Keith Dowen

One type of clothing system used in the English Civil War, more common amongst cavalrymen than infantrymen, was the linen shirt, wool waistcoat and buff-coat. Ballistic testing was conducted to estimate the velocity at which 50% of 12-bore lead spherical projectiles (V50) would be expected to perforate this clothing system when mounted on gelatine (a tissue simulant used in wound ballistic studies). An estimated six-shot V50 for the clothing system was calculated as 102 m/s. The distance at which the projectile would have decelerated from the muzzle of the weapon to this velocity in free flight was triple the recognised effective range of weapons of the era suggesting that the clothing system would provide limited protection for the wearer. The estimated V50 was also compared with recorded bounce-and-roll data; this suggested that the clothing system could provide some protection to the wearer from ricochets. Finally, potential wounding behind the clothing system was investigated; t...

One type of clothing system used in the English Civil War, more common amongst cavalrymen than infantrymen, was the linen shirt, wool waistcoat and buff-coat. Ballistic testing was conducted to estimate the velocity at which 50% of 12-bore lead spherical projectiles (V 50) would be expected to perforate this clothing system when mounted on gelatine (a tissue simulant used in wound ballistic studies). An estimated six-shot V 50 for the clothing system was calculated as 102 m/s. The distance at which the projectile would have decelerated from the muzzle of the weapon to this velocity in free flight was triple the recognised effective range of weapons of the era suggesting that the clothing system would provide limited protection for the wearer. The estimated V 50 was also compared with recorded bounce-and-roll data; this suggested that the clothing system could provide some protection to the wearer from ricochets. Finally, potential wounding behind the clothing system was investigated; the results compared favourably with seventeenth century medical writings.

With power to enforce government directives devolved to county authorities, the process of creating an 'exact militia' equipped with modern, standardised arms and armour was often a slow and difficult process. Contemporary documents reveal that in many parts of the country the militia was both untrained and poorly equipped and in need of urgent reform. Responsibility for the condition of the militia was shared among a number of individuals, many of whom lacked enthusiasm in fulfilling their military obligations. However, the active participation of the lieutenancy was key to the successful implementation of government policy. Although recent developments in firearms technology and battlefield tactics resulted in the declining importance of armour, it had certainly not been rendered obsolete. Maintenance was largely carried out on an ad-hoc basis and the storage of armour and military equipment varied considerably. Notwithstanding the myriad difficulties that the Jacobean and Caroline governments faced, progress was made particularly under Charles I who took a keen interest in creating a professional well-armed militia. Although the 'exact militia' program was not a complete success, by 1638 the militia was, by and large, as well trained and equipped as it had been since the late 16th century.