ECW Flag and some Foot Unit help

[Sparrow]

Just a thought - it is possible (just "possible") that Waller's own foot regiment may have been yellow coats. Looking at the Cheriton campaign we have Waller's and Paulet's(? -  check this as I'm typing this on holiday so without my books). One is mentioned as being a yellow coated regiment and one blue coated but we are not sure which?  Waller's "colour" may have been yellow (witness the field on his cavalry cornet) and his troops MAY (ie we're certainly not sure) have worn yellow sashes so he MAY have had the yellow coated regiment? Peter Young refered to Waller's as being blue coats in one of his books back in the 1970's and this has stuck and been repeated ever since but the actual source is less clear.

In my own army I have Waller's as blue coats but I'm wondering if I need to revisit this?

If anyone can throw any more light on this please do!

[sukhe_bator]

Ah sparrow, I recall this debate now - my troops have long since gone and my ref books all packed away. Yellow coats are a possibility... but probably more of a tan colour than proper yellow.
There's long been a debate about the correlation between coat and ensign colours and what the Royalist spies who viewed the Parl musters were actually reporting on...

[Codsticker]

Isn't there the possibility that their coat colour changed as the war progressed? I have a vague recollection about reading that somewhere....

edit: nevermind... I am thinking of a different regiment...

[westwaller]

Wallers foot regiments colours were blue, but the devices are unknown. It is possible that Wallers foot, had yellow coats, but it may be that the yellow coated regiment that was part of Wallers army was Christopher Potleys regiment, not William Wallers...

[Sparrow]

 Codsticker - you're quite right - coat colours could change with each issue of coats. It just adds to the "fun" and confusion. The best way around this is to focus on a particular year or campaign to give yourself a chance.

[westwaller]

Focusing on the year is a good idea.

[sukhe_bator]

If I recall the key year was 1644 when in December the first Self Denying Ordinance was put forward in an attempt to bar politicians from leading armies. It took a 2nd attempt which took effect in April 1645. This got rid of the 'half measures men' like Essex and Manchester, but also the 'good ones' too like Waller and Heselrigg. Colonels were responsible for raising and equipping their own regiments. I believe with the formation of the New Model Army administration of the regiments post 1645 became more centralised and more standardised issues of uniforms etc. were made, hence the large scale adoption of red coats by the New Model Army etc.
I can't speak for others but the most interesting period for me is 1643-1644 with the ongoing turf war between Oxford and London. 

[Codsticker]

I can't speak for others but the most interesting period for me is 1643-1644 with the ongoing turf war between Oxford and London. 

I enjoy the same period.

[Sparrow]

Wallers foot regiments colours were blue, but the devices are unknown. It is possible that Wallers foot, had yellow coats, but it may be that the yellow coated regiment that was part of Wallers army was Christopher Potleys regiment, not William Wallers...

Potley's - that was it! Not "Paulet's" ) Thank you!  The perils of getting involved on your hols! 

 As said, the source (linked to the Cheriton campaign) always was taken to imply Waller's were the blue coated regiment but this dates from the days when conceived wisdom had it that the cost colour matched the ensign field. We now know that where this was the case it was merely a co-incidence. It'll be interesting to go back and re-read the actual original source idc.

As for Waller - I'm a convinced Parliamentarian but I don't rate him amongst the best, not least because had a habit of losing armies. To misquote Oscar Wilde, to lose one army (Roundway) is unfortunate, to lose two (Cropredy campaign) is positively careless? 

[westwaller]

As for Waller - I'm a convinced Parliamentarian but I don't rate him amongst the best, not least because had a habit of losing armies. To misquote Oscar Wilde, to lose one army (Roundway) is unfortunate, to lose two (Cropredy campaign) is positively careless? 

I has been said that he appears not to have wanted to press home the advantage, but it is worth remembering that this was a different stage of the English Civil War, in which many of the participants on the Parliamentarian side, were still only trying to persuade the King of the folly of his advisors and not capture or kill him.

As for Roundway, Is it not the case that Essex refused to send reinforcements, even though requested by Parliament, leaving Waller vulnerable to Wilmots (iirc) cavalry attack?

Wiki is not the best source, but it surmises the situation well: Waller had previously been favoured to replace the Earl of Essex as lord general of the Parliamentarian armies. His defeat at Roundway Down made this impossible. Waller and his supporters criticised Essex for his perceived inactivity, which had allowed the royalists to detach Wilmot's cavalry from Oxford.

I appreciate that we are a bit off topic now, so apologies to the OP.

[Sparrow]

As for Roundway, Is it not the case that Essex refused to send reinforcements, even though requested by Parliament, leaving Waller vulnerable to Wilmots (iirc) cavalry attack?
[/i]

Probably a fair point! That said Waller had the advantage of being on the "right" side come the Restoration so he does sometimes get an overly fair hearing by some historians?

appreciate that we are a bit off topic now, so apologies to the OP.

Another very fair point - I'll shut up!  

[westwaller]

No need, but I just hope the OP doesn't mind .

Isn't Essex partly to blame for Coropedy Bridge too, as he decided to go to the relief of Lyme, rather than Oxford as ordered?

Poor morale among the trained bands was the other reason, but they might have felt better if they had had some backup...

[Sparrow]

I said I'd shut up, but......

I don't think Waller was a bad General (and I'm certainly not an apologist for Essex!), I just find it odd that Waller keeps losing armies. It can't always be someone else's fault?  He has to take at least some of the blame? It's also interesting to note that Essex, Manchester etc held together reasonably consistent field armies throughout the first civil war whereas Waller's change... a lot?

Part of this could be down to their armies benefiting from quality subordinates (eg Skippon, Crauford, Cromwell) so, again, I'm probably being a tad unfair, but Waller never seems to have managed to create that invisble glue that holds an army together through the bad times. Even after Essex's disaster at Loswithiel his army manages to re-bond together (thanks to Skippon) whereas after Cropredy (far less of a disaster), nothing of note re-emerges?  

I think I'm coming back to my earlier point. Waller was ok (and on a good day, pretty good) but he wasn't one of Parliament's best. History has been kind to him as he was politically astute/well placed in the restoration and so gets good PR from people like Clarendon which we've never really questioned?

So, who are in my "fantasy team"? Well, Sir Thomas Fairfax, Sir Philip Skippon and one Oliver Cromwell. Spotting a theme eh?