The Royal Artillery in the Peninsula campaign was in a most parlous state for want of equipment, stores and most notably, horses. The majority of these problems do not appear to have affected the Royal Horse Artillery, who appears to have been better equipped. This all impacted upon the tactical organisation of the artillery, as well as its usage.

Field Equipment

The state of the artillery on 1^st November 1808 is recorded in a letter from Lieutenant-Colonel William Robe, in the Peninsula.

He lists a total of 52 field guns and howitzers:

• Medium 12-pounders                9         New pattern
• Long 6-pounders                      5         New pattern
• Light 6-pounders                     21        New pattern
• Light 3-pounders                      4         Old
• Heavy 5 ½ inch Howitzers       4         New pattern
• Light 5 ½ inch Howitzers         9         2 Old, 7 New

The reference to “new” and “old” pattern relates to the block-trail compared to the double-bracket carriages. The block-trail carriage had been designed in 1775 by General Thomas Desaguliers (17?? – March 1780) who had been Superintendent at Woolwich Arsenal. The design was based upon a light carriage captured on Martinique in 1761. Under the auspices of the Marquis Townshend, Master of the Ordnance, the block-trail was introduced for the light 6-pounders and heavy 3-pounder field guns in 1777 and in the same year William Congreve, Commander of the Royal Military Repository (the training school for Artillery Officers at Woolwich) prepared a drill manual for it. The block-trail was “extended” to the heavy 6-pounder and the 5 ½ inch howitzer  by the Duke of Richmond in 1788 when gun carriages and vehicles “on Desaguliers 3-pounder Principle” were universally introduced, the key feature of which was a cast-iron axle and a standardised wheel size of 5 feet for all vehicles.  It was adopted as the standard carriage for the embryonic Royal Horse Artillery in 1792 when we find that 12-, 6- and 3- pounders as well as the 5 ½ inch howitzer were thus mounted.

The Royal Foot Artillery, in 1797 received a gun carriage designed by Major James Butler. The double-bracket carriage and Desagulier’s block-trail were in use side by side, the latter principally by the RoyalHorse Artillery, until at least 1811. By 1813, according to Adyes’ “Pocket Gunner”, all guns and vehicles were of the “New Pattern” i.e. the block trail.

From the list by Robe, it can be observed that by 1808 the Desaguliers block-trail carriage was almost universally used by the artillery; only 6 out of 52 pieces were on the old double-bracket carriage which Robe considered “…totally inapplicable to the service”.  The howitzers on their old carriages “…may be put to use here, by forming a reserve Brigade with the extra Guns of the German Artillery.”

These returns also confirm that the 5 ½ inch howitzer was indeed mounted on the block-trail carriage, a fact that has been often refuted by many commentators on this subject.

It has long been considered by artillery historians or commentators on the subject, that the Royal Artillery in the Peninsula lacked any field guns that could match the French 8- and 12-pounders; it is obvious from these returns that the British did have 12-pounders in the field brigades and therefore would have had guns that were able to reply to them. The British had and used a 12-pounder field gun.

Furthermore, it has long been suggested that the 9-pounder Blomefield was introduced to the Royal Artillery c.1809 in order to provide a weapon to match the French artillery – which we now know they were already able to do. Captain, later Sir, Thomas Blomefield was the Inspector of Artillery from 1780 and his system of ordnance was introduced in 1784. It was based around gun tubes of 17 calibres in length for the heavy pieces and 13 calibres for the light and siege pieces. The Blomefield 9-pound gun had a gun tube 5 feet 11.4 inches long (i.e.17 calibres) and it weighed 13cwt 2qrs. The calibre was 4.200 inches. The weapon was under development in the 1790s as tests were being carried out at Woolwich during the first half of that decade.

In fact, the 9-pounder was adopted in Spain, say Lieutenant Colonels Robe and Harding, due to the simple fact that they had a similar effective range to the 12-pounder, but more importantly, only required 8 horses to move them, as opposed to the 10 needed for the 12-pounder. The argument that the 9-pounder was adopted to match the fire-power of the French artillery, therefore, is incorrect. The accusation that the 12-pounder was too heavy to be of use in the field Brigades only appears to hold true for Spain, and it is likely that had sufficient good quality horses been available the weapon would have continued in service.

The returns from the Peninsula provide an intermediary view of this situation, showing that the double-bracket carriage had almost superseded the double-bracket carriage by 1808.

Robe recommended that the light 3-pounders be returned to England or to Gibraltar and replaced with weapons mounted on carriages “of the present type” i.e. the block trail. A letter from Robe of 23^rd March 1809 notes that the light 3-pounders were “fitted” for cavalry and were attached to them: “Captain Lawson’s Company will have Light 3-pounder Brigade with the Cavalry, as soon as it can be put into movement”. Interestingly, Lawson was an officer in the foot, not horse, artillery.

Robe also recommended the use of the 3-pounder which was used with the Light Infantry and to good effect in the West Indies, but with their limbers altered to “make the draft double”.  Their wheels were smaller and the axles narrower, which were thought to be “answer very well in this Country…The span of the Wheels being less than Common will answer the wain roads…”  Might these be the ‘Light Infantry’ 3-pounders introduced in the 1770’s?

Criticism was also levelled at the ammunition wagons, the two-wheeled ammunition cars and the ‘old pattern’ limbers:  the weight of them was not borne evenly and importantly it was all thrust directly onto the horses, causing them to suffocate or have back problems.

During the Peninsula, the artillery was also short of many support vehicles; due to a lack of ammunition wagons etc the artillerymen had to carry gun powder barrels on their shoulders from the magazines. Furthermore the “Forge-carts are almost all of the oldest pattern, and are of a dead weight to us”. Robe ordered one forge cart to be made up using local timber, and ordered a further 6 to be sent out from Woolwich “…of the most newest and approved form. With the miserable set we have here, it is only increasing expenses to the country and multiplying our labor. The low wheels are abominable.” He considered that the 1788 rolling stock was far superior: “The plan of the frame of the Limber-Wagons is the most proper”. Of the forge cart he says it was based upon the limber wagon design “… the folding sides being fixt to it, and the pole lengthened, to admit turning. The limber boxes serving to carry the tools of the wheeler and collar maker”.

The remainder of the artillery in November 1808 were all “refitting in the Arsenal, and will be immediately applicable for service”. Despite the guns and carriages being refitted, the artillery had a lack of stores and equipment; Robe says they “…were compleat for service, except in Harness, and some Stores which had been applied to the use of the Army going forward, and of which an exact account preparatory to a Demand, is now making”.

The foot artillery was organised into four Brigades as follows:

• 1st Brigade      4 Light 6-pounders, 2 light 5 ½ inch howitzers
• 2nd Brigade    5 Light 6-pounders, 1 light 5 ½ inch howitzers
• 3rd Brigade     5 Medium 12-pounders, 1 heavy 5 ½ inch howitzer
• 4th Brigade     5 Long 6-pounders, 1 heavy 5 ½ inch howitzer

The light artillery, attached to the cavalry had four light 3-pounders and two light 5 ½ inch howitzers, which were all on the double-bracket carriage.

The Royal Horse Artillery at the same date consisted of two troops, each armed with five light 6-pounders and one 5 ½ inch howitzer.

There were also three brigades of Royal German Artillery. The official title for this corps appears to have been either ‘King’s German Artillery’ or ‘Royal German Artillery’, both of which appear in contemporary letters &c. Their equipment was “…now in Good Order” and like their British counterparts “requiring only the harness and stores to replace what has been used, for which a return is now preparing”.

The Royal German Artillery mustered the following pieces:

• Medium 12-pounders               4
• Light 6-pounders                    12
• Heavy 5 ½ inch howitzer         2
• Light 5 ½ inch howitzer          2

Unlike their British counterparts they were all of the new pattern. One must also note that the RGA “Brigades use eight Pieces of Ordnance each, except the 12-pounder; four guns are kept in reserve.”

In other words, the RGA had two eight-gun brigades and a half-brigade of four 12-pounders, which acted in affect as a miniature Park. However, due to the lack of horses, they were “manned in a similar way to the English companies”, i.e. six guns per Brigade, and the spare guns were transferred to the Park or to garrison duties.

The five Brigades of artillery at Lisbon on April 9^th 1809 consisted of:

• Light 3-pounder Brigade           4 light 3-pounders
• 1st Light 6-pounder Brigade      5 light 6-pounders, 1 heavy 5 ½ inch howitzer
• 2nd Light 6-pounder Brigade     4 light 6-pounders, 2 heavy 5 ½ inch howitzers
• 3rd Light 6-pounder Brigade      2 light 6-pounders, 1 heavy 5 ½ inch howitzers
• Heavy 6-pounder Brigade         5 heavy 6-pounders, 1 heavy 5 ½ inch howitzer

The reduced size of some of the Brigades was not due a lack of materiel but quite simply of horses to draw them, which will be discussed in more detail below.

Part 2