History of the Royal Regiment of Artillery, Vol. 1. Duncan Francis

      Among the earliest occasions recorded of the use of Artillery by the English, were the campaigns in Scotland of Edward II. and Edward III.; the capture of Berwick by the latter monarch in 1333; his campaigns in Flanders and France in 1338-39-40; his siege of Vannes in 1343; his successful raid in Normandy in 1346; the battle of Cressy on the 26th August in that year, when the fire of his few pieces of cannon is said to have struck a panic into the enemy; the expedition to Ireland in 1398; Henry IV.'s defeat of the French in Wales, in 1400; another successful siege of Berwick in 1405; the capture of Harfleur in 1415; and the battle of Agincourt on the 25th October of that year; the sieges of Tongue and Caen in 1417; of Falaise and other towns in Normandy in 1418; concluding with the capitulation of Cherbourg and Rouen after protracted sieges, stone projectiles being thrown from the cannon with great success; the engagements between Edward IV. and Warwick, when Artillery was used on both sides; the expedition to France in 1474, and to Scotland in 1482, when yet another successful siege of Berwick took place, successful mainly owing to the Artillery employed by the besieging force; the capture of Sluis, in Flanders; and the attack on Calais and Boulogne in 1491. In the sixteenth century may be enumerated the expedition to Flanders in 1511, in aid of the Duchess of Savoy; the Siege of Térouenne and Battle of the Spurs in 1513; the Siege of Tournay; the Battle of Flodden Field, where the superior accuracy of the English Artillery rendered that of the Scotch useless; the descent on the coast of France and capture of Morlies in 1523; the Siege of Bray and Montedier in 1524; the siege of Boulogne in 1544; the expedition to Cadiz under the Earl of Essex in 1596, and that to the Azores in 1597. In the next century, daring the Civil War, and in all Cromwell's expeditions, the use of Artillery was universal; and the part of the century after the Restoration will be alluded to in a subsequent chapter.

      The use, therefore, of Artillery by the English has existed for centuries; but, – regarding it with modern eyes, its application would better deserve the term abuse. Nothing strikes the student so much as the absence of the scientific Artillery element in the early trains; and this feeling is followed by one of wonder at the patience with which our military leaders tolerated the almost total want of mobility which characterized them. Not until the last decade of the eighteenth century was the necessity of mobility officially recognized, by the establishment of the Royal Horse Artillery; and it took half a century more to impress upon our authorities that a Field Battery might not unreasonably be expected to move occasionally faster than a walk.

      It is difficult, in reviewing such a period as the last fifteen years have been in the history of Artillery in England – so full of improvements in every way – to single out any one of these as more worthy of mention than the rest; but when posterity comes to review it dispassionately, the improvement in equipment and mobility of our Field Artillery will most probably be considered the prominent feature of the time. And these are the very qualities which for centuries remained in England unimproved and stagnant. The eighteenth century saw Artillery conducted by drivers, not under military discipline, nor marked by distinctive costume; who not unfrequently fled with their horses during the action, leaving the gunners helpless, and the guns at the mercy of the enemy. In this year, 1872, our drivers go into action unarmed, it being considered that the possession of defensive weapons might distract their attention from their horses. But we do not commit the old error of using men not under martial law. A driver who, on an emergency, finds himself with his whip merely to defend him, may possibly feel aggrieved: but however far he may run away, he cannot escape the embrace of the Mutiny Act, and is as liable to punishment as the man who deserts before the enemy, after his country has sent him into the field armed from head to foot.

      In the very earliest days of Artillery in England, the number of gunners borne on permanent pay on the books of the Ordnance bore a very small proportion to the artificers so borne. With the increasing use of cannon, an increase in the number of artillerymen took place, but by no means pari passu: and, as towns in England became gradually fortified, a small number of gunners in each was found to be necessary to protect and take care of the stores, and to fire the guns on high days and holidays. In 1344, although no fewer than 321 artificers and engineers were borne on the books of the Ordnance in time of peace, only twelve gunners and seven armourers appear. In 1415, at the Siege of Harfleur, there were present 120 miners, 130 carpenters, and 120 masons; but only 25 master, and 50 servitor gunners – the latter corresponding probably to the matrosses of a later date. At the Siege of Tongue, in 1417, no less than 1000 masons, carpenters, and labourers were present, but only a small number of gunners. At this time, the driving of the guns, the placing them in position, and shipping and unshipping them, devolved on the civil labourers of the trains, and there was a military guard to escort the guns on the march. The gunner's duty seems to have been a general supervision of gun and stores, and the laying and firing it when in action. He was the captain of the gun in war – its custodian in peace. After the fifteenth century there was a marked increase in the number of artillerymen in the trains, although still totally inadequate. For example, in the train ordered on service in France, in 1544, where the civil element was represented by 157 artificers, 100 pioneers, and 20 carters, there were no less than 2 master-gunners, 264 gunners, and a special detachment of 15 gunners, for the guns placed immediately round the King's tent. The principal officers of the Ordnance also accompanied the expedition.

      There was a distinction between the gunners of garrisons and those of the trains, as regarded the source of their pay, or rather its channel. At first, both were paid from the Exchequer; but after the proper establishment of an Ordnance Department at the Tower, the gunners of the various trains were paid by it, the others receiving their salaries as before. The company of fee'd gunners at the Tower of London differed from the gunners of other garrisons in receiving their pay from the Ordnance directly. It must not be imagined, however, that the gunners of garrisons were beyond the control of the Board of Ordnance because their pay was not drawn on the Ordnance books. Not merely had the Master of the Ordnance the nomination of the gunners of garrisons, but the power also of weeding out the useless and superannuated. The instance given in the Introductory Chapter of this volume, shows how directly they were under the Board in matters of discipline; and although, as a matter of Treasury detail, their pay was drawn in a different department, a word from the Ordnance Office could stop its issue to any gunner in any garrison who was deemed by the Board to have forfeited his right to it in any way. It was not until 1771, long after the formation of the Royal Artillery, that these garrison gunners were incorporated into the invalid companies of the regiment; and at the present date they are represented by what is called the Coast Brigade of Artillery. The pay of the old gunners of garrisons depended on the fort in which they resided. Berwick, for example, as an important station, was also one in which the gunner's pay was higher. In the reign of Edward VI. we find the average pay of a master-gunner was 1s. a-day, and of the gunners, from 4d. to 1s. Later, the pay of the master-gunner was raised to 2s. a-day, and that of the gunners rarely fell below 1s. In time of war, the pay of the gunners of the trains far exceeded the above rates. The senior master-gunner was styled the Master-Gunner of England. From 2s. a-day, which was the pay of this official in the sixteenth century, it rose to 160l. per annum, and ultimately to 190l. His residence and duties lay originally in the Tower, and chiefly among the fee'd gunners at that station; but after Woolwich had attained its speciality for Artillery details, quarters were allotted to him there in the Manor House. Among the oldest Master-Gunners of England whose names are recorded may be enumerated Christopher Gould, Richard Webb, Anthony Feurutter3 or Fourutter,4 Stephen Bull, William Bull, William Hammond, John Reynold, and John Wornn – all of whom held their appointments in the sixteenth century, and the majority of them by letters patent from Elizabeth.