Sikh Cav. All of which is quite accurate, as a tulwar is pretty darn dangerous. I have held some and they are light in the hand but cut so well. In sharp contrast, British Cav steel has a long history of being a bit bendy and not cutting much.
All good info for people to have.
-
The quote from Forbes-Mitchell is from his book about the mutiny, but is from an appendix dealing with a swords, in this part is about the Sikh wars, beginning "I remember reading of..."
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/33426/33426-h/33426-h.htm#Page_286
OB does mention F-M as reading this.
This is a great discussion folks, with lots of information, references, discussion and opinions (mine included from earlier). Looking forward to more of both.
That's great, another piece falls into place. Thank you Emir.
:)
-
@OB
@Italawars
Really....ask General Custer about those pesky Indians at the Little Big Horn. Try not to make generalizations without understanding history better.
Aroudaki...
1) there is nothing wrong in "generalising" as the sources (including yours) confirm that "generalising", if we talk about colonial warfare, is, as in many things of life, the right and best way to reach a conclusion and it's also supported by well related statistical facts. Maybe you had nt been taught that history is an interdisciplinary science.
2) As shown by subsequent and recent archeological surveys and by very good articles/sources about Little Big Horn, including those by the top writer on the subject, Gregory Michno, and even those by Peter Panzeri who is not only a succsefull writer specialised in Indian Wars but also a wargamer (that could be helpful as i suppose your interest to history is driven by wargame)..the totality of wounds find on US troopers skeletons/remains had been made by firearms or few by arrows not by melée weapons ..also the positions of the few indians remains formed some kind semi-circles around the supposed spots were last stands from isolated troopers took place.., not to mention the proximity of expended cartridge cases from Indian's weapons ...all evidences clearly suggesting that no contact/no charges/ no close-in occured that day but only fires at isolated small groups of coverless dismounted men from an overwhelming mass of well armed warriors....i was not there but i'm also sure, from what i read, that the war tactics of dakotas never envisaged any kind of foot or mounted charges ...so your example suggest the opposite of what you're trying to teach me..
3) please try to learn some foreign languages, read sources, better if you can get some sort of degree and "study" something different than Osprey Campaign
And finally i don't know if many had never ridden a galloping horse..personally i did and i ve also been on the receiving end of mounted anti-riots police threats ..my conclusion which will certainly piss of many is that i even question, if we talk about reality, the very possibily of a charge to close in ...one thing is to charge the other is to threat to charge..
-
@Italwars, your comments continue to entertain, as your knowledge is clearly unique.
Let me remind you that you made an absolute statement when you wrote -How many native cavalries were capable and had the will to charge? absolutly none
This was not a 'generalization' as you now seek to claim but was clearly you once again claiming something that is just plain incorrect. Yet, when you get called out for such silly statements you do what I have seen you do to so many forum members, attack the person citing that your logic is flawed. Your entire thread is an attack, claiming I (1) have a poor education, (2) a lack of knowledge of military matters, (3) that I can't speak foreign languages, etc etc.
As you have a habit of editing out your text to cover your personal attacks against others, lets memorialize your derogatory and false comments you have made:
1) there is nothing wrong in "generalising" as the sources (including yours) confirm that "generalising", if we talk about colonial warfare, is, as in many things of life, the right and best way to reach a conclusion and it's also supported by well related statistical facts. Maybe you had nt been taught that history is an interdisciplinary science.
2) As shown by subsequent and recent archeological surveys and by very good articles/sources about Little Big Horn, including those by the top writer on the subject, Gregory Michno, and even those by Peter Panzeri who is not only a succsefull writer specialised in Indian Wars but also a wargamer (that could be helpful as i suppose your interest to history is driven by wargame)..the totality of wounds find on US troopers skeletons/remains had been made by firearms or few by arrows not by melée weapons ..also the positions of the few indians remains formed some kind semi-circles around the supposed spots were last stands from isolated troopers took place.., not to mention the proximity of expended cartridge cases from Indian's weapons ...all evidences clearly suggesting that no contact/no charges/ no close-in occured that day but only fires at isolated small groups of coverless dismounted men from an overwhelming mass of well armed warriors....i was not there but i'm also sure, from what i read, that the war tactics of dakotas never envisaged any kind of foot or mounted charges ...so your example suggest the opposite of what you're trying to teach me..
3) please try to learn some foreign languages, read sources, better if you can get some sort of degree and "study" something different than Osprey Campaign
And finally i don't know if many had never ridden a galloping horse..personally i did and i ve also been on the receiving end of mounted anti-riots police threats ..my conclusion which will certainly piss of many is that i even question, if we talk about reality, the very possibily of a charge to close in ...one thing is to charge the other is to threat to charge..
Italwars, your personal attacks are simply unacceptable and will not be tolerated. As stated, I have seen you do this time and time again to various forum members and to be frank, I am rather sick of it. I am aware from past experience with you that the moderators for some reason you a lot of slack of your nasty behavior but enough is enough. Your entitled to an opinion and entitled to back it up with facts. However, you are not entitled to launch your usual barrage of personal attacks against other forum members who clearly know the topics far better than you and which promote dialogue and the dissemination of knowledge.
-
OB started this thread with a good and interesting question. I have been researching the Khalsa Raj, and in particular the Sikh Wars for many years now, so hope the info/leads I have provided help. Apologies to OB and everyone else for this Italwars individual.
-
You should apologize for your lack of self control and good manners even in a forum dedicated to a relaxing hobby ..
-
@Italwars, your comments continue to entertain, as your knowledge is clearly unique.
Let me remind you that you made an absolute statement when you wrote
This was not a 'generalization' as you now seek to claim but was clearly you once again claiming something that is just plain incorrect. Yet, when you get called out for such silly statements you do what I have seen you do to so many forum members, attack the person citing that your logic is flawed. Your entire thread is an attack, claiming I (1) have a poor education, (2) a lack of knowledge of military matters, (3) that I can't speak foreign languages, etc etc.
As you have a habit of editing out your text to cover your personal attacks against others, lets memorialize your derogatory and false comments you have made:
Italwars, your personal attacks are simply unacceptable and will not be tolerated. As stated, I have seen you do this time and time again to various forum members and to be frank, I am rather sick of it. I am aware from past experience with you that the moderators for some reason you a lot of slack of your nasty behavior but enough is enough. Your entitled to an opinion and entitled to back it up with facts. However, you are not entitled to launch your usual barrage of personal attacks against other forum members who clearly know the topics far better than you and which promote dialogue and the dissemination of knowledge.
I understand your rage once faced by my logical facts but that’s my ideas about this topic ..I m totally free to generalize and tell you, as you ve be been so rude, that I don’t have “to better study history “ and “do not generalize” simply because my education in history ecc seems better than yours ..and nothing justify your arrogance for that reason I ve be obliged to teach you a well deserved lesson pointing some facts to you ..
But as you continue
I’ve reported again your shameful words ..and it s not the first time you do it including vs other forum members ..so I suggest you to leave if you cannot restrain yourself from personal attacks and this ridiculous rage even if you’re the aggressor ..Enough it’s enough ..sorry but I cannot do anything to appease your envy ..