Dear Reader,
We are approximately two weeks away from the 250th anniversary of the most commonly accepted starting point of the American Revolutionary War, or as also known, the American War of Independence. As a result, many organizations and companies (including wargame companies like Warlord Games with their new Revolution epic battles range) are rushing to commemorate and capitalize on this anniversary.
But what were battles in the Revolutionary War really like? It's a subject that, as a history professor, I have spent my life studying.
I am creating this guide as a resource for those commemorating the anniversaries of the Revolutionary War. Maybe you are an interested member of the public, or a wargamer, or reenactor. Regardless of your background, this guide is designed to make research on the Revolutionary War available to you in a variety of formats. I have a large number of articles and suggested reading below, but for those in a hurry, are looking for something to listen or watch, we'll begin with podcasts and videos. At least in terms of the podcasts and blog links, a lot of this is my work:
If you are looking for a beginner's guide to eighteenth-century warfare and battle, check out this two-part episode of the Prime and Load Podcast:
If you are more of a youtube learner, check out these lectures on the nature of war in the American Revolution and Eighteenth Century.
Revolutionary War in the West (British Army)
Infantry in Battle at History Hive
Now, for those who are looking to read more on this in detail, I'd highly recommend the following articles on Kabinettskriege and there will be books below. So what were battles like in this period? And what about the soldiers who fought in those battles?
Armies were divided into infantry, cavalry, and artillery, what an eighteenth-century English speaker would have called "foot, horse, and guns." This guide will mainly focus on the experience of infantry, for three reasons. First, it is my academic speciality. Second, more troops served in the infantry than any other branch of service, so there are more written records from these men. Third and finally, especially in the American Revolutionary War, battles were largely decided by infantry engagements.
The average soldier would take part in 3 or 4 major battles, which lasted roughly 4 hours apiece. In the course of his career, he also fought in innumerable sieges, skirmishes, and smaller actions. His chance of being wounded in an individual battle was quite small, but rose to almost 60% over the course of his career. What did the infantry firefights in this period look like? The experience of battle looked very different here than in movies.
First, soldiers often fired at comparatively long ranges, perhaps 75-300 yards. Both British, European, and American infantrymen did frequently aim their weapons, and were instructed to, despite the challenges of their flintlock smoothbore muskets. They were trained to fire quickly, perhaps around 3 shots per minute. Particularly in the Russian and American armies, soldiers would fire buckshot from their muskets, in addition to larger musket balls. Despite this, with the level of smoke and relative inaccuracy of these weapons, many firefights were indecisive, leading to ammunition shortages. These problems were exacerbated by the fact soldiers often fired without waiting for orders, and fired as soon as they loaded rather than waiting to all fire a volley together. Soldiers didn't always march in cadence or lockstep, they frequently jogged and ran on battlefields, to rapid close the distance between themselves and the enemy or to get out of the line of fire. At least compared to its frequent depiction in Hollywood, hand-to-hand combat in open fields, were soldiers mutually charged into melee combat, was quite rare. Hand-to-hand combat was common when fighting cavalry, when fighting over defending obstacles like fortifications, and when fighting armies outside of military Europe.
For much of the last hundred years, we have misunderstood how the British tactically fought in the Revolutionary War. They were much more flexible, fastmoving, and aggressive than displayed in movies like the Patriot. That's one of the reasons it was so difficult for Washington to win the Revolutionary War: the British army was well-suited to fighting in North America. Like many eighteenth-century armies, they used cover and concealment effectively.
And now the soldiers. Who was the "average" eighteenth-century soldier? More than likely, he had been a day-laborer or apprenticed weaver before enlisting in the service. He had first enlisted in his early twenties, and after seven or eight years of service was around thirty years of age. He was unmarried. The soldier was tall compared with many civilians, likely around 5 feet 8 inches (approx 172 cm). When on the march with his regiment, the soldier was capable of covering an average of 14 miles per day, although that could easily be increased in times of extreme need, such as when 10th Regiment of Foot dashed 70 miles in a 24 hour period in the Seven Years' War.[1] His daily calorie intake ranged from roughly 2200-3000, and mainly consisted of meat and bread of some type. Even when not marching or fighting, his daily life was quite rigorous, as he and the men around him were often engaged in strenuous physical labor. He was far more likely to die from disease than enemy action. Talk of his propensity for desertion has perhaps been overblown.
Finally, some suggested readings.
If you read one book on the eighteenth-century armies and the AWI, it should be Christopher Duffy's The Military Experience in the Age of Reason.
If you read two books on eighteenth-century armies and the AWI, the second should be Matthew H. Spring's With Zeal and With Bayonets Only.
If you read three books on eighteenth-century armies and the AWI, the third should be Martin and Lenders 'A Respectable Army'.
Good luck as you read on the period and commemorate the anniversaries of the Revolutionary War.
As always,
Thanks for Reading
Alex Burns
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
