This chapter will discuss the historiography and methodology of the dissertation. This will be done by; firstly, examining the historiography of the issues of recruitment and promotion in the Napoleonic British Army; secondly, by briefly describing the specific areas of recruitment and promotion that the dissertation will focus on, and the reasons for the 28th Foot at Waterloo being the subject of that focus. It shall then discuss the primary sources to be examined and also the sources that will be used to supplement any information that is uncovered. Finally, it shall detail the process by which the personal information of the soldiers of the 28th came to be extracted from the Public Records Office.

    Historians have argued that during the Napoleonic Wars of 1793 to 1815, the territorial affiliations that most line infantry regiments bore in their title had little relation to the origin of the majority of the men who served in them. Both Oman and Haythornthwaite seem to indicate that the primary reason for this was the large number of ex Home Forces men serving in the ranks, (the term "Home Forces" describes the various short service irregular units raised by the Crown for service in Britain and Ireland). They claim that the practice whereby large groups of these men could volunteer to serve in any regiment of their own choosing, (rather than enlisting in their local regiment), was the major contributing factor. Some indication of the territorial origin of a large proportion of these soldiers might be gained from Linda Colley's book Britains: Forging the Nation 1707-1837. In this Colley suggests that men from certain Southern counties of England when questioned in a national survey in the year 1803, were apparently more willing then their counterparts in the North of England to defend their country in the event of invasion. The reason for this is the suggestion that the closer the proximity to France then the more seriously the threat was perceived. Consequently, more civilians from these areas enlisted in the Home Forces with the intention of defending their homes and loved ones. Therefore, it might logically be expected that an army which relies heavily on recruits from the Home Forces might have a disproportionate number of men from these areas within its ranks.

    Whilst much has been written about recruitment comparatively little has been written about promotion within the ranks of the ordinary soldiery. Oman and Haythornthwaite both refer to the works of the Napoleonic soldier writers to examine the personal qualities that Non-Commissioned Officers required, qualities such as sobriety, honesty and a modicum of education to keep company administrative records. In Wellington's Armies Haythornthwaite produces data drawn from Holmes and Kirby's Meda1 Rolls of the 23rd Foot to examine the territorial origin of that unit's Senior NC0s, however no attempt is made to critically analyse the relevance of such information, or place it into a wider historiographical context.

    This dissertation will focus on the areas of both recruitment and promotion. Specifically, it will examine to what extent the origin of the soldiers of the 28th Foot reflected its territorial affiliation, or whether any other territorial or national link is apparent. It will also attempt to ascertain the proportion of ex Home Forces men in the unit and examine whether or not this confirms or denies the arguments of historians. It will then examine the influence on promotion of such factors as literacy, skill level of previous employment, nationality, length of service and previous military service amongst the NCOs of the 28th Foot. The findings for the 28th Foot will then be compared with and supplemented by that information previously published for two other line infantry units at Waterloo.

    The soldiers of the 28th Foot at Waterloo are the focus of this dissertation for a number of reasons: Firstly, the 28th (North Gloucestershire) Regiment of Foot later became the Gloucestershire Regiment, and a study of recruitment and promotion within the enlisted ranks of the regiment during one of Europe's most important battles can only contribute to the County of Gloucestershire's military heritage. Secondly, the Waterloo Campaign of 1815 was the first for which all enlisted British participants were recorded by name and received a medal immediately afterwards. In addition, for all participants who were later to claim a pension, being present at Waterloo counted as an additional two years reckonable service, and such service is recorded in their discharge documents. Thus the discharge documents of the Waterloo soldiers of the British Army, if used in conjunction with the Waterloo Medal Roll, allow the historian to locate a group of soldiers during the same three day period of all their respective careers, aiding the study of recruitment and promotion within this group. Whilst material has been published regarding the soldiers of both a Scottish and a Welsh line infantry unit at Waterloo, (the 2/73rd and the 23rd respectively), none has been produced for an English regiment. Thus the information regarding the 28th, an English line infantry unit, will provide an interesting and complementary balance to that material. Finally, by 1815 the 28th had served in many actions throughout the Napoleonic Wars. Therefore, if in the years prior to Waterloo large groups of soldiers had entered the regiment at the same time and from the same source, (e.g. the Home Forces or Ireland), then one might expect that for all but the most recent entrants, the passage of time and the casualty rate would no doubt have facilitated the dispersal of these individuals throughout all enlisted ranks of the regiment.

    This dissertation shall be utilising a number of primary sources: The document WO 12/4430 is the 1814-1815 Muster & Paylist for the 28th Foot, including the period 25th of May to the 24th of June 1815, and provides a comprehensive list of the names and locations of all NCOs and men of the regiment.¹ Also included in this source is a provisional roll submitted by the regiment shortly after the battle, which lists all ranks of Corporal and below who served in the actions of the 16th to the 18th of June. Both of these sources are bound in a leather ledger in good condition and the handwriting is clearly legible. The WO 100/15A Waterloo Medal Roll is dated May 1816 and lists by name and rank all officers and soldiers serving, deceased, discharged, absent or dead for whom the 28th Foot was eventually issued Waterloo medals for.² This is a microfilm impression of the original document, and it remains undamaged and legible. However, on occasion the surnames of some soldiers appear to vary in spelling, when they are cross referenced with WO 12 and WO 97, (e.g. a Private Jeanes is variously listed as Jeans, Jeanes and Janes), and this obviously makes the process of identifying some soldiers as definitely having served at Waterloo more difficult. Finally, WO 97 is the main series of documents of enlisted soldiers, (not officers), of all regiments who became either in patients or out patients at the Royal Hospital Chelsea in the period 1760 to 1855.³ The majority of records present are those of successful applicants for pensions claimed on the grounds of disability or unfitness resulting from military service. These records, (an example of which can be seen in Appendix 1), usually contain both an attestation and a discharge document for each soldier, recording such details as length of reckonable service, places of birth and enlistment, army rank, wounds and injuries received, promotions and demotions, a character reference, and a physical description on discharge. These documents are direct microfilm impressions of the originals and the majority are undamaged and legible. However, some are partially damaged and do not have all the information this dissertation requires either present or legible on them. In addition, preliminary research indicates that a number of the soldiers in this particular source who have been credited with two years Waterloo service are not listed as being present at Waterloo in either WO 12 or WO 100/15A. Finally, whilst the WO 97 records a soldier's rank on discharge and the length in years and days spent in each rank, in the majority of cases it is impossible to assess which rank was held at what time. However, soldiers who served at Waterloo also had their rank in the campaign recorded as well, (probably for the purposes of assessing pension entitlement on discharge), and this allows the historian to locate Waterloo men far easier than if one was to do a similar study on soldiers at any other period of the Napoleonic Wars.

    The findings for the 28th Foot will be compared and supplemented with that information already published, although not critically analysed, in The 2nd/73rd at Waterloo by Sly and Lagden, and Medal Rolls-23rd Foot-Napoleonic Period by Holmes and Kirby. Both works provide personal details for only those soldiers specifically named on WO 100/15A, and the bulk of such detail has undoubtedly been taken from WO 97. However, as it is unlikely that WO 97 records exist for the whole unit it could be suggested that some information must have been entered as an educated guess at a soldier's identity. Therefore this casts some doubt on the sources' authenticity. In addition, neither publication records whether or not an individual soldier was able to sign his own name, and thus neither will be able to assist in an examination of the influence of literacy on promotion. Any attempts at comparing the soldiers of the 28th with those of the 23rd and 2/73rd must acknowledge the historical differences that may have influenced the composition of each regiment. A brief examination of the service histories of all three regiments shows that by 1815 both the 23rd and 28th were single battalion regiments, (hence their being referred to merely by number as opposed to battalion and number), who had seen extensive action in the Peninsular campaign. In contrast, the 2/73rd was the junior battalion of the 73rd Foot and had been raised in 1808 specifically for war time service, and had seen only limited action in Northern Europe in 1814. Thus it might be expected that the composition of the men of the 2/73rd might differ from that of both the 23rd and 28th, and that this may produce differences in recruitment and promotion.

    With regard to secondary sources I shall be utilising the works of the most prominent writers on the British Army of the Napoleonic period, Charles Oman and Philip J Haythornthwaite. Oman's Wellington's Army, 1809-1814 was originally published in 1913 and contains chapters on the organisation of army regiments and the composition of the rank and file, both of which are relevant to this dissertation. However, Oman's work, whilst containing numerous anecdotal accounts from Napoleonic soldiers and an excellent bibliography, is not referenced which makes confirmation of many of his assertions very difficult. Haythornthwaite's The Armies of Wellington was published in 1994, and is probably the most modem and authoritative of works on the British Army of the Napoleonic period. He examines in much greater detail than Oman the issues surrounding recruitment and promotion, however, whilst he has referenced his work, such referencing is haphazard and this makes many of his assertions difficult to verify. It is also obvious from the respective titles that Haythornthwaite's work has to some extent been influenced by Oman, and therefore it is extremely likely that many of Oman's unsubstantiated assertions have merely been repeated in Haythornthwaite's book.

    The 28th Foot had approximately 540 enlisted men present at Waterloo, however I was initially unaware how many of these would have their details present in WO 97, or indeed whether the exact information I hoped to find would be present. A computerised database has been created at the Public Records Office, Kew, containing brief details on each man present in the WO 97 records. On inputting a soldier's name and regiment one is provided with his full name, place of birth, period of service, (e.g. 1797 to 1816), and age on discharge. The database is meant to be a guide to the WO 97, and makes it possible to ascertain whether an individual's details are present, prior to commencing a lengthy search for that individual's direct impression records on the WO 97 microfilm for his particular regiment. The WO 97 database recorded that approximately 1400 individual records existed on microfilm for soldiers who had served in the 28th Foot in the period 1760 to 1855. However, it proved impossible to break the records down to a list of those who were serving in the year 1815. The WO 97 database was then used in conjunction with WO 100/15A in the hope that a study of one of the 28th's ten companies could be undertaken, however, as the database listed WO 97 details existing for only 20 out of 55 men of the 28th's Number One Company at Waterloo, it was decided that the only way a reasonable size study of the 28th could be achieved was to examine the WO 97 microfilm and record all the details of all the 28th's Waterloo men. Ultimately, 300 individuals were discovered whose presence with the 28th at Waterloo was noted in their WO 97. However, after cross checking their names with WO 100/15A, only 284 could be considered as definitely being present and therefore eligible to be used in this dissertation. Consequently, from the WO 97 records of these 284 men it was possible to extract the basic data this dissertation required for an examination of recruitment and promotion, (a copy of this data can be found in Appendix 2). The records for 284 men are both a substantial number and proportion of the 28th's enlisted men at Waterloo, and there is no reason to suspect that they are not representative of the regiment in June 1815. On a larger scale the 28th were one of 15 of the 24 British line infantry units at Waterloo that had seen service in the Peninsular campaign,⁴ and the men of these units totalled approximately 9700 of the 15000 British line infantry deployed at Waterloo.⁵ Therefore, there is no reason to suspect that the men of the 28th were not representative of the majority of the line at Waterloo.

References:

1.    PRO       WO 12/4430        1814-1815 Muster and Paylist. 28th Foot.
                                                   Public Records Office, Kew, London.
2.    PRO       WO 100               Waterloo Medal Roll.
                                                   Public Records Office, Kew, London.
3.    PRO       WO 97/468-475    Soldiers Discharge Documents.
                                                   Public Records Office, Kew, London.
4.    Weller                                 Wellington at Waterloo, p240.
5.    Siborne                               History of the Waterloo Campaign, p531-533.