Having a Mounted Officer on an Infantry Battalion Command Base

[armchairgeneral]

I notice across SYW to ACW, some people have a mounted officer incorporated in the command base of their units. I think it looks quite cool and maybe a bit inspired by Howard Pyle admittedly romanticised picture “The Nation Makers” (which hangs in my study/wargames room) I was thinking of doing this for some of my AWI Americans. Just wondering though about the historical reality of this? Wouldn’t mounted officers be further back directing and commanding rather than in the front line of an infantry unit making himself a prime target?

[olicana]

It's pretty historical. Indeed, it's when senior officers (colonels +) fought dismounted that is most often remarked upon: Being mounted was taken as read.

Even in the late 19th century British colonels were mounted - there is mention of British officers at 2nd El Teb in 1884 (I think?) being more vulnerable to bouncing canister shot because they were mounted (it was safely bouncing over the heads of the infantry).

I rather suspect being mounted was part of the honour and duty of rank. Being mounted meant more of your men could see you with them (being mounted identified you), even if it also meant being more vulnerable. One should also remember that, for much of the period, firearms were not accurate enough to pick anybody out - in Napoleonic times they didn't have sights, and the order wasn't to "aim muskets" but to "level muskets".

[Warboss Nick]

It seems like both was the case. The higher up the ranks, the more likely the officers were in horseback. However, Colonels did not regularly command their regiments in the fields, let alone battalions. There are stories from the Peninsular War of French officers jumping up and down, motivating their men. So do whatever floats your boat.

[olicana]

On Napoleonic British armies (Osprey: Battle Orders #2)

"In general outline, tactical command and control was straightforward enough. Divisions were supposed to be led by lieutenant-generals, brigades by major-generals and battalions by lieutenant-colonels."

In the British Army the word lieutenant is generally dropped from the names of all ranks (except basic lieutenant) in general speech. They are all called either 'General' or 'Colonel'. I've always followed that rule.

I believe that in other armies (like the French) equivalent ranks did not always have the same name. In French service, I think a major was equivalent in rank to a British lieutenant-colonel because they had the same job (?). I might be wrong on the specifics of this. I know a wargamer who only refers to "Battalion, Regiment and Brigade commanders" for exactly this basic reason and I'm trying to recall the conversation we had about it.

[Ray Rivers]

Wouldn’t mounted officers be further back directing and commanding rather than in the front line of an infantry unit making himself a prime target?

Mounted colonels in the line certainly look good, but my feeling (from a historical perspective) is that in battle they would either be mounted to the rear of the line or dismounted in the line or in front leading the line in attack. In fact, I can't think of a single instance in which a mounted officer was actually in line during a battle. Close to the rear, predominately, but not actually a part of the line. The whole point of fighting in line is so you don't shoot your own folks in the back. Certainly, by the time you get to ACW, being mounted at all in battle for a colonel, would lead to a quick death, as rifles were quite accurate.

That doesn't stop people from doing it, because it looks very nice on the table top, and I would think you could "imagine" that he is actually close to the rear of the line as the battle ragged, or like "marching" figures, leading the troops forward to the battle while mounted.

I have seen some folks rage against "firing" figures as that represents only a moment in a battle, but most folks have no problem with lines of firing miniatures, even if they are marching on the table top.

So yea, go with what you want and what pleases your eye.

[olicana]

Close to the rear, predominately, but not actually a part of the line.

That would certainly be the case, a few yards at most, otherwise he wouldn't be heard. One of the reasons for being mounted is the ability to get from one end of the line to the other quickly, transmitting orders to company officers, etc. The officer in your pic is, if you look at it, just behind the line.

However, in practical wargaming terms, unless you are going to have separate mounted colonels (E.g. Sudan in the Gilder fashion), or none, they need to go somewhere in the unit. Personally, I don't do mounted colonels due to base depth (they quite often nee a deeper command base) but, they do look good.

[Cubs]

I'm doing a Napoleonic British Highlander battalion right now in 1/72 and I'm mounting them in 'companies' of 4 models (2x2) on bases 40mm x 30mm. The mounted commander (Colonel or Major) is on a base with a drummer and piper and he will be placed wherever I reckon looks best! Standard tactics of the time were for the commander to be in the middle of the formation for a column or square and to the rear when in line. Having said that, there are plenty of occasions when the commanding officer did lead from the front, when advancing/charging forward, to encourage his troops.

[armchairgeneral]

Thanks for all the comments everyone. Food for thought.

[IronDuke596]

Almost all of my Peninsula and War of 1812 Battalions have mounted battalion commander figures on separate stands. This allows the battalion commander to be placed in a variety positions depending on the formation of the battalion.

We use General de brigade rules and we apply the risk to general table to the battalion commanders if the unit rolls a double one in firing or melee. If he is killed the mounted figure is removed and generally replaced with a foot figure commanding officer and the battalion morale drops one level.

So, there is a practical purpose to having a single mounted battalion commander in our games. Nonetheless, a mounted commanding officer that is incorporated into a command stand is visually appealing.