|
|
Post by Jon Metters on Aug 6, 2019 13:23:58 GMT
Hello all,
I have long been working on a diorama showing the 73rd foot in square at Waterloo.
I was planning to show a trumpeter, but then I was told this was incorrect.
Does anyone know (or could point me in the right direction) what the 73rd had in addition to drummers. Was it fife? Was it a piper? (They were a highland regiment, but did not wear the kilt.)
Thank you!!! |
|
|
|
Post by waynew on Aug 6, 2019 13:53:11 GMT
I would assume a bagpiper; after all, even without kilts they were still a Highland regiment.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ned on Aug 6, 2019 17:28:24 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by SteveO on Aug 6, 2019 18:14:00 GMT
This is "Lord Hill's" blog showing his 73rd Foot at Waterloo. The second shows later in the day when losses meant they had to form a combined "square" (more of a rectangle!) with the 30th Foot. He makes the point that the Light Company with its buglers did not form part of the square as they were off outside skirmishing. The 73rd, along with a number of others, lost the kilt/bonnet in 1809 and perhaps their "official" highland status although this move was hotly contested by what had become the minority of Scots in the unit. No pipers shown. Those Highland battalions that did have pipers only had one or two anyway and seem to have been classed as supernumeraries as well as fifes and bands. britisharmywaterloo.blogspot.com/2014/06/73rd-regiment-of-foot.htmlbritisharmywaterloo.blogspot.com/2014/06/ |
|
|
|
Post by Brian on Aug 6, 2019 23:03:17 GMT
Hi Jon,
There is such a thing as artistic license if you want a bugler, piper or fifer in your diorama, I would put one in as long as there is a chance it could have actually happened and is not impossible then why not.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rod MacArthur on Aug 7, 2019 17:24:17 GMT
All British battalions were established for 2 drummers per company and the grenadier company had 2 fifers as well. There was no establishment for buglers, but light companies seem to have used them rather than drummers. Pipers were not established in any unit, but were unofficially appointed by most Scottish units, often personally by company commanders. The 73rd Foot may well have had pipers.
Rod
|
|
|
|
Post by SteveO on Aug 7, 2019 19:36:59 GMT
Rod, that's very useful information, especially about the fifers in the grenadier company, thanks. I've just been relying on "Wellington's Infantry" by Bryan Fosten (Osprey MAA114) which states the organisation under the 1809 establishment as follows: "Each company consisted of: one captain, two lieutenants or ensigns, two sergeants. three corporals, one drummer; in some battalions [also?] one fifer; 85 to 100 privates (Foot Guards battalions had larger establishments). In practice these figures were seldom achieved..." (pg19)
Grateful if you could point me to better sources?
Also dug out "Wellington's Highlanders" by Stuart Reid (Osprey MAA253) which has this to say about Bagpipers: "The status of pipers in highland regiments was by no means clear-cut. While it is usually stated that none were authorised until January 1854 this is not entirely true. Two fifers were carried on the establishment of line regiments; and in the letters of service granted to a number of highland regiments, including e.g. the 79th and 97th Foot and the Strathspey and the Northern Fencibles, pipers were substituted for the fifers. In other regiments pipers may simply have been enlisted as fifers; and a rather crude print depicting a piper', probably of the 73rd, actually shows a fife case slung by his side." (pg40)
Unfortunately it doesn't mention when that print dates from but I suspect before 1809 when it was a true Highland unit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rod MacArthur on Aug 8, 2019 17:18:48 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by SteveO on Aug 8, 2019 19:32:44 GMT
Fantastic site, Rod - bookmarked! Those National Archives documents sound amazing.
On drummers I also found a note in Haythornthwaite's "British Napoleonic Infantry Tactics 1792-1815" that Gen David Dundas lists only one drummer per company under "normal" establishment but it increased when put on war footing (pg11 and pg13)
|
|
|
|
Post by mikem on Aug 9, 2019 7:39:31 GMT
Please bear in mind British military terminology, then and now. A man who blows a bugle or a fife in a Line infantry regiment was, and still is, a "drummer". The "Field Musicians" were all known as "drummers", independently of the instrument actually played. Fifes were generally only used by Grenadier companies, as in some other armies, including the Prussians and Russians.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rod MacArthur on Aug 9, 2019 7:39:44 GMT
Hi Steve,
When Haythornthwaite quotes “Dundas” he is quoting straight from “Rules and Regulations for the Formations, Field Exercise and Movements of His Majesty’s Forces”. This was originally published in 1792. Although several editions were published they are all identical. For instance the text in my electronic (free download) 1798 edition is identical to that in my (expensive) actual 1815 edition, apart from the fact that the latter has six additional General Orders bound into the back of it and the earlier editions used long “f”s instead of “s”s.
His structure of 3 Officers, 2 Sergeants, 3 Corporals, 1 Drummer and 30 Privates was therefore correct for 1792, but by the time I started my research from December 1802 (for the Napoleonic as opposed to Revolutionary Wars), that organisation had been replaced so that all battalions had companies of either 75 Rank & File (4 Corporals and 71 Privates) or 100 Rank and File (5 Corporals and 95 Privates). That structure was phased out in 1803 and replaced with a flexible (task based) one of 40, 60, 80, 100 or 120 R&F) per company. Officers, Sergeants and Drummers were additional to these R&F figures, but between 1802 and 1815 there were always 2 drummers per company, regardless of the size of that company.
There was, incidentally, no such thing as a “War Establishment”. All Establishments were fully costed and had to be approved by Parliament each year. Any “In Year” changes also had to be approved by Parliament. Without that parliamentary approval the Army had no right to exist. This dates back to the English Civil War and was a way of ensuring that, although the Army owed its loyalty to the Monarch, it was under Parliamentary control. That system was only changed recently (1980s I think) with the introduction of five year Ministry Of Defence budgets.
In 1792 we were at peace. France declared war on Britain on 1 February 1793 which started our involvement in the Revolutionary Wars. I have not researched it, but I am sure Parliament would have passed supplementary Acts to increase some Army Establishments to whatever size was agreed at that time. A new act was passed for each Financial Year, which in those days was 25 December to 24th December.
Rod
|
|
|
|
Post by greentiger on Aug 9, 2019 11:24:34 GMT
Well the 71st retained certain highland elements including pipers but have not heard that the 73rd did. I would be very sceptical of the suggestion that the light company was 'off skirmishing' unless there is a source to the contrary that I am unaware of? (This would be extremely hazardous when the regiment was under cavalry attack).
|
|
|
|
Post by Jon Metters on Aug 9, 2019 14:38:42 GMT
Thank you all! This is exactly the kind of information I am looking for!
Best regards,
Jon
|
|
|
|
Post by SteveO on Aug 9, 2019 15:25:19 GMT
Rod, thanks again for the clarification; you should be writing the book to correct all the past misconceptions! However your website, which I'm still exploring, does a fine job.
Not sure what others think but having worked in resource management for several government departments all the stuff about staffing establishments and budgetary control was my bread and butter. Had to smile at the comment on your site about the Treasury attitude of "use it or lose it" when it came to annual budgets. It was certainly at the fore of our minds, especially as the end of the financial year loomed. Those ledgers may have an elegance but during my career I was so glad when the wonder of Excel came along...
|
|
|
|
Post by Rod MacArthur on Aug 9, 2019 16:14:05 GMT
Well the 71st retained certain highland elements including pipers but have not heard that the 73rd did. I would be very sceptical of the suggestion that the light company was 'off skirmishing' unless there is a source to the contrary that I am unaware of? (This would be extremely hazardous when the regiment was under cavalry attack). Greentiger, When Wellington (or Wellesley as he was then, first went to the Peninsula in 1808 he issued orders that all of the light companies in each brigade should form a small converged light battalion whenever the brigade moved or faced the enemy. He repeated this when he went back in 1809 and again in 1815 at the start of the Waterloo campaign. There is a paper about this on my website: rodwargaming.wordpress.com/miltary-historical-research/organisation/british-converged-light-battalions/The effect was that skirmishing was a Brigade asset, not controlled by individual battalions. Some of the better Napoleonic wargame rules, like General de Brigade, recognise this. Rod |
|
|
|
Post by greentiger on Aug 12, 2019 16:23:21 GMT
Mr MacArthur thanks for this though it does rather scupper an angle I was considering researching (based on first hand accounts of skirmishing in the British army of the period). I am in the very early stages of my research and I was aware of Wellington's general order but felt the existence of such an order was merely proof that such tactics were not being employed up to that point. However as you have found this organisational proof it seems that I am just looking down the wrong end of the telescope as it were. (You may be interested to learn that my research so far shows that the famous 95th spent considerably more time deployed in line than you would have thought). I will have to spread my net a little wider I think.
All the best - GT
|
|
|
|
Post by Jim buffs on Aug 12, 2019 17:57:34 GMT
Hi
There was a skirmish screen in the morning at Waterloo but that was recalled at the start of the battle. The 73rds light coy I don’t know if deployed most units spent the day locked up in line or square. 73rd did retail some Scottish affectations will dig out the 6 or so books I have on highland units being English dressed. To show a bugler would mean the light coy or the music (band) again I can have a look in some of my reference books for whether they had obeyed the 1812 regulations on dress in the music. I do recall many of the 73rd had come east London and Middlesex at that time. Presumably volunteers from the militia.
|
|
|
|
Post by waynew on Aug 15, 2019 14:36:21 GMT
I never ceases to be amazed at how a seemingly simple question can inspire such an extensive - and informative - discussion. It's one of the great things about forums like this, I think. Some of you did their homework on this question and I think we all benefitted. But I think, if I may presume, the bottom line is the 73rd, even though being officially considered a "Highland" regiment had done away with many of those trappings we associate with Highland regiments because of composition of its rank-and-file. So the next question becomes did they have fifers, buglers, or bagpipers?
It doesn't seem we can come up with a certain answer. It could be they did have a piper or two out of tradition - until we get a certain confirmation I think it's up to the individual whether or not he wants a piper with his 73rd or not. I try to be as accurate as possible in my hobby - though I try not to be obsessive. At the end of the day it boils down to the individual - I always say, "It's your army - unless you're doing a diorama for a museum or gaming if yo want to put an M-60 gunner with my 7th Cavalry at the Little Big Horn to even the odds it's your business..." ;-)
In light of solid evidence one way or the other I think you'd be safe either way. A piper would at least assure to a viewer that he/she was looking at a Highland regiment.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris D on Aug 15, 2019 16:02:47 GMT
Hi,
Cent Jours has the regulation bugler for the light company and drums for the other nine companies.
My understanding is that pipers were at the colonels discretion.
The 73rd was uniformed as a line regiment not kilted.
Personally I use a Piper or two with the kilted units in my Quatre Bras re fight to emphasise the Scottish element.
Best wishes,
Chris
|
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Aug 16, 2019 3:41:27 GMT
C.E. Franklin's "British Napoleonic Uniforms" says that the 73rd(Highland) Regiment of Foot, along with several other regiments, lost highland dress and distinction in April 1809 and was retitled The 73rd regiment of Foot. All online references I've found also say the regiment lost it's highland status in 1809. Apparently it was decided that the population of the highlands of Scotland was not large enough to support recruitment for all of the highland regiments (Perhaps they should have recruited in Canada). The second battalion of the 73rd, the one that was at Waterloo, was recruited in 1809 in Nottingham from local militia. One site I've seen even states that the "Battalion were ordered to discard Highland dress and no longer to be recognised as Highland – no vestige of tartan was to be worn, so that Englishmen could be encouraged to join the ranks", but they don't say where they got that from. The first battalion, which was originally Highland and might be more expected to retain a piper, went to Australia with their Colonel Lachlan MacQuarrie, when he replaced William Bligh as governor of the Colony after The Rum Rebellion. I thought it might be useful to look online for Australian references. There is mention of a civilian band master called Francis Detrich (or Dietrich), a band sergeant, Sgt Samuel Wiggins who was born in Bridport Dorset, and fifers and drummers who were paid 7d 3 farthings per day; but no mention of pipers (pipers would, off course, be listed on the books as drummers or fifers). There are several newspaper articles recording the band of the 73rd playing "God Save the King" and other patriotic airs on their arrival in Sydney, playing at various Government events and dinners, providing the music for balls, and being paid for playing sacred music in church; but no mention of pipers. Governor MacQuarrie was a very proud Islander, if he had pipers I think he might have made a show of them, but no mention. Ensign Alexander Huey of the 73rd kept a diary of the voyage to Australia; I haven't read every word but I had a good look through it. He makes several references to the band playing, to fifes and drums, nut no mention of pipers. Hueys diary is quite detailed, he seems to record every squall of wind, every flying fish, every man overboard and even seeing the unstockinged legs of a Princess all the way to the thigh; but I haven't found a mention of a piper. He does, however, relate how in Rio a Lieutenant and Ensign of the Regiment went ashore in their kilts, to the great wonder and amusement of the Portugese who came from all quarters to see them. I also searched for the first bagpipes in Australia but only found reference to the first sets MADE in Australia, which date to 1840 and 1850. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence of course but the more I read the less likely it seems there was a piper at Waterloo. But as I said at the other place I don't mind if you include one, the regiment was originally the 2nd Battalion of The Black Watch and that's an impeccable Highland pedigree. One other point might be of interest to you. During the massed cavalry attacks the Duke of Wellington took refuge inside several of the infantry squares. One of which was the combined square of the 2/73rd and 1/30th. sydney.edu.au/paradisec/australharmony/register-british-military-bands-in-australia.php#Band-of-the-73rd-Regimentnla.gov.au/nla.obj-52775452/view?partId=nla.obj-89713793#www.bda-online.org.au/files/MR4_Military.pdf |
|
