any advice would be helpful as i want to field brigades with a least a nod to the period. thanks
![Embarassed :oops:](./images/smilies/icon_redface.gif)
I believe it did, at least in the 1730s on for the French and the Spanish. It was an intermediary rank for men commanding brigades but who weren't Marechal de Camp. The Russians also used it during the Seven Years War.dashing blade wrote:Hi Jim,
Intresting, Would a Brigadier have existed as a rank in this era?
Eh, sorta. A Brigadier General was not a substantive rank; it was a temporary appointment and existed only as long as a particular colonel or lieutenant colonel was commanding a brigade. For example, both Rowe and Ferguson were still colonels substantively, but they were commanding more than just their own regiment and therefore addressed as Brigadier General by courtesy.Churchill wrote:Hi Rob & Tom,
You are both right and I misread the term "Brigadier" you are quite correct the term would have been Brigadier General or Major General at the time of Blenheim.
Honestly, I think in terms of regiments when painting, especially for the Lace Wars. All of the messy details are by regiment, after all. The generals sit in the corner of the box, and I don't even necessarily have the same figure command the same troops the next time I get them out of the box. Well, except the C-in-C, since I only have one of those! On the field, a brigade is pretty much whatever troops I decide to put into it. In my SYW collections, a "brigade" could be as large as 12 battalions!barr7430 wrote:Thinking in terms of 'brigades' is very neat for a wargming mind it deals with:
1. Organization
2. Painting schedules
3. Table top commands
4. Dovetails into rule mechanics.
So the convention is extremely useful and my suggestion is that in our discussions we maintain it as a 'constant' otherwise questions relatiing to orbats, commands, officer rank etc will disappear into the realms of confusion.