History of the British 1st Division (1809–1909)
| |
---|---|
Active | 1809 – present |
Country | United Kingdom |
Branch | British Army |
Nickname(s) |
|
Anniversaries | Peninsular Day[1] |
Engagements | |
Website | Official website |
The 1st Division is an
During the mid-to late-19th century, several formations bearing the name 1st Division were formed. According to the current division's official website, three such formations form part of its lineage. The first was formed in 1854 in Ottoman Bulgaria and took part in the
While all of the earlier formations to bear the name were raised for a particular war, a new, permanent 1st Division was formed in 1902 in the UK. It fought in the First and the Second World Wars, was converted into the 1st Armoured Division in the 1970s, fought in the Gulf War, and was renamed the 1st (United Kingdom) Division in 2014.
Napoleonic Wars
Peninsular War
During the
On formation, the division consisted of one brigade of
The next engagement was at the Battle of Bussaco on 27 September 1810, where the 1st Division suffered 141 casualties. This was followed by a general retreat to the Lines of Torres Vedras and skirmishes during the Battle of Sobral.[5] The following year, 828 casualties were suffered at the Battle of Fuentes de Oñoro (3–5 May 1811).[6] In early 1812, the division took part in the Siege of Ciudad Rodrigo and then on 22 July fought in the Battle of Salamanca, where it formed the left wing of the army and defended the village of Arapiles. Back-and-forth fighting took place for control of the village, which resulted in 158 casualties.[7] In September 1812, the division invested the castle at Burgos. Over the next four weeks, it repulsed several French sorties and launched two failed assaults with heavy losses. By the end of the unsuccessful siege, close to 2,000 casualties had been suffered. A general retreat from Burgos followed, during which the commanding officer Edward Paget was captured. His replacement, William Stewart, delayed part of the retreat when he ignored orders issued by Wellington.[8][9]
In May 1813, a new campaign was launched. After a march north through Portugal, the Allied Army again entered Spain. The following month, the 1st Division fought in a series of battles;
Waterloo campaign
At the end of the fighting, British and
The 1st Division's first action of the new war came at the
In the late morning, Napoleon ordered the farm complex and its environs to be captured, beginning the battle. As French troops moved forward, the guns of the 1st Division opened fire and checked several advances. They were not able to completely halt the French, who advanced into the woods and drove the division's infantry back into the farm complex.
Maitland's brigade, while based on the crest of the ridge, spent the entire day under heavy French cannon fire, and repulsed several attacks by cavalry and infantry.[23] Around 19:00, the Middle Guard of the Imperial Guard launched the final French attack of the day. In preparation, Maitland's brigade was formed into a four-ranks-deep line and was ordered to lie down. The French attack, due to the disorganised manner in which the troops assembled, came in several waves. The 3rd and 4th Régiment de Chasseurs led under heavy cannon fire that diminished as they closed on the ridge, due to dwindling ammunition stocks. Wellington then reportedly shouted, "Up, Guards, make ready!". The sudden appearance of the brigade caused the French to halt and start to deploy to exchange volleys. Maitland's two battalions heavily engaged the 4th Chasseurs and forced them to retreat. The British Guards followed with a bayonet charge. The sight of these two events, in conjunction with being under heavy attack themselves, resulted in the 3rd Chasseurs also retreating. The next wave was led by the 3rd Régiment de Grenadiers, who were joined by other Middle Guard units and regular French infantry. Maitland's troops halted their chase of the Chasseurs and reformed. Both sides then engaged in a ferocious exchange of volleys. While the French were concentrated on Maitland's men, the British 2nd Division conducted a flanking manoeuvre, fired close-range volleys at the French, and charged, causing them to retreat.[24][25]
During the battle, the division suffered 232 killed and 819 wounded, and four men were reported missing.[16] The following day, in conjunction with the rest of the army, the division marched into France and arrived on the outskirts of Paris on 1 July. The French capitulated a short while later, ending the war.[26][27] The 1st Division was chosen to form part of the Army of Occupation and remained in France until December 1818. It was disbanded when the British military withdrew from France and returned to the UK.[28][29]
Victorian era
According to the 1st Division's official website, its lineage includes the Peninsular War, the Battle of Waterloo, the Crimean War, the Anglo-Zulu War, and the Second Boer War.[30] Other 1st Divisions were raised during the 19th century, each on an ad hoc basis. A 1st Division was raised in 1851 under Major-General Henry Somerset, during the Eighth Xhosa War.[31] In 1857, an expeditionary force was formed from the Indian Army for service in the Second Opium War. The force contained a 1st Division, which was under the command of Major-General John Michel.[32] Major-General Charles Staveley took command of a 1st Division, which was around 10,000 men strong and was formed in September 1871 solely for training manoeuvres in England. During the 1882 Anglo-Egyptian War, Lieutenant-General George Willis commanded another newly established 1st Division.[33]
Crimean War
On 28 March 1854, in support of the
In October, at the Battle of Balaclava, the 1st Division moved from besieging Sevastopol to reinforce British forces in the Balaclava area due to a Russian buildup of troops. Delays in the arrival of additional infantry and a changing tactical situation resulted in the division not engaging Russian forces, and the Charge of the Light Brigade was ordered. Following the ill-fated cavalry charge, it was decided not to commit the infantry to assault Russian positions. If they were captured, the positions would have needed to be occupied by the division and it could have invoked unwanted additional Russian attacks in the area whereas the division was more needed around Sevastopol.[40][b] On 5 November, the Russian Army launched a major attack known as the Battle of Inkerman. The 1st Division, containing three battalions after leaving half of its force to defend Balaclava, moved to reinforce the embattled 2nd Division. In a heavy mist, the Russian force was engaged in close-range fighting with bayonets. Throughout the morning, 582 men of the division were killed or wounded or reported missing.[42][43] During the fighting, the Duke of Cambridge had his horse shot from under him and he retired from the battle.[44] Although the battle ended in an Allied victory, it created conditions that lengthened the siege through the winter into 1855.[42] In 1855, the Light and the 2nd Divisions saw most of the fighting. During the assault on Sevastopol in June, the 1st Division was tasked in a supporting role, and it was held in reserve in September during the Battle of the Great Redan.[45][46] The expeditionary force remained in the Crimea until the war ended in 1856, after which the army demobilised.[47][48]
1870s
Following the Franco-Prussian War (1870–71), the British Army reviewed and attempted to implement an organisation similar to that used by the Prussian Army. The resulting 1875 mobilisation scheme called for 24 divisions spread across eight army corps. These formations did not exist and the scheme looked for scattered units to merge in a time of crisis.[49][50] This method was used to form three divisions, including the 1st, in 1871 when regular, reserve, militia, and yeomanry units—as well as volunteers from across the UK—converged on Aldershot, Hampshire, for training.[51]
In January 1879, the Anglo-Zulu War broke out; over the following three months, back-and-forth fighting included the battles of Isandlwana and Rorke's Drift. Reinforcements were dispatched to Natal to prepare for a second invasion of Zululand, which resulted in the formation of two divisions. No. 1 Division consisted of British, colonial, and African troops, and was 9,215 men strong.[52][53] The division made a slow advance into Zululand along the coastal plain, established forts and improved infrastructure as it moved, and was not engaged in combat. At the close of the campaign, the division was near Port Durnford on the uMlalazi River and accepted the surrender of neighbouring Zulus.[53][54][55] With the war over, the division was broken up in July.[56] Frances Colenso, who wrote about the campaign, stated: "An earlier advance and a little dash would have given the laurels of the second campaign to the 1st Division ... but it was not to be".[57] According to Craig Stockings, Lieutenant-General Garnet Wolseley, who had arrived to oversee the final stage of the campaign, considered the division to have been "entirely irrelevant".[55]
Second Boer War
The Second Boer War broke out on 11 October 1899 after tensions arose between the British Empire, the South African Republic, and the Orange Free State.[58] In response, and to reinforce the British military presence in southern Africa, the British Government mobilised the Natal Field Force in the UK. This force, also known as the First Army Corps, corresponded with the I Corps of the 1875 mobilisation scheme, and included the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Divisions.[59][60] On mobilisation, the 1st Division consisted of the 1st—which was later dubbed the Guards Brigade—and the 2nd Infantry Brigades. The command was given to Lieutenant-General Paul Methuen.[60][61] The majority of the division departed the UK between 20 and 24 October, and arrived at Cape Town around three weeks later.[c] Before their arrival, the Boers invaded the British Cape and Natal colonies, and besieged Kimberley and Ladysmith respectively.[62] These moves changed the initial plan for the army corps, which had been to march on the Boer capital Bloemfontein. Instead, the majority of arriving force, which included the division's 2nd Brigade, was ordered to Natal to lift the siege of Ladysmith. The 1st Division was assigned to relieve Kimberley and allotted the 9th Infantry Brigade, which was newly formed from troops already based in southern Africa, to replace the 2nd Brigade. This brought the division to 7,726 infantry, and 850 cavalry and mounted infantry. Additional support was provided by the 3rd (Highland) Brigade, which secured the division's lines of communication.[63]
The advance towards Kimberley started on 21 November and followed the Cape Town–Kimberley railway line. After skirmishing with Boer forces, the 1st Division encountered the first prepared defensive position near Belmont, where the Boers had entrenched themselves on several hills that dominated the railway track. During the Battle of Belmont, which was fought on 23 November, the division assaulted and captured these positions just after daybreak, although the majority of the Boers withdrew in good order.[64][65][66] British losses amounted to 54 killed and 243 wounded; Boer losses included 80 killed and 70 taken prisoner, in addition to the capture of draft animals and supplies. Frederick Maurice, author of the British official history of the war, lauded the small-unit tactics used by the division but said Methuen failed to convert the "successful engagement into a decisive victory".[67] Stephen Miller, a historian who has written about the war, noted the battle "was a victory of sorts" for the 1st Division but that it was not "the decisive victory Methuen had wanted" due to the lack of mounted troops. This deficiency meant the division was unable to press or attempt to encircle the retreating Boers, who were able to escape and fight again two days later.[66]
Similar battles and outcomes occurred on 25 and 28 November, when the Boers were engaged in the battles of Graspan and Modder River. Between the two battles, 628 casualties were suffered; Boer losses are not known but are believed to be low in comparison—Maurice stated at least 40 Boers were taken prisoner and 73 dead bodies were located.[68] After the Battle of Modder River, the Boers destroyed a railway bridge and retreated to Magersfontein. The 1st Division remained in the area to rest, receive reinforcements, and assist in the construction of a replacement bridge until 10 December. The following day, the Battle of Magersfontein took place. Despite a preliminary artillery bombardment, the 1st Division's attack failed with 948 casualties. Boer losses are estimated between 236 and 275.[69][70] In conjunction with other failed attacks that occurred during the same week, the news of events at Magersfontein led to the political crisis known as Black Week.[71]
Having failed at Magersfontein, Methuen retreated and took up position on the Riet River, which was dubbed the "Modder position". Part of the political backlash of Black Week saw Methuen's command come into question; the War Office wanted to remove him. The preferred replacement was Lieutenant-General Charles Warren, who was commanding the 5th Division and had not yet arrived in southern Africa. General Redvers Buller, commander of the First Army Corps who was also under considerable political pressure due to Black Week, defended Methuen. This defence, coupled with a changing military situation and discussions about morale resulted in no change of command. From the "Modder position", the division conducted reconnaissance and raids into Orange Free State that destroyed farms, burnt crops, and seized livestock; a precursor to the large-scale adoption of similar methods later in the war.[72][73] Such tactics have been seen as war crimes in breach of the 1899 Hague Convention.[74] In January, the 1st Division was assigned a defensive role; that month, artillery, engineers, cavalry, and most of the division's transport were transferred to new commands, as was the Highland Brigade. Rumours of Methuen having scapegoated the brigade, in addition to heavy casualties that included the loss of their commanding officer, resulted in increasing animosity among the soldiers. Their new commander noted all were relieved when the transfer took place, and Methuen privately wrote he believed none would want to serve under him again. The division was provided with four 4.7 in (120 mm) siege guns to reinforce their defensive posture.[75][76] Miller stated the division's presence prevented the Boers from attempting to invade Cape Colony during this period.[77]
Behind the screen provided by the 1st Division, four additional divisions were assembled. On 7 February, a new offensive was launched; it lifted the siege of Kimberley on 15 February. During this offensive, the 1st Division was restricted to flank and lines of communication protection.
In June, the division attempted to trap the elusive Boer leader Christiaan de Wet and relieve besieged Imperial Yeomanry. The first engagement occurred on 1 June near Lindley, where the division stormed Boer positions but found they had been too late to relieve the yeomanry. Skirmishing later took place without major engagements.[82][83] Between 17 and 23 June, several divisions, including the 1st Division, were reorganised as the British Army reacted to the end of conventional warfare and to combat Boer guerrilla warfare tactics. Methuen's command, now a division in name only, became a flying column of five battalions with a force of 3,600 men supported by some artillery pieces and machine guns. The intention was to be more mobile and constantly searching for Boer forces. The rest of the division was transferred to similar columns or assigned to static defences to guard settlements or other vulnerable positions. The frustrating pursuit of de Wet and other Boer leaders went on for months. In September, the division lifted a Boer siege of Schweizer-Reneke, took 28 prisoners, and seized nearly 5,000 animals and 20,000 rounds of ammunition.[84][85] By the end of 1900, the field divisions had ceased to exist; additional garrisons and mobile columns were formed as British strategy was further refined to counter the Boers.[86]
Reform period
In response to the lessons learnt from the Boer War, which included the army's failings in the opening months, the Secretary of State for War St John Brodrick set out to reform the standing army.[87] He intended to create six army corps, three of which would be composed of permanent standing formations that consisted of the army's regulars. They would be ready for immediate dispatch in the event of an imperial crisis or a European war.[88] In 1902, three corps were formed; these would allow up to nine divisions, each of two brigades, to be created; including the reforming of the 1st Division, which was finalised on 30 September 1902 when Major-General Arthur Paget took command. The reformed division consisted of the 1st and the 2nd Brigades, each containing four infantry battalions. The division, along with the 2nd and 5th, was regarded as being ready for war on the order of mobilisation.[89][90]
In 1907, the Haldane Reforms further restructured the regular army into six infantry divisions, each with three brigades. These divisions would form the basis of a British Expeditionary Force (BEF) that would be dispatched to Europe in the case of war. The reform also replaced the army corps with regional commands. The changes resulted in the 3rd Brigade being assigned to the 1st Division; in addition to two field companies of Royal Engineers, two signal companies provided by the Royal Engineers, and three artillery brigades—each containing three batteries of guns. The 1st Division was assigned to Aldershot Command, where the 1st Brigade was located. The 2nd Brigade was based at Blackdown and the 3rd Brigade was housed at Bordon.[91][92]
History beyond 1909
The 1st Division subsequently fought in the
See also
- List of commanders of the British 1st Division
- List of wartime orders of battle for the British 1st Division (1809–1945)
- List of Victoria Cross recipients from the British 1st Division
Notes
Footnotes
- ^ A separate 1st Division, under the command of Major-General William Henry Clinton, operated during this period as part of Lieutenant-General John Murray's independent Army on the Tarragona.[11]
- ^ By the time of the battle, the 93rd (Sutherland Highlanders) Regiment of Foot had been detached from the division and had been assigned to the Balaclava defences. During the battle, it was engaged by Russian cavalry in a famous incident known as the Thin Red Line.[41]
- ^ The final ship to depart did so on 29 November, carrying the divisional cavalry squadron, and did not arrive at Cape Town until Christmas Day.[61]
- ^ Due to the same and similar feats, the division was also referred to as the 'Mudcrushers'. Due to their efforts in reliving besieged outposts or garrisons, the division was also nicknamed 'The Salvation Army' and 'Beechams' (from Beecham's Pills, a popular cure-all).[81]
- ^ Not to be confused with the Second World War-era 1st Armoured Division, which was a separate formation with its own lineage.[97]
Citations
- ^ "1 (UK) Division". Twitter. 6 July 2022. Retrieved 6 July 2022., "1 (UK) Division". Twitter. 22 July 2021. Retrieved 22 July 2021., "1(UK) Division". Twitter. 10 September 2020. Retrieved 10 September 2020., and "1 (UK) Division". Twitter. 14 June 2019. Retrieved 14 June 2019.
- ^ Haythornthwaite 2016, The Divisional System.
- ^ Reid 2004, p. 35.
- ^ Oman 1903, pp. 517–520, 535–543, 554, 645, 650.
- ^ Oman 1908, pp. 362, 397, 408, 439–443, 550.
- ^ Oman 1911, pp. 314, 326–330, 622–623.
- ^ Oman 1914, pp. 169–170, 433–434, 596.
- ^ Reid 2004, p. 38.
- ^ Oman 1922, pp. 17, 29–30, 44–47, 151–152, 741.
- ^ Oman 1922, pp. 321, 374, 405, 446, 476–478, 485, 566.
- ^ Oman 1922, p. 762.
- ^ Oman 1930, pp. 17, 123–127, 172, 236–237, 246–250, 256–259, 332–333, 337, 530, 534, 541, 545, 547.
- ^ Oman 1930, pp. 496, 504–513, 561.
- ^ Glover 2015, pp. 11–22, 31; Weller 2010, p. 34; Siborne 1900, p. 783.
- ^ Siborne 1900, pp. 186–190.
- ^ a b Haythornthwaite 2007, p. 215.
- ^ Siborne 1900, pp. 339–342.
- ^ Siborne 1900, pp. 376–380.
- ^ Glover 2014, p. 177.
- ^ Siborne 1900, pp. 381–384, 435, 445–446, 486–488.
- ^ Glover 2014, pp. 177–178.
- ^ Siborne 1900, pp. 521, 570.
- ^ Siborne 1900, pp. 480–484, 527.
- ^ Siborne 1900, pp. 521–526, 530–531.
- ^ Glover 2014, pp. 177–180, 182.
- ^ Siborne 1900, p. 747.
- ^ Glover 2014, pp. 217, 224.
- ^ Ross-of-Bladensburg 1896, pp. 48–50.
- ^ Veve 1992, p. 159.
- ^ a b "1st (UK) Division". Ministry of Defence. Retrieved 27 June 2022.
- ^ "No. 21245". The London Gazette. 16 September 1851. p. 2350.
- ^ Butler 1926, pp. 192–194.
- ^ Verner 1905, pp. 55, 236–237.
- ^ Royle 2004, pp. 127–129; Barthorp 1980, p. 155; Bowden 1991, p. 16; Ponting 2006, p. 72.
- ^ Ponting 2006, p. 53.
- ^ Ponting 2006, pp. 89, 94.
- ^ Royle 2004, pp. 210, 227–229.
- ^ "No. 21606". The London Gazette. 8 October 1854. p. 3050.
- ^ Ffrench Blake 2006, pp. 169–170.
- ^ Royle 2004, pp. 267, 272, 277.
- ^ McGuigan 2001, pp. 21–22.
- ^ a b Royle 2004, Inkerman: An Infantryman's Battle.
- ^ "No. 21631". The London Gazette. 22 November 1854. p. 3695.
- ^ Ponting 2006, p. 152.
- ^ Royle 2004, p. 403.
- ^ McGuigan 2001, pp. 44, 58.
- ^ Ffrench Blake 2006, pp. 143–144, 150–151.
- ^ Demchak 2011, p. 127.
- ^ Furse 1883, pp. 9–11.
- ^ "Memorandum Of The Secretary Of State Relating To The Army Estimates, 1887–8: Mobilization". Parliamentary Debates (Hansard). House of Commons. 19 December 1979. Retrieved 29 October 2019.
- ^ Verner 1905, p. 55.
- ^ Colenso & Durnford 1880, pp. 394–395.
- ^ a b Laband 2009, p. 5.
- ^ Colenso & Durnford 1880, pp. 433–435, 461.
- ^ a b Stockings 2015, p. 48.
- ^ Cooper King 1897, pp. 363–364.
- ^ Colenso & Durnford 1880, p. 435.
- ^ Raugh 2004, p. 51.
- ^ Dunlop 1938, p. 72.
- ^ a b Creswicke 1900a, Chart of Staff Appointments Made at the Commencement of the War.
- ^ a b Maurice 1906, p. 473.
- ^ Creswicke 1900a, pp. 52, 66, 136, 160.
- ^ Maurice 1906, pp. 197–198, 200–203, 214–215.
- ^ Maurice 1906, pp. 216–227.
- ^ Creswicke 1900a, pp. 86–88.
- ^ a b Miller 1999, p. 94.
- ^ Maurice 1906, pp. 227–228.
- ^ Maurice 1906, pp. 232–260.
- ^ Maurice 1906, pp. 260, 304–305, 312, 329.
- ^ Pakenham 1979, p. 206.
- ^ Maurice 1906, p. 380.
- ^ Maurice 1906, pp. 376–377, 385, 387–388.
- ^ Miller 1999, pp. 165, 169–172, 174–175.
- ^ Miller 2010, p. 331.
- ^ Maurice 1906, pp. 433, 437–439.
- ^ Miller 1999, pp. 171, 176.
- ^ Miller 1999, p. 175.
- ^ Maurice 1907, pp. 12, 37–38.
- ^ Miller 1999, pp. 176, 178.
- ^ Maurice 1907, pp. 145, 183, 241, 332–333; Maurice 1908, pp. 66, 70, 107–108, 124–125; Creswicke 1900a, pp. 39, 45, 89, 161; Miller 1999, p. 188.
- ^ Miller 1999, pp. 188–189.
- ^ Maurice 1908, pp. 131–133.
- ^ Creswicke 1900b, p. 168.
- ^ Maurice 1908, pp. 134–136, 243, 342, 360, 497.
- ^ Miller 1999, pp. 189–192.
- ^ Creswicke 1901, p. 138.
- ^ Satre 1976, p. 117.
- ^ Satre 1976, p. 121.
- ^ "No. 27482". The London Gazette. 14 October 1902. p. 6496., "Naval & Military Intelligence". The Times. No. 36889. 3 October 1902. p. 8., and "Hart's Annual Army List, 1904". National Library of Scotland. p. 97.
- ^ Dunlop 1938, pp. 218–219.
- ^ "Hart's Annual Army List, 1909". National Library of Scotland. pp. 97–98.
- ^ Dunlop 1938, pp. 245, 262.
- ^ Joslen 2003, pp. 35–36.
- ^ Lord & Watson 2003, p. 25; Smart 2005, Murray, General Sir Horatius (1903–1989), GCB, KBE, DSO.
- .
- ^ Lord & Watson 2003, p. 25; Blume 2007, p. 7.
- ^ Lord & Watson 2003, pp. 23–26.
- ^ Blume 2007, p. 7; Heyman 2007, p. 36.
- ^ Tanner 2014, pp. 50–51.
- ^ Kemp, Ian (2020). "The UK's Armoured Fist". EDR Magazine (European Defence Review) (52 July/August 2020): 30–40.
References
- Barthorp, Michael (1980). The Armies of Britain, 1485-1980. London: OCLC 252418281.
- Blume, Peter (2007). BAOR The Final Years: Vehicles of the British Army of the Rhine 1980 – 1994. Erlangen, Germany: Tankograd Publishing. OCLC 252418281.
- Blumenson, Martin (1984). Mark Clark: The Last of the Great World War II Commanders. New York: Cordon & Weed. ISBN 978-0-312-92517-8.
- Bowden, Mark (1991). Pitt Rivers: The Life and Archaeological Work of Lieutenant-General Augustus Henry Lane Fox Pitt River DCL, FRS, FSA. Cambridge: ISBN 978-0-52140-077-0.
- Butler, Lewis (1926). The Annals of the King's Royal Rifle Corps. Vol. III. London: OCLC 81665440.
- OCLC 731088583.
- Cooper King, Charles (1897). The Story of the British Army. London: Methuen. OCLC 752927257.
- Creswicke, Louis (1900a). South Africa and the Transvaal War. Vol. II. Edinburgh: T. C. & E. C. Jack. OCLC 154231374.
- Creswicke, Louis (1900b). South Africa and the Transvaal War. Vol. V. Edinburgh: T. C. & E. C. Jack. OCLC 154231374.
- Creswicke, Louis (1901). South Africa and the Transvaal War. Vol. VI. Edinburgh: T. C. & E. C. Jack. OCLC 154231374.
- Demchak, Chris C. (2011). Wars of Disruption and Resilience: Cybered Conflict, Power, and National Security. Athens, Georgia: ISBN 978-0-82034-137-8.
- Dunlop, John K. (1938). The Development of the British Army 1899–1914. London: Methuen. OCLC 59826361.
- Ffrench Blake, R.L.V. (2006) [1971]. The Crimean War. Barnsley: ISBN 978-1-844-15449-4.
- OCLC 561112902.
- Glover, Gareth (2014). Waterloo: Myth and Reality. Barnsley: Pen & Sword Books. ISBN 978-1-78159-356-1.
- Glover, Gareth (2015). Waterloo: The Defeat of Napoleon's Imperial Guard: Henry Clinton, the 2nd Division and the End of a 200-year-old Controversy. Barnsley: Pen & Sword Books. ISBN 978-1-84832-744-3.
- Haythornthwaite, Philip (2007). The Waterloo Armies: Men, Organization and Tactics. Barnsley: Pen & Sword. ISBN 978-1-47380-043-4.
- Haythornthwaite, Philip (2016). Picton's Division at Waterloo. Barnsley: Pen & Sword Books. ISBN 978-1-78159-102-4.
- Heyman, Charles (2007). The British Army Guide 2008–2009. Barnsley: Pen & Sword. ISBN 978-1-783-40811-5.
- Joslen, H. F. (2003) [1960]. Orders of Battle: Second World War, 1939–1945. Uckfield, East Sussex: Naval and Military Press. ISBN 978-1-84342-474-1.
- Laband, John (2009). Historical Dictionary of the Zulu Wars. Historical Dictionaries of War, Revolution, and Civil Unrest. Lanham, Maryland: The Scarecrow Press. ISBN 978-0-81086-078-0.
- Lord, Cliff; Watson, Graham (2003). The Royal Corps of Signals: Unit Histories of the Corps (1920–2001) and its Antecedents. West Midlands: Helion. ISBN 978-1-874622-07-9.
- OCLC 85910290.
- Maurice, John Frederick (1907). History of the War in South Africa, 1899–1902. Vol. II. London: Hurst and Blackett. OCLC 85910290.
- Maurice, John Frederick (1908). History of the War in South Africa, 1899–1902. Vol. III. London: Hurst and Blackett. OCLC 85910290.
- McGuigan, Ron (2001). 'Into Battle!' British Orders of Battle for the Crimean War, 1854–56. Bowdon, Cheshire: Withycut House. ISBN 978-1-89924-402-7.
- Miller, Stephen M. (1999). Lord Methuen and the British Army: Failure and Redemption in South Africa. London: Frank Cass. ISBN 978-0-71464-904-7.
- Miller, Stephen M. (2010). "Duty or Crime? Defining Acceptable Behavior in the British Army in South Africa, 1899—1902". Journal of British Studies. 49 (2). Cambridge University Press: 331. S2CID 143145178.
- Oman, Charles (1903). A History of the Peninsular War. Vol. II Jan.–Sept. 1809. Oxford: OCLC 185228609.
- Oman, Charles (1908). A History of the Peninsular War. Vol. III Sept. 1809 – Dec. 1810. Oxford: Clarendon Press. OCLC 185228609.
- Oman, Charles (1911). A History of the Peninsular War. Vol. IV Dec. 1810 – Dec. 1811. Oxford: Clarendon Press. OCLC 699709225.
- Oman, Charles (1914). A History of the Peninsular War. Vol. V Oct. 1811 – Aug. 31, 1812. Oxford: Clarendon Press. OCLC 185228609.
- Oman, Charles (1922). A History of the Peninsular War. Vol. VI September 1, 1812 – August 5, 1813. Oxford: Clarendon Press. OCLC 185228609.
- Oman, Charles (1930). A History of the Peninsular War. Vol. VII August 1813 – April 14, 1814. Oxford: Oxford University Press. OCLC 185228609.
- ISBN 978-0-86850-046-1.
- Ponting, Clive (2006). The Crimean War: The Truth Behind the Myth. Sydney: ISBN 978-0-71263-653-7.
- Raugh, Harold E. (2004). The Victorians at War, 1815–1914: An Encyclopedia of British Military History. Santa Barbara, California: ISBN 978-1-57607-925-6.
- Reid, Stuart (2004). Wellington's Army in the Peninsula 1809–14. Oxford: Osprey Publishing. ISBN 978-1-84176-517-4.
- Ross-of-Bladensburg, John Foster George (1896). A History of the Coldstream Guards from 1815 to 1895. London: A.D. Inness & Co. OCLC 1152610342– via Gutenberg.org.
- Royle, Trevor (2004) [2000]. Crimea: The Great Crimean War, 1854–1856. New York: ISBN 978-1-403-96416-8.
- Satre, Lowell J. (1976). "St. John Brodrick and Army Reform, 1901–1903". S2CID 154171561.
- Siborne, William (1900). The Waterloo Campaign (5th ed.). Westminster: Archibald Constable and Co. OCLC 672639901.
- Smart, Nick (2005). Biographical Dictionary of British Generals of the Second World War. Barnsley: Pen & Sword Military. ISBN 978-1-78346-036-6.
- ISBN 978-1-10709-482-6.
- Tanner, James (2014). The British Army since 2000. Oxford: Osprey Publishing. ISBN 978-1-78200-593-3.
- Verner, William Willoughby (1905). The Military Life of H. R. H. George, Duke of Cambridge. Vol. II. London: John Murray. OCLC 926919206.
- Veve, Thomas Dwight (1992). The Duke of Wellington and the British Army of Occupation in France, 1815-1818. Westport, Connecticut and London: Greenwood Press. ISBN 978-0-31327-941-6.
- Weller, Jac (2010) [1992]. Wellington at Waterloo. Barnsley: Frontline Books. ISBN 978-1-84832-586-9.
Further reading
- Wilson, Peter Liddell (1985). The First Division 1809-1985: A Short Illustrated History. Viersen, Germany: 1st Armoured Division. OCLC 500105706.
- Wilson, Peter Liddell (1993). The First Division 1809-1993: A Short Illustrated History (2nd ed.). Herford, Germany: 1st Division. OCLC 29635235.
External links
- "Division's official Twitter".
- "Defence of the Chateau de Hougoumont by the flank Company, Coldstream Guards, 1815". National Army Museum. Retrieved 27 June 2022.
- "'The 3rd Regiment of Foot Guards (now Scots Guards) at the battle of Waterloo, Jun 18th 1815. Repulsing the final charge of the old Guard'". National Army Museum. Retrieved 29 June 2022.