Drill manuals - full regiment: now with added 15mm RoF at 1:1 picture

[Radar]

Has anyone got a drill manual diagram for a full (theoretical) regiment? I've got Venn which only shows company level diagrams.

In an act of jubilee avoidance I want to recreate a Civil War regiment at theoretical full strength in 15mm at 1:1. Just for some photos to see what it looked like, no other purpose.

(Don't panic, not creating from scratch, utilising my existing figures)

Want to place soldiers in their theorem correct positions.

Thanks in anticipation

[robh]

Stuart Peachey's "Mechanics of Infantry Combat" has a conjectural diagram of one of the forces at Rathconnel 1642 which locates commanders and troops by deployment based on a well detailed but anonymous source (not named in Peachey anyway).

Goes down to the level of individual named officers by station.

[Radar]

Thanks. Is that still in print?

[George1863]

The 'Weapons And Warfare' website is worth a browse. It has a number of detailed diagrams on ECW infantry formations derived from original Dutch and Swedish (as in 'pattern') sources.

[Friends of General Haig]

Hi Radar - have you got the Osprey Pike & Shot Tactics?  p63 there is a contemporary diagram of Rainsborough’s regiment drawn up.  Shows the position of the pike, muskets, ensigns and officers (not the drummers, unfortunately).

[robh]

Thanks. Is that still in print?

I believe so, Stuart Press is still around. Nice 'old school' order system as he used to trade almost exclusively at ECWS and SK events.
https://www.stuart-hmaltd.com/ECW_military_practice.php

The book is an excellent little resource and well worth picking up regardless, but I can pdf the diagram and its key for you if that is the only page you need.

[Radar]

Thanks for the kind offer, I've ordered it.

I've since had a pop at creating a Regiment of Foot at 1:1, heavily influenced by Streeter, with a sprinkling of Venn thrown in for good measure.



More pictures and rationale https://www.keepyourpowderdry.co.uk/2022/06/a-regiment-of-foot.html

[Captain Blood]

That’s an amazing illustration 

I think (as you say, constraints of your kitchen table), the depth is wrong, because musketeers could not sensibly be deployed 15 to 20 ranks deep. I seem to recall that using the ‘countermarch’ tactic of each rank firing a volley and then dropping back to let the next rank march through to give fire, the optimum was around 6 ranks deep?
This would give the overall unit a frontage possibly three times as wide as you depict.
Which would then beg the question as to whether the pikemen would necessarily be distributed in smaller parties along this frontage to protect the musketeers, who would otherwise be very vulnerable to cavalry attacks.

But it’s still an impressive demonstration

[Radar]

Thanks. Musket and pike are 12 deep, so twice the width.

Seeing it like this has certainly thrown up some interesting questions and discussion about the formation. I'm beginning to think more and more that this is a default formation from which it is easiest to react and change formation depending upon what starts coming at the regiment.

But also, Streeter rules in my house 

[Merlon]

Regiments were never formed as a whole.
The aim was to create battles / battalia of around 450 - 500 men each. So a strong regiment would aspire to creating two battles / battalia.

Smaller regiments were just added into the melting pot and allocated to battles / battalia as designated by the Sergeant Major General of the Army. This being his primary admin role.
This diagram is from a 1630s French drill manual which shows the dimensions of a roughly 500 man battle / battalia. Dimensions are in pied or feet.