Belloc

Yeah I've always been amused by the incidents at Austerlitz when the Russian and French Imperial Guards fought one another. I dunno, battle of the Imperial Guards I guess.

Kevinmeath

What a surprise.

jeroenrottgering

xD at least I didn't pick the Dutch Red Lancers or the Dutch Grenadiers

harbinger

France:Tiralleurs de corses.Tiralleurs de Po.
Old guard grenadiers.57th 'the terrible' ligne .
Also the ligne called the 'incomparable'.Mostly davout's entire 3rd corps.

caldrail

Elite regiments were always given specific names like 'guard', but some elite troops such as 'grenadiers' were part of a line regiment. Skirmishers were never elite so I'm afraid that Sharpes Rifles were never as important as the television series and novels try to suggest.

Kevinmeath

Light infantry in Wellingtons army were most certainly an 'elite' unit, partly by training and partly because their veteran status.

The 95th Rifles (Sharps supposed regiment) were indeed an elite unit by training and their own 'espirti de corps', to be far you should also include 5/60th and the light battalions of the KGL in the term 'Rifles'.

ClearlyInvisible

I have a very distinct respect for the Pavlov Imperial Guard Grenadiers of the Russian Tsar. Very very intimidating and battle hardend men.

Also, French Chasseurs a Cheval fall under BOTH Cav and infantry and could easily make one run in fear.

caldrail

Training for skirmishing and use of rifled firearms did not make them elite. After all, skirmishes were only a precursor to the 'real' fight in the 19th century mind. As for veteran status, that also does not make a unit elite, merely experienced and therefore perhaps more useful circumstantially (hopefully, though some veteran units are far less willing than recruits at various times in military history)

I would accept period evidence of elite status - as it happens, I don't see any. There are cases of skirmishers coming from elite units - France did that occaisionally, but the skirmishing tactics were not the reason for elitism, which in the early 19th century was derived from assignation, association with ruling power, or honours won on the battlefield in previous wars.

Kevinmeath

In the British army for the Napoleonic period and just before Grenadier and Light companies were considered ‘Elite’ companies within each regiment.

However with the increased use of Light infantry in the period both the British and French formed whole regiments of light infantry who were specially selected and considered an ‘Elite’. They fought with light infantry tactics and could (and did) fight as normal Line infantry.

Where do you get the idea that ‘skirmish tactics’ were only a ‘precursor’ in the 19th century mind?

The French sent a screen of light infantry ahead of their columns in attack, these were to unsettle and harass the opposition line as the column advanced. To counter this the British sent a screen of light infantry to engage the French, added to this they interspersed companies of Riflemen (usually 5/60th KGL, Brunswickers, and Portuguese Cacadores----the 95th usually kept battalion structure) that gave Wellingtons troops a distinct advantage. At times the Light infantry screen was so thick that the French thought it was actually the first line. So it was not a ‘precursor’ at all but a fully fledged part of the attack.



You would accept period evidence? Very gracious of you, so while I must accept your word for it I have to supply period evidence , books on the subject are not acceptable I must supply period evidence.
“Although they were normally used in the same manner as ordinary line infantry, the concentration of several battalions into the Light infantry Brigade, later the Light Infantry Division, of the Peninsula army produced a force ideally suited as a vanguard, exceptionally adept at ‘outpost’ duty (maintaining the army’s forward position) and deservedly regarded as the elite of the army...................
.........................The 95th enjoyed an espirit de corps probably higher than any other unit”
‘The Armies of Wellington’ by Philip Haythornwaite pg 94
I presume this is not acceptable, it’s not primary evidence
Searching for quote in Mark Urbans book ‘Rifles’ is a waste of time or in works by Hibbert, Hamilton-Williams or Holmes because I must supply primary sources.
Well if I get time I will see if Kincaid or Harris mention such things in their books, does Siborne count as a period source?

caldrail

Not quite. Under the reforms that saw the rifle companies formed there is no mention of elite status. The recruiting poster for the 95th is wonderful - "No White Belts!" it proclaims, and further mentions that the green coats wopuldn't need cleaning. The intent was clearly to induce some sort of esprit de corps (if a little laziness) and although the recruits would no doubt believe they were join ing something special (as indeed on account from the period suggests), elite status is not the same. The Rifle Corps were a different branch of the British Army of the time and clearly those responsible for them wanted their troops to be shown as worthy, but elite status without battle honours? Without association to the crown? Without official decree?

I see the word 'elite' used very freely and often at any excuse, but the issue of elite status in those cases has more to do with modern definitions in which specialist units are generally considered elite as a matter of course.

Quote:

Where do you get the idea that ‘skirmish tactics’ were only a ‘precursor’ in the 19th century mind?

That was the whole point of skirmishing - to go ahead of the line both as a buffer against casualties and to harass the enemy as the regular troops approached. In any case the officers of the 195th century weren't particularly noted, despite a few exceptions, for their operational nous. We are taklking about an army with commisions paid for by their fathers when the officers were only infants - an army that was led by an upper class with strong traditional values on average.

Quote:

You would accept period evidence? Very gracious of you, so while I must accept your word for it I have to supply period evidence , books on the subject are not acceptable I must supply period evidence.

I didn't mean it like that, there's no need to take offence., but I apologise for the misunderstanding nonetheless.