Series Introduction: Piquet to Chasseur

Interpretive Staff Portray French Troops defending Niagara, 1759

Photo Credit, Davis Tierney

A Plea for the Armies of Ancien Régime France

Dear Reader,

This is not at all meant to be an academic dissection of current historiography regarding the French Army from the Kabitnettskriege era, or even the era from the War of Austrian Succession until the French Revolution. Frankly, it is something that I have long been interested in, but only now am I engaging the topic academically. My background, like many other Americans, turned into Eurocentric military historians, focuses primarily on the British Military. As well, while I’ve had the amazing privilege of work at Fort Ticonderoga, for Campaign 1776, and partaking in several educational projects around 1740-1790 timeframe, I first and foremost would weigh my expertise on the First World War of 1914-1919.

One theme that I have begun to pick up on as I continue my work with the Great War is the deeply rooted national narratives which define the wartime experience. With those narratives so ingrained in modern society, it is only now becoming mainstream to incorporate topics and research to create an international military history of a particular engagement or theme. While British military historians, and in fact, all those of the Anglophone world have grown an appreciation for topics involving the primary enemy power of Imperial Germany, relatively few have thoroughly dissected the Allied heavy hitter of the Western Front, France.

This is unsurprising. As so many modern narratives of the major Allied powers gain traction from their sacrifices during the First World War, it is inevitable that for many Britons the BEF was the elite force on the Western Front, or for Americans the AEF. In Anglophone public perception, those were forces which many times had to pick up the slack of the conscripted masses of the French Army. This is, of course, untrue and fails to appreciate the weight of the war which fell on French shoulders. Yet this opens a theme which brings us back to the wars of the 18th century.

Louis-Nicolas Van Blarenberge, The Siege of Yorktown, 1786;
(Private Collection of Nicholas Taubman)

In the case of the many wars fought during the reigns of Louis XV, and Louis XVI, France and its army have become a force which exists only to teach the British a lesson in warfare on the frontiers of America, only to be outmaneuvered and battered by the Royal Navy at sea and the Germanic forces on land unless in direct coordination with American efforts. Any professional historian would find the fault with this, yet only now is the historiography of the French Army during the Kabitnettskriege-era expanding. The French Army which suffered from “Victor’s Disease” after the War of Austrian Succession went on to be defeated in the Seven Years War. The changes which were introduced to the Troupes de Terre following this debacle did not only modernize the French Army and bring it to victory in the American Revolutionary War/Eight Years War. It also formed the groundwork for France’s (and arguably all of Europe’s) most successful military force, Napoleon’s Grande Armée. The French Army both started and ended the Enlightenment era as the predominant land force in Europe, starting in size and ending in quality. Therefore, they deserve much more of our attention. However, our biggest hurdle is ourselves in our narrowly Anglophone world.

I’ll be the first to admit, I have limited French. I took some French in college, and used it while working overseas on First World War battlefields. I am not alone in saying this is my biggest impediment to further research on the Ancien Régime. A younger generation of historians such as Dr. Jonathan Abel, William Raffle, Andrew Bamford, and Charles Mayhood have all recently (Standby for the reviews of their excellent books soon!) However, these works only form the tip of the iceberg if we are to begin to fully understand the military, political, and social mechanisms which made the French Army operational.

Jonathan Abel's work on French theorist Guibert is one of the newer studies of the French Army during this time period.

Therefore, I put out a plea to the readers to join with me in pursuing the study of the French Army of the Ancien Régime. As a British focused historian, I for one can’t fathom understanding the Redcoats who fought at the Plains of Abraham and Brandywine, without understanding the foe they considered to be their greatest, the French soldiers of Fontenoy, Minden, and Yorktown. We must break free of our Anglo-American biases and preconceptions and open ourselves to truly be experts in the field we all love.

If you enjoyed this post, or any of our other posts, please consider liking us on facebook,  or following us on twitter. Finally, we are dedicated to keeping Kabinettskriege ad-free. In order to assist with this, please consider supporting us via the donate button in the upper right-hand corner of the page. As always:

Thanks for Reading,

James Taub[1]


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] James Taub is a military historian specializing in the Modern Era, with an interest in World War One and Early Modern Warfare. He is currently finishing a tenure as the Education Coordinator for the US World War I Centennial Commission. He took an undergraduate degree in History from Dickinson College, and a Master's Degree from the University of Glasgow in War Studies. He is pumped for Top Gun 2.

Sampson Staniforth at the Battle of Fontenoy

A Romantic Imagining of Fontenoy

Sampson Staniforth, a twenty-five year old British soldier fought at the Battle of Fontenoy on May 11th, 1745. This battle was a key French victory in the War of Austrian Succession. AlThough he did not specify his regiment, circumstantial evidence suggests that Staniforth may have served in the 20th Regiment of Foot (Bligh's). He later worked as a Methodist preacher, and his recollections of life in the British army were recorded with his experiences of the War of Austrian Succession. The following is his description of Fontenoy:

"And in the mean time, the French batteries playing upon us, did us much hurt. We wheeled off, in order to get into the plains of Fontenoy. I had not marched far before we met a horse without his rider, and the lower part of his head taken off by a cannon-ball. A little after, I saw one of the guards lie dead ; and soon after, many more. We still advanced, and drew up in line of battle, in the plain of Fontenoy. The French before us were intrenched up to the neck, and many batteries of cannon were playing upon us. I was in the front rank, and the left-hand man joining the Dutch. We stood there, till the Dutch turned their backs and marched away. I was then left exposed to a battery on the left, and the batteries and small arms in the front. Soon after our regiment, with some others, were ordered to advance and attack the French in their trenches. We marched up boldly; but when we came close to the town of Fountenoy, we observed a large battery ready to be opened on us. And the cannon were loaded with small bullets, nails, and pieces of old iron. We had orders to lie down on the ground; but for all that, many were wounded, and some killed. Presently after the discharge we rose up, and -marched to the first trench, still keeping up our fire. They gave way ; but when we entered, batteries in the flanks were opened, which tore our regiment so, that we were obliged to fall back into the rear. Yet we rallied, and renewed the attack. But it was to no purpose. All the day I was in great spirits, and as composed in my mind, as if I had been hearing a sermon. I neither desired life nor death, but was entirely happy in God. Night coming on, the retreat was beaten, and the whole army marched away, leaving our cannon, and sick, and wounded behind us."[1]

Staniforth's recollection is useful in two ways related ways. First, it shows the difference between the drill square and battlefield reality. In order to avoid fire, even here in the 1740s, British soldiers were ordered to lie down. This matches descriptions from Scottish units also at Fontenoy, who would through themselves to the ground to avoid incoming fire. As helpful as understanding drill square evolution and complicated firings are, soldiers' accounts of the battlefield must be our first source for any understanding of what combat was like in the eighteenth century.

Second,  it gives a glimpse into the reality of combat as experienced by private soldiers. In comparison to fanciful accounts of officers yelling invitations for the other side to fire first, Staniforth shows the gritty nature of war in the eighteenth century. While eighteenth-century fighting men may well have worn a good deal of lace, private soldiers' experience of combat was not rarefied or gentlemanly.

Thanks for Reading,


Alex Burns


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1][] Thomas Jackson, Lives of the Early Methodist Preachers,  Vol IV,  125.