Not a snowy Christmas image, but the 11th Hussars in among the Russian guns during the Battle of Balaklava, October 25th, 1854.
A question for the readership, who are better versed than I in military concepts and related terminology. For the horse and musket era, how do you understand the term 'disorder'? When do troops -- say a battalion of line infantry in a firefight, receiving (or running from) an enemy charge, or a squadron of cavalry about to engage with a unit of charging enemy cavalry -- become disordered? At the moment, I associate the term with retreat (temporary disorder) and a rout (permanent disorder). Is this in the ballpark? I'd really appreciate some clarification and related explanation, if you please. Thank you in advance.
-- Stokes
Comments
Cavalry charging 'too early' or in an un organized way (too exuberant) would decrease their striking power and make them more likely to 'bounce'. Foot getting ragged lines from light casualties (i.e. not sufficient effective in the rules to remove models etc), malingerers, or troops getting a bit worried about those cavalry rolling around their flanks and clumping up instead of being in nice long lines could also represent 'real' effects of being disordered.
A British line unit about 200 strong, surprised by cuiirassiers. Attempting to form square, the Light Company got themselves gut off, leaving the rear of the square open. The gap was plugged by supernumaries and a few fellows shoved into place by NCOs. It would not have held against a real enemy. It was disordered, but not retreating.
The same square was ordered to reform line, when more horsemen appeared through the smoke. Half the blokes tried to follow orders while half tried to reform the square. The approaching cavalry were our Dutch allies, in their French-style uniforms. Again, disorder without falling back.