Slitherine

I gather the trend is to call it the British Civil war now.

In overview, how would these armies differ from one another in general composition and capabilities?

Early Parliament

New Model Army

Scots Covenanters

I see from another thread that the Scots can be built as a poor swarm. I was under the impression that they were composed in large part of tough and experienced veterans from the 30 Years War?

Would the earlier continental Huguenot or Dutch armies be tougher?

Well the earlier Dutch armies are full of English mercenaries who then will be beating on each other during the ECW.
Basically both sides realized that neither one could win the ECW if they continued as they did. In the early part the King kept winning but since his army would disband constantly he could never really secure his victories. I have read that in some cases the locals would refuse to march past the county line,so there goes part of your army.
The New Model Army was a standing army, clothed by Parliament, and regularly paid, another thing that was pretty much unheard of. Unpaid soldiers tended to take what they wanted from the surrounding area, did not matter whose side the locals were on. I believe it was a Royalist commander who was garrisoning a town and had the local well to do types contribute to the garrison coffers so that the pay roll could be fairly steady and thus his troops behaved themselves.
So the NMA was a standing army that could be trained drilled and was always available at a set strength when needed and became a much better fighting force.
Thats a quick overview to say the least and I am sure you can get more in depth into it all if you wanted.

Skullzgrinda wrote:I gather the trend is to call it the British Civil war now.

Not forgeting the Irish (the Conferates the Scots Irish the Roylists and the Parliment English)

Regarding veterans of the TYW.
Most of the English, Scots and Irish who went overseas to serve as soldiers ended up in foreign graves, the brutal rate of attrition in period armies saw to that. For example the Marquis of Hamilton led 6000 men to serve alongside the Swedes, by 1632 less than 400 remained. Now the fate of Hamilton's English Army is a bit of a extreme case but even in the best of cases losses were high. Those in Dutch service probably had it easier due to the wealth of the Dutch keeping the men better paid and fed.
The turmoil back in England and Scotland also cut off the supply of new recruits in the later 1630's, IIRC the last Scots regiment disbanded by 1639 and the last large battle fought by the Scots brigade was Wittstock 1636 where the Scots and English lost close to 44% of their strenght when they and the Swedish brigade tried to fend on Imperial infantry to their front while struck by Imperial & Saxon cuirassiers in the flank.

DanielS wrote:Regarding veterans of the TYW.
Most of the English, Scots and Irish who went overseas to serve as soldiers ended up in foreign graves, the brutal rate of attrition in period armies saw to that.

Maybe thats why studies have come up with the figure of 50,000 scots taken from the commisions granted to recruit troops in Scotland both for the Danish and Swedish armies.

If anyone has any research of numbers raised for the Imperial armies from Scotland/Ireland I would be most welcome if you could pass it on.

Would you be the DanielS on the TMP site?

Dave

The one and only

The commisions are an invaluable sources but are also a bit "blunt" as intruments because they record the number of men the recruiter wanted to raise rather than what he was able send of to the wars. I know of several instances when Swedish recruitment of scots fell well short of the intended target with only 40-60% of the commisioned troops being raised.

There is "Scots in Habsburg Service, 1618-1648" though I've not read it, Brill's "History in Warfare" series is expensive enough that even I have to limit my purchases. There ought to be some research done into the Irish regiments serving in the Spanish army as well though I can't think of book title at the moment.

DanielS wrote:The one and only

The commisions are an invaluable sources but are also a bit "blunt" as intruments because they record the number of men the recruiter wanted to raise rather than what he was able send of to the wars. I know of several instances when Swedish recruitment of scots fell well short of the intended target with only 40-60% of the commisioned troops being raised.

There is "Scots in Habsburg Service, 1618-1648" though I've not read it, Brill's "History in Warfare" series is expensive enough that even I have to limit my purchases. There ought to be some research done into the Irish regiments serving in the Spanish army as well though I can't think of book title at the moment.

Good to see you writing on the site, yes I forgot the Scots in Habsburg service. Of course your right the commisions only gave them the right to recruit up to a figure if they could'nt that was that. I must admit the Library Service were I am seems to be able to get some good books for me through the inter library system. But as you've said in the past if you read German they do have some good books. But I'm reading Monro at the mimuate if you can get past the old world english its a good book showing the war from the point of a junior officer.

So . . .

Are the Covenanters looking like scrubs in the lists? Or can they hold their own?

Skullzgrinda wrote:So . . .

Are the Covenanters looking like scrubs in the lists? Or can they hold their own?

Their cavalry are crap but very cheap. They must have 3 Poor P&S BGs.

However, this leaves them enough points for an awful lot of Average P&S BGs, and I think they might be surprisingly effective if handled by a good player.

rbodleyscott wrote:

Skullzgrinda wrote:So . . .

Are the Covenanters looking like scrubs in the lists? Or can they hold their own?

Their cavalry are crap but very cheap. They must have 3 Poor P&S BGs.

However, this leaves them enough points for an awful lot of Average P&S BGs, and I think they might be surprisingly effective if handled by a good player.

Well, the last part kills that idea, but I do thank you for the answer!

It was going to be my first army as well...

Need to look for a list that will work when handled by a bad player...

david53 wrote:

DanielS wrote:The one and only

The commisions are an invaluable sources but are also a bit "blunt" as intruments because they record the number of men the recruiter wanted to raise rather than what he was able send of to the wars. I know of several instances when Swedish recruitment of scots fell well short of the intended target with only 40-60% of the commisioned troops being raised.

There is "Scots in Habsburg Service, 1618-1648" though I've not read it, Brill's "History in Warfare" series is expensive enough that even I have to limit my purchases. There ought to be some research done into the Irish regiments serving in the Spanish army as well though I can't think of book title at the moment.

Good to see you writing on the site, yes I forgot the Scots in Habsburg service. Of course your right the commisions only gave them the right to recruit up to a figure if they could'nt that was that. I must admit the Library Service were I am seems to be able to get some good books for me through the inter library system. But as you've said in the past if you read German they do have some good books. But I'm reading Monro at the mimuate if you can get past the old world english its a good book showing the war from the point of a junior officer.

Thanks!

Intra-Library loans are a huge help when researching this period, I couldn't have done without them myself as the sheer expense of travling between libraries would have seriously hindered my own research. There are a number of German works online at archive.org, iirc I posted a list of them over at TMP some time ago. But you do have to read the language and all too often the older ones are printed in "Fraktur" which is such a joy to read...

Monro is an invaluable source even though not all parts are from his own personal viewpoint, a good example of this is the battle of Lützen which Monro was not present at. The Danish chapters are of particular interest as sources for that period are scarce.

DanielS wrote: Monro is an invaluable source even though not all parts are from his own personal viewpoint, a good example of this is the battle of Lützen which Monro was not present at. The Danish chapters are of particular interest as sources for that period are scarce.

I like the fact that its written with regard for the most part work of companies, the Danish part when he mentions the 300 Scots killed when they refused to surrender when a breach was made in the town wall they were defending(can't remember the town just now) and the other bit when the Danish army(more german) was caught before it could get aboard the ships to Denmark when the Cavalry regiments and 5 foot regiments just went over to the Imperials as a whole keeping their flags as well.

I like these books about the small scale units it gives you the feel about the period from a position I can understand much better than the grand scale plans.

I struggle with German but i do find its worth it at times mores so since there are few books on the 30 years war armies in English