Thank you very much again,
>Interestingly, John Campbell's letter to Siborne doesn't mention taking command, in fact his wording almost implies someone else was in charge.<
Could you quote it please? If he got a promotion and the Bath order, he must have done something outstanding at Waterloo.
>brevet rank was just a title for seniority, I don't think there was any uniform distinctions,<
Iīm not sure. Itīs said, that officers of the british Guards wore their army rank distinctions, because they indicated their higher rank better than wearing the rank distinctions they should use within the Guards. Donīt know if thatīs true. In the french Guards such things were common, even generals were commanders of regiments and wore regimental dress with generals distinctions. That isnīt to confuse with regimental colonel-in-chiefs in some armies.
The brevet thing is really a confusing matter.
I guess it was a rank only by title which didnīt included the higher pay, but the officer was able to get a higher command than his original rank allowed him. The whole system allowed able junior officers to be put in the positions where they were needed, without provoking the higher rankers. The topic was disscussed on the forum I remember. Maybe Ron will know better.
>I am also guessing if he did take command, that he would have made sure he had a mount, who knows.<
I think all the british officers were mounted on the march, because it was an 18th century tradition. The question is, if the regimental trains were close enough to get his riding horse when taking over command in the meantime. At least the captains may have had their own horse with them like many others of their rank did in other armies.