In 1686, the newly formed 2nd battalion of the Earl of Dumbarton's regiment today's Royal Scots, returned to Scotland. It was the first time the regiment had been in its native country since it was formed in 1633. During this time the battalion was mustered several times, and these rolls give some insights into the organisation of a regiment in the late 17th century.

The Royal Regiment of Foot was a very unusual regiment in the small Restoration army. Formed in 1633 by a Scots veteran of the Swedish army, it served in the French army from 1633 to 78. The regiment returned to England in the late 1670's as a result of Charles II's international realignments, but were shuffled off to the less"sensitive areas of Ireland and Tangiers. In England from 1684, in 1686 James II replaced 7 companies of his Scottish Footguards with the 2nd battalion Royal Regiment.

The ten companies of the regiment sent to Scotland were commanded by a lieutenant- colonel and nine captains. The companies each had two lieutenants, an ensign, three sergeants, three corporals and two drummers, besides 50 or so private soldiers.

The muster rolls themselves are fairly uniform in appearance. About 10 inches square, the layout looked something like this:

Name of Captain
Captain-Lieutenants
Sergeants
Corporals
Ensign
Drummers
Private Private Private

This company consists of one captain, two lieutenants, one ensign, three sergeants, three corporals, two drummers and fifty private soldiers mustered x on y

The roll is then signed by two officers and a third, non-regimental, person.

Each roll gives the private's name in alphabetical order, although one company used the christian and not surname to determine the order.

The muster rolls cover the period 15th May 1686 to 19th March 1688. and throw up several oddities which are worth commenting on.

Royal Regiment 1686-8 Men common to both 1st and last musters
Captain's Name	Privates Mustered in 86/88	Officers & NCO's	Privates
Lt-Col. Archibald Douglas	50/49	8	10
Charles Barclay	50/49	8	7
Alex Cunningham	50/49	11	8
John Defore/Thomas Scott	50/49	8	7
Lord George Hamilton	50/50	11	7
George Morray	50/49	10	8
Andrew Monro	50/49	8	10
Sir James Morray/ George Graham	51/49	6	7
Lord James Murray	50/49	10	7
John Ruthven	50/49	11	16

The first thing of note is the size of the companies. The official strength of an English army company was a captain, lieutenant, ensign, two sergeants, three corporals and a drummer, as well as 60 privates. The strength of the regiment doesn't meet that, being short of 10-11 privates, each company has in excess a drummer, lieutenant and sergeant!

Of the private soldiers only guesses can be made as to why each company is the same number short. It may be uncharitable to note 10-11 privates' pay would cover the cost of the extra NCO's and officers.

The compliment of non-privates was established before 1685. On 16th July of that year James II ordered all companies to be reduced from 100 to 60 privates and also to lose a drummer and a sergeant. In addition, the Royal Regiment was to lose the extra lieutenant per company which it had had since its service in the French army. It is obvious that this order had little effect on the Royal Regiment, who carried on with., it would seem, official sanction.

The second problem the muster rolls throw up is the dramatic loss of privates between 1686 and 1688. On average, only 1 private in 7 was left, compared to officers and NCO"s who retained 60-90% of their numbers. It would be at a high cost that any army had to replace 80% plus its soldiers every two years. A possible answer is that the regimental privates were rotated into the companies in England in small groups, thus giving the whole regiment the chance to go home. Support for this solution comes from references before the march to Scotland of spare men and NCO's being sent to reinforce garrisons. (3) Furthermore, many new NCO's/drummers appear in the rolls who have not been promoted through the battalion, and this suggests they were with the privates sent north.

Promotions were on a fairly large scale from 1686 to 88. The officer corps numbered 40 men, of whom 7 changed positions during the period. Two captains, John Defore and Sir James Morray, were replaced by First battalion men. (4) Of the lieutenants, two were new commissions, while one was the promotion from 2nd to 1st lieutenancy. The two ensigns were new commissions.

The NCO's and drummers numbered 80 men in total. Of these 80, 30 positions changed, however only 10 were promotions within the battalion. 20 are newcomers, probably bringing new men from England. The 10 promotions were all from the company that promoted them, in no circumstances did a private get promoted to a 'drummer' or did a man get promoted into another company. (5)

To draw too much from so little data is perhaps foolish, especially with the regiment. Dumbartons, being a special case for historic and political reason, however the picture the muster rolls give is of a regiment in change. Over the two years 1/4 of all NCO's changed position as did over 3/4 of the privates. What is evident is that for the private the focus of life was the regiment, not the company.

Notes

(1) 7 companies of guards would be paid the same, more or less, as 10 companies of the line.
(2) Where two names are given, the original captain has been replaced.
(3) References exist in CSPD of men left behind without officers being sent to join other garrisons, or sergeants taking men to reinforce key points.
(4) Defore died; of Morray his reasons for leaving are unclear. One of the replacements, Thomas Scott, was the Colonel's Captain-Lieutenant.
(5) One demotion occurred from corporal to private.