The Origins of the New Model Army

Sir William Waller (1597-1668), son of a Lieutenant of Dover Castle, was one of the first Parliamentary leaders to take the field. He saw successful action at the end of 1642 in Dorset, Hampshire and Sussex: and as a direct result Parliament placed him in command of the army of the Western Association (Gloucestershire, Wiltshire, Somerset, Worcester, Shropshire and the city of Bristol) upon its formation on 11 February 1643. When this army was largely destroyed at the fateful battle of Roundway Down (13 July 1643), Waller moved on to take command of the South Eastern Association army (Kent, Surrey, Sussex and Hampshire) from its beginnings in early November 1643. Since his forces now consisted of both Association troops and those of the London Trained Bands, Waller had great difficulty in keeping his army intact in the field. The London regiments-by far the strongest available to Parliament-would only serve for short periods, and were not to be relied upon for service in lengthy campaigns. The commercial life of the city virtually came to a standstill when the Trained Bands marched out of London; and those who held the purse-strings were constantly pressing for their early return.

An ordinance passed in March 1644 went some way towards stabilizing the fluctuating strength of Waller's forces, by providing for the raising of an army for him which would serve more permanently and in sufficient strength to counter the Royal army. Waller's new army saw action at Cropredy Bridge (28 June 1644) and at the second battle of Newbury (27 October (644). At Second Newbury Waller's forces outnumbered those of the king two to one, yet were still unable to force a decision. This experience, coupled with his unhappy memories of local armies which fought bravely to defend their own country but would not move outside it, must have crystallized Waller's belief that the war could never be won until Parliament had an army which could be relied upon to serve when, where, and for however long the military situation dictated. Waller's views were widely shared among senior Parliamentary officers, and events came to a head in December 1644 when Oliver Cromwell made a major speech calling for a remedy to Parliament's military failings.

Much debate followed, but as a direct result of Cromwell's speech the formation of the New Model Army was sanctioned on 4 February 1645. The Self-Denying Ordinance, which was passed by Parliament on 3 April 1645, forbade members of either House from holding military rank or office. This vital reform swept away much of the 'dead wood' from the hierarchy of Parliament's armies, leaving the field clear for the professional soldiers-such as were available. Ironically enough it also swept away Waller himself-but with him went other and far less able men. The new army was formed under the command of Sir Thomas Fairfax (1612-71), an experienced soldier of courage, intelligence and integrity.

#

Between 1645 and 1660 a number of new regiments were raised. In all the New Model had some 28 regiments of horse, 62 of foot, and four of dragoons; not all these were in existence simultaneously, but the majority were. From the small beginnings of 1645 grew an army which, although naturally of variable fighting quality, generally proved to be of impressive battlefield value, and which laid down the organizational and tactical blueprint for the Restoration army of King Charles II, and thus for the generations of British soldiers who came after them.

THE RIFLE AS A MILITARY WEAPON

 

One of the first breech-loading weapons that saw military service was the Ferguson rifle. This was designed by Captain Patrick Ferguson of the 70th Regiment (Surrey Regiment).1 In March 1776 he took out a patent in London for a flintlock screw-plug breech-loading rifle. Ferguson acknowledged his debt to Chaumette but incorporated in his design certain modifications that were intended to overcome the fouling problem that had bedeviled the design up to that point. He introduced a smooth section cut across the threads that faced the chamber when the weapon was loaded and closed, he had vertical grooves cut into the threads, and he had a small reservoir behind the breech plug.

The system operated in a very simple, soldier-proof fashion, in that one turn of the trigger guard opened the mechanism to the full extent. The soldier then put a ball into the hole on top of the rifle and let gravity feed it to the forward part of the chamber. He then poured powder in to charge the weapon and simply rewound the trigger guard to close the weapon. He could then brush any surplus powder left on top of the breech directly into the pan or, if it was windy or there was no surplus, could charge the pan, cock, and fire.

The Ferguson rifle was a remarkable piece of engineering in that the matched screw threads of the male (the rotating plug) and the female (the breech hole) were mated exceptionally well, making the action extremely smooth to operate. The example (by Durs Egg) held in the Weapons Collection of the Small Arms School Corps (at the School of Land Warfare on the outskirts of Warminster, Wiltshire, England) is still operable, and even fireable, and the rotating lever action functions perfectly.

The weapon was a rifleman’s dream at the time, being easy to load and fire and relatively easy to clean and maintain. It also has a pleasing balance. It was a weapon that would have made the British Army, had it adopted it wholesale, the leading force in rifle use and would have served the army far better than the rag-tag of weapons that were used in its stead.

#

The rifled arm as a military weapon did not truly come into use until the eighteenth century. However, the Landgraf of Hesse had a troop of riflemen in 1631, and ten years later Maximilian of Bavaria had several troops armed with rifled arquebuses. Louis XIII armed his bodyguard with rifles, and later ordered that two men from every light cavalry regiment should be so armed. These men were later formed into a regiment of carbineers, but the first issue carbine did not appear until 1793. The English learned the value of the rifle when it was used against them in the American War of Independence; they hired Continental Jäger to take on the American backwoodsmen, whose accuracy was streets ahead of the musket armed infantry of the line.

There are other examples of small rifle armed units in the eighteenth century, such as the Austrian chasseurs, sharpshooters, and skirmishers who were issued with a rifle in 1759. Austrian border guard sharpshooters were issued with special over-and-under rifles in 1768, with a smoothbore lower barrel and a rifled upper barrel for firing patched ball. The rifle was fired resting on the hook of a long pike, which served as a protection if the riflemen were attacked. The Russians issued a similar weapon between 1776 and 1796.

As far as the British Army was concerned, it received its first firearms in 1471, when the hand cannon was introduced. This was followed by the matchlock, which remained in use (only a few wheel locks were ever issued on the grounds of cost and complication) until the reign of James I (1603–1626), when some flintlocks were issued to the leading regiments. Muskets came into general use in the reign of William III; from these muskets developed the “Brown Bess” weapon, which served the British Army for over 100 years.

Brown Bess fired a ball two sizes smaller than its caliber,24 to allow for easy loading, but range and accuracy were laughable. Greener commented that “the immense escape of explosive matter past the ball prevented the possibility of any velocity worthy of the name being given to the ball, and the range is the most contemptible of any gun I know: 120 yards is the average distance at which the balls strike the ground when fired horizontally at five feet above the level.”

Rifles were issued to the British Army as early as 1800, but in such small numbers as to be ineffective. The 95th Foot, the Rifle Brigade, was the first regiment to have this new weapon, which it used, it seems, without being officially noticed by the British War Office, until the Brunswick rifle was introduced in 1835.

Eighteenth-Century Artillery

Spurred by evolving technology, organization, and tactics, smoothbore artillery achieved its maturity during the eighteenth century. Constantly improving metallurgy allowed for lighter and shorter gun tubes that did not sacrifice safety or accuracy. In addition, new gun carriages greatly aided the mobility of field artillery. The growing use of at least nominally interchangeable components also presented a valuable advantage in facilitating repairs, especially in the field. Except for slight national differences, typically in decoration, artillery designers went on to partially reach their elusive goal of standardization of basic gun types. The period of the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries at last saw the end of cannons being designated by such confusing and fanciful names as saker, minion, and basilisk. Instead, artillery, still cast in both bronze and iron, was classified more precisely according to a basic type, as to its use, bore diameter, or the weight of its projectile.

Artillery's growing complexity and sophistication attracted the attention of some of the most talented scientists, mathematicians, and engineers of the period. The English engineer and mathematician Benjamin Robins (1707-1751) published New Principles of Gunnery in 1742 and conducted experiments concerning the calculation of muzzle velocities. He published the findings of these tests-conducted with contemporary flintlock muskets-in London in 1747, and translations in German and French soon followed. In 1775, Robins’s fellow countryman and mathematics professor at the Royal Military Academy, Charles Hutton (1737-1823), continued his explorations. In that year Hutton applied Robins's methods to experiments with a 6-pounder cannon at Woolwich. On the Continent, Bernard Forest de Belidor (1698-1761), a Spanish-born mathematician, engineer, and professor of artillery at the French military academy at La Fere, applied his talents to ballistics. His studies led to more efficient powder measurements to make possible the use of less powder while achieving the same results as earlier cartridges.

A number of influential artillerists emerged during the century to play major roles in pushing smoothbore artillery to the limits of its capabilities. Chief among these were Joseph Wenzel, Prince Lichtenstein of Austria, General John Armstrong of Britain, and General Jean Valliere of France. It was, however, Valliere's fellow countryman Jean Baptiste Gribeauval who initiated considerable changes to all aspects of artillery design, organization, and tactics. By the end of the century the combination of perfected designs, organization, and tactics had elevated artillery to a role equal to that of the already established and celebrated infantry and cavalry. The Napoleonic wars further helped to establish artillery as an independent arm. Earlier theory, based on the regimental guns pioneered by Gustavus Adolphus, relied on relatively small numbers of light guns parceled out piecemeal to infantry units. The Napoleonic campaigns, however, proved the effectiveness of heavier massed artillery fire at decisive moments. To that end, England and France led in establishing a central artillery command capable of providing critical firepower when needed.

As ordnance and artillery theory matured, so did the appreciation that professional artillerists required specialized training, as did members of the other technical or “scientific” arm, the engineers. To that end, France and Austria led the other European powers in establishing the first artillery schools and in fully integrating their artillery arms into their overall military structures. French artillery held an advantage early in the period owing to a series of reforms under Louis XIV and the work of General Jean Valliere in the 1730s. England's artillery initially lagged somewhat behind that of the major Continental powers, as early in the century it was not fully integrated into the army structure and remained under the overall authority of the master general of ordnance. Britain did, however, achieve a major advantage in the field, as it was the only power during the period to adopt the solid block trail carriage.

It eventually became evident that the training and education of artillerists must keep pace with the growing sophistication of their weapons. Having tentatively approached the issue with an informal training program at Douai in 1679, France took the lead in artillery schooling in 1720. In that year it established Europe's first national artillery school that, in effect, also broke ground as the world's fir s t modern professional school. The French artillery school attracted some of the most brilliant teachers of the day and stressed a rigorous program incorporating mathematics, the sciences, and practical fie l d exercises. Other nations soon followed the French example, providing a level of professionalism among artillerists matched only by their fellow “scientific” arm, the engineers. As the century progressed, both Valliere and Gribeauval continued to stress the need for educated artillery officers and men. Valliere emphasized mathematics, technical drawing, and theory, while Gribeauval added programs requiring hands-on skills and set up schools for noncommissioned officers.

Part of the Gribeauval system: cannons of 12, 8 and 4.

The Gribeauval System

French artillery at last reached prominence under the direction of Jean Baptiste Vaquette de Gribeauval (1715-1789). Having entered the French army as a volunteer, Gribeauval rose in the ranks and gained a reputation as a skilled artillerist. He was impressed early in his career by Prussian artillery while on an inspection trip to that country before the Seven Years' War. During the Seven Years' War, Gribeauval served on detached duty with the Austrian army as a general of artillery, for which service he received the rank of lieutenant general and the Cross of Maria Theresa. His talents were so apparent during his service with the Austrians that none other than Frederick the Great, who had personally witnessed Gribeauval's handiwork against his own forces during the 1761 siege of Schweidnitz, offered him a commission in the Prussian army. Gribeuaval, however, remained loyal to France and was rewarded upon his return home in 1762 with the French rank of lieutenant general and the Order of Saint Louis.

Upon his return to active French service, he focused on rectifying the deficiencies of the Valliere System and pushed for more artillery reforms. Gribeauval also respected Lichtenstein's work immensely but wanted to carry his ideas to the logical conclusion of a totally integrated artillery system. Upon his elevation to inspector-general of the artillery by Louis XIV in 1776, Gribeauval at last undertook a complete overhaul of the French artillery system. Touching nearly every aspect of cannon design, construction, carriages, and deployment, the so-called Gribeauval System served France into the Napoleonic Era. It was so far-reaching that it also profoundly influenced artillery in other nations, including that of the emerging United States. The general also designated French cannons by their specific use, including field, siege, garrison, and seacoast, with each type mounted on the appropriately specialized carriage. These reforms in combination with Gribeauval's strong advocacy of close artillery support for infantry made France's the most advanced artillery during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.

Gribeauval began his task by redesigning the French gun tubes to produce lighter, more efficient barrels. Following the method already adopted by a number of other powers, he at last ordered that the bores of French gun tubes be drilled rather than cast around a mandrel. This procedure produced more exact tolerances within the bore and reduced the windage between the projectile and the bore's wall. That, in turn, reduced the loss of energy from the blow-by of the cannon's detonation around the ball. As this improvement made the weapon more efficient, less powder was needed, and thus the barrel's walls could be thinned to create a lighter piece, a goal that Gribeauval continued to seek by shortening the barrel tubes.

Gribeauval's gun tubes were, however, still somewhat heavier than their Prussian and Austrian counterparts; he nevertheless considered the extra weight acceptable, as it helped lengthen the service life of the pieces. The ratio of the weight of gun metal to that of an individual shot in the Gribeauval System was 150 pounds of gun metal to 1 pound of shot, whereas that of the Austrians was 120 to 1 and the Prussians, 100 to 1.

Gribeauval also did away with Valliere's ornate baroque embellishments in favor of a plainer, more businesslike appearance to his gun tubes. In the process the dolphins lost their ornamental sculpturing and instead became simple, functional handles. He also raised the trunnions to a point slightly below the barrel's centerline and increased their diameter where they met the barrel with reinforcements known as rimbases.

Gribeauval's extensive field service also influenced his introduction of one of the most practical field artillery accessories-the prolong. In effect nothing more than a thick, long rope, the prolong allowed artillerists to connect the piece to the limber without directly mounting the carriage to the limber. This gave the crews two significant advantages in combat-it still provided the pulling power of the horse team, yet allowed the piece to be more easily and quickly manipulated by the gun crew. In addition, it also allowed the horses and limber to be at a somewhat safer distance when under fire. To reduce the tendency of the rear of the carriage to dig into the ground when being dragged by prolong, Gribeauval also redesigned the lower end of the trail with a slight upward tilt.

His intimate understanding of the practical problems of field artillerists operating on rough, broken, or muddy ground was also evident in Gribeauval's introduction of the bricole. A leather cross-belt, the bricole allowed gun crews to harness themselves to metal rings on the gun carriage to help manhandle it over rough terrain. Gribeauval's other innovations included improved ammunition gauges to reduce windage and a better bore searcher. He also developed the hausse rear sight, a removable, highly accurate instrument that later saw adoption by numerous other powers.

Having worked with artillery and artillerists, Gribeauval also dictated that rather than drawing weapons from a general stockpile, individual artillery companies should be permanently assigned specific pieces. This innovation ensured that, as they were more invested in their cannons, crews would more properly maintain their pieces rather than perform any but the most perfunctory cleaning and repairs. Moreover, as all artillery pieces-regardless of the sophistication of manufacture-have unique quirks, crews would be more likely to understand and thus more efficiently serve their weapons.