"Drummer boys & powder monkeys – looking for further reading" Topic

I'm looking for some well-source historical reading about the boys serving in the late 18th century. My veey specific interest is in the French forces during the American revolution, but any information will help with context, whether that's American or British forces in earlier or later contexts (let's say the Seven Year's War to the Napoleonic Wars). How prevalent were children serving with the forces? Were they paid and treated as 'small adults'? Any pointers will be very gratefully received!

I can only provide you with info for the British (and only infantry at that), but the "drummer boy" is largely a Victorian myth. What generally happened was that older boys would be taken onto the regimental strength and listed as a drummer; this was done for two reasons – one was to make the boy part of the regiment so that when he grew up he would want to join the ranks, the other was to help out families (especially the larger ones) by adding to the family income. To this, of course, you have to factor in the definition of "child" in the 18th Century. School, at that time, was not compulsory, so there was no official "leaving age" at which you were expected to go out to work, or undertake further vocational training (to put this in context, school leaving age up to 1918 was 12 and you would regularly find 12 and 13 year-olds working in coal mines, shipyards, building sites, factories and other dangerous places, as well as being "band members" in serving regiments and junior ratings on ships; it was only raised from 14 to 16 – which it still is now – in my schooldays).

Whilst the need for drummers disappeared during the AWI – an official order in 1778 from Horse Guards required commands to be passed by word of mouth, but it was almost certainly done for at least a year or more before that "in theatre". You would not entrust such an important role to mere children – quite apart from the physical job of lugging the drum about, which was bigger than a modern side-drum. That said, most regiments sent the very young (especially if dad had died or been discharged) home to join recruiting parties, and they may well have played the fife or drum with those.

As a different example of what might happen to a "child of the regiment" in this ear, on July 4, 1777, the wife of the 21st's sergeant major (equivalent to RSM today) gave birth to a small boy named James Anderson, at the newly-captured Fort Ticonderoga, NY. By the end of the campaign, it appears both of his parents had died, so the 21st's CO, Lt Col Hamilton (who had returned home on parole), adopted the boy. Around the age of 12, a commission was purchased for him. The boy died, aged 38, also as a Lt Col, leading the charge of the Royal Scots Greys at Waterloo.

In terms of pay, during the AWI a drummer in a Line regiment received 1/- (one shilling) per day, compared to 8d (eightpence – not to be confused with the modern eight pence) for a private soldier; the figures were 1/2d (one shilling and "tuppence") and 10d (tenpence) respectively for The Guards. So you can see that it was considered a responsible job and paid up to half as much again as a private soldier – they also wielded the "cat" for floggings, again not a job you would normally entrust to a child (for various reasons).

To give you one example of Victorian hyperbole – there is a painting by Lady Butler of the fifes and drums of the 57th Foot ("the Diehards") at Albuhera in 1811. The painting shows a group of what are all clearly boys, at one end of and slightly behind the 57th's line. Some of them have been injured, and there's dead and dying all around. The average age of the 57th's drummers at that time was……26.

Do ask if you need any more info on the British forces.

link

There was also a triangle player John Scott who served with the 42nd at Waterloo, who was 10 years old.

link

"Regula Engel, survived the battle (Waterloo), even though she had been shot in the neck and bayoneted in her side. Her husband, however, was killed before her eyes and her 9-year old son Joseph (a drummer boy) was shot in the head."

Paul

My Paternal 4 x GGrandfather was a Drummer in the Royal Marines joining in 1798. He was 8 years old. He served in this capacity for 13 years until 1812. He was made a Private and served with the Battalions in Canada. In 1815, after that conflict had finished, the Corps was reduced and he was discharged (he was half an inch under the minimum height) He later re-enlisted in 1816 and served on Albion and Severn until finally paying off in 1822.
Cheers
Col

I think we have to take some of the tales told in memoirs such as those of Regula Engel with a pinch of salt. John Scott, writing in 1889, might also need to be viewed with caution, although to be honest I'd never heard of him till to day.

There were apparently some doughty women who tried to stay with their men in British battalions at Waterloo but they weren't welcome, any more than a 9 or 10 year-old boy, and were ordered to the rear. Some managed to stay close by.

I doubt any boys much under 14 on the strength were likely to be allowed to accompany the battalion into the field. I don't know about marines. The Navy does things differently.

Bennett Cuthbertson wrote in 1768; "Young, active Men, from seventeen to twenty-five years of age, make the most tractable Soldiers; nor should they be desired taller than six feet, nor lower than five feet, six inches and a half, when circumstances will admit so great a nicety: a Man, who from his size must be unfit for the Battalion Companies of a Regiment, and yet, from the poorness of his figure, cannot be appointed to the Grenadiers, should by no means be enlisted. In time of War, the difficulty of raising a sufficient number of Men, makes it necessary to dispense with many niceties, in regard to Size and Figure." ('System for the Complete Interior Management and Oeconomy of a Battalion of Infantry', 1768)

During the AWI the minimum age that men could be pressed was established as 16 but regiments appear to have been able to set their own standards. Under-age youths who were over 5'.5" well-set up, and could stand the rigours of the march, not to mention battle, might be acceptable as recruits.

Those details are from an article in the 'Journal for Army Historical Research' titled Drummers in the British
Army during the American Revolution but I am afraid I don't have reference for it.

My g.g.g.g father ran away to be a soldier aged 17. He was enlisted in Captain Tonyn's troop of the 15th Light Dragoons in September 1768 and then, it would seem, packed off home again. He later served for seven years in the AWI and, having gained a commission, served for some time as DAQMG to Major Gen Wm. Erskine- (who happened to have been the CO of the 15th when he enlisted. We haven't got to the bottom of that yet).

He died in 1799. In May 1803, his 14 year-old son went off on a whim to join the Navy as a midshipman and six months later fell to his death from the rigging of HMS Defiance, sailing off Ushant.

I would echo 42flanker's caveat on believing everything you read in, say, a pension application/memorial – bear in mind that the aim was to "big up" the writer's service in order to qualify for Government money. Attitudes to women varied from regiment to regiment – often in battle they would assist the drummers (and later bandsmen) in removing the wounded, and even in carrying refreshments and ammunition to the men in the ranks; however, they were often seen as more trouble than they were worth – Burgoyne set up a provost corps to deal with the wives of his British troops, who behaved quite badly in the latter stages of the campaign (and staffed it with Germans, most likely to avoid the women "sweet-talking" their way out of trouble!).

Midshipmen and Powder Monkeys were the norm in Royal Navy vessels of the time (it was also not uncommon for women to be allowed aboard larger ships – from which the term "son of a gun" is derived), and younger Marine/Royal Marine personnel could be kept ashore as a last resort. However, sailors didn't have to march long distances and there were plenty of jobs that did not involve carrying/hauling heavy weights if an individual's physique obviously wasn't up to it, whereas soldiers could not really avoid this – hence the different approaches to age suitability.

42flanker

I think we have to take some of the tales told in memoirs such as those of Regula Engel with a pinch of salt. John Scott, writing in 1889, might also need to be viewed with caution, although to be honest I'd never heard of him till to day.

See:

'Scott, John. "Triangle-player John Scott" in Gareth Glover (ed.). The Waterloo Archive Volume VI: British Sources. Barnsley: Frontline, 2014. Pages 199 – 201'

And

link

Paul :)

Yes, I saw those. Among the many 10 year-old triangle players present at Waterloo, I think John Scott's account might be among the less reliable. By his own admission he could remember very little, which may say more about his age in 1889 than his role on the battlefield in 1815.

"I played my triangle and shouted Scotland forever til I was hoarse and could scarcely speak a word. I never got a scratch,but I think it was my height that saved me. I was so little, I had not much risk to run, but the Black Watch was so cut up that it had to join with the 77th."

As for Regula Engel's adventures, well, 'Mother Courage' had nothing on her.

Possibly something to do with trying to sell books.

Many thanks for these comments – fascinating stuff!