Great Britain has produced a race of heroes who, in moments of danger and terror, have stood as “firm as the rocks of their own native shores,” and when half the world have been arrayed against them have fought the battles of their country with heroic fortitude. We have written with no wish to foster a bellicose spirit, for we regard war as an evil which is only endurable when the cause is just. But no love of peace should deaden our admiration of brilliant deeds, and unquailing heroism. War, like peace, has its virtues, which only a fanatic will under-value. Happy England no longer girds on the sword but with a good reason. But we presume that a record of achievements in war—victories complete and surpassing—gained by our countrymen, our brothers, our fellow citizen-in-arms, who have waved our triumphant standard on the Indus, the Tagus, the St. Lawrence, and the Seine (the thunder of our guns has resounded in China, in the mountains of the Pyrenees, and on the coast of the Black Sea)—a record which stimulates the memory of the bravest of the brave, and brings their gallant deeds before us—will, we are confident, prove acceptable to millions of the happy inhabitants of our silver-coasted isle.

The natives of Britain have at all periods been celebrated for innate courage and unshaken firmness; and the national superiority of the British troops over those of the finest armies of Europe, as well as the multitudinous hosts of Asia, has been evinced in the midst of the most imminent perils. History contains so many proofs of extraordinary acts of bravery that no doubts can be entertained concerning the facts which will follow in this work.

It must be admitted that the distinguishing feature of the British soldier is intrepidity. This quality was manifested by our forefathers when their country was invaded by Julius CÆsar, when the undaunted Britons rushed into the sea to attack the Roman soldiers; and although they had little or no discipline, and were armed in an inferior manner to their adversaries, yet their fierce and dauntless bearing intimidated CÆsar’s favourite Tenth Legion. But their bravery was unavailing against CÆsar’s disciplined legions. In the course of time a military system, with discipline and subordination, was introduced; and British courage being thus regulated, a full development of the national character followed, and in the hour of need it has frequently shone forth in all its native brilliancy in a way that nothing could daunt, nothing dismay.

The military force of the Anglo-Saxons consisted principally of infantry. The chivalrous Thanes, noblemen and men of property, fought on horseback, and armed and mounted a portion of their retainers. The infantry consisted of two classes—heavy and light; the former carried large shields, and were armed with spikes and long broad-swords, and spears; while the latter were armed with swords and spears only. There were also men armed with clubs, and others with battle-axes and javelins.

The Saxon law esteemed every man a soldier, unless incapacitated by age or physical weakness, and he was regularly trained in the use of arms. The head of a family was the leader of all the capable males in that family.

The line of battle of our Saxon forefathers was simple in the extreme. The Royal standard stood in the centre; around it gathered the mounted Thanes, while the infantry stood in the foremost ranks to bear the brunt of the fighting. The weapons carried by the infantry during several reigns succeeding the Conquest were bows and arrows, half-pikes, swords, and daggers. Armour was worn on the head and body, and in course of time the practice became general, and men were so completely encased in steel that it was almost impossible to slay them. But the introduction of gunpowder for purposes of war, in the early part of the fourteenth century, produced a change in the arms of both mounted and dismounted soldiers. Bows and arrows gave place to various kinds of fire-arms, but the British archers continued formidable gentlemen to face. We find that, during the reign of Queen Elizabeth, companies of infantry numbered from 150 to 300 men. Each company had a colour, and were armed in five different ways. A company formed up for attack, or defence, would appear thus:—

[COLOUR]

It was customary to unite a number of companies into one body called a regiment, which frequently numbered 3000 men, exclusive of officers. Armour was gradually laid aside by the infantry in the 17th century, as it was not proof against the musket-ball, which weighed one-tenth of a pound.

The introduction of long knives or bayonets, in 1672, which at first were made to fit or screw into the muzzles of the muskets to be used after the ammunition had been exhausted, soon became a great favourite with our men. In the early part of the 17th century regiments were reduced to 1000 men, exclusive of officers; and gunpowder, which heretofore had been carried in flasks, was made up into cartridges and carried in pouches, as now. In 1764 the infantry discontinued carrying the sword. Since then the arms of the infantry have been limited to the musket or rifle and bayonet. The arms and equipments of the British soldier have seldom differed materially from those of other European States. At times, however, through neglect, the arms of our soldiers have been inferior to those of nations against whom they have had to contend. Such was the case at Inkermann with our Fourth Division and Marines; but, notwithstanding this disadvantage, the superiority of the Briton came out in all its splendour.

Great Britain has produced a race of lion-like champions, who have dared to confront a host of foes, and have proved themselves valiant with any arms. At CreÇy King Edward III., at the head of 30,000 men, defeated 100,000 renowned French veterans, completely routing them from the field. Ten years afterwards, Edward, Prince of Wales, at Poictiers, defeated another French army of 60,000 horse, besides infantry, with but 14,000 of the sons of Albion, capturing the French King and his son upon the field. Again, on the field of Agincourt, King Henry V., with an army of about 13,000 Britons, routed the Constable of France, with the flower of the French nobility and 60,000 of their choicest troops. In the wars of Queen Anne the fame of the British army, under the unconquerable and redoubtable Duke of Marlborough, was spread throughout the world. Witness the deeds of that brave army in Egypt in 1801. Under the noble Abercrombie, there the vainly styled “Invincibles” had to bow and give up the palm to the descendants of CreÇy. Again, we would glance at that noble army throughout the Peninsula and the south of France, under the command of the immortal Wellington. Here Britons, side by side with the gallant sons of the Emerald Isle, routed their boastful enemy from field after field, and nailed victory after victory to our glorious old standard. We think it has been pretty clearly proved that the sons of Albion, side by side with the noted boys of Erin’s Isle, have not degenerated from their unconquerable forefathers who fought and conquered at CreÇy, Poictiers, Agincourt, and Blenheim. And the determined stands made by the British army at Waterloo and Inkermann, against overwhelming odds, has compelled the world to admire. We would not forget the achievements of the invincible bands on the heights in front of Delhi, and at the Residency of Lucknow; also in the recent battles in the Soudan, against multitudinous fanatics. All engaged there proved that they were no unworthy successors of the veterans of Marlborough, Wellington, and Clyde, who fought and conquered on a hundred fields.

We say again that the sons of Albion of the 19th century can produce a catalogue of victories, both by sea and by land, that stands unparalleled in the annals of the world. The fame of the deeds of the past and present generations in the various battle-fields where the robust sons of Albion and Erin’s Isle have fought and conquered surrounds the British standard with a halo of glory. These achievements will live in the pages of history, stimulating the rising generations to the end of time. It has been frequently proved of late, in the hour of peril, that they are true and loyal sons, and “faithful unto death.” The rank and influence which our much beloved isle has attained among the nations of the world have in a great measure been won for her by her intrepid sons. And to all who have the welfare of their country at heart we hope the following pages will prove instructive and interesting.

T. G.