"Drum-Majors in Action during the Napoleonic Wars " Topic

Do you used them?

"In the performance theatre of the early nineteenth-century British military spectacle, drum-majors took centre stage. Sporting cocked hats and silver-tipped canes, these princes of pomp and circumstance uncased and lodged the regimental colours for parade and marched at the head of the battalion during reviews and inspections.

"It should never be objected", wrote Captain Bennet Cuthbertson, that a drum-major was "too great a coxcomb", using a contemporary synonym for a dandy. On the contrary, a drum-major's dress should promote vanity and self-importance, for it was "absolutely necessary for him to strut, and think himself a man of consequence" when leading his drummers on parade.

A drum-major's appearance was a source of regimental pride. According to a 1782 satirical work, this foppish figure was "the Paris, if not the Adonis" of a battalion, for "every judge of discipline will estimate the goodness of the corps by the taste and splendor of [his] trappings."[2] Unsurprisingly, the prestige associated with well-dressed drum-majors encouraged lavish expenditure; in 1813 the 1st Devon Militia paid the eye-watering sum of seventeen pounds, six shillings and eight pence for their "drum-major's suit", ceremonial baldric and "fine silver-laced hat" – more than six times the cost of an ordinary drummer's cap and coat. This bill excluded the price of the drum-major's finely engraved silver-mounted staff or cane, often almost as tall or taller than its wielder…"
See more here
link

Amicalement
Armand

Trumpet Major Krettly from the "Chasseurs a cheval de la Garde Imperial" was equally famous for his musicianship and bravery on the field of battle, rewarded several times for his actions.

All of my drum majors must perform like this, or else they go back in the scrap heap.

youtu.be/MKuF_yST4vc?t=2m5s

"the Paris, if not the Adonis"

Positively…

link

;-)))

From Swords Around A Throne by John Elting:

'The field music consisted of the regimental drum major (tambour-major), his assistant, the drum corporal (tambour-maître), and all the regiment's drummers, two in each company. The drum major was a man of weight and consequence, a member of the regimental staff, ranking in a lonely state somewhere among the senior NCOs and junior officers, yet in himself unique. Traditionally tall, elegant, and fearless, he was expected to set a personal example of military bearing and exemplary conduct. Assisted by his drum corporal, he trained the regiment's drummers-no small responsibility, since it took approximately five years to produce a drummer capable of beating all the different signals (batteries) correctly, day or night, under the stress of combat, and some ten years to produce a real expert. Replacements had to be constantly under instruction to replace casualties. Training was largely oral, mouth-to-ear, most tambour-majors and tambour maitres having little tricks of the trade they liked to keep secret. Occasionally, with a slow learner, the technique could be hand-to-ear. Steinenger, when an enfant de troupe of a Swiss regiment in the Piedmontese service, was trained as a drummer by an elderly Italian who had a very long queue; every time Steininger missed a beat, his instructors whipped him across the fingers with it.'-336.

'…Drum majors had their swords and usually a brace of pistols, but their best weapon was often their long baton with its loaded head. Drum major Andre Forest of the 24th Legere, cut down by two Russian cavalrymen, came up swinging and beat them both out of their saddles. At Dresden in 1813 the first rush of a Young Guard battalion to recapture a lost redoubt outside the city walls collapsed as all the officers in the leading companies went down. Out of the ruck, a veteran drum major led fifty boys through the ditch, over the rampart, and into the stronghold-as well as into the midst of several hundred Austrians. A flourish of his baton dropped the Austrian commander, and the following wedge of bayonets cleared a gate to let their comrades in. And, fittingly, in the last sunset hours of Waterloo, as two battalions of Old Guard bayoneted fourteen Prussian battalions away from the French right flank, men remembered their tambour-major flailing a war lane through the Prussian ranks…'-340-341.

Thanks…!

Amicalement
Armand

That stuff about taking five years to train a drummer is pure baloney. It takes 6 months worst case to bring a drummer up to speed. I don't know where this nonsense comes from.

And remember! Drummers didn't only play the drum, they also learned to play other instruments too.

Paul :)

That stuff about taking five years to train a drummer is pure baloney. It takes 6 months worst case to bring a drummer up to speed. I don't know where this nonsense comes from.

The source was posted. If you have contrary evidence then post it.

As sources you might try Les Campagnes d'un Musicien d'Etat-major by Philippe-Rene Girault and Memoires d'un Vieux Deserteur: Adventures de J Steininger, edited by P de Pardiellan. Steinenger himself was a drummer.

"That stuff about taking five years to train a drummer is pure baloney. It takes 6 months worst case to bring a drummer up to speed. I don't know where this nonsense comes from."

Yes indeed – seemingly one of the pet subjects of brech, neither one of the sources he claims to provide that data – do so or they don't exist.

link

Again-if you have evidence to the contrary that disproves the initial quotations from Swords, then post it and we can continue the discussion. If not, then the point is moot.

It's amazing to think that drummer Bentinck of the 23rd was still learning to play his drum at the battle of Albuera and had only just mastered it at Salamanca

I wonder how long it took him to learn to play the Serpent and other woodwind instuments?

Paul :)

It's taken my wife five years to get to grade five on the piano, one grade a year.

My son took 7 years to master up to grade 8 flute

Maybe drums are easier

Or my family are rubbish

Oh, and back on thread, rather than just getting into the standard arguments, Franznap has released a fantastic set of drum majors, so it is good to know that mine will have a combat value

link

Enjoy

"Maybe drums are easier"

Arguably, yes, since playing the drums is principally a question of rhythm, rather than melody, chords or creating and holding a note, although the technique required involves considerable skill.

More importantly, perhaps, drummers were professional musicians and their working week was devoted to learning their instrument and perfecting the calls.

Drummers played other instruments as well

Drummers weren'y required to learn the bugle until considerably later in the century; at least not in the British infantry. I don't believe light infantry buglers were required to play the drums as well, even if they were described as 'drummers' to begin with.

I spent 2 years as a Drum Major whilst a cadet. Drummers were trained to a useful standard, including all drill etc., within 6 months, on a basis of 2 to 3 2-hour sessions per week.

The question is two-fold:

First, now many batteries (drum calls) had to be learned, and,

Second, you have to perform them by memory, under fire, no matter the time of day.

I would suggest that's just a 'little' different from today.

My son has been playing the trumpet for six years, going on his seventh. He's going into his second year of marching band, and he is now getting to be what I would call proficient. And he still has to read music…

Well, once again, the trumpet is a different instrument from the drum. Producing a clean, sustained note is a job in itself- but while we're about it, playing a solo bugle is not the same as playing trumpet in a band or orchestra

In both cases, the military drummer/bugler in this period would be playing by ear. I imagine that those who did not show an aptitude for the instrument would be returned to the ranks.

Yes, the trumpet is quite different, but if you noted in the quotation, it took five years to train a drummer capable of beating all of the calls/batteries properly. That is a qualifier-it certainly does not mean that they had to wait five years to put the drummers with their companies and regiments.

In short, it wasn't easy and it wasn't done overnight.

Not easy. Not learned overnight. I think we can agree on that.

The 'quotation' you refer to seems to be not wholly trusted.

In the French army, at least, drummers and trumpeters clearly were a different pair of shoes.

Drummers were listed as soldiers. Many had been enlisted as drummers from the beginning, others were chosen within the regiment from among the privates or enfants de troupe, others still were transferred from other regiments, and they were not usually transferred to the band but remained with the companies (just check the regimental registers kept at Vincennes). Usually, they did not receive any professional musical training beyond drum signalling nor was such a thing needed to become a good drummer. Everything was taught ad hoc by the drum major and/or his deputy, the drum master or caporal tambour. When in 1754 the French infantry drum signals (in use until 1831) were introduced, the drum majors of the infantry, militia, and navy were summoned to Versailles and learnt the whole thing within two months. In my opinion, it's reasonable to assume that the ordinary drummers needed longer than that to learn the same but it's quite unlikely that they needed five years or more. Besides, in Napoleonic times, rehearsals were ordered to take place whenever possible and, if I remember correctly, regimental drummer trainees usually were taught their business at the regimental depots first before being assigned to the units in the field, emergencies excepted, of course. So, no need to assume that normally they were not able to learn their business moderately well, at the very least, within a few months. What else was needed? And, of course, some drummers were better than others, so what?

Trumpeters, however, though listed as soldiers as well, received professional musical training at the École des trompettes at Versailles before being assigned to their regiments, including performing on band instruments (see e.g. the very elucidating memories of Jacques Chevillet, trumpeter with the 8th chasseurs à cheval). This is why cavalry regiments were not usually obliged to hire contracted musicians in order to create bands (with the exception of the band master) but could resort to their own company trumpeters in order to do so (both Chevillet's and François-René Girault's memories make it clear, however, that cavalry regiments had hired contracted musicians before cavalry bands were officially prohibited in late 1801. Band masters appear to have been the only contracted musicians in the cavalry from 1802 on).

Infantry regiments, on the other hand, did not usually draw bandsmen from among their company drummers but instead contracted professional musicians and/or used enfants de troupe and soldiers from among the ranks with a talent for music. Please note: infantry regimental bands were by no means composed of contracted musicians (gagistes) only, but always included a substantial number of soldier-musicians (musiciens-soldats), many of whom were quite talented and could even become one of only 8 regular regimental staff musicians ("musiciens de l'état-major"). Jean-Louis Sabon of the 69th line was one such soldier-musician (while Philippe-René Girault of the 93th line was a contracted musician or musicien gagiste who before had been in the 102e demi-brigade de ligne and then in the 5e Hussards).

The regimental registers do also make it very clear that though both musiciens gagistes and musicien-soldats were assigned to the regimental staff, they did not all receive the title of "musicien de l'état-major". This denomination was a "rank" or status that apparently was not automatically extended to all musiciens gagistes (I could not find any reference in Girault's memoires that he had been promoted to "musicien de l'état-major"), nor categorically denied to musiciens-soldats (as mentioned before, Sabon, despite being – and remaining – a "musicien-soldat", became a "musicien de l'état-major").

42flanker

Drummers weren'y required to learn the bugle until considerably later in the century; at least not in the British infantry. I don't believe light infantry buglers were required to play the drums as well, even if they were described as 'drummers' to begin with.

Nevertheless, Bentinck played the Serpent too, which means he could play in melody as well as rhythm and I'm sure that he wasn't unique. And I never mentioned the Bugle, trumpet or any other brass instrument!

With musical instruments, isn't it an old saying that you never stop learning?

Paul :)

Regarding French cavalry bands, I'd like to add that besides the bandsmen chosen from among the (more talented) company trumpeters (whose role appears to have been comparable to that of the musiciens gagistes in the infantry), more musicians were recruited from among talented troopers. So, while infantry bands were composed of musiciens gagistes and musiciens-soldats, in the cavalry they appear to have been composed normally (from 1802 on) of musiciens-trompettes and musiciens-soldats.

However, other than infantry bands which continued to exist more or less complete during wartime, cavalry bands normally were dissolved at the beginning of a campaign – for obvious reasons as both trumpeters and most troopers had to join the ranks. Band instruments were handed over to the band master who, with a few troopers, kept them at a safe place, usually the regimental depot, until further notice.

This information can be gleaned e.g. from Chevillet's highly interesting memories.

Nevertheless, Bentinck played the Serpent too, which means he could play in melody as well as rhythm and I'm sure that he wasn't unique. And I never mentioned the Bugle, trumpet or any other brass instrument!

I am afraid I have not read Richard Bentinck's memoir. Presumably he didn't play the serpent as part of his duties as a company drummer. Did Bentinck graduate to the band of the 23rd? It's fair to say, acquiring drumming skills did not preclude the acquisition of other musical skills for those afforded the opportunity.

With musical instruments, isn't it an old saying that you never stop learning?

Practise, practise, practise!

As for "drummers" playing band instruments in the British army:

Apparently, bandsmen were not officially registered as "bandsmen" but either as "drummers" or "privates", probably for administrative reasons. They are then described as functioning as bandsmen or musicians…

Can't go into details here as I haven't yet checked enough sources to be more precise but several examples are mentioned by a certain John Gleeson ("johngleeson") whose various contributions on French Revolution/Napoleonic era British bands – especially the band of the Coldstream Guards (but others as well) – are very interesting but, unfortunately, very much scattered over a thread titled "You don't say!" on this website:

link

I thought that, in general, bandsmen of infantry regiments had to be funded by the Colonel and officers.

Drummers were on the strength, entered in the rolls separately from enlisted men and sergeants. However, the Crown was not responsible for musicians. Highland regiments were allowed to enter two pipers as drummers in the grenadier coy. Any more had to be paid for by the officers of the regiment, or the Colonel if he was so disposed, which was not always the case.

The 'quotation' you refer to seems to be not wholly trusted.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion on whatever subject, though it is better if it is based on facts and research.

42flanker

I am afraid I have not read Richard Bentinck's memoir. Presumably he didn't play the serpent as part of his duties as a company drummer. Did Bentinck graduate to the band of the 23rd? It's fair to say, acquiring drumming skills did not preclude the acquisition of other musical skills for those afforded the opportunity.

Again, I have not said that he played the Serpent as part of his duties as a drummer of the (Grenadier Company) 23rd.

A link to a thread I started some years ago

link

Paul :)

Correction regarding the use of gagistes by cavalry regiments:

In the case of Chevillet's 8th chasseurs à cheval, Curto, newly appointed colonel of the regiment, had established a first regimental band including company trumpeters, troopers, a gagiste band master, and a few gagistes, as late as a few months before the 1805 campaign started, which is just one example demonstrating that Napoleon's decreed abolishment of cavalry bands was by no means obeyed if the colonel had other ideas and that cavalry bands were not suppressed at any cost by the military administration after the official abolishment. This first band was dissolved, however, at the eve of the campaign, when trumpeters and troopers had to return to the ranks and the gagistes, including the band master, vanished as they didn't feel urged to participate in war activities. A second band was restored in late 1806, during peace time (the regiment was stationed in Italy then), this time with trumpeters and troopers as well as a contracted band master only.

I have not said that he played the Serpent as part of his duties as a drummer of the (Grenadier Company) 23rd.

That would probably explain why I asked whether he did, Paul.

So, it would appear that I created a small storm with my earlier comment, that "..five years to train a drummer is pure baloney". Kevin ask me to provide contrary evidence, so here is what I have.

I contacted a couple of instructors that I know at the National Civil War Field Music School ( link ) . I know its not Napoleonic but I believe I am on safe ground when we talk about musical training. I asked their opinions on the subject. Both instructors noted that 5 years was completely incorrect. One stating that 'if 5 years were required to train a musician, the Civil War would have been over before any musicians had been trained'. While neither could give me a specific timeframe for training a musician, they suggested I consult Augustus Meyer's journal, "10 Years in the Ranks, US Army".

Augustus Meyers was a typical immigrant boy living in New York City, when he enlisted in the Army in 1854 as a fifer. Meyers was sent to Governors Island to the Army "School of Practice" for incoming field musicians. His training lasted for 8 months ( April – November 1854 ) . A couple of observations:

1 – This pertains to the Civil War, not the Napoleonic Wars. But, I know from personally reviewing both Civil War and Napoleonic camp calls and duties, while the music was different, the number and purpose of the calls was quite similar. I can quote sources if necessary. Likewise, I am sure the number of marches that needed to be learned would have been similar. I am both a Civil War and Napoleonic reenactor hence my familiarity with the topic.

2 – Augustus Meyers was a fifer. Our discussion had been centered around drummers. Not being a musician I can't say whether one or the other instrument required greater training. Perhaps someone on this forum can shed light on this.

3 – Meyers went through his training during peacetime. I don't know if the period of training was accelerated when war broke out. I suspect so, but have nothing to base that on.

Rob

In the other hand… wasn't a French Drumm Major who first deserted in the Waterloo Campaing informing the Prussians about the inminent Emperor attack?…

Amicalement
Armand

I think Scharnachtal's note of 13 Jul 2016 11:42 a.m. was fairly instructive.

Whatever the truth of how long a Napoleonic drummer required to learn his trade, I don't think we can take an 1859s fifer as a model.

Flanker,
I would disagree. Music is a universal language so to speak. It doesn't suffer from national language differences nor does it suffer from time – especially if the difference in time is only 50 years. What it took to train a musician in 1805 or 1854 would have been the same. IMHO
Rob

Bentinck was a drummer months after enlistment and was such at Copenhagen. He 'acquired' at great risk to his life, a set of fine drumsticks taken from a sniped French Grenadier drummer at Martinique in 1809 to replace the ones he had. And at Albuera, after the battle, he was part (as with all the other drummers and musicians) charged with the collecting of the wounded.

So five years? Perhaps to be an expert, but not to be a competent drummer in combat as that can't be learn't other than through direct experience; and in Bentinck's case, was but months after enlistment. By Waterloo, though listed in the roll as a drummer (Bentick) in Hawtyne's Grenadier Company, was by this time a bandsman.

Paul :)

I would disagree. Music is a universal language so to speak. It doesn't suffer from national language differences nor does it suffer from time – especially if the difference in time is only 50 years. What it took to train a musician in 1805 or 1854 would have been the same.

No. Do you have anything besides a reenactor experience to back this assertion up?

And were Civil War drummers employed in the same way that those in the Grande Armee were? Or, were they considered noncombatants who did not go into combat with their company commanders. And were used by those commanders to communicate the maneuvers that the unit was required to do under fire?

I submit there was a great difference.

MDavout has good arguments – brech – none – 5 years to train a drummer – a joke.

I don't see how Civil War drummers come into in the picture. Augustus Meyer was a fife player in the pre-Civil war US infantry. Presumably he would also have been receiving basic training during those eight months instruction(I have only read the chapters on his Plains service).It may be US army drummers took as long to train but it would be coincidence.

The fife and the drum are entirely different instruments. Military fifers not only have to learn melodies but also play them in time and tune (more or less) with other musicians, and be able to play a wind instrument while marching.

C'est tout.

MDavout has good arguments – brech – none – 5 years to train a drummer – a joke.

If you have material to support your ideas, then post them. If not, then comments that you make such as the above, and unfortunately you make them repeatedly, not only do not have merit, they are ludicrous.

Kevin – I am going to make a couple of points:

You posted that statement by Elting about it requiring 5 years to train a drummer. I know that's nonsense and stated so. You asked me to site evidence to the contrary, which I have done. Granted, it has its limitations which I have acknowledged. But, in lieu of any other evidence to the contrary, it supports my original statement. Now, If you have evidence that contradicts mine, please post it.

"And were Civil War drummers employed in the same way that those in the Grande Armee were? Or, were they considered noncombatants who did not go into combat with their company commanders. And were used by those commanders to communicate the maneuvers that the unit was required to do under fire? I submit there was a great difference."

Well, if that's not the case, prove it. I simply do not have the time myself to pour through the various manuals and do a side by side comparison.

And finally, I find that statement, "Do you have anything besides a reenactor experience to back this assertion up?" somewhat condescending, when the evidence I presented was based on source material.

Rob

Condescending, it's what he does best. As it is, so shall it be.

John

You posted that statement by Elting about it requiring 5 years to train a drummer. I know that's nonsense and stated so. You asked me to site evidence to the contrary, which I have done. Granted, it has its limitations which I have acknowledged. But, in lieu of any other evidence to the contrary, it supports my original statement. Now, If you have evidence that contradicts mine, please post it.

Col Elting's material is the evidence and I posted two original source documents to back it up.

I suggest that you research the material given to you. If not, then it might suffice that Col Elting is still the authority in English, at least, on the Grande Armee. Thirty years of research went into Swords Around A Throne and I am also fortunate to have some of the source material that was used for the book.

It's twenty-five volumes of the old La Sabretache which have thousands of pages of primary material on the Napoleonic era.

Your 'charge' of nonsense is ludicrous and you haven't supported it at all, unless I missed it. What source material for the period do you have that contradicts what Col Elting stated in the quoted passage?

And, again, the 'reenactor experience' isn't enough to provide evidence. Historical inquiry is based on assembling facts and then coming to a logical conclusion. To begin that process I highly suggest that you read David Hackett Fischer's Historian's Fallacies: Toward a Logic of Historical Thought. That book should be kept to hand in any historical study or discussion.

Your 'verdict' of 'nonsense' is ludicrous as well as inaccurate.

Brechtel is posting Elting's writings from the French point of view. Perhaps they were much slower on the uptake than other nations drummers.

Paul :)

I did not come across any contemporary source stating that it took 5 years to train a French drummer in the French Army, as pointed out by othe contributors – a lot of wars would be over till there would be any drummer available.

Eltings work is badly sourced – cross checking very difficult because of the lack of foot notes pointing in the right direction. For that reason I am not using it for any reference of the French army.

It might be useful to cite the source in Sabretache</i) that discusses the training period required by French army drummers.

Obviously, it would also be interesting to know where Elting took his figure of five years from. If he did not provide footnotes that would make assessing his conclusions difficult.

First it would be a good idea to cite Elting in a good matter – page – where he states that, I cannot find it – but brech knows Elting better than me – now I wait for the grashopers and the ants, or that it is my duty to chase this up :-))

With all the 'wailing and gnashing of teeth' on the subject, no one has yet to post anything that disproves what Col Elting wrote.

So, again, if you disagree, then find and post something to disprove it. If not, you're merely chasing butterflies with a damaged net.

Training of drummers in the British Army currently takes 18 weeks for the combined 2nd & 3rd class drummers' course. No previous musical skills are required.

The 1st class drummers' course lasts 2 weeks, and is aimed at Drum Corporals to qualify them for promotion to Sergeant, in conjunction with the Drum Majors' Drill Course.

Source: link

That is presently, is it not?

Different ball game.

Why is it a different ball game? The drums have not changed greatly since Napoleonic times, apart from using rod tension instead of ropes and synthetic drumheads instead of skin.

We are talking the time required to train a drummer, not a soldier. Present-day British Army drummers are also trained soldiers, as the Corps of Drums in an infantry battalion is a regular rifle platoon, these days, but the soldier skills are trained in addition. If the British Army takes 18 weeks to train a drummer to 2nd Class standard, why should it have taken 5 years in the Napoleonic period?