Pending projects ~~ The First Colonial Soldiers

After the relative success of my '1699' and '1714' half-pay lists, the last of which good pretty nice reviews in The Irish Sword and the Journal of the Society of Army Historical Research, a number of new projects were started.

One of these projects will be written together with an Englishman of name, and with a good deal more experience in writing. Apart from the topic, on which more shortly, this cooperation is already very inspiring and instructive.

The topic of this project focusses on colonial soldiering in the 17th and early part of the 18th centuries. Whereas this topic is pretty well covered in literature for the period of the later 18th century (King George's War, the French and Indian Wars), this is much less true for the preceding period.

Thus, the scope of the project is related to the early years of settlement and colonisation of New England, the West Indies and, to a lesser degree, West Africa and the East Indies, and more in particular to the garrisons of these colonies: The First Colonial Soldiers. Also dealt with are 'European' overseas possessions like Gibraltar, Dunkirk and the Channel Islands.

For each colony, or overseas possession, an introductory narrative is provided with the relevant background information on the genesis of that colony. More important, and the main topic of the project, are the 'colonial soldiers', the garrisons in those colonies. Lists of troops are provided, regulars and militia, with dates of commissions and organisational / regimental details. Whereas information on regular troops is - relatively - well known and available, the parts on the various colonial militias are often the result of new research and compilation of information from various sources.

Furthermore, the militia had, almost by definition of being the local form of defence, strong bindings to the local community and administration of the colonies. Reading the history of these militias, and their officers, reads like a history of the colonies.

The First Colonial Soldiers is expected to be published by July 2014. Visit this blog for updates, or check the publisher's site.

Some regimental establishments

Following the earlier post on the size of the regiment of foot, and the various (official) establishment listed, this post will actually detail some of these establishments. This post will look at the regiments in the Low Countries.

As stated previously, regiments in the Low Countries numbered 867, 876 (no typo) or 938 men. How does these numbers translate in companies, sergeants and privates.

Let's start with the largest. This establishment was authorised already in the conflict for regiments serving in the Low Countries. The regiments were composed of thirteen companies: twelve battalion companies and one of grenadiers. Besides the private men, each company consisted of three officers - captain, lieutenant and ensign, or a captain and two lieutenants for the grenadiers, three sergeants, three corporals, and two drummers. The battalion companies had 60 private men, the grenadier companies were slightly larger with 70 men. Together with 5 staff officers - chaplain, adjutant, quarter-master, and the surgeon and his mate - this adds up to 938 men.

The smallest is a big odd, but it existed. This regiment had only twelve companies, 11 battalion and one of grenadiers, at the same establishment as the large regiments, with also five staff officers. This was the regiment of William Evans. It was raised in April 1703, and went to the Low Countries the same year. Though at first established with 938 men, and thirteen companies, part of the regiment was drafted in 1704 to regiment that went to Portugal. The result was this 12 company establishment.

The middle sized regiments, there were four of them in the Low Countries, were all part of the augmentation of 20,000 men to the Confederate forces agreed upon in 1703. Four of the regiments of this augmentation were English, and established with 876 men. These regiments also had thirteen companies, and five staff, and had the same number of officers, non-commissioned officers and drummers. However, the difference was in a somewhat lower establishment of the companies: each company had 56 men.

The estimates for the forces show these establishment until the end of the conflict, and it is interesting to know why the regiments of the augmentation were somewhat smaller than those of the earlier British contingent.

What was the size of a regiment of foot?

After a couple of months of research for other projects, I returned to the reductions after the War of the Spanish Succession (see also my Half-Pay officers for 1714). Here I looked into the question on the size of a regiment. More in particular, and do keep it simple, the size of a regiment of foot.

Anyone, including me, with some knowledge of the British army, and the Marlburian period, would probably answer that a regiment numbered 13 companies with one of grenadiers.

However, a careful look at the establishment lists of the armies between 1701 and 1712 reveals a variation that must have given contemporary quartermasters severe headaches. And it gives some nice number-crunching.

Let's use the estimate for the armed forces for 1711 as an example (see the Calendar of Treasury Books):
In the Guard & Garrisons, i.e., the regiments serving in England or in garrison on the colonies we have regiments of 760, 809, 834, 876, and 951 men. Judging from the reductions, the regiments were all established with 12 companies.

In the army in Flanders we find regiments of 938 and 876 men. The ones with 938 men were definitely established with 13 companies, the ones with 876 men most likely.

When we move to the Iberian Peninsula, the situation was as worse as at home: regiments of 725, 785, 834, 845 and 876 men. All regiments appear to have been established with 12 companies.

After the reductions of 1712-14 we find the following establishments:
at Dunkirk, 669 men to a regiment of foot with 12 companies
in Flanders 613 to a regiment with 12 companies
at Minorca 625 men with 12 companies
at Gibraltar 500 with 12 companies
In England/Scotland, including the West Indies, 445 men with 10 companies
in Ireland,  444 men, also in 10 companies
(the one man difference between England and Scotland was the Quarter-Master, for whom was no room on the Irish Establishment).

Battle of Neerwinden 29 July 1693 ~~ British regiments

The English language wiki on the Battle of Neerwinden conveniently gives an order of battle of the British regiments present at that battle. Unfortunately, that order of battle uses (more) modern titles for the regiments, unknown in 1693. The section's title ('English, Scottish and Irish Order of Battle') may make the reader think there were separate English, Scottish and Irish components in the army in Flanders. Though there were English, Scottish and Irish regiments, they were all on the English Establishment. There are some minor inaccuracies as well.

Presented here is a somewhat revised order of battle is given, with 17th century titles (i.e., understandable for contemporaries and EMEMH-ians). A more modern title, usually the territorial designation valid for around 1900, is given between brackets and should be understood by the younger generations.

The corrections were largely made using d'Auvergne's account of the campaign of 1693, and Walton's history of British Standing Army.

Cavalry

- Life Guards - three squadrons: 1st, 3rd and 4th Troops of Life Guards. The latter one was actually the Dutch Garde du Corps. This unit came over to England in 1688, and was on the English Establishment between 1689 and 1699. In England it ranked as the 4th Troop of Life Guards. The regimentation of these three troops may have been for convenience and tactical purposes only. The wiki shows the Royal Horse Guards, which were in England in 1693 and should be considered an error.
- The Queen's Regiment of Horse - 3 sqns (1st Dragoons Guards)
- Lord Berkeley's Regiment - 2 sqns (3rd Dragoons Guards)
- Francis Langston's Regiment - 2 sqns (4th Dragoons Guards)
- Hugh Wyndham's Regiment - 2 sqns (6th Dragoons Guards)
- Earl of Galway's Regiment - 3 sqns (a Huguenot regiment, disbanded in 1699 and not in the wiki)

Lord Fitzharding's Regiment of Dragoons - 3 sqns (4th Dragoons)

Foot

- First Regiment of Foot Guards - 2 bns (later Grenadier Guards) 
- Coldstream Regiment of Foot Guards - 1 bn (Coldstream Guards)
- Scots Regiment of Foot Guards - 2 bns (Scots Guards)
- Royal Regiment of Foot - 2 bns (Royal Scots)
Remark: it should be remarked that the battalions of the regiments of guards were temporary, tactical, formations, and not necessarily distinctive, ever-present and unchanging administrative formations as we came to know battalions at a later period. The Royal Regiment, however, was really organised into two battalions.
- William Selwyn's Regiment of Foot - 1 bn (Queen's (West Surrey))
- Charles Churchill's Regiment - 1 bn (Buffs (East Kent))
- Henry Trelawney's Regiment - 1 bn (King's Own (Lancaster))
- Royal [Regiment of] Fuziliers - 1 bn (Royal Fusiliers (City of London))
- John Tidcomb's Regiment - 1 bn (West Yorkshire)
- Francis Collingwood's Regiment - 1 bn (disbanded in 1700, not in wiki)
- James Stanley's Regiment - 1 bn (Leicestershire)
- Thomas Erle's Regiment - 1 bn (Green Howards (North Yorkshire))
- Francis O'Farrell's Regiment - 1 bn (Royal Scots Fusiliers (Ayrshire))
- Earl of Leven's Regiment - 1 bn (King's Own Scottish Borderers)
- Andrew Munro's Regiment - 1 bn (Cameronians)

- Sir Charles Graham's Regiment - 1 bn (Scots Brigade)
- Aeneas Mackay's Regiment - 1 bn (idem)
- George Lauder's Regiment - 1 bn (idem)
Remark: the previous three regiments are dubbed as Dutch mercenaries on the aforementioned wiki. In reality this were Scottish regiments in pay of the Dutch Republic. They came over to England in November 1688, and were placed on the English Establishment in early 1689. In 1697 the regiments returned onto the Dutch payroll. The designation 'mercenaries' is not really appropriate, in the author's opinion. Graham's regiment is not mentioned in Walton's overview of infantry officers casualties (p. 270-1), but is found in d'Auvergne's account of the campaign of 1693 (pp. 91-5).

Thomas Erle's regiments

Students of the British army of the late 17th and early 18th centuries will know that in those days regiments were usually single battalion organizations. That means that the strength of a regiment matches that of a battalion: somewhere between 600 and 800 men divided into about a dozen companies.

There were, of course, exceptions. Most prominent are the regiments of foot guards. These regiments had a larger number of companies, with a somewhat larger establishment, and could, probably therefor, spawn several battalions to serve somewhere.

(Here I explicitly void using the phrasing 'split into several battalions'. From literature it seems that the battalion was foremost an ad-hoc tactical formation. The concept of a battalion as a permanent administrative entity was something for the future. Thus, a regiment of foot guards, say the Coldstreams with 14 companies, could be divided into two battalions in the field or for manoeuvres. But this does not apply that something existed as a 1st and 2nd Battalion.)


One famous general of the Nine Years' War and War of the Spanish Succession was Thomas Erle. In the spring of 1689, when the English army was increased in size, Erle was given a colonelcy of one of the newly raised regiments. It was quite exceptional that he would obtain the colonelcy of yet another regiment in January 1691, namely the regiment of the late Francis Luttrell (the future Green Howards of North Yorkshire). This regiment was raised in November 1688, immediately after the Dutch invasion and in support of William III.

(Erle's first regiment served in Ireland until 1691, and was in garrison in Plymouth(?) afterwards. It also took part in the abortive action against Brest in 1694. His second regiment, Luttrell's, was in Plymouth until 1692 when it proceeded to Flanders for the rest of the war.)

Now is becomes a little tricky how these regiments were related to each other. Some sources state that Erle's first regiment was sometimes known as the 2nd Battalion of his (larger) regiment (because is was junior to his second regiment). Probably this is a modern day interpretation (imposing modern concepts on the past).

From the Calendar of State Papers Domestic a few things become (more or less) clear:
1. Commissions in the regiment of Erle do not differentiate between one of the two regiments. So it seems that both regiments were combined as a new regiment, or that is was treated as one.
2. There is no reference to a 1st or 2nd battalion. However, there is sometimes reference to 'his other regiment'.

A few snippets:
On 22 March 1692 we find

  John Pitt, clerk, to be chaplain of the Irish battalion belonging to Col. Thomas Earle's regiment of foot.

and on 12 April 1692, related to the weak garrison of Plymouth

There now are only ten companies of Colonel Earle's regiment in garrison at Plymouth, which by reason of the great drafts for his other regiment lately gone to Flanders, which was recruited out of this, are very weak, and most of them newly raised men.

Finally, on 28 April 1694, probably in preparation of the Camaret Bay operation

Whereas the following several battalions and regiments of foot are to encamp near Portsmouth, viz.: one battalion detached out of our first, second, and Dutch regiments of foot guards; thirteen companies of Colonel Earle's regiment, Lord Cutts' whole regiment, and Colonel Venner's whole regiment; the said battalions and regiments [...]

This last quote illustrates, in my opinion, that Erle's regiment was larger than the usual 13 companies to a regiment. In the yearly estimates for the army presented to Parliament both regiments/battalions of Erle are listed separately, however. One with the additional 'formerly Luttrell's', and the other with 'from Ireland'.

English intervention in Catalonia

Thanks to Rampjaar, who pointed me at the following publication:

God save Catalonia

See also this link for more details (which points to the
http://desperta-ferro-ed.blogspot.com/ blog). It is good to have more publications on this somewhat forgotten theater of the War of the Spanish Succession.

The Battle of the Dunes

Fought 14 June 1658 as part of the Franco-Spanish War, with Royalists fighting in the Spanish army, and a Parliamentarian corps fighting with the French. So, probably this battle can be considered as the last battle of the English Civil War.

In the Digitales Archiv Marburg a nice copper engraving of the battle. The Spanish army is at the top, and the French army at the bottom of the engraving. The English Royalist regiments are on the Spanish right wing in the first line of battle (near 2, who is the Duke of York). Several of the Parliamentarian regiments are on the French left (F, who is Sir William Lockhart), thus facing the Royalists.



Several English regiments fought in this battle, on both sides, which would form the basis of the Restoration Army of 1660-61.

Standing Army 1685

The university library of Utrecht appears to have the Manuscripts of the House of Lords for the 17th century. In the volumes for 1689-90 and 1695-97 some information about army estimates and regiments to be raised is given (as per references found elsewhere). However, these two volumes appear to have gone AWOL during some reorganization ....

Nevertheless, the volume for 1697-99 has one page showing the state of the army as it was in November 1685. This was delivered to the House of Lords 24 January 1699. Probably this list has to do with the debates going on at that time about the disbandment of the army, and the future size of the standing army.

Economizing the army in 1690?

Fresh from the library, the article Fluctuations in the Strength of Forces in English Pay sent to Flanders during the Nine Years' War, 1688 - 1697, by David Chandler, and published in 1983 in War & Society, Vol.1, No. 2 pp.1-20.

As usual, William of Orange had to battle with Parliament each year to get the money he needed to maintain the army at a strength deemed necessary to fight Louis XIV. As a measure to reduce costs, it was suggested by Count Solms to merge three regiments into one single regiment composed of three battalions with eight companies each. This would save a little money, and make available some 4,266 men for new units.

However, the plan fell on stony ground and the idea was never made effective. Probably the opponents of this plan were too deeply involved in the profitable business of the English regimental system...

Battalion sent to Virginia

In the previous post two emergency regiments were detailed. Subject of this post is a battalion formed for service in the New World, and which would be known as the battalion sent to Virginia.

The formation of this battalion relates to Bacon's Rebellion of 1676. To quell this rebellion a battalion was formed by taking companies from existing regiments: two companies from the 1st Regiment of Foot Guards, and one each from the Coldstream Regiment of Foot Guards, the Duke of York's Regiment, and the Holland Regiment. The battalion was furthermore brought up to strength by drafts from garrision companies, and 500 men were recruited additionally: 1,000 men in total. The battalion may have been called the Virginia Regiment. It was commanded by Herbert Jeffreys, who would become governour of Virginia in 1677, replacing William Berkeley.

The battalion arrived in the James River between February and April 1677, too late to have any part in the conflict. Nevertheless, the battalion remained in Virginia for the greater part of 1677, though Charles II ordered Jeffreys in May 1677 to return to England. It was not before March 1678 that the first elements embarked at Gravesend. Of the initial 1,000 men, approximately 350 show on the muster rolls. However, almost 200 men decided to stay in Virginia, but this still makes an appalling loss of some 450 men without seeing any action.

Precedence - commentaries on the 1694 Warrant

With some comments on the previous post on the 1694 Warrant on precedence in mind, the author thought it necessary to publish a supporting article with additional comments and remarks.

In the said warrant the Queen's Regt of Foot is mentioned, after which the three English Regt's previously serving in Holland should take precedence. As there were various regiments known as the Queen's Regt, or some other form, in the late 17th century, this may give rise to confusion.

The Queen's Regiment mentioned here is what would later become the 4th (the King's Own) Regiment of Foot, and eventually the King's Own (Royal Lancaster Regiment). Raised on 13 July 1680 as the 2nd Tangier Regiment, it was named in 1684 after the future Queen Mary (of Modena), the wife of the duke of York and Albany, the future James II. In 1688 the regiment was renamed as the Queen's Consort's after Queen Mary II, consort of William III. It appears from literature that the designation Consort was omitted; see, e.g., the regiment's historical record by Richard Cannon. In 1702 it was renamed the Queen's Regiment. This changed to Queen's Own Regiment later, probably to avoid confusion with the other Queen's Regiment, the future King's Regiment.

The other regiment in 1694 with Queen in its title was the Queen Dowager's Regiment, named after Queen Catherine, widow of Charles II. This regiment was raised in 1661 as the Tangier Regiment. The title "Royal" was conferred upon the regiment in 1703 for gallant duty in Flanders. It is unclear whether the regiment was redesignated the Queen's Royal in 1705, after the demise of the late Queen Catherine, or that this happened later (see, e.g., the regimental timeline on the Queen's Royal Surrey's website).

Now to the three English Regiments from Holland. These three regiments were part of the Anglo - Dutch Brigade, which additionally contained three Scots Regiments. The English regiments all date from 1674, when, after the Treaty of Westminster, England was opened again as recruiting ground for the Dutch. (In 1665 the English regiments in Dutch service were recalled; see the Holland Regiment for information on this.) Actually one regiment was known as the Irish Regiment, but that was omitted in 1675.

In 1674/75 the regiments were:
Viscount Clare's, this being Daniel O'Brien, the 3rd viscount
Henry Lillingston's, being most likely the father of the later Luke Lillingston. Often these two are confused.
William Molyneux - Disney's

In 1685 the regiments were recalled to England by James II because of Monmouth's rebellion, and were placed on the English establishment for the period 5 June - 3 August. In November 1688 the regiments would return with William of Orange's invasion force, and be placed on the English establishment subsequently. In 1688 the regiments were known as:
Thomas Tollemache's
Philip Babbignton's
John Cutt's

Only the first two regiments would be retained after the Treaty of Rijswijk in 1697, and would become known as the 5th Regiment of Foot and 6th Regiment of Foot, respectively, and much later as the Northumberland Fusiliers and Royal Warwickshire Regiment.
As has been illustrated, the third regiment was disbanded, despite attempts saving it by placing the regiment on the Naval establishment. The reason for this is unclear, as the regiment held precedence over several regiments that were retained.

Finally the author want to point at a possible writing error in the document in the previous post: it says that in 1668 the earl of Ossory made a capitulation of the regiments in Holland. However, the earl of Ossory assumed command of the Anglo - Dutch Brigade in 1678. So probably it should be 1678 and not 1668.

Precedence - the 1694 Royal Warrant

For those interested, here is the full text of the Royal Warrant of 10 June 1694 laying down rules for establishing rank and seniority. Besides the rules, which clearly state that English regiments (i.e., regiments on the English establishment) take precedence over Scots and Irish, there is a list of regiments in Flanders.



(Page comes from the National Archives, reference WO 71/2 p.106 (and was dug up and copied by mr Mike Shingleton).)

Marine regiments -- converted foot

Besides the regiment of the Anglo - Dutch Brigade that was converted to marines, there were two other regiments of foot that saw conversion into marines in 1698. Like for Seymour's Regiment, this was probably an attempt to save them from disbandment by placing them on the Naval Establishment. And like Seymour's, these two were also disbanded on 20 May 1699. These regiments were those of Edward Dutton Colt and Henry Mordaunt.

The first was formed 10 March 1688 under James II and was chiefly officered by those that had left the British regiments in service of the Dutch United - Provinces and was commanded by John Hales. He was succeeded on 26 September 1692 by Robert Goodwyn, and Colt became colonel on 31 October 1693.

The second regiment was formed 10 November 1688 and was one of the embryonic English regiments that was part of William of Orange's invasion force. Viscount Mordaunt was the first colonel of the regiment. He was succeeded 25 April 1694 by his younger brother Henry or Harry Mordaunt. Though his regiment was disbanded in 1699, Henry Mordaunt became colonel of a newly raised regiment of marines in 1702. He would remain colonel until the regiment was disbanded in July 1713.

William of Orange's expeditionary force - last chapter

In the previous articles on the infantry and cavalry components of the invasion army of the Prince of Orange the most important part of this army is covered. Of a total size of the invasion army of 21,000 men, these Dutch regiments (including the English and Scots) amounted to a little over 15,000. This leaves approximately 6,000 men unaccounted for in one of the regiments detailed previously.

These men can be clarified as follows:
- The invasion force contained a train of artillery (twenty-one 24 pounders), a detachment of engineers with pontoon bridges, and a mobile forge. Furthermore, there would have been men assigned to commissariat tasks.
- Approximately one-fifth of the invasion force consisted of Huguenot refugees. Part of them were on the strength of regiments mentioned earlier, but the remainders served as supernumeraries or volunteers.
- In most literature the presence of foreign detachments is mentioned: contingents from Sweden, Brandenburg, Switzerland. Some literature makes mention of "Finnish soldiers clad in bearskins", which according to the author is an urban legend: one of the Danish regiments that entered English service in 1689 was recruited from the island of Funen, called the Fynske Regiment. This may easily be confused for being a Finnish unit. (This apart from the fact that Finland did not exist as an independent state in the 17th century ...)
- According to John Childs in his monograph on the British Army under James II there were also several embryonic English regiments part of the invasion force. These were regiments commanded by: Sir John Guise, Sir Rowland Gwynn, Sir Richard Buckley, Sir Robert Peyton, Lord Richard Coote (possibly the later 1st Earl of Bellamont), Lord Charles Mordaunt (3rd Earl of Peterborough), and (1st) Earl of Macclesfield. Only the regiments of Guise, Peyton (future Lancashire Fusiliers), and Mordaunt seem to have survived after the invasion, and information on the remainder is not found at present.

The total size of the expeditionary force was some 40,000 men. Of these 21,000 are found in the invasion army itself, as detailed previously. Some 9,100 men were serving on the war ships, and the remaining 10,000 were manning the approximately 500 transport ships.

Mystery regiments of 1662

In Dalton's English Army Lists and Commission Register one will find several regiments raised in 1662 that have no clear context that justifies their formation. Also the dates of disbandment or disembodiment is unclear. This unlike the regiments raised for the Second and Third Anglo - Dutch Wars in 1667 and 1672/73, respectively.

The regiments were formed on 1 September 1662, and there seemed to be three regiments of horse, and two of foot. In the Calendar of State Papers Domestic a little is found, most notably the commissions to the five colonels in September 1662. The foot seem to disappear, but for the horse some bits are found during 1666.

Earl of Cleveland's Regiment of Horse
Cleveland got colonelcy of an old Parliamentary regiment of foot in 1660 during the restoration.

Earl of Lindsey's Regiment of Horse

Earl of Northampton's Regiment of Horse
Like Cleveland, Northampton gained the colonelcy of a Parliamentary regiment of foot in 1660.

Earl of Craven's Regiment of Foot
Commanded at the same time an English regiment in Dutch service. In 1670 Craven would assume command of the Coldstream Regiment of Foot Guards.

Sir William Killigrew's Regiment of Foot
Commanded at the same time an English regiment in Dutch service. In 1664 Killigrew would be colonel of the first marine regiment in the British Army.

To the author some questions come to mind:

1. To what reason were these regiment levied? The Restoration period is not characterized by deliberate raising of regiments, unless there was a war.
2. May the raising of these regiment relate to suspected uprisings, like the Venner riots in early 1661?
3. Are things being overlooked, and are these regiments simply regiments of militia?

The authors looks forward any discussion related to these regiments.

William of Orange's expeditionary force - horse and dragoons

Besides the fifteen infantry regiments a large contingent of cavalry formed part of the invasion force. The cavalry consisted of two regiments of dragoons, the Gardes du Corps and Regiment Gardes te Paard (Life Guards and Horse Guards, respectively), and 14 regiments of horse.
It should be noted that this latter number does not become apparent from literature directly. Het Staatsche Leger, Volume VI, pp. 126-128 gives a neat order of battle of the invasion force, and shows us 40 troops (called companies) of horse. In Het Staatsche Leger, Volume VII, pp. 426-428 another list is presented showing (Dutch) regiments that would stay in English pay and the regiments to return to Holland. Here 14 regiments of horse are shown: 9 in English pay with 27 troops between them, and 5 returning with the remaining 13 troops. Data presented here is based on this source. For more information, please see the Dutch Regiments website.

Gardes:
Gardes du Corps, the Life Guards which would stay in English pay until 1699.
Regiment Gardes te Paard, the Horse Guards commanded by Bentinck, the Earl of Portland which would be in English pay until 1699 as well.

Regiments of horse:
Regiment Waldeck, returned in 1689
Regiment Nassau - Saarbrücken (Usingen), returned in 1689
Regiment Ginkel would stay in English pay until 1697
Regiment Montpouillan, same as Ginkels
Regiment Obdam, returned in 1689
Regiment 's Gravenmoer which would stay in English pay until 1697
Regiment Flodrof, returned in 1689
Regiment Lippe stayed in English pay until 1697
Regiment Nassau - Zuylestein, also in English pay until 1697
Regiment Oyen, idem
Regiment Soppenbroek, idem
Regiment Heyden, returned in 1689 to Holland
Regiment Riedesel, in English pay until 1697
Regiment Schack, also in English pay until 1697

In Knoop: Krijgs en geschiedkundige beschouwingen over Willem den III reference is made to Regiment Kingma, whereas Oyen's is missing. However, Regiment Kingma was disbanded in June 1688. Probably Regiment Oyen took its place, but the author is not sure about that.

The regiments of dragoons:
Regiment Gardes Dragonders, stayed in English pay until 1698
Regiment Marwitz which would return to Holland in 1689.

William of Orange's expeditionary force - infantry

In total 15 regiments of infantry formed part of the invasion force. This included the Gardes te Voet consisting of 25 companies, the six regiments of the Anglo-Dutch Brigade, and eight other regiments of foot. According to Het Staatsche Leger (volume VI page 128) this added up to 11,212 men; the overview below is based on the list of regiments given in the previously mentioned reference. Future articles will discuss other aspects of the expeditionary force.

Regiments with no additional information returned early 1689 to Holland.

The regiments were:
Gardes te Voet consisting of three battalion with about 25 companies between them (this number varies in literature). This regiment would remain in English pay until 1699 and ranked as 3rd Foot Guards.
Regiment Wijnbergen
Regiment Birkenfeld
Regiment Holstein - Norburg
Regiment Fagel
Regiment Brandenburg, in English pay until 1697.
Regiment Nassau - Saarbrücken (Ottweiler), in English pay until 1697.
Regiment Hagedoorn
Regiment Bornig, in English pay until 1697.
Regiment Tollemache, English regiment in Dutch service. In English pay after 1688.
Regiment Babington, English regiment in Dutch service. In English pay after 1688. In Het Staatsche Leger called Regiment Bellasis. This is not entirely correct for late 1688 since on 7 April 1688 Philip Babington succeeded Sir Henry Bellasis as colonel.
Regiment Sidney but better known by under the name of its Colonel Commandant John Cutts. English regiment in Dutch service and in English pay after 1688. Again, Het Staatsche Leger does not show the correct colonel: on 17 April 1688 Henry Sidney, the future earl of Romney, succeeded Thomas, 8th Earl of Pembroke as colonel.
Regiment Mackay, one of the famous Scots regimnts in Dutch service. In English pay after 1688.
Regiment Balfour, another of the three Scots regiments, which also transferred into English pay after the revolution.
Regiment Ramsay, the third Scots regiment. In Het Staatsche Leger referred to as Wauchope's. However, that is not correct since Wauchope was one of the officers that returned to England following the recall of the English and Scots regiments in Dutch service by James II in March 1688. In England he commanded a Scots regiment in pay of Louis XIV which was composed chiefly of Roman Catholics and officered by officers previously in service of the Dutch States - General. Ramsay would later command the Scots Regiment of Foot Guards.

Thus 15 regiments, and 17 battalions in total. Of this number, 12 would remain in English pay until the end of the Nine Years' War.

Dutch names -- part II

In the first article on this subject the scope and limitations of this topic have been detailed. In this second (and last?) part some more Dutch name to be found in the English army are detailed.

Godard van Reede, heer van Ginckel
b.1644, d.1703. During the invasion of England in 1688, Ginckel was colonel of a Dutch regiment of horse. However, he is probably better known for his role as commander of the Williamite forces in Ireland from late 1690 until the surrender of Jacobites and the Treaty of Limerick. (which included the battles of Athlone and Aughrim). Later he would serve with distinction in Flanders, and in 1702 he became commandant of the Dutch forces serving under the Duke of Marlborough. For his services in Ireland he was created Earl of Athlone and Baron of Aughrim in 1692.

Arnold Joost van Keppel
b.1670, d.1718. Much younger than William of Orange, he nevertheless became a close and intimate friend. This, probably, caused some separation and cooling of the relationship between Bentinck and William of Orange. Keppel, as said being in the inner circle of William of Orange, was created Viscount Bury and Baron Ashford in 1696, and in 1697 he was also made Earl of Albemarle; the title still exists.
As for his military career, Albemarle became colonel of the 1st Troop of Horse Guards in 1699, a post he would held until 1710 when the 2nd Earl of Portland, the son of the aforementioned Bentinck, became colonel. As for other regiments, Albemarle assumed in 1701 command of a newly raised Swiss regiment in Dutch service. It may be of interest to note that this regiment went over to England during the Jacobite Rebellion of 1745 and took part in the battle of Culloden.

Arnold's son Willem (b.1702, d.1754) would serve in the British Army as well, and would be the (future) 29th Regiment of Foot (1731 - 33), the Coldstream Guards (1744 - 54), and the 3rd Troop of Horse Guards (1733 - 44).

Dutch names in English service

Following the Glorious Revolution of 1688, several Dutch officers that came with William of Orange were naturalized and/or were elevated to a peerage in England or Ireland. Several of these individuals held a colonelcy of a regiment during the war of Spanish Succession. With these several titles it is easy to confuse officers, and difficult to find someone (like the author experienced on more than a number of occasions!). Though all lineage and genealogy of men under consideration can be retrieved from online sources, the author thought it handy to have it all in on one page ('achterkant van een bierviltje'). As such, it is not the intention to provide extensive biographical details here. For this the author refers the reader to, e.g., the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. However, it is hoped that this little post will be of use to other people as well. Also, the scope of this article is limited to the period from the Glorious Revolution until the end of the War of Spanish Succession.

The author welcomes any remarks and comments on this article's contents and, more important, omissions.

Hans Willem, Baron Bentinck
b.1649, d.1709. Known foremost as a close and intimate friend of William III of Orange. Was colonel of the Regiment Gardes te Paard. In April 1689 he was created Baron Cirencester, Viscount Woodstock, and Earl of Portland being the title for which Bentinck is known best.

His second and eldest surviving son Hendrik (b.1682, d.1726) inherited the title 2nd Earl of Portland in 1709, and was in 1715 elevated as Duke of Portland and Marquess of Titchfield. In 1710 he assumed the colonelcy of the 1st Troop of Horse Guards.

Willem - Frederik van Nassau - Zuylestein
b.1649, d.1708. Another Dutch soldier closely related to William of Orange: Willem - Frederik's father was the illegitimate son of Frederik Hendrik van Nassau, the grandfather of William III of Orange. He commanded a regiment of horse during the Glorious Revolution and was naturalized afterwards. In 1695 he was created Baron Enfield, Viscount Tunbridge, and Earl of Rochford.

His eldest son William van Nassau van Zuylestein (b.1681?, d.1710) became the 2nd Earl of Rochford in 1708. Upon his father elevation to the peerage as earl, William was styled as Lord Tunbridge. Under that title we find an regiment of foot raised in 1706 and placed in the Irish Establishment. In 1707 he took command of a regiment of dragoons in Spain, and was killed at the battle of Almenara on 27 July 1710.

Another son, Maurits (b.1685, d.1720), or Maurice in English, took command of a regiment of foot in 1711, that has been raised in 1704 in Ireland.

Hendrik, graaf van Nassau - Ouwerkerk
b.1640, d.1708. Also closely related to William III (Hendrik's father was an illegitimate son of Maurits van Nassau, Prins van Oranje, being a great - uncle of William III), and was colonel of the Gardes du Corps (Life Guards) between 1672 and 1708. Following the invasion of England in 1688, he was naturalized. He was, however, not elevated to a peerage. In English his name is usually spelled as Overkirk. In Dalton (see the blog's bibliography) he is listed under the French version de Nassau d'Auverquerque however.

His second son Hendrik (b.1673, d.1754) was created Earl of Grantham, Viscount Boston and Baron Alford in 1698.

His youngest son Frans (b.1682, d.1710) (in Dalton listed as François de Nassau d'Auverquerque) raised a regiment of foot in 1706, and in 1707 assumed command of a regiment of dragoons in Spain raised by the 3rd Earl of Peterborough. He would be killed in the battle of Almenara on 27 July 1710 as well.


The Earl of Athlone and and the Earl of Albemarle are subject of a second article.

Precedence - the 1694 rules set by William III

In 1694 a new set of rules was laid down, by Royal Warrant of 10 June 1694, for determining the precedence of regiments serving in the Low Countries. Regiments from the English, Scots and Irish Establishments serving together, in combination with Huguenot regiments and regiments that had been in service of the Dutch Republic, should give rise to debates on each others relative ranking. Hence, several rules were made to overcome this problem. These rules would be used well into the 20th century to settle and seniority of regiments.

The new rules discarded the old which states that a regiment would rank from the day of its raising, and stipulated:

1. An English regiment shall take precedence before all others;
2. An Irish regiment shall have rank from the day is comes upon the English Establishment, and it would not lose it when being returned to Ireland or placed on the Irish Establishment;
3. A Scots regiment entering the English Establishment shall have rank from that time;
4. Any other regiment, regardless of nationality, being raised in England shall have rank from time of raising;
5. This settled the rank for the three English regiment previously part of the Anglo-Dutch Brigade: the three regiments shall rank immediately after the Queen's Regiment of Foot, the future King's Own Royal Regiment.

So, this explains why the future Royal Northumberland Fusiliers and the Royal Warwickshire Regiment ranked as 5th and 6th, respectively.

Also, though the Royal Scots Fusiliers date from 1678, they did not enter the English Establishment until late 1688 and were thus ranked after the regiments raised much later. Likewise, the Royal Scots Greys were ranked as 4th(!) until the close of the War of Spanish Succession for the same reason. Reference has been made to the influence of colonels on the board determining precedence in an earlier article, and this is how the Royal Scots Greys became ranked as 2nd, and kept that rank.