Friday 6 September 2024

Trip to Emilia-Romagna

A trip back in time that is. To 1743. The Battle of Camposanto was fought by the Spanish & Neapolitans and the Austro-Piedmontese in the War of the Austrian Succession. Camposanto is a town a dozen miles north east of Modena and 20 north west of Bologna in northern Italy. Wiki gives a handy overview, but I'm also drawing on an old book written in the 1920s by Spenser Wilkinson called the Defence of Piedmont, 1742-1748.

It's a small battle by the standards of most of the historical battles I've gamed solo, but I wanted to blood the Piedmontese and Spanish armies (not counting the Italian campaign I did early in the year). Wiki says the armies were 12-14000 each. Nafziger has handy orders of battle here: https://usacac.army.mil/sites/default/files/documents/carl/nafziger/743BAA.pdf

By my reckoning the totals were:-

Spanish-Neapolitans: 13 squadrons and 37 battalions. Wiki gives 12 guns but Nafziger is silent on the matter.

Austro-Piedmontese: 23 squadrons, 27 battalions and 17 guns (Wiki says 25).

The context for the battle was that de Gages in command of the Spanish had orders to attack the Austrians and their allies. Order which de Gages seemed a bit reluctant to follow. With an attempt to keep his movement secret, de Gages left Bologna and made for Camposanto where he threw up bridges, crossed to the north bank of the Panaro river, and headed west towards Modena. Near Bomporto he discovered the Austro-Piedmontese ensconced in a strong position with flanks protected by the Panaro and another watercourse, the Cavo Fiumicello. The Spanish retreated back to Camposanto where de Gages gave orders for the baggage train to cross the river, preparatory to a retreat back to Bologna. The canny Austrian, Traun made the move on the north side of the Fiumicello, allowing him to circle round the Spanish position in order to attack from the north so de Gages army would fight with a river at its back. When de Gages discovered that the Austro-Piedmontese, had followed him, his retreat was blocked by chaos amongst the baggage train.  The Spanish would have to stand and fight whilst the baggage crossed the river. 

The area of operations, shown on a modern map.

The Spanish position described a shallow trapezoid with the river at the long side, and the town in the middle of that side. The Austro-Piedmontese attacked the right side of the Spanish position (pinning the left with light troops) but the Spanish responded with vigour and even had the upper hand in the early encounters. Gradually the Spanish were ground down but night came early (it was early February) and the fight fizzled out in a stalemate. At 3500 the Spanish losses were nearly twice those of their enemy, but they had held off the attacks. To that extent de Gages could claim success as it had bought time for the baggage to cross the river, and in the night the soldiers followed. He spun this as a victory in his report to Madrid (helped no doubt by some captured colours) and promotions followed for de Gages and his senior officers. Traun too reported a victory, after all when he advanced to continue the action the next morning the Spanish had gone. The Spanish stayed at Bologna until late March, but short of supplies and suffering from disease, they retreated to Rimini where they remained until the campaign season re-opened.

Map downloaded from the Royal Collections (it's a goldmine for old maps!). Rather nice and with lots of detail, only not showing the bends in the river seen on modern maps. Now the river shape may have changed in the last 281 years, but usually rivers are straightened not the opposite (ignoring 're-wilding').

Modern map of the battlefield area. Traun crossed the Doggaro from the north. Looking at Wilkinson's map (below) the Spanish line seems to have started somewhere inside the modern town (possibly near the station), and ended near Case Bruciate.

On this map there appears to be a crossing point on the Panaro just west of the Spanish line, as there is a road both sides which seems to cross the river. Maybe a ford. The southern leg of the road isn't shown on the modern map, but opposite Passo Sant'Anna there is a collection of buildings by the river which might be a clue. Notice how this shows the Austro-Piedmontese starting slightly further west than the French map.

One of the other reasons for choosing Camposanto is because, using Twilight of the Soldier Kings, I can fit it on this thing.

At 60x100cm this is big enough for Camposanto (3000 x 5000 yards at scale). I recently bought a pack of 3 for £35 from Lidl, giving a total area 180x100cm or approx 6ft by 3ft in old money. It folds away and the height is adjustable up to 95cm if I recall correctly, so it should reduce back ache! And it is all much lighter than the kitchen cabinet boards I have been using. The downside is it's a bit wobbly so no leaning on it.

I should be able to get the game on over the weekend.

17 comments:

  1. Looking forward to seeing this play out! I would enjoy giving this scenario a run out as well but ACW may be up next for me.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sounds like a great game to start your new armies on Chris.

    Good purchase of the tables, especially at that price and being height adjustable.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Their stability is the only thing that concerns me. But all will be revealed.
      Chris

      Delete
  3. Chris,
    An interesting battle. And a popular one to refight....

    https://nigbilpainter.blogspot.com/2015/05/was-in-italy-5-battle-of-campo-santo.html

    https://www.wargamingftb.net/?p=12525

    https://goatmajor.org.uk/2023/06/

    https://www.igiochideigrandi.it/para-bellum-xii-camposanto-1743.html

    Is that a "wargaming shed" I espy? Very jealous if it is.....
    Neil

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the links Neil. I’ve only seen the first one before. I’ll read the others before I commit to the table.
      The shed is multi-purpose I’m afraid, but I have left an 8x4ft table up for weeks and there was still room for 5 eighteen year olds to hang out.
      Chris

      Delete
  4. Well this looks like it will be fun Chris and a handy sized battle too. When I saw those table advertised, I thought many a gamer might find them useful!

    BTW the latest issue of Model Military International magazine has some articles on Stug III's in Finnish service, which might be of interest to you?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh! Thanks for the tipoff on the ‘Sturmi’ article Steve. I didn’t realise that MM had gone international. How very jet age! 😉
      Chris

      Delete
  5. You certainly do your research old fruit. Should be a good battle. Good to see someone else engaged in the never ending search for the ideal gaming surface. lol.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. All part of the affectation of pursuing a “serious hobby (it’s not playing)” old chap.
      I’ll report back on the use of the table in due course in case Lidl/Aldi have reached your parts.
      Chris

      Delete
  6. This looks an interesting one, especially with the imbalance of infantry and cavalry (defenders having more infantry is probably good for them?). I look forward to seeing how it plays out!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, it looks an interesting imbalance of cav/inf, albeit balanced overall I think.
      Good to see you on Friday. Interesting talk.
      Chris

      Delete
  7. Thanks for the history Chris. It has certainly whetted my appetite for your game report.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hope I haven’t oversold it Richard!
      Chris

      Delete
  8. Excellent research. I used the same maps for my scenario. I never was really sure - as I had the famous volume of the KuK-war archive at my hands and the impression from the lines there is somehow different and I thought about the impact of the small channels, roads and dykes. Maybe it was not really easy for the Allied horse to advance at the enemy - but besides I didn't wanted to make my map and scenario too complicated for such a small battle...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I did think about making it more difficult to move with linear barriers, but I decided to keep it simple. On reflection that might not have been the right decision.
      Is it difficult to read the old K und K records? Has the language changed much or the manuscript difficult to interpret?
      Chris.

      Delete