Err something against the Irish ???

[switze01]

Hi

Cant see why Montroses irish are rated as they are -
According to Reid they used what seems to be Salvo tactics.
March straight up to the enemy fire a salvo and break into him using musket butts.
Surely they should be veterans - some of the covenanter troops they fought were
quite good - certainly at auldearn and elsewhere.
Why then are strathbogies rated higher than veterans like the irish
who had already campaigns behind them - i scent negative bias

Steve

[switze01]

Quote from article on inverlochy -

The Royalists started edging forward in their impatience to charge. Then the fighting really started. O'Cahan's regiment advanced right up to to Gillespie's division, holding their fire until their firelocks were in the faces of the enemy, then releasing a massive volley that allowed them to smash their way through the ensuing bedlam, and hurl themselves in a solid wedge at the Covenant troops behind. At the same time, Alistair and his men through themselves at Auchinbrecks left, and behind him the whole army came

How is this not veteran salvo exactly ????

Steve[/b]

[nikgaukroger]

Hi

Cant see why Montroses irish are rated as they are -
According to Reid they used what seems to be Salvo tactics.
March straight up to the enemy fire a salvo and break into him using musket butts.

My understanding that the current view is that they generally used normal tactics for the period and that the idea of a salvo followed by a charge is outdated - although like many troops of the period they could, and did, use a volley tactic at times.

John who wrote the list may pop along and comment further.

[nikgaukroger]

Quote from article on inverlochy -

The Royalists started edging forward in their impatience to charge. Then the fighting really started. O'Cahan's regiment advanced right up to to Gillespie's division, holding their fire until their firelocks were in the faces of the enemy, then releasing a massive volley that allowed them to smash their way through the ensuing bedlam, and hurl themselves in a solid wedge at the Covenant troops behind. At the same time, Alistair and his men through themselves at Auchinbrecks left, and behind him the whole army came

How is this not veteran salvo exactly ????

Steve[/b]

The fact that this (unattributed) quote mentions firelocks makes me doubt its accuracy.

[marshalney2000]

Steve, I worked with Nik on the Montrose list and I think the Irish were one of the most difficult troop types we had to classify. We also had a long debate on superior or not. At the end of the day a decision and not a unanimous one was taken to go for average on the basis of the quality of the foes they faced. I would also not undervalue the swordsmen capability when fighting other foot and indeed mounted.
I am happy to comment on the fighting style of the Irish which varied from battle to battle but would like to know the source of the article you quote? The Irish brigade has become the source of more written twaddle of a romantic nature than most other troops in history and I fear that this might be one of them.
As for Stuart Reid, his latest writings tend to shy away from the single volley and charge in mentality and present a picture of a professional pike and shot unit who did things differently on certain occasions. At Aberdeen they opened their ranks and let enemy cavalry pass through and later in the same battle tossed their pikes aside. They did this again in another battle when they tossed the pikes aside and charged into a cavalry melée.
As for bias, I am a Scot and this is one of the armies I am in the course of painting.
John
Ps a lot of this is covered in the notes with the army list
Pps hope this helps

[nikgaukroger]

Steve, I worked with Nik on the Montrose list and I think the Irish were one of the most difficult troop types we had to classify. We also had a long debate on superior or not. At the end of the day a decision and not a unanimous one was taken to go for average on the basis of the quality of the foes they faced.

To which I would add that there was also a desire to avoid what is, in the end, a minor/fringe army, albeit a fairly well known one, from becoming some sort of super army in period because of an over generous classification. On balance we preferred to risk "under-cooking" it rather than "over-cooking" it. The same has been done with other such fringe armies in the list books.

[nikgaukroger]

To which I would further add, that if you violently disagree please feel free to put forward your own ideas in the Player Designed Lists sub-forum - it is one reason for its existence. Putting down your version, with the evidence you are basing it on, may well create an army people are willing to use in agreement with their opponents, rather than the official list books version.

[switze01]

Hi

Having re-read the different bits in reids books and phamplets plus
max hastings account i can see what you are trying to do.
The swordsmen thing also allows them some anti cavalry ability.
Are you sure there opponents were rubbish - at inverlochy they faced
the regulars.
Their and strathbogies opponents at auldearn put up a considerable fight.
Lawers brigade were not poor troops.
So why cant they at least be veterans - they had come from a warzone
and nastier fighting than skirmishes like megray hill which is all that
strathbogies had seen.
If strathbogies were vets then so should some of the covenanter units
who had seen action down south .
If they cant be salvo surely they should be vets
Just because this is outside the mainstream doesnt make the irish brigade
a less heroic lost cause - montrose was no genius - he failed to scout
many times and at auldearn his own troops pulled his iron out
of the fire - why under rate them ?

Steve

[switze01]

I guess i will look at doing my own list for this
I agree with not having super armies and can
see where you are coming from

I just really like the idea of the irish brigade because
i have irish ancestors i guess

Steve

[rbodleyscott]

because i have irish ancestors

Doesn't everyone?

[babyshark]

because i have irish ancestors

Doesn't everyone?

Marc

[david53]

because i have irish ancestors

Doesn't everyone?

No

[nikgaukroger]

I guess i will look at doing my own list for this

Look forward to seeing your ideas.

[nikgaukroger]

because i have irish ancestors

Doesn't everyone?

Only the Americans seem to think this, oh, and the Irish

[marshalney2000]

Steve, I also look forward to seeing your list and also please supporting sources particularly for salvo training. I looked at Stuart Reid again this morning and he only mentions the Irish brigade closing quickly to action once at Inverlochy where other than argylls own regiment most of the rest of the enemy were levies. At Aberdeen, tippermuir and other actions he describes them engaging in long and sustained firefights which is hardly the behaviour of salvo troops.
I think if you game the Irish as they are at present you may be pleasantly surprised at their effectiveness.
John

[marshalney2000]

Steve, forgot to say that I do not intend to denigrate the Covenanters as indeed many of their units fought well. Most of the units left in Scotland were however second string. It was when the front line units came back from England that the going got tough such as Lawers at Auldearn. It is interesting that contrary to previous myth that at Tibbermore the Royalists outnumbered the Covenanters.
John

[switze01]

Hi

Like some of your friends i have been already building both
covenanters and montrose foot in 28mm
So too late now to change my mind
I like FOG a lot and have enjoyed all my games with the ancients
so without wingeing any more i will sign off with a thank you for
listening to my opinions - will look for some more refs though i
use reid mostly
Just on thing -
in his pamphlet he seems to say the gordon horse wore buff coats
and breastplates - if so should not they be armoured
Or is this not evidenced elsewhere
Steve

[marshalney2000]

Steve, I think in Scotland as a whole there was areal shortage of armour and buff coats for that matter. From my reading the Covenanter cavalry were lucky to get a buff coat and this situation was compounded by the lack of good horse flesh to mount armoured men. You will see that the Covenanter cavalry has no armour and as the Gordon horse changed sides to Montrose I imagine they would have come over with the equipment they had. This is not to say that officers and a few wealthier individuals would not have had armour and indeed a better horse. I am open to additional information on this if you have it.
By the way if you want a book that does give the Irish Brigade highland charges et al the you should read Highland Warrior ( a biography of McColla
by Professor Stevenson of Dundee university. it raises an interesting question which is if the Irish Brigade are superior and used impact type tactics then the Confederate Irish list also needs to be reviewed unless of course they thought up the new tactics on the coracles on the way over.
I wish you good luck with your new armies.
John

[switze01]

Yup got that one

Trouble is the irish confederates had a zero success
rate against everyone

[marshalney2000]

My point was that if the Members of the Irish Brigade fought in Ireland then where did they earn their superiority and alleged salvo tactics. It is true that some of them served in the Swedish army of the TYW but so did many Covenanters and that tactic was dying out even in the Swedish army as the number of veterans diminished.
All I was trying to do was look at the origin of units and examine why they would be different from their origins.
John