"Looking for info on some troops in Scotland" Topic
12 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please remember not to make new product announcements on the forum. Our advertisers pay for the privilege of making such announcements.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Renaissance Discussion Message Board Back to the English Civil War Message Board
Areas of InterestRenaissance
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Top-Rated Ruleset
Featured Showcase ArticleThe Acolyte Vampires return - based, now, and ready for the game table.
Featured Workbench Article
Featured Profile ArticleThe Editor is invited to tour the factory of Simtac, a U.S. manufacturer of figures in nearly all periods, scales, and genres.
Featured Book Review
|
Elenderil | 01 Oct 2017 12:59 p.m. PST |
Can anyone cast any light on the details of covenanting horse organisation. I read somewhere that horse squadrons were of mixed types early in the ECW part lancer and part harquebusier with the proportion of lancers increasing as time passed. I'm also interested in the organisation of Montrose's highlander and Irish foot. Especially weapon mixes and fighting formations. Any primary or secondary sources much appreciated. |
Elenderil | 01 Oct 2017 12:59 p.m. PST |
Can anyone cast any light on the details of covenanting horse organisation. I read somewhere that horse squadrons were of mixed types early in the ECW part lancer and part harquebusier with the proportion of lancers increasing as time passed. I'm also interested in the organisation of Montrose's highlander and Irish foot. Especially weapon mixes and fighting formations. Any primary or secondary sources much appreciated. |
Elenderil | 01 Oct 2017 1:02 p.m. PST |
Argh double post and double topic!!! Please can a mod edit it to one post and one thread please? |
Timbo W | 01 Oct 2017 3:12 p.m. PST |
Hi Elenderil, off the top of my head, will go back and check another time :-) horse regiments were generally organised similar to English Rgts ie around six troops of around 60 to 80 per troop. Of course exceptions were numerous, probably more so than the 'standard', ie many independent troops, some rgts with more troops, many with less, and nearly always under strength after a little while on campaign. Occasionally horse rgts had a dragoon troop attached. This is for the army of the Solemn League and Covenant ie Marston Moor Scots. It seems standard at this time for the regiments to be split into 2 squadrons each of 3 troops, one pistol armed the other light lance armed. Later on in 2nd and 3rd Civil Wars, cavalry regiments tended to shrink (iirc 3 troops totalling 240 was considered full strength but I may have detail a bit off here). Also most of later cavalry units were supposed to be armed with the lance rather than pistol, due to shortages of pistols I think. Montrose's highlanders are rather a mixed lot, occasional highland- raised but regular pike and shot armed regiment. most highlanders mixture of musket, bow, sword etc depending on how many of the poor crofters the clan leaders managed to drag along I think. The Irish bde one Rgt of over 1000 men in 16 coy, 2 Rgt of 500 in 6 coy each, but of course their numbers dwindled soon enough. Armament has been controversial. They definitely had muskets, might have been solely musket armed. traditionally lots of big swords are supposed to be involved. They did have access to pikes as someone noted Irish Rgt trailing pikes at a funeral, but whether used in the field is uncertain. Stuart Reid proposed they had half- pikes as there's a note that they left the long pikes on the ships when they reached scotland. This seems a weird compromise but not so crazy now as we know the parliamentarians armed a regiment of foot with muskets and half-pikes for service in the welsh hills. |
Guillaume deGuy | 01 Oct 2017 3:13 p.m. PST |
Hi Elenderil, Good questions for which I would like to find a source that gives detailed answers also. Based on the questions I assume you don't want general knowledge about Montrose's campaign or the Covenanter armies that operated the Three Kingdoms. Edward Furgol's "A Regimental History of the Covenanting Armies, 1639-1651" gives the best comprehensive overview (although Stuart Reid has some unspecified issues with it). If you are not familiar with BCW Project, the Regimental Wiki, wiki.bcw-project.org is a useful resource also. I have the same understanding that the troops of lancers and harquebusier were mixed together. Much of the problem for the Scots was there mounts were small and not available in large quantities. I have read three primary sources on Montrose's campaign but they are open to a good deal of interpretation when reading the battle accounts. I have definite opinions about how the Irish Foot were armed and fought, but they are only opinions. Highlanders of course seem to engender an almost religious zeal among some, but the best answer is that some were very well armed and some barely armed and it is very difficult on most occasions to know precisely who showed up. Again, I have opinions but they are just that. A couple things I've learned so far are: Just because they are called "Highlanders" doesn't mean that they didn't show up equipped with muskets and pikes. Just because they are called "Irish" doesn't mean they are actually from Ireland. The Irish and Highlanders seemed to usually get lumped together as "Irishes" (they spoke near the same language). To add to the confusion, the Covenanter regiments that were sent to Ulster in 1642 and after are called "Irish" regiments. So – the short answer is – I don't know. 😀 Would certainly like to hear from more knowledgeable people. |
Guillaume deGuy | 01 Oct 2017 4:04 p.m. PST |
Oops, sorry Timbo I must have posted right when you did. You ARE one of the more knowledgeable people! |
Timbo W | 01 Oct 2017 4:08 p.m. PST |
no probs Guillaume, we crossposted at same time sometimes I think I know just enough to be dangerously wrong :-) |
Elenderil | 02 Oct 2017 11:30 p.m. PST |
Thanks guys that backs up what I have read elsewhere. Is Furgol available as an ebook? I don't have an issue with opinions when they are flagged as such and are based on an interpretation of source materials so feel free to add opinions |
Elenderil | 03 Oct 2017 12:16 p.m. PST |
|
Guillaume deGuy | 03 Oct 2017 1:50 p.m. PST |
I haven't found Furgol as an ebook. If it were I would consider buying in that format, just to get a text search feature! He organizes by army beginning with the First Bishops' War running through the 3rd Civil War giving a total ten armies. So you can find yourself referencing the index a good deal. Two other useful books (having the most bang for the buck IMHO) are Stuart Reid's "Auldearn 1645, the Marquis of Montrose's Scottish Campaign"' and David Stevenson's "Highland Warrior Alasdair MacColla and the Civil Wars" Hope this helps. |
Elenderil | 06 Oct 2017 12:06 p.m. PST |
I'm hearing good things about Alaisdair Macrae's book how Scotland won the Civil War |
Ferreo Cuore | 25 Dec 2017 2:25 p.m. PST |
|
|