Swedish vs Dutch models and basic notes on infantry organisation in English Civil War

A few notes and jottings as I move further into the project ... truly the web is a wonderful place... 

"Your advance upon an Enemy, in what posture soever he be, should be with a constant, firm and steady pace; the Musketeers (whether they be on the Flanks or interlin'd with either the Horse or the Pikes) firing all the while; but when you come within Pistol-shot [so, approx. 30 yards - StW], you should double your pace, till your Pikes closely serr'd together, charge these, whether Horse or Foot, whom you find before them. It is true, the business very oft comes not to push of Pike, but it hath and may come oft to it, and then Pikemen are very serviceable". Sir James Turner

...interesting..  "business very oft comes not to push of Pike".. so the image of large English Civil War armies poking each other at close quarters like some giant rugby scrum may not be as realistic as I thought..

Infantry Organisation/Weapons

• The basic model of infantry organisation adopted by each side consisted of a regiment of ten equal companies of one hundred men for a total strength of one thousand. Sometimes the companies were of unequal size, but the basic building block was a regiment of a 1000 divided in 10 companies..

• Pikemen and musketeers were not organised in separate companies, but each company had a proportion of each. 

• Later in the war a ratio approaching two muskets to every pike (2:1) became the norm on both sides, but at the time of Edgehill it was more likely to be 1:1. All things being equal Royalist regiments would have tended to more pike than Parliamentarian ones, as Parliament had started the war in control of a number of the main arsenals..

• Most of the muskets would have been matchlocks. The effective range was typically no more than fifty to one hundred meters. I have read in two places of studies showing there was a no better than 50% chance of hitting a man at 100 yards, but of course they weren't firing at just one man, so I'm guessing 100 yards or less was optimal...   musket rests were more common in the early stages of the war but fell out of use as the war progressed..

Now the realities...

• "In practice .. both Royalist and Parliamentary regiments could have as few as six companies, and were sometimes down to 200 men or so, while 800-900 was about the maximum strength. The gap between establishment and actual strength was even wider in the 16th and 17th Centuries than in later periods, as has already been shown, and in the Civil War the raising of troops was particularly local, personal and haphazard, especially on the King's side, while practices like the recruitment of prisoners of war (though common in Europe also), would be likely to mean many troops of limited enthusiasm, and a high rate of desertion" from http://home.mysoul.com.au/graemecook/Renaissance/RenaissanceWarfare-AirfixMagazineArticles.htm (George Gush Renaissance Warfare)

• "A regiment, according to strength, would form in the field one or two 'divisions'; some-times drawn up eight deep, more often six, with the musketeers flanking the pikes. Some musketeers would be detached ('commanded') to form a 'forlorn hope' screen, often lining a hedge or ditch, and others would often be found on the flanks giving fire support to the cavalry in Swedish fashion. At first, fire was generally by counter-march*, but in Parliamentary armies of the later war years, and in at least one Royalist force - Montrose's Scots-Irish army - the Swedish 'salvo' or simultaneous three-rank volley was used, the shot being reduced, from six ranks to three by 'doubling the files' before firing." from http://home.mysoul.com.au/graemecook/Renaissance/RenaissanceWarfare-AirfixMagazineArticles.htm (George Gush Renaissance Warfare)

* counter march..  think of an infantry version of the cavalry 'caracole' - basically the first rank would fire and then retire behind the current rear rank to reload, all the other ranks stepped forward one rank, and the firing process is repeated..  the idea being that by the time they got back to the front rank, the first rank to fire had reloaded..  a regiment could do this while advancing or retreating by omitting the step forward to retire, or taking two or more steps forward to advance..

•  "Both Swedish and Dutch tactical formations [see next for a slightly more detailed view of each] were employed, the latter especially in the earlier stages, though for infantry Dutch formations were simpler and probably more practical than the rather complex Swedish-based formations advocated by contemporary drill books such as that of Robert Ward". from http://home.mysoul.com.au/graemecook/Renaissance/RenaissanceWarfare-AirfixMagazineArticles.htm (George Gush Renaissance Warfare)

Dutch System

• The first of the main military modifications were made by the Dutch (specifically Maurice of Nassau, Prince of Orange) from the 1590's onward's and were as a result of their long wars with the Spanish.. basically they split the large unwieldy regiment of 900-1000 into two battalions of 500/smaller numbers, changed firing methodology, and modified tactics to take advantage of the more flexible small battalions...

• Same number of men, but less ranks [than the Tercio that had been the dominant formation up until then] meant the regiment covered a greater frontage.. "its shallower depth of ten ranks meant that it could bring a higher percentage of its musketeers into the firing line than a deeper formation" Osprey - Pike and shot Tactics 1590-1660

From this:

...typical Spanish type Tercio... over 2000 men in one battlefield body..  a steam roller.. reminds me of a French infantry attack column in the Napoleonic Wars...

 ...to this:

...smaller, flatter, more muskets to bear..

• "The Dutch style was by far the best known system among English officers in 1642. Both the Parliamentarian and Royalist captain-generals, the Earl of Essex and the Earl of Lindsey, had commanded regiments in the Dutch service. At .. Edgehill, .. both commanders planned to deploy their forces broadly in accordance with Dutch practice. However, the King's nephew Prince Rupert insisted upon re-deploying the Royalist army in the more complex brigade formation of the Swedish style." http://bcw-project.org/military/tactics [clicky]

• "Under the Dutch system, the central pike block drew up in ranks between five and ten men deep, while the flanking shot drew up in ranks of between eight and twelve men. The shot were drilled to perfect the countermarch, in which the front rank would fire a volley, then turn about and march to the rear down the intervals between the files to reload their weapons. The second rank would then step up, fire their weapons and turn about in the same way. This continued until the front rank had returned to its original place, by which time their guns were reloaded and ready to fire again. In this way, the Dutch battalions could keep up a continuous fire for as long as their ammunition lasted". http://bcw-project.org/military/tactics [clicky]

• When threatened by cavalry, the shot could retire behind [or in] the pikes without disrupting the formation of the battalion. http://bcw-project.org/military/tactics [clicky]

• The Dutch battalions [army] were deployed in three lines of battle. They were staggered in a "chequerboard" formation, adapted from the Roman acies triplex (triple battle order), so that the gaps between the front line battalions were covered by those behind. While the second line could be used to support the front line, the third line was a reserve or rearguard, which was only committed to battle as a last resort, either to reinforce a final push for victory or to cover a withdrawal". http://bcw-project.org/military/tactics [clicky]

Swedish System

Swedish type deployment - click to embiggen - note how the brigade in the second line deploys to cover the gap between the brigades in the front line...

• A further modification of the Dutch system driven by Gustavus Adolphus during his wars in Germany - it's basically a more offensive version of the essentially defensive Dutch system, as I read it... In the Swedish system, armies tended to forget about the 3rd deployment line and would deploy in just the two..

• "Gustavus divided his infantry regiments into two units of around 500 men each, which were known as squadrons and were equivalent to the Dutch battalions. The principal Swedish battlefield unit was the brigade, which was formed either from four squadrons deployed in a diamond pattern or, more usually, from three squadrons deployed in an arrowhead formation.
  
  Gustavus initially sought to increase the firepower of his infantry in order to compensate for the inferiority of the Swedish horse. Swedish squadrons maintained the central pike block flanked by musketeers, but the formations were shallower than in the Dutch system, with ranks six men deep. This presented a broader front which brought more firepower to bear on the enemy. Like the Dutch, Swedish musketeers were drilled to maintain a continuous fire by use of the countermarch. However, Gustavus added the tactic of "doubling the files" when the enemy drew near, in which the rearmost ranks of shot moved up to fill the gaps between the frontline ranks, thus transforming a six-rank formation into three ranks. The front rank would kneel, the second rank would crouch and the third rank would stand. When commanded, all three ranks would fire simultaneously to deliver a devastating salvo, the "Swedish salvee". If the enemy stood firm, the musketeers would reload behind the shelter of the pikes to fire another salvo. As soon as the enemy faltered, the Swedish infantry charged forward to break them in hand-to-hand combat.
  
  The formidable firepower of the Swedish infantry was increased by the use of light field artillery pieces that fired a three-pound shot and were manoeuvrable enough be moved with the troops in battle. As many as twelve field guns were attached to each brigade" http://bcw-project.org/military/tactics [clicky]

Detail from a painting by Snayers [clicky]depicting an infantry formation - from the above I'd say deployed in the Swedish style as the musket sleeves look to be about 7 or 8 ranks deep rather than the slightly deeper Dutch style..

• "The Swedish brigades themselves were formed of either three squadrons [battalions] to form an arrowhead formation, or four squadrons to form a diamond"

• "The Swedes deployed supporting cavalry squadrons behind both the first and second lines of infantry, as distinct from the Dutch practice which placed them behind the first line only. The cavalry wings were reinforced with 'commanded musketeers' - a Swedish innovation that differed from Dutch practice".

• "Soldiers who were already experienced in Dutch and Danish tactics could quickly be re-trained in the basics of the Swedish practice, since the drills were the same. However, the Swedish tactical formation was more complex than the Dutch, and only veteran soldiers could achieve competence in it quickly".

The German Style

A composite of both that came in shortly after the death of Adolphus..

• "The battalions (sometimes termed 'brigades') had around 1,000 men drawn up with a reduced depth; Monteccuoli referred to a file of seven men for the pike block in 1632 (when the horse included both full cuirassiers and lighter-armed battle cavalry). This formation, influenced by the Dutch but also using the Swedish model of forming small infantry brigades as fighting units rather than simply a deployment tool, was the foundation of the composite German style".

Edgehill specifics:

• "Prince Rupert was inspired by the aggressive tactical approach and decisive victories of Gustavus Adolphus, and through his influence the Royalist army was deployed at Edgehill .. with its infantry in the Swedish brigade pattern, and both cavalry and infantry in the Swedish unit depths of six-deep an d three-deep respectively........ five Royalist infantry brigades in two lines, each brigade in the Swedish 'four-squadron' formation....  to work successfully it required veteran officers and NCOs and a cadre of veteran soldiers. The Royalist infantry was only recently raised and had few veterans;"Pike_and_Shot_Tactics_1590-1660

• It's mentioned that the Swedish style was not used again by the Royalists after 1642 - they too went more German in style...

Royalist Deployment Edgehill - copyright Osprey

• "[At Edgehill] the Parliamentarian regiments deployed in eight ranks, according to the Dutch method, a regimental frontage would occupy approximately 150 yards, and a brigade front over 600 yards. The left of the Parliamentarian line was occupied by Sir James Ramsey with 24 troops of horse, 600 musketeers and perhaps three guns. Ramsey deployed 300 musketeers between his first-line squadrons and 300 along the hedges to his left. The Parliamentarian centre was arranged in two lines with the infantry brigades of Colonel Charles Essex and Sir John Meldrum in the first line, Colonel Thomas Ballard's Brigade in the second and Sir Philip Stapleton's and Sir William Balfour's Horse in support" Pike_and_Shot_Tactics_1590-1660

• "Parliament army at Edgehill  .. its infantry were drawn up in two lines of  battalions .. with each regiment forming either one or two battalions. The depth for the Parliament army followed an English variation on the Dutch model current since the mid-1630s, with infantry drawn up eight deep rather than the Dutch ten, and the cavalry fighting six deep. The deployment of the Parliament cavalry on its left wing included both commanded musketeer plottons of about 50 men each, drawn up six deep, and light artillery in the model originated by the Swedes and now forming part of the composite German style". Pike_and_Shot_Tactics_1590-1660

• The Royalist army was deployed at Edgehill - the first battle of the Civil War - with its infantry in the Swedish brigade pattern, and both cavalry and infantry in the Swedish unit depths of six-deep and three-deep respectively. The Royalist battle plan .... shows five Royalist infantry brigades in two lines, each brigade in the Swedish 'four-squadron' formation. .... While this was certainly an effective tactical style, it was more complicated to operate than either the Dutch or German equivalents, and to work successfully it required veteran officers and NCO's and a cadre of veteran soldiers. The Royalist infantry was only recently raised and had few veterans; the practical effect was that while they could be drawn up in the Swedish style this was simply a fagade, since they lacked the experience to use it to advantage". Pike_and_Shot_Tactics_1590-1660

=======================================

Finally, this is amazing - a real resource... click and enjoy

https://brego-weard.com/lib/ns/ELI_179_Pike_and_Shot_Tactics_1590-1660_-_Ospr.pdf

Also recommend here:

http://www.battleofedgehill.org/edgehill-battlefield/index.html [clicky]

Enjoyed that..  cavalry and artillery next!