Using 'Principles of War' For The South American Wars of Liberation

Introduction

This document is a set of notes on using 'Principles of War' (POW) to fight the South American Wars of Liberation, a series of campaigns fought in modern Chile, Peru, Ecuador, Colombia and Venezuela in the decade following the Battle of Waterloo. They are written for use with the original 19^th century 'Principles of War' set, but conversion for use with the Napoleonic set should not be difficult.

These notes are based on personal interpretations of the troop classifications in the rules, and are open to discussion. The rating of troops is based upon their relative performance with respect to other troops in the same wars, or even the same battle, rather than assessing them against similar troops in other time periods and geographical locations. Thus, troops that may only be regulars relative to European contemporaries may rate as elite when compared to other South American formations and will be described as such.

I have not yet created any generic army lists as I plan to refight actual battles. However, the creation of such lists may be an interesting exercise, if only to provide a basis for which to classify troops for individual battles or for made-up actions.

Finally, it should be noted that the British troop employed in these wars were very highly regarded, and performed exceptionally. Their high rating should therefore not be seen as reflecting the author's own national bias!

Officers

Command seems to have been generally competent, so the majority of officers should be rated as Average. Bolivar and San Martin merit a Good rating. A couple of Spanish army commanders (e.g. Osorio) may rate as Poor.

Troop Representation

Most troops are regulars, although some gaucho formations may rate Irregular Horse status. However, the actions in which troops of this nature are involved are probably too small to represent under the rules anyway.

Two regular infantry units will generally represent a battalion. This equates to roughly three companies per unit. Artillery will represent 2-4 guns. Cavalry is more of a problem, as it seems to have often been used in squadron strength units. My current solution is to assume that a cavalry unit represents a small regiment or a single squadron, but to significantly reduce the base strength for units representing squadrons. This may not work, and I may have to combine squadrons to form amalgamated cavalry units for game purposes. Another possibility would be to give the units a low strength, but give them a morale bonus, so that they have a higher staying power than fighting strength.

Infantry

POW rates regular infantry as Militia, Regular or Elite. The majority of troops seem to perform as Regulars and should have a base strength of 6. A few veteran Spanish units and the British Legion should rate as Elite and have a base strength of 8. No troops seem to rate Militia status in their own right, but some Regulars may be downgraded to such to represent significant pre-battle exhaustion e.g. the Army of the Andes prior to Chacabuco.

Experienced troops should be rated Steadfast. This would include the British Legion, the Rifle Battalion and veteran Argentinean units in the later stages of the Chilean campaign. In general, Elite troops are good, but may have off-days, whilst Steadfast troops are consistent performers. The Spanish seem to be brittle enough not to rate any Steadfast troops, but there does not seem to be a significant difference in performance between colonial troops and regulars to justify rating the colonials as Militia.

I am uncertain as to whether to rate the Rifles as Elite or Steadfast or both. They seem to have been made up of mainly Venezuelan troops with British officers and NCOs. Rating them as both Elite and Steadfast may be a little extreme, therefore. Making them Steadfast regulars would seem best; they would be consitently good, without being overpowering.

POW allows certain infantry to be rated as Light Infantry if they have specific training in this respect. This rating allows them to ignore the effects of most rough terrain, and gives them a bonus when shot at. Only the Rifle Battalion seems to merit this; the Spanish had a number of light battalions, but they seem to be used in the same role as line units.

Both sides occasionally formed amalgamated battalions, made up of the light and grenadier companies of other battalions. These could be rated as Elite. Note that since both light and grenadier companies were combined to make up these formations, it could be assumed that there was no difference in role for these troops, just a perceived elite status.

All infantry except the Rifle Battalion will be armed with smoothbore muskets (SB). The Rifles will have early Muzzle Loading Rifles (MLR). These fire as MLR but are limited to effective range.

Cavalry

Spanish cavalry seems to have been predominately colonial and was usually outclassed by the opposition. It would probably best be rated as Militia, with some Regular units. Republican cavalry generally seems to be better quality and should be rated as Regular, with the Argentinean Horse Grenadiers being Elite.

If using squadrons as the base unit then the starting strengths should be downgraded.

Cavalry will be armed with Miscellaneous Weapons (MW) or Lance (La) and will not have Mounted Infantry training. Whether a unit is lance armed or not is problematical. There are some dedicated lancer units, but other units seem to have been issued them on a campaign by campaign basis.

Despite the rough terrain cavalry seems to have been used both extensively and effectively. How this is likely to work in game terms is unknown.

Artillery

Artillery definitely seems to be the minor arm in relation to infantry and cavalry. There certainly doesn't seem to be a lot of it used. The nature of the terrain and the relative lack of impact on battles would suggest that all artillery should be rated as Light, and in this period all guns would be Smoothbores. Units should have a base strength of 2 or 4 depending on how many guns are represented and how they were deployed.

Organisation

Armies seem to have been organised into divisions with between 1 and 3 infantry battalions, 1 and 3 regiments/squadrons of cavalry and 2 to 6 guns.

Terrain

In Chile and Peru assume steep hills with plenty of broken ground, which is generally only accessible to foot. Areas of low brush could be rated as cultivated land, as this slightly impedes movement, but is passable to all troops. In Venezuela and Colombia there will perhaps be fewer hills, and those less steep, similar quantities of broken ground, more brush and some woods (jungle).

A number of battles involved forcing a stream crossing and two Chilean battles featured farms as strongpoints.