The Loose Association of Wargamers

Pikes in the Williamite armies, and their enemies are an odd subject.

The 6 English Regiments from 1688 Hounslow Heath manouvers had 2 companies of pikes to 6 of muskets, generally depicted as centred on the regiments frontage with the colours and Officers (which was also dutch, french and spanish practice at the time). However, anecdotally during monmouths attempt, they were grouped as one large block that were left behind when it entered the levels (cavalry not being an issue there).

The Swedes held there pikes seperate, in the same manner as grenadiers were used in other armies, as the offensive cutting edge. Imperials had a lot more pikes at this time, due to fighting the turks, where in the open they were essential. Poles seemed to yave had few pikes, but they had a bigger and better cavalry arm than most western armies, so were perhaps less essential for fending off horse.

From 1660 until 1704 there was almost an innovation a year to keep up with and everything changed with great rapidity. Except for the very well chronicled, pretty much anything goes.

If you can find it at a good price, this book is invaluable, as he fills in from 1689 despite the dates in the title.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Fit-Service-Tr ... 0198226470

Paul wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 6:02 pm

FreddBloggs wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 5:14 pm Cartridge bag or apostles, in the 1688 apostles are still seen but by 1692'ish the regulats had gone over to a bag on the hip. Cartridge boxes are the province of privately raised or french supplied troops at this point. Unless doing Neerwinden or Steenkirk, a mix is probably appropriate.

Pretty much how i'd have put it Reid refers to both Cartridge boxes and Patronashes (ie a small box worn on the waistbelt like, he says, the Dutch and French).
As to Muskets, the changeover to Flintlock started in the mid 1680's. The Scots Guard rank and file got theirs in 1686 although the Grenadiers had fusils from '82. Other Regts were certainly at least in the process of changing by 1689.

I was wondering how you depict pikes in your Regts? I couldn't find a picture although I'm sure there are some. Do they get a separate stand or part of the Command stand etc... I'm looking at nominally around 1/4 to 1/3 as Pikes (alhough some militia appear to have more) for the period i'm interested in.

And thank you again.

As for pikes, I like to have them in the centre with the command figures. I put a musketeer somewhere in the front rank to show that it's not a pike stand, but I use the flag poles to make it look like there are more pikes than the three I actually have. I also drift one or two pikemen towards the rear of the base to make it look like there's more depth. And thinking about it, I seem to have a seventh figure on the centre base.

I hadn't finished the bases on these chaps, obviously.



But, if nothing else, I have realised for the first time that I actually refer to bases and stands all the time. I'm shocked.

I'll not buy the book. Thanks for the heads up.

Iain

FreddBloggs wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 6:45 pm If you can find it at a good price, this book is invaluable, as he fills in from 1689 despite the dates in the title.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Fit-Service-Tr ... 0198226470

Ouch £62...and that's the cheapest one out there!

Essex Boy wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 7:28 pm As for pikes, I like to have them in the centre with the command figures. I put a musketeer somewhere in the front rank to show that it's not a pike stand, but I use the flag poles to make it look like there are more pikes than the three I actually have. I also drift one or two pikemen towards the rear of the base to make it look like there's more depth. And thinking about it, I seem to have a seventh figure on the centre base.

Excellent pictures, lovely looking Regiments.

For some reason I had it in mind that you had 24 figure Units...18 figure ones make it all the more interesting.

Paul wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 7:41 pm

FreddBloggs wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 6:45 pm If you can find it at a good price, this book is invaluable, as he fills in from 1689 despite the dates in the title.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Fit-Service-Tr ... 0198226470

Ouch £62...and that's the cheapest one out there!

I got my copy at 45, and winced, but to me it is worth it. Pretty much everything he quotes is primary source, and he distils it well.

FreddBloggs wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 6:45 pm If you can find it at a good price, this book is invaluable, as he fills in from 1689 despite the dates in the title.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Fit-Service-Tr ... 0198226470

Yes, got that one, Fred. Many thanks.

I suspect you won't be surprised to learn that I add pikes wherever I can because they look pretty. You'll know that there are some who suggest that some British regiments at Blenheim may have had pikes........that's more than enough for me.

I remain to be convinced that pikes were any kind of offensive weapon...........a subject on which you should not get me started........unless we find ourselves in a pub and the beer is flowing freely.

FreddBloggs wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 9:27 pm

Paul wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 7:41 pm

FreddBloggs wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 6:45 pm If you can find it at a good price, this book is invaluable, as he fills in from 1689 despite the dates in the title.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Fit-Service-Tr ... 0198226470

Ouch £62...and that's the cheapest one out there!

I got my copy at 45, and winced, but to me it is worth it. Pretty much everything he quotes is primary source, and he distils it well.

I got mine for £20 I think.

I checked out regimental museum shops and eventually found one at a reasonable price.

Paul wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 7:44 pm
Excellent pictures, lovely looking Regiments.

For some reason I had it in mind that you had 24 figure Units...18 figure ones make it all the more interesting.

Ta.

Given my time again I'd perhaps go for the same frontage but add another rank. I've seen a few collections like that and they look very smart. Gary's 24 figure regiments (in two ranks) do look rather more impressive than mine. Mine are cuterer though......I think.

Essex Boy wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 12:28 am I remain to be convinced that pikes were any kind of offensive weapon...........a subject on which you should not get me started.......

C'mon I've showed you the documents about swiss pike training, they certainly were and the specific ECW accounts I think too. [EDIT: I've just tracked it down and it was 6 1/2 years ago :o I was much more knowledgeable about stuff back then now I just sit in a corner and grumble]
But, as the C18th wore on probably less so except maybe in the east of Europe.
But just think how pretty an offensive pike unit would look on the tabletop