British Army Structure Below Company

[keeper]

Hey chaps.  I want to do a bit of skirmishing involving small groups of British infantry in the colonial period, but I'm struggling to find any information on how the infantry (or any other branch for that matter!) structured itself within a Company.  I only really want to have about twenty or thirty British in a force, but I'd like to know what regular formations of this size should be before I start messing about with irregular formations and under- and over-strength forces.

Found some useful info on http://www.colonialwargaming.co.uk/ but I think I'm being a bit thick and having trouble teasing out the threads. Help? please? anyone?

[Captain Blood]

Think it was probably pretty much as throughout the C20th, at least in 'standard' infantry battalions - 3 platoons plus a Coy. HQ section - so around 90 - 100 men in theory, although the official numbers per section, platoon, company and battalion have fluctuated a lot I think...

[itchy]

this from the empress web site should help its speciffically for the zulu war but should be generic for that period.

 http://www.empressminiatures.com/BritishForces.pdf

hope it helps.

[keeper]

Thanks chaps   Just what I needed!

Thanks to Empress too, of course!

[Paul @ Empress Miniatures]

   

[Gluteus Maximus]

Keeper,

I'm currently reading "The Drums Of Kumasi" about the Ashanti wars. Sir Garnet Wolseley's orders for the 1874 campaign [the first jungle warfare manual, apparently] is printed verbatim and in it he specifies that due to the dense nature of the terrain and the consequent lack of close control in company-sized and larger linear formations, companies should be split into 4 sub-units which should operate exclusively in skirmish formation, each commanded by an officer or senior NCO. This is such a specific order that it implies that normally companies would be the smallest operational unit in other "conventional" campaigns with more open terrain.
It appears that modern-style platoons weren't the norm before 1874, but whether this was a one-off for Ashanti or became standard British practice after this I'm not sure  Presumably they could be split for garrison duties etc if required, but maybe not in the field?

So it appears that there is a precedent for splitting companies into smaller units, even if you chosen campaign might not historically justify this. If it was good enough for Sir Garnet, it's good enough for me 

[former user]

I'll be in my bunk 
as you can see from gluteus' comment
paper organisation and tactical use of troops are totally different things

military organization of tactical units is based on a theoretical concept of how independent units (batallion) are to operate and what elements they should contain
but also on logistical issues (tents, kitchen, bagagge train etc) and commanding elements needed in the actual period
this works well for a unit which is kept in barracks - and tactical organisation is about that matter
on campaign, the skilled officer  (as Wolseley above) would sudivide the batallion as tactically necessary, also detaching troops from other units for support, adding logistical elements etc

unless You are gaming a historical scenario, where the actual composition is reported (as for isandlwhana above), you are totally free to include whatever You like, and from any units you like

what You can do is find out how british troops were housed during campaign and how many soldiers a cook and his aides would feed, as well as how many soldiers a baggage wagon could supply.
theoretically, this would be the minimum subunit to be detached independently, because this would be also a group of soldiers accustomed to each other, living together etc, and thus having been drilled together and cooperating smoothly
for example at Isandlwhana the companies are said to have formed firing lines on their own but it is hardly imaginable that the shooting drill would have been exercised in company strength
also when You see bodies of troops marching or parading on a daily basis, the company is subdivided -
only on special occasions do companies or batallions parade as one body, and this has to be exercised (watch "trooping the colours" on Youtube)
nowadays one barracks is housing one platoon, and this is the subunit for the daily routine

I could imagine that the formal platoon subdivion was established after campaign experiences, so Wolsley's orders make totally sense
however, if You want to wargame this, you will never form units bigger than 15, since this is unwieldy
unless of course You are attacking over open terrain against MG fortifications

this would be my approach

from my experience, two units of ca. 12 soldiers with firing drill rules  (the british professional soldier -the old contemptibles- were so good at this that german units first facing them in 1914 mistook the drill for MG fire!) would be enough to hold at least 50 warriors who don't shoot back at bay, in any rules system (my experience includes T&T,Sword and the Flame, WHAB), and this without gatling guns or MGs

any regular british unit in colonial context (or european unit for that matter) would be able to massacre hundreds of native warriors unless outwitted or badly led, and make a huge fruit salad afterwards

[keeper]

Thanks for the info, chaps! It's all good!

Off to see if I can find a copy of The Drums of Kumasi on Amazon ...

[Gluteus Maximus]

It's a very good read, but it might be OOP as my copy dates from the early 60s.

It's a fascinating acount of an unusual campaign and worth getting if you can.

[keeper]

Found one (just one!) on an Amazon.co.uk reseller.  £12 - but I'll call it a present for myself! LOL