DOCSLIB.ORG

Whitworth 1.5-Inch Breechloading Rifle

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Whitworth 1.5-Inch Breechloading Rifle Presentation for Chesapeake Chapter, Company of Military Historians, Alexandria, VA 12/1/2012 “A Few Guns and Their Stories”* By John Morris *All weapons described will be available for inspection at the presentation The numbered weapons below are those discussed in this presentation 1. Gen. Ulrich Schellenberg’s Bronze Hackbut ca. 1510 • Bronze hackbut barrel, had tinder snap-lock, features unusually extensive decoration • COA, identified by officials at Library of Congress, is that of Austrian Gen. Ulrich Schellenberg • Schellenberg employed by Emperor Maximillian, then King Charles V in Italian wars ca. 1515 • Schellenberg, a lawyer who preferred military service, led up to 15,000 Swiss mercenaries fighting for Holy Roman Empire • The Hackbut was likely purchased by Schellenberg for use by his mercenaries • Provenance: late W. Keith Neale, prominent Guernsey arms dealer, to late Company Fellow Hampton P. Howell, jr. Schellenberg Coat of Arms on Hackbut Ulrich Schellenberg Ulrich Schellenberg’s Sword (Kunsthistoriches Museum, Vienna) Double-Hackbut (Doppfelhaken) complete (Germanischesmuseum, Nuremberg) Battle of Pavia, 1525 2. Spanish Bronze Siege Mortar “EL GAVILAN” Taken from CSA in 1862 • Cast at Royal Cannon Foundry in Barcelona,1750, by master founder Joseph Barnola (marked accordingly). • Named “EL GAVILAN” (The Chicken Hawk), name is in banner on top of piece • One 6” Mortar listed individually in all “Dotacion” inventories at Castillo de San Marcos, St. Augustine FL, from about 1780-1834 • Formal treaty OF 1821 between Spain and the U.S, ceding Florida to the US, mentions that two bronze mortars, one 7-inch* and one 11-inch*, to become US property. • Confederates move some ordnance from Ft. Marion (former Castillo) to Fernandina in 1861-2 • Muzzle inscribed with capture info CAPTURED BY RER. AD. DUPONT, FERNANDINA FLA FEB 3, 1862 (exact date is incorrect, should be March 8.) • Ship’s Deck Log for USS FLAG, 3/8/1862 mentions receiving two mortars from a ship’s boat returning from Fernandina; undoubtedly those mortars were EL GAVILAN (7”) and EL ICARO (11”.) • A Spanish 11” mortar at Castillo de San Marcos (EL ICARO) bears identical engraved inscription • Mortar displayed at Washington Navy Yard Ordnance Museum, from 1862 until it closed in ? (see Brady photo of mortar outside museum.) • Navy needed space in 1959; sold metal including the two captured Spanish mortars to local scrapyard. • Mortar ended up in collection of Santa Monica, CA collector Frank Bivins. – Spain’s system of measures changed in about 1812, so 6 inch pre-1812=7 inch afterward “El Gavilan” is the 6” Mortar Shown in this Table from Manucy’s “Artillery Through the Ages” 6-in mortar- Report of the State of the Artillery at St. Augustine, FL for year of 1790 Gunpowder Status Report (unrelated to my topic, but I think it’s neat) 20 June 1821, US Commissioner to Spanish Commissioner “Brass Mortars: 11 inch,1; 7 inch,1” Deck Log, USS Flag, 8 March 1862 USS Flag, 8 March 1862 3. Spanish-Made/British-Used Trophy Mountain Gun of Lt. Wm. L. Robe • Bronze Mountain Gun ca. 1790, Spanish-made • British Lt. Robe successfully employed this gun against French at Battle of Nivelle, 1813 • Lt. Robe’s father and several brothers were in the British Army • The cannon was etched/engraved to become a trophy presented to Lt. Robe’s father after the Lt. was killed at Waterloo The presentation inscription reads: BROUGHT OUT OF THE FIELD AT THE BATTLE OF NIVELLE 10TH NOVR. 1813 BY LIEUT. WM. L. ROBE OF THE RL HORSE ARTILLERY GIVEN TO HIS FATHER BY THE EARL OF MULGRAVE MASTER GENL OF THE ORDNANCE Addendum for Lt. Robe trophy cannon • The donor of this cannon, General Sir Henry Phipps, 1st Earl of Mulgrave, GCB PC (1755-1831) was Foreign Secretary 1805-06, First Lord of the Admiralty 1807-10 and Master General of the Ordnance 1810-18. Its recipient, Colonel Sir William Robe KCB, KCH (1765-1820), served in the West Indies and Canada in the 1780s, in Flanders 1793-94 and 1799 and at Copenhagen in 1807. In 1808 he went to Portugal to command the artillery in Sir Arthur Wellesley's first expedition and, between 1809 and until being invalided home following a severe wound late in 1812, served as a lieutenant-colonel of artillery in numerous battles and sieges in the Peninsular War, eventually receiving the Army Gold Cross with one clasp and being created a Knight of the Portuguese Order of the Tower and Sword (Stearn, 2004). Robe's eldest son, William Livingstone Robe, entered the Royal Military Academy Woolwich as a cadet in 1805 and was commissioned second lieutenant in the Royal Artillery in 1807, immediately joining an expedition to Göteborg and subsequently being posted to Gibraltar. From Gibraltar, he volunteered for service in Portugal, was promoted first lieutenant in June 1808 and joined his father in time to see his first action at the Battle of Vimeiro, 21st August 1808. After accompanying the army on the retreat to Corunna in 1809, Robe returned to the Peninsula to see his next action at the Battle of Pombal, 11th March 1811, and between that date and the ending of the Peninsular War in 1814 was in action against the enemy some thirty times, at the battles of Fuentes d'Oñoro, Badajoz, Salamanca, Nivelle and Nive as well as at lesser-known engagements. Late in 1813, Wellington began planning his assault upon France via the Pyrenees. His artillery commanders, realising that light guns would be needed to deploy in very mountainous terrain in support of the infantry, sought such weapons in order to form a small detachment of 'mountain artillery'. As the regimental historian records: 'Marshal Beresford brought a few 3-pounders from Lisbon; but it was found almost impossible to procure mules for them. Three guns of the same calibre, which had been taken from the French, had been temporarily equipped for single draught, and placed under the command of Lieutenant Robe, the son of the gallant officer who commanded at Roliça and Vimiera...A medley equipment was found for the guns brought from Lisbon, - the Artillery-men being Portuguese, but the drivers and mules being British. These guns were carried on the backs of the mules, and three of them were added to Lieutenant Robe's command.' (Duncan, 1873, p. 376) Robe's effective use of his mountain guns at the Battle of Nivelle, 10th November 1813, was such that his services were commended in dispatches by the Commander Royal Artillery, Lieutenant-Colonel Alexander Dickson, by Robe's divisional commander, Lieutenant-General Sir Henry Clinton KB, and ultimately by the Army commander, the then Marquess of Wellington. Dickson reportedly wrote, 'the mountain guns under Lieutenant Robe, and the Portuguese guns of similar calibre, were most active and useful, accompanying their respective corps during the day, and supporting the advance of their light troops.' (Duncan, 1873, p. 379). In a report to his corps commander, Lieutenant-General Sir Rowland Hill KB, of 11th November 1813 Clinton wrote: '...I must not omit to mention the good conduct of Lieutenant Robe of the Royal Artillery, who had been attached to the 6th division [Clinton's] in the command of the brigade of mountain guns: this officer by great exertion succeeded in getting his guns up to the height, and rendered himself useful in cannonading the enemy as the 2nd division drove him [the enemy] along his position.' (Wellington, 1861, p. 359). Hill sent Clinton's report to Wellington, who duly mentioned Robe in his dispatch of 13th November 1813 to Lord Bathurst, Secretary of State for War. Wellington's dispatch was printed in The London Gazette of 25th November 1813 and singled out for mention 'three mountain guns, under Lieutenant Robe' as being an effective part of Hill's corps on the British right flank. Later in the same dispatch, after recording the capture of 'fifty-one pieces of cannon', Wellington wrote: 'The artillery which was in the field was of great use to us; and I cannot sufficiently acknowledge the intelligence and activity with which it was brought to the point of attack, under the direction of Colonel Dickson, over bad roads through the mountains at this season of the year.' (Duncan, 1873, p. 379). Battle of Nivelle 4. Spanish Bronze Pedrero Taken by Gen. F.D. Grant, Philippines, 1902 • Typical very light Spanish bronze gun used as swivel or carriage gun • Probably fired canister –type ammunition; this one was still loaded with nails, glass, etc. when plundered ca. 1950 • Marking is “R” for “Real” (meaning Spanish Royal Property) and “73 ½” for weight • Gun came on huge, heavy 4-wheeled carriage custom-made for it (photo follows) • Gun found among Spanish equipment left in Philippines after Spanish departure in 1898. • Spanish property inventory assigned to Filipino Gen. Antonino M. Guevara (initials AMG) who had an engraver friend apply his initials to the piece • Piece surrendered by Guevara to Gen. Grant at Samar, 1902. • Gen. Grant gave the piece to friend Elihu Root, Sec. of War. Piece was found in the Root summer home in Clinton, NY., along with other Philippine Insurrection artifacts • Artifacts including cannon acquired from Grant descendents, the Griffiths family, in 1980’s • Brief biography of Gen. Guevara is appended to presentation Pedrero marked “AMG” on Original Carriage Grant-Root-Griffiths Family Connections Elihu Root (1845-1937) Sec. of War 1899-1904, Sec. of State 1905-1909, Nobel Peace Prize Winner… Elihu Root's daughter Edith married U.S. Grant III, and their daughter Edith Grant married D.W. Griffiths; her stepson R.F. Griffiths was a member of Hamilton College class of 1940. Here's a summary of info about that house variously known as the Root House, the Grant House, and now the Elihu Root House: • 1893, purchased by Elihu Root • 1937, home of Edith Root Grant and Ulysses S.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • La Guerra De La Independencia: Una Visión Militar. Revista De Historia
    T167-09 Port RHM Extra.fh11 9/2/10 08:50 Pgina 1 C M Y CM MY CY CMY K AÑO LIII Núm. EXTRA REVISTA DE HISTORIA MILITAR DE HISTORIA REVISTA 2009 Composicin NUESTRA PORTADA: Anverso del díptico correspomdiente al Ciclo de Conferencias «La Guerra de la Independencia. Una visión militar», celebrado en el Instituto de Historia y Cultura Militar durante el mes de octubre de 2008. instituto DE historia Y CULTURA MILitar Año LIII 2009 Núm. Extraordinario Los artículos y documentos de esta Revista no pueden ser traducidos ni reproducidos sin la autorización previa y escrita del Instituto de Historia y Cultura Militar. La Revista declina en los autores la total responsabilidad de sus opiniones. CATÁLOGO GENERAL DE PUBLICACIONES OFICIALES http://www.060.es Edita: NIPO: 076-09-090-7 (edición en papel) NIPO: 076-09-091-2 (edición en línea) ISSN: 0482-5748 Depósito Legal: M-7667-1958 Imprime: Imprenta del Ministerio de Defensa Tirada: 1.200 ejemplares Fecha de edición: enero, 2010 NORMAS PARA LA PUBLICACIÓN DE ORIGINALES La Revista de Historia Militar es una publicación del Instituto de Historia y Cultura Militar. Su periodicidad es semestral y su volumen, generalmente, de doscientas ochenta y ocho páginas. Puede colaborar en ella todo escritor, militar o civil, español o extranjero, que se interese por los temas históricos relacionados con la institución militar y la profesión de las armas. En sus páginas encontrarán acogida los trabajos que versen sobre el pensamiento militar a lo largo de la historia, deontología y orgánica militar, instituciones, acontecimientos bélicos, personalidades militares destacadas y usos y costumbres del pasado, particularmente si contienen enseñanzas o antecedentes provechosos para el militar de hoy, el estudioso de la historia y jóvenes investigadores.
    [Show full text]
  • Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Dickson Nick Lipscombe Msc, Frhists
    “Wellington’s Gunner in the Peninsula” – Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Dickson Nick Lipscombe MSc, FRHistS INTRODUCTION Wellington was, without doubt, a brilliant field commander but his leadership style was abrupt and occasionally uncompromising. He despised gratuitous advice and selected his close personal staff accordingly. He trained his infantry generals as divisional commanders but not army commanders; of his cavalry commanders he had little time often pouring scorn on their inability to control their units and formations in battle; but it was his artillery commanders that he kept at arm’s-length, suspicious of their different chain of higher command and, in consequence, their motives. One gunner officer was to break through this barrier of distrust, he was a mere captain but by the end of the war he was to become the commander of all the allied artillery succeeding to what was properly a major general’s command. EARLY LIFE 1777-1793 Alexander Dickson was born on the 3rd June 1777, the third son of Admiral William Dickson and Jane Collingwood of Sydenham House, Roxburghshire. There is little information regarding his childhood and it is difficult to paint an accurate picture from his marvellous diaries, or the ‘Dickson Manuscripts’1 as they are known. By the time Dickson commences his peninsular diaries, at the age of 32 and in his 15th year of army service, both his parents and two of his older brothers had died. His mother was to die when he was only five, and as the young Dickson was coming to terms with this tragedy his oldest brother James also died, aged just fifteen.
    [Show full text]
  • Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Dickson by Colonel Nick Lipscombe
    “Wellington’s Gunner in the Peninsula” – Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Dickson By Colonel Nick Lipscombe INTRODUCTION Wellington was, without doubt, a brilliant field commander but his leadership style was abrupt and occasionally uncompromising. He despised gratuitous advice and selected his close personal staff accordingly. He trained his infantry generals as divisional commanders but not army commanders; of his cavalry commanders he had little time often pouring scorn on their inability to control their units and formations in battle; but it was his artillery commanders that he kept at arm’s-length, suspicious of their different chain of higher command and, in consequence, their motives. One gunner officer was to break through this barrier of distrust, he was a mere captain but by the end of the war he was to become the commander of all the allied artillery succeeding to what was properly a major general’s command. EARLY LIFE 1777-1793 Alexander Dickson was born on the 3rd June 1777, the third son of Admiral William Dickson and Jane Collingwood of Sydenham House, Roxburghshire. There is little information regarding his childhood and it is difficult to paint an accurate picture from his marvellous diaries, or the ‘Dickson Manuscripts’1 as they are known. By the time Dickson commences his peninsular diaries, at the age of 32 and in his 15th year of army service, both his parents and two of his older brothers had died. His mother was to die when he was only five, and as the young Dickson was coming to terms with this tragedy his oldest brother James also died, aged just fifteen.
    [Show full text]
  • TITLE: #Docref=WP1/227 Letters to the Duke 2 January 1809 - 11 January 1809 ..CONTENTS: a Bundle of Papers, Labelled "Letters to F.M
    ..TITLE: #Docref=WP1/227 Letters to the Duke 2 January 1809 - 11 January 1809 ..CONTENTS: A bundle of papers, labelled "Letters to F.M. the Duke of Wellington", 2 January 1809 - 11 January 1809 [incorrectly docketed 1 - 12 January]. The papers are numbered WP1/227/1-10 and have been catalogued individually. #Bdate=02/01/1809 #Adate=11/01/1809 ..TITLE: #Docref=WP1/227/1 Letter from Lord Castlereagh to Sir Arthur Wellesley sending a report of instructions from Marshal Berthier to Marshal Soult, 2 January 1809 ..CONTENTS: Letter from Robert Stewart, Viscount Castlereagh, [Secretary of State for War and the Colonies], to [Lieutenant General] Sir Arthur Wellesley: [Transcript] "The inclosed is the contents of Bertier's letters. Moore is gone against Soult. Our army is in excellent health, well supplied and in good spirits and the weather is good. We think that Soult will be off and Moore cannot go so far as to risk his retreat to the passes of Astorga. Bonaparte will of course be at his rear. This manoeuvre may [f.1v] save Portugal for a time, though Cradock will have his hands full. Is it possible to maintain the northern provinces for six months. This would give time." 2 Jan 1809 #Adate=02/01/1809 Enclosed are: (i) a "Purport of Marshal Berthier's instructions to Marshal Soult", Chamartin, Spain: [Transcript] [f.3r] "He is to have under his orders: First brigade, the 8th Regiment of Dragoons, 22nd of Chasseurs: General De Valle Second brigade, Regiment de Tascher, Regiment Hanoverian: General Franceschi First division de Morle, first division Menton: infantry With these he is ordered to make himself master of Leon, drive the enemy into Gallicia and take possesion of Benavente and Zamora and the Asturias.
    [Show full text]
  • British Artillery Battalions and the Men Who Led Them 1793-1815
    The Napoleon Series British Artillery Battalions and the Men Who Led Them 1793-1815 By Steve Brown Royal Horse Artillery 1793: 1st February – A & B Troops formed at Woolwich 1793: 1st November – C & D Troops formed at Woolwich 1794: 1st November – E & F Troops formed at Woolwich 1804: September – G Troop formed in Ireland 1804: June – H Troop formed at Woolwich 1805: 1st February – I Troop formed at Colchester 1805: 1st February – K Troop formed at Ballinasloe (Ireland) 1805: July – L & M Troops formed at Woolwich 1813: Rocket detachments formed (later named 2nd Rocket Troop) 1813: December – 1st Rocket Troop formed at Woolwich 1815: April – M Troop disbanded 1816: July – D, K, L & 2nd Rocket Troops reduced 1819: February – B Troop disbanded 1819: December – H Troop disbanded 1855: Board of Ordinance abolished, Royal Artillery transferred to War Office 1859: Battalion renamed brigades, companies renamed batteries 1924: Became part of the Royal Regiment of Artillery 1936: Brigades renamed Regiments 1947: Permanent numbers allotted to batteries. Colonels-Commandant 1801: James Pattison 1805: Duncan Drummond 1806: Vaughan Lloyd Colonels / Colonels en Second 1793: 1 November - Ellis Walker 1795: 6 March - Vaughan Lloyd 1800: 12 November - Thomas Blomefield 1804: 20 July - John Macleod, GCH 1805: 29 December - Sir Edward Howorth 1814: 20 December - Sir Hoylett Framingham Lieutenant-Colonels 1793: 17 January - Vaughan Lloyd 1795: Thomas Paterson 1795: John Lemoine 1796: Orlando Manley 1796: Robert Lawson 1797: 21 August - John Macleod 1801: Sir Francis Whitworth 1802: Edward Howorth 1804: James M. Hadden 1805: John Harding 1806: George Cookson 1806: George William Dixon 1806: 3 December - Benjamin Blomefield 1808: 1 February - Sir George Adam Wood, Kt.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Sieges of Ciudad Rodrigo 1810 & 1812 Within the Spectrum of Modern Military Conflict, Siege Warfare Is All but Defunct
    The Sieges of Ciudad Rodrigo 1810 & 1812 Within the spectrum of modern military conflict, siege warfare is all but defunct. The rise of the nation state on the one hand, and advances in weapon technology on the other, led to inter alia, greater mobility in both the attitude and execution of warfare. Napoleon, citing Frederic the Great as his source, established self-contained fighting formations and capitalised on the concept of manoeuvre; and Clausewitz, in his work Vom Krieg, provided the doctrinal endorsement. Nevertheless, during the Napoleonic era, siege warfare remained an essential tool and the struggle in Iberia, particularly on the Portuguese-Spanish border, provides appropriate illustration. The border forts at Almeida, Badajoz and Ciudad Rodrigo were captured and recaptured throughout the six years of war; Iberian topography dictated that these structures could not be masked or bypassed in the prosecution of campaign objectives. Ciudad Rodrigo was besieged and captured by the French in 1810 and then recaptured by the allies in 1812; both sieges opened distinct chapters in the war, the 3rd French Invasion of Portugal for the former and the Salamanca Campaign for the latter. Both sieges were a success for the attacker; the outcome, therefore, was the same but the dynamics and processes of reaching that goal could not have been more dissimilar. Current British Military Doctrine would seem an odd tool with which to examine and gauge those dissimilarities and yet the three components of fighting power, conceptual, physical and moral, are an ideal apparatus. Figure 1: The Components of Fighting Power ~ Applicability to Siege Warfare in the Peninsular War.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 1: the Archaeology
    Appendix 1: The Archaeology Employ the word ‘archaeology’ and a vision is instantly conjured up of Neolithic hand axes, Bronze-Age swords and Roman coins. For this the reason is very simple: in brief, until comparatively recently archaeology was a discipline that focused on the ancient world, the most that could be expected of it otherwise being the occasional foray into the mediaeval period. In Spain in particular, meanwhile, the emergence of archaeology as a modern scientific discipline has arguably been slower than elsewhere: thus, such departments of archaeology as exist are in many instances comparatively recent in their foundation. Put these factors together and add in the fact that one of the legacies of the Franco era was a rooted aversion among the academic community to all things military, and the result is that the archaeology of the Peninsular War is a subject that is very much in its infancy, and this at a time when conflict archaeology in general, and the conflict archaeology of the Napoleonic Wars in particular, have been making steady progress, as witness the discovery and systematic investigation of a mass grave in the Lithuanian city of Vilnius that proved to contain the remains of 2,000 French soldiers who had succumbed to typhus in the wake of the Retreat from Moscow.1 Still worse, the task of achieving similar progress in Spain is one whose path is rendered extremely problematic by a variety of different issues. In the first place, it is only in recent years – the key date is 1985, that year seeing the passage of the crucial
    [Show full text]
  • HENRY SHRAPNEL and FAMILY MG 24, F 113 Finding Aid No. 1777
    Manuscript Division des Division manuscrits HENRY SHRAPNEL AND FAMILY MG 24, F 113 Finding Aid No. 1777 / Instrument de recherche no 1777 Prepared by Timothy Dubé Préparé par Timothy Dubé of the State and Military Archives du Programme des Archives de l'état Program in 1989 and revised in 1994 et des armées en 1989 et révisé en 1994 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ..............iii-iv Calendar Series I: Henry Shrapnel Original Inventory........... 1 Commissions of Henry Shrapnel........ 1 Correspondence and Reports Relating to the Design and Testing of Shrapnel Shells........ 2 Correspondence Relating to the Use of Spherical Case Shot . 4 Instructions on the Use of Shrapnel Shells ...... 7 Use of Shrapnel's Designs by the Royal Navy...... 8 Use of Shrapnel's Designs by the East India Company .... 8 Miscellaneous Reports and Ordnance Dimensions..... 10 Ordnance and Shell Drawings ........ 11 Tangent Slides and Other Equipment for Firing Shrapnel Shells . 12 Calculations to Determine the Correct Firing of Shrapnel Shells . 13 Musket, Rifle and Pistol Designs by Henry Shrapnel.... 14 Range Tables............ 16 Series II: Henry Needham Scrope Shrapnel Commissions of Henry Needham Scrope Shrapnel .... 17 Henry Needham Scrope Shrapnel's Appointment and Correspondence as Barrack Master ....... 17 Henry Needham Scrope Shrapnel's Role as an Immigrant Agent . 18 Miscellaneous Correspondence ........ 19 Series III: Shrapnel Family Genealogical References and Notes........21 Medical Concerns and Interests of Henry Shrapnel.....23 Trust Fund for Henry Needham Scrope Shrapnel ..... 23 Documents Concerning the Shrapnel Home in Orillia, Ontario . 26 Webber and Barter Family Correspondence ...... 27 Miscellaneous Bills and Receipts ........ 29 Appendices I - List of Items transferred to Visual and Sound Archives Division .
    [Show full text]
  • "Not Very Much Celebrated:" the Evolution and Nature of the Provincial Marine, 1755-1813
    "Not Very Much Celebrated:" The Evolution and Nature of the Provincial Marine, 1755-1813 Robert Malcomson "Our Navy...is worth [less] than nothing — the Officers are the greatest cowards that ever lived, and would fly from a single Bateau."' So wrote the Reverend John Strachan at York in November 1812 as he summarized developments in the war on the border of Upper Canada. After applauding land successes at Detroit and Queenston, Strachan condemned the inability of the Provincial Marine to operate as an effective naval force, an opinion shared by Sir George Prevost and other key British officers. The opinion of at least one individual on the quarterdeck of the Provincial Marine was different. Lieutenant James Richardson, a member of the service from 1809, observed in his memoirs: Our little squadron, though not very much celebrated for exploits in the way of fighting, managed, however, to keep open the communications between the Eastern and Western Divisions of the Army...The importance of such services in the then uninhabited state of the country, and the lack of land conveyance owing to the badness of the roads must be obvious.' Which view of the Provincial Marine is closer to the truth? The marine department, as it was also known, is an aspect of Canadian maritime history that has received little scholarly attention. W.A.B. Douglas discussed the "incompetence" of the department by presenting a few details about its early years and describing the activities of some of its prominent shipbuilders and officers. He argued that its leading
    [Show full text]
  • Royal United Services Institution. Journal the Diary of First
    This article was downloaded by: [New York University] On: 10 October 2014, At: 12:24 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Royal United Services Institution. Journal Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rusi19 The Diary of First Lieutenant William Swabey, Royal Artillery, 28 July to 31 October, 1807 Major John H. Leslie R.A. Published online: 11 Sep 2009. To cite this article: Major John H. Leslie R.A. (1916) The Diary of First Lieutenant William Swabey, Royal Artillery, 28 July to 31 October, 1807, Royal United Services Institution. Journal, 61:441, 63-90, DOI: 10.1080/03071841609419044 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03071841609419044 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
    [Show full text]
  • British Artillery Battalions and the Men Who Led Them 1793-1815 4Th Battalion, Royal Artillery
    The Napoleon Series British Artillery Battalions and the Men Who Led Them 1793-1815 By Steve Brown 4th Battalion, Royal Artillery 1757: Royal Artillery as a single formation comprising 19 companies 1757: 2 April - augmented to 24 companies 1757: 1 August - Royal Artillery split into two battalions of 12 companies each 1757: 2nd Battalion formed from 12 existing RA companies 1759: 3rd Battalion formed 1771: 1 January - 4th Battalion formed 1779: 1 August - 4th Battalion augmented to 10 companies 1819: Reduced to 8 companies 1825: Companies to be known by number rather than commander's name 1855: Board of Ordinance abolished, Royal Artillery transferred to War Office 1859: Battalion renamed Brigades, Companies renamed Batteries 1862: Royal Artillery absorbed East India Company Artillery 1899: Royal Artillery divided into Royal Field Artillery and Royal Garrison Artillery 1924: RFA and RGA amalgamated as Royal Regiment of Artillery 1936: Brigades renamed Regiments 1947: Permanent numbers allotted to batteries Colonels-Commandant 1777: 25 April - James Pattison 1801: 14 Oct - Vaughan Lloyd 1805: 28 June - George Fead 1815: 21 Nov - William Cuppage Colonels 1782: 1 Dec - William Martin 1794: 20 Oct - William Borthwick 1800: 12 Nov - Thomas Blomefield 1801: 14 Oct - Alexander Shand 1803: 9 Apr - Edward Fage 1804: 20 July - John H Yorke 1806: 1 June - Thomas Desbrisay 1808: 16 December - Flower M Sproule 1809: 20 June - Charles N Cookson 1814: 20 Dec - George Wolff Lieutenant-Colonels 1791: 16 Mar - William Borthwick 1793: 5 Dec - Thomas Blomefield
    [Show full text]