Russians not Hessians- Catherine's legions sent to fight in ARW

Just read Anthony Mockler's book THE NEW MERCENARIES today, where he discussed how during the ARW, there was a proposal- which didn't come to fruition- for Catherine the Great to have sent 20,000 Russian soldiers to fight for the British in America (of course, before the Hessians' services were appropriated from the Landgrave of Hesse-Cassel & other German states). Now, WI said proposal for using Russian mercenaries had eventuated ? Woudl the need for Hessian mercs have then been removed ?
 
May have depended on the costs of using both set of troops.

The thing about the Hessians is that most were conscripts or debtors forced to join. I'm assuming the Russians would have been professional soldiers. So, the actual losses during the ARW may have been different (less) for the British hired troops.

Depending on if the Colonies still won, it would be interesting to see how the society and culture emerge with Russians replacing the Germans that would have settle in North America at the conclusion of the war.
 

Susano

Banned
The thing about the Hessians is that most were conscripts or debtors forced to join. I'm assuming the Russians would have been professional soldiers. So, the actual losses during the ARW may have been different (less) for the British hired troops.
Uh, conscription by force was the norm of the day. Conscripts WERE your professional soldiers of the age, and it would not have been any other with Russian soldiers. Plus, the Hessians were among the best soldiers on British side, so while its certainly always possible to get even better troops, I wouldnt bet on it.
 
Wider European war if the French, Spanish and Dutch still jump in?

I know they're meceranries but one British empire enthusiast can still dream
 

67th Tigers

Banned
Uh, conscription by force was the norm of the day. Conscripts WERE your professional soldiers of the age, and it would not have been any other with Russian soldiers. Plus, the Hessians were among the best soldiers on British side, so while its certainly always possible to get even better troops, I wouldnt bet on it.

Not really, conscription was not the main method of getting troops, nor could it be in a society heavily dependent upon manual farm labour to feed itself.

This is why Ireland, Switzerland, Western Germany and Northern Italy provided so many mercernaries, they were areas that had an excess population to fight wars. I believe the Serf system of Russia created similar areas.

True conscription gets going after the agricultural revolution frees up labour and increases productivity to the point that large standing armies are sustainable.
 

Susano

Banned
Not really, conscription was not the main method of getting troops, nor could it be in a society heavily dependent upon manual farm labour to feed itself.
Oh of course it could in such societies. With the government simply not bothering about the affected families!

As for population excess, in certain German areas (including, yes, North Hesse) there was, but overall there was an underpopulation going back all the way to the 30 Years War. Frederick II still was heavily involved in "re-population" in Prussia. Of course, this only helped conscription - if you need an army, but have not enough population to work on volunteers alone, well...

Of course, most conscription of the day wasnt at all systematic (in fact that is what made Prussia stand out), but was more along the lines of forcing "volunteers"...
 
Not really, conscription was not the main method of getting troops, nor could it be in a society heavily dependent upon manual farm labour to feed itself.

This is why Ireland, Switzerland, Western Germany and Northern Italy provided so many mercernaries, they were areas that had an excess population to fight wars. I believe the Serf system of Russia created similar areas.

True conscription gets going after the agricultural revolution frees up labour and increases productivity to the point that large standing armies are sustainable.
Russia was very thinly populated, and before 19th century it hadn't surplus population. Recruits were taken by force from countryside (state-owned peasants were delivered by their self-government authorities, privately-owned peasants - by their landlords; in both cases recruiting officer and relevant official/owner had opposite interests - army needed healthy soldiers, while village elite wanted to get rid off troublemakers and/or worst workers). Consequently, quality of soldiers, especially freshly taken ones, wasn't that great, though older privates and especially sergeants could be very experienced and skilled. Russian army before mid-19th century was systematically undersupplied, and, as a result, between battles soldiers worked as artisans, construction workers, sometimes even as hired farmhands, so that they could be adequately fed, dressed and housed.
Summing up, hypothetical Russian mercenaries of the UK in America would be reasonably well-trained, very disciplined (they'd pillage when left without supplies, though), but completely un-understanding what are they doing in foreign land, so far from homeland, under command of strange generals. Of course, Russians were accustomed to wars of conquest in Europe and (rarely) Asia, but it was always done in countries bordering Russia. Almost nobody in 18th-century Russian village knew even about existence of America.
 
Last edited:
Oh of course it could in such societies. With the government simply not bothering about the affected families!

As for population excess, in certain German areas (including, yes, North Hesse) there was, but overall there was an underpopulation going back all the way to the 30 Years War. Frederick II still was heavily involved in "re-population" in Prussia. Of course, this only helped conscription - if you need an army, but have not enough population to work on volunteers alone, well...

Of course, most conscription of the day wasnt at all systematic (in fact that is what made Prussia stand out), but was more along the lines of forcing "volunteers"...

After looking some things up on it, apparently when they went to consript people they were only supposed to take non-natives of the area. The following is from Edward Lowell's "The Hessians".

Forcible recruiting was forbidden; but this rule was probably intended to apply only to natives. It certainly does not seem to have diminished the activity of the recruiting officers, and probably no such rule existed in the smaller states. In Anspach no subject could leave the country, or marry, without permission ("Geschichte von Anspach," Fischer, 1786.) It is to be noted that in this case the country did not mean Germany, but the territories of the Margrave, and that the foreigners whom the Landgrave of Hesse wished to see recruited were the subjects of the neighboring German princelings. Recruiting officers were active all over Germany. Spendthrifts, loose livers, drunkards, arguers, restless people, and such as made political trouble, if not more than sixty years old and of fair health and stature, were forced into the ranks. The present of a tall, strapping fellow was at that time an acceptable compliment from one prince to another, and in every regiment were many deserters from the service of neighboring states. Together with this mixed rabble served the honest peasant lads of Germany, forced from their ploughs. It may be noted, as a general rule, that the regiments sent to America in 1776 were made up of better material than were the bodies of recruits subsequently furnished (In the autumn Of 1777 Knyphausen complains to the Landgrave that since the new recruits have joined the army, pilfering within the regiments and plundering outside of them can hardly be restrained.)

So, with the population shortage you mention it makes sense for them to want to keep their own people while conscripting others just passing through. Of course as the above mentions it didn't stop anyone from recruiting the locals.
 
Uh, conscription by force was the norm of the day. Conscripts WERE your professional soldiers of the age, and it would not have been any other with Russian soldiers. Plus, the Hessians were among the best soldiers on British side, so while its certainly always possible to get even better troops, I wouldnt bet on it.

I thought conscription became more widespread during the Napoleanic wars.
 

Valdemar II

Banned
Denmark had a conscrip army in that periode, it was based on that 1 soldiers was raised by the local manor for every 20 hartkorn (unit of farming production)*, the local lord had a right to forcefull impress people living on his land, so usual farmhands was impressed. To give a idea how efficient it was Denmark-Norway with a population of 2 million had a army of 100 000 man, and these numbers hide that even through Norway made 40% of the population only between 20-25% of the army was from Norway**, through they made a significant part of the navy instead.
Of course few states was as extreme and paranoid as Denmark.

*usual a farm was 7-12 hartkorn

**And the Norvegian troops wasn't raised in this way, only the Danish and Holsteinians.
 

Susano

Banned
Well, I guess what I meant isnt really systematic conscription, but pressing soldiers into service...
 
Top