The Battle of Edgehill, 23 October 1642

English Civil War began in 1642 when forces under King Charles I clashed with Parliamentarian troops under the Earl of Essex. The King was marching from Shrewsbury to seize the military stores in the Tower of London, and Essex was sent to stop him. The two forces met at Edgehill in Warwickshire. After several hours hard fighting neither had gained an advantage, and both generals drew their forces off.

A pikeman's arms and armour, and the equipment of a musketeer. From Principles of the art military by Henry Hexham (1642), Vol. 1.

A pikeman's arms and armour, and the equipment of a musketeer. From Principles of the art military by Henry Hexham (1642), Vol. 1.

At the start of the war both King and Parliament had to raise and train their armies very quickly; England had been peaceful for many years and had no standing army. Only men who had taken part in the European wars had any experience, but these adventurers brought back knowledge of how the Europeans trained and used their soldiers.

One such man was Henry Hexham, and in 1642 he published The First Part of the Principles of the Art Military, Practised in the Warres of the United Netherlands. Two further parts were published in 1642 and 1643. These books give instructions on how to raise and equip forces, the roles and duties of the various military officers, tactics in the field, and how to train recruits in the use of pike and matchlock musket.

Drill postures of the pikeman. From Principles of the art military by Henry Hexham (1642), Vol. 1.

Drill postures of the pikeman. From Principles of the art military by Henry Hexham (1642), Vol. 1.

Hexham had served in Holland, the leading centre for military innovation in Europe at this time, and his works are substantially based upon those of contemporary Dutch authors. The book is lavishly illustrated, and it is interesting to note the original Dutch commands are still present in the illustrations of pike and musket drill, suggesting that Hexham recycled existing engravings rather than commissioning new ones.

The Principles of the Art Military provide us with a great insight into how the Civil Wars were fought, and how armies were created out of ordinary citizens at this time. Strategically Edgehill was a victory for Parliament, as the King was prevented from marching on London. But in reality the bloody stalemate merely set the scene for several years of grinding, savage fighting.

Blogger: Stuart Ivinson, Library Assistant

Weird and Wonderful

Henry VIII was well-known for his interest in technological innovation when it came to armour and weaponry, whether it was for personal use or for equipping his army. The sixteen gun shields which survive in the collections of the Royal Armouries are a prime example of his fascination with new or unusual developments. These shields formed part of a group of thirty-five such contraptions listed in the inventory made of Henry’s armoury after his death in 1547, which recorded them as ‘targets steilde wt gonnes’. They are thought to have been produced for the King by Giovanbattista of Ravenna around 1544. He may have supplied them complete, or possibly just the shields, in which case they would then have been fitted with guns in England.

All the surviving shields are of similar form. They are circular, measure approximately 50cm in diameter, and are fitted with breech-loading matchlock firearms which protrude either from the centre of the convex face, or slightly above the centre point. In most of the shields with centrally mounted guns, there is a small aperture covered by a grill, which must have been used for sighting and aiming. The main shield bodies were constructed from two layers of thin strips of wood, possibly oak, ash or elm. The bases were then edged and faced with iron or steel plates. Some of the shields have the remains of textile linings, which seem to have been woollen cloth covering a layer of tow or hemp fibre which acted as padding for the arm holding the shield. Leather straps provided attachments for the arm, and the guns were braced with an iron bracket.

Shield front and rear view

Shield front and rear view

A further inventory of the armoury in 1676 shows that over time, the number of gun shields had increased to sixty-six. To have been present in such numbers, they seem to have had some credibility as military weapons, even if this was short-lived. This theory is supported by the recovery of fragments of gun shields from the wreck of the Mary Rose, because it is unlikely that they would have been on board if they were not considered potentially useful for offensive and defensive purposes. There has been speculation that their presence on the Mary Rose meant that they were specifically intended for naval use. However, it seems more likely that they had been packed to be transported as part of the royal arsenal, because they were placed in storage in the ship’s orlop deck rather than positioned for immediate use as part of the ship’s armament.

These gun shields never experienced widespread usage. This was probably due to their unwieldy nature and the risk of injury to the face, eyes and hands from the blast of combustion gases when the guns were fired. However, the shields are of exceptional interest today because they provide an early example of breech-loading firearms which used pre-loaded iron cartridges tapered to match the taper of the breech of the gun. Firearms were becoming increasingly versatile in the sixteenth century, and gun shields provide an important indication of this.

Blogger: Natasha Roberts, Curatorial Assistant

Neigh-ly Done

Previously on the Royal Armouries blog we posted a story about an equine project our Conservation Team have been working on. This life-size papier-mache horse was created by the early 20th century craftsman Felix Joubert. The horse came up to Leeds from the Tower of London to undergo repair work earlier this year.

Repair work on the horse's ear

Repair work on the horse's ear

Since our initial report the Joubert horse is starting to look a little better after a lot of filling, sanding, consolidating and infill painting. His ear is firmly back in place and the damage to his neck, sides and legs have been stabilized and fixed.

The horse awaiting transportation to our Stores area

The horse awaiting transportation to our Stores area

Now it is only the tail which needs conserving, this in itself will be a big project as great care needs to be taken so as not to damage it any further.  In the meantime the horse will be stabled in our Stores area.

Blogger: Alex Cantrill, Conservator

STEN – Now and Then

Mass-produced military firearms rarely survive with much of their service histories intact. At the Royal Armouries in Leeds we recently discovered an exception that has been hiding a lot of history – in plain sight – in the markings stamped and scratched into its metal body.

Close up of the engraving on the Mk.II STEN

Close up of the engraving on the Mk.II STEN

It is a rare type of Mk.II STEN made in 1943 using a new, cheaper, wrapped steel body. These were found to be faulty and were all recalled – just like a car would be today. This particular STEN survived because it had been supplied to South Africa and ended up in Cyprus sometime in the 1960s.

An explanation for this is that lots of young Greek men went to South Africa during the Second World War to fight with both the South African and the Greek armies, and the STEN must have left with them at the end of the war.

Mk.II STEN on the production line

Mk.II STEN on the production line at BSA assembly facility plant at Tysley, 1942

Having been cut and welded internally to prevent it firing, it was then purchased by the Royal Armouries and spent 17 years being used for education and live interpretation. We don’t normally collect deactivated firearms, you wouldn’t blunt a medieval sword after all, but we have now added this example to the permanent collection due to its rather interesting history.

Blogger: Jonathan Ferguson, Curator of Firearms

Exploded Firearms

As a soldier it was, and still is, important to be familiar with your personal issued weapon in order to be able to keep it clean and keep it functioning correctly. Before multi-media learning aids the best way to learn about the functionality of a weapon was to take apart the real thing and mount it on a wooden board, much like a 3-D exploded diagram today.

Board

Webley Mk.I and II revolvers of 1895 and several devices called 'Morris Tubes'

Three boards in the Royal Armouries’ collection contain all of the separate components for several iconic British military firearms. The first shows the Magazine Lee-Metford Mk.II and Lee-Enfield Mk.I rifles, both introduced in 1895. The next board focuses upon the Short Magazine Lee-Enfield of 1903 and the Pattern 1907 bayonet. The last contains the Webley Mk.I and II revolvers of 1895 and several devices called ‘Morris Tubes’. These were designed to allow military rifles in .450 .303 calibre to fire cheaper small-bore .22 rimfire ammunition for training purposes. All of these are pre-First World War, though versions of the SMLE and Webley revolver were standard issue right through to the Second World War.

Rifle board

Short Magazine Lee-Enfield of 1903 and the Pattern 1907 bayonet

We don’t know for sure where these particular boards originated but they were made to instruct soldiers and officers in the component parts of their issued weapons and would have been hung on the wall of a classroom in one of the army’s training establishments.

Blogger: Jonathan Ferguson, Curator of Firearms

Battle of Mons, 1914 – a Personal Account

The First World War erupted in August 1914, as German troops drove across Belgium meeting the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) based around Mons on the 23rd. The battle raged for several days as British and French forces were initially driven back until they held the Germans in early September and regained some lost territory.

The cover of the diary; ‘In case of accidents please forward to: - Mrs. E. Stone, 4 Lansdowne Place, Blackheath, London’.

The cover of the diary; ‘In case of accidents please forward to: - Mrs. E. Stone, 4 Lansdowne Place, Blackheath, London’.

Housed in the Royal Armouries archive’s collection in Leeds is the diary of Captain Edward Stone. Captain Stone began the war as second-in-command of B Company 2nd Dragoon Guards one of the cavalry regiments that were part of the BEF, but soon rose to commanding officer. His diary covers the period of 14 August – 28 October 1914 and vividly portrays the fast-paced action of the early weeks of the war.

A page from the diary of Captain Edward Stone

A page from the diary of Captain Edward Stone

The German army drove French troops to the right of the BEF into retreat and the British were forced to withdraw to ensure they were not outflanked as the Germans advanced. Stone coveys the confusion of the withdrawal as the BEF pulled back from the enemy:

‘On arriving at Le Cateau the place was swarming with infantry and artillery and cavalry, and there was absolute chaos. Finally we pulled off the road and camped in another wet turnip field; the horses and men were just about done in and wet through…’

Stone goes on to describe the British counter-attack at Le Cateau, and following actions at Nery, Aisnes and Messines as the German advance was gradually halted and the battle front stabilised into the lines of trenches that remained in place until 1918; the Western Front was born.

Officers of the 2nd Dragoon Guards, Captain Stone is on the front row, third from the left. This picture was taken in August 1914, only a few days before the Regiment went into action.

Officers of the 2nd Dragoon Guards, Captain Stone is on the front row, third from the left. This picture was taken in August 1914, only a few days before the Regiment went into action.

Edward Stone survived the horrors of the First World War. He was promoted to Major in 1917 and after a long career retired in 1926.

Blogger: Stuart Ivinson, Library Assistant

Mysteries of the Horned Helmet

One of the most mysterious objects in the Royal Armouries’ collection is the ‘Horned Helmet’, made for Henry VIII. It formed part of a magnificent armour, commissioned in 1511 by the Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian I as a gift for the young king, who would have worn the armour for court pageants rather than in combat.

The Horned Helmet

The Horned Helmet

The decoration on the grotesque mask is etched, with life-like facial details even down to the stubble on the chin and crow’s feet around the eyes, and there is a pronounced drip beneath the nose. The mask is complete with a pair of spectacles, which heighten further the strangeness of this helmet. A pair of ram’s horns, beautifully modeled in sheet iron, complete this extraordinary piece and make it so remarkable that it was chosen as the object to represent the Royal Armouries museum in Leeds when it first opened in 1996.

Research into the identification of the source which inspired the mask of the Horned Helmet is continuing, but the copper alloy (possibly originally gilded) spectacles were never fitted with lenses. It is believed that the spectacles form part of the identity of a ‘fool’, a figure commonly found in late 15th- and early 16th-century imagery, suggesting that everyone, however noble or lowly, has elements of foolishness in their character.

Details of the Horned Helmet

Details of the Horned Helmet

A number of images of fools exist which show them wearing or carrying spectacles of this kind. The spectacles themselves are of so-called ‘rivet’ type, an almost universal design which hinged in order that they might grip the bridge of the wearer’s nose. Spectacles of this type are known in Europe from at least the middle of the 14th century.

Work on the iconography of the mask of the Horned Helmet continues, but there is increasing support for the view that it is that of a fool and that the spectacles are entirely a part of the representation of such a grotesque figure. An explanation for the presence of the horns, which at the time the helmet was made were usually the sign of a cuckold or of the Devil, also has to be finally established. Currently opinion is that it may not have been thought appropriate to fit horns to a helmet which was to be given to the King of England.

Blogger: Graeme Rimer, Academic Director