More specifically, Loyalist Militia.
What would have been the duties of Lt. Colonels, Captains, & Lieutenants?
Is it possible to approximate an individual’s age from these ranks?
Militias on both sides tended to roughly follow the structure of the British army. You’d have a company of men with maybe 50 or 60 privates, led by 3 or 4 corporals and 3 or 4 sergeants. These would be commanded by a captain who would have a lieutenant to assist him.
A group of companies together would be a regiment, commanded by a colonel, who would be assisted by a lieutenant colonel.
There was a lot of individual variation on this and the structures didn’t even necessarily remain consistent throughout the war in some militias.
Most of the volunteers in today’s army start at roughly the same age, around 18, which makes predicting the age of someone at a given rank a little easier. In the revolutionary war though folks of all ages were signing up. You can make some generalizations, like you aren’t going to take some 16 year old kid fresh off the farm and turn him into a colonel overnight. Obviously, you’d expect your ranking officers to be older and more experienced, but that’s about as much of a prediction as you can make.
Especially towards the beginning of the war, you’d gather up a bunch of men and they would elect who they wanted to be their officers. In general you wouldn’t expect them to choose someone young and inexperienced for a leadership position. It was however certainly possible that they could elect a younger person to a higher rank just because he held a prominent place in society and had some proven leadership ability, where someone older than him might be elected as his junior assistant just because the men don’t have as much knowledge about him or as much confidence in his abilities.
ETA:
One other important note is that militias on both sides tended to be somewhat lacking in proper military discipline. Even Washington’s army had problems with this at first.
One major variation is that the organization you’re describing is foot (infantry)… cavalry or dragoons would be organized, manned, and led somewhat differently.
In the British Army, one could buy a commission:
But Militia, the ranks were all over the place. David Fanning was selected Col when only about 25yo.
Really don’t know the answer to your question, however The Battle of Springfield (NJ) involves farm boys (age 16+/-) who shoot British and their hired help. Battle took three days. Each night British returned to Elizabeth, NJ, Boys ran from neighboring farms in what is now Roselle Park and vicinity. Would they be considered militia?
Yeah, but cavalry militia would be extremely rare and special, if any even existed. It’s not like your average farmhand or shopkeeper had a stable of riding horses and the time to get good at riding.
Thanks. I’m trying to get a feel for some relatives (& quite possibly ancestors) who were loyalists during the Revolution. Things have always gotten murky once I get to my g-g-grandfather. I suspect that his father was a Tory. That’s probably info that would not have been broadcast for general consumption back in the early 1800s. I found a company of Loyalist Militia in South Carolina with a Captain, Lieutenant, & private with my surname. Yet another Captain of Loyalist Militia with my surname appears in an account of his lynching by patriots.
My family has shit-for-luck when it comes to war. We didn’t pick a winner until WWI. *
*We appear to have stayed home in 1812 & the Mexican War, we showed up big time to wear gray.
I guess it evens out though. WWII ended before my dad had to invade Japan in his tank.
Cavalry militia were common in England from Napoleonic times. They were called Yeomanry.
They were mostly farmers and landed gentry, who certainly did have horses.
NM
http://www.royalprovincial.com/ has a fair bit of information on Colonial Loyalist units, including muster roles, orderly books, and histories of some regiments.
It also is a great place to start research on the Loyalist story.
-Ed
aka Sgt. Andrew Rickley
Breakenridge Coy King’s Rangers.
(Select weekends from April to October)
Thanks! I’ll check that out.
One more bit, if you’re looking for more information on a particular soldier, google the name. Often times, much of the information has been added to genealogical records.
For example, Andrew Rickley of the King’s Rangers (who I loosely portray while reenacting) is listed online. From this information, I was able to trace down and find that his daughter (Elizabeth) married the son (William) of another King’s Ranger (Elisha Phillips)when they settled in Canada after the war.
It also gives evidence that he served the King in the war of 1812 an Ensign as well, and gives birth and death dates.
Knowing that Andrew was born in 1760, and he served in the King’s Rangers no earlier than 1779, and no later than 1784, he was between 19 and 24 during his service.
The duties were fundamentally similar to those of any other Army, even today’s. They made plans and policies, ensured the NCOs were doing their job, provided direction and motivation to the troops, made sure everyone got their beans and bullets, and when the shooting started it was their job to give the orders so that the soldiers moved and fought as a unit rather than a mob.
Back in the day, there was basically no relationship between rank and age. As above, many European armies linked rank with wealth and aristocracy in the form of “buying” commissions. This was their way of keeping the riff-raff out of the club. Some armies (like the Austrians) instituted a strict system of seniority, which was even more of a disaster because merit had nothing to do with advancement. In the early US Army, officers were either elected leader of their militia, or appointed on a basically arbitrary basis. One hoped the election or appointment would result in a competent officer, but almost everyone was learning on the fly in those days.