Heights (and soldiers)

Thanks!

Steve Brown has a database of 470 soldiers in the 45th Foot and their average height was about 5' 7". So I think we might be able to say based on a sample of almost 10,000 records that the average height was probably about 66.5 inches.

In my database of 7,250 British rankers of this period, the average height was 5’ 6.32”.

Have you seen this post LINK? For my forthcoming book, Wellington at Bay, I did some work on the heights of the French soldiers at Villamuriel 1812. A sample of 112 men were shown by the Matricules to have an average height of 65 inches which agrees with the 64.6 average given in the LINK.

Regards

Actually the 1st Foot Guards records are quite detailed. In addition to the information about physical traits, they list their occupation upon enlistment, plus the home of record. Between the two you should be able to obtain a fairly good idea about what part of society they came from. For example for occupations:

Table 3 – 11: Top Five Former Occupations of the Soldiers in the 1st Foot Guards at Waterloo

Occupation Number Percent

Labourer 954 45%

Weaver 257 12%

Cordwainer / Shoemaker 124 6%

Tailor 55 3%

Framework Knitter 30 1%

Thanks for everyone's comments.

I managed to find a few things about height in the period (after finding the term anthropometry to search). Turns out a lot of the academic discussion (mostly economic historians discussing the impact of urbanisation and early industrialisation) is based on data from the military, with all sorts of complicated attempts to adjust for it. I can't help reading it and thinking a few of us could add something to this debate as we know the context that the sources were created much better.

So I'm kind of trapped in a data loop - the information about heights in Britain comes mostly from soldiers, so I can't really judge how soldiers compared to the rest of the population as reconstructed information about the population comes from records of soldiers...

For French Army you can consult the registres des matricules, try that link to find out more

https://www.memoiredeshommes.sga.defense.gouv.fr/fr/arkotheque/navigation_facette/index.php?f=regmatricule&mde_present=tableau&delcrit=20&v_20_1=%3Ctitleproper%3EGR+21+YC+1+%E0+963.+Registres+matricules+des+sous-officiers+et+hommes+de+troupe+de+l%27infanterie+de+ligne+%281802-1815%29.%3C%2Ftitleproper%3E

funningly the links doesn't work and shows a different picture than on my desk, you should go to

https://www.memoiredeshommes.sga.defense.gouv.fr/fr/article.php?larub=202&titre=registres-matricules-dit-controles-de-troupe-

and muddle yourself through, maybe some of those professional historians here on the board can advise in a better way how to access this source.

I came across a few of comments on height in some inspection reports for some of the regiments in the 2nd Division in 1812. The 50th had 300 men were under 5' 6" and the inspecting general made a note of this in his comments. The 92nd ‘was not a tall body of men’ with 150 men under 5' 5". The 39th were ‘not tall but of a serviceable size’. It's difficult to get accurate average heights from British inspection reports as the lowest heights are 'under 5' 5"' so you don't know how short the outliers are, the same with the fewer tallest men.

When I was working on the 5/60th the average did look to be slightly taller than British regiments but that may have just have been that the recruits were older with most having already served in continental armies.

Barbara Chambers did a massive study of the British 1st Foot Guards at Waterloo called Men of the 1st Foot Guards at Waterloo and Beyond. In it she compiled the records of over 2500 officers and men who served in the regiment in 1815. For the enlisted soldiers it included much demographic data, included age, height, hair and eye color, occupation at enlistment, etc. It is a gold mine for this type of information. The following is from my and Ron McGuigan's book Wellington's Foot Guards at Waterloo:

Physically, recruits entering the 1st Foot Guards were taller than the average recruit in the British Army. Between 1802 and 1812, recruits were an average height of 66 inches (1.68 meters).[1] The average height for the 1st Foot Guards at Waterloo was 68 inches (1.73 meters). Although Army regulations stipulated that a recruit had to be at least 63 inches (1.6 meters), boys under the age of 16 could be 60 inches (1.5 meters) while those under the age of 17 had to be at least 62 inches (1.6 meters).[2] The median height for the soldiers in 1st Foot Guards was also 68 inches. The regulation concerning height appeared to be followed, however in the case of 20 year old Private William Walker of the 2nd Battalion, they were overlooked. When he enlisted in 1813 at the age of 18, he was only 60 inches (1.5 meters) tall. Drummer John Crooke of the 3rd Battalion enlisted at the 16 in 1814 and was only 56 inches (1.4 meters). Forty soldiers were over 72 inches (1.8 meters). The tallest was Private Charles Thompson of the 2nd Battalion, who was 75.5 inches (1.9 meters).

[1] Floud; page 102 [2] De Fonblanque; page 242

Table 4 – 7: Heights by Rank in the 1st Foot Guards at Waterloo

Rank Average Tallest Shortest

Sergeant 68 inches 74 inches 65.5 inches

Corporal 68 inches 73 inches 64 inches

Drummer 66 inches 71 inches 56 inches

Privates 68 inches 74.5 inches 60 inches

Another myth of the Napoleonic Wars was that the shorter men were in the Light Companies, since they were often used as skirmishers being smaller would be an advantage. Although there is some logic in this, it did not hold true for the 1st Foot Guards’s Light Companies. Their average height was 68 inches, the same as the regiment.

Table 4 – 8: Heights of the Light Companies Soldiers in the 1st Foot Guards at Waterloo

Average Tallest Shortest Median Height

2nd Bn 68 inches 70.5 inches 66 inches 68 inches

3rd Bn 68 inches 71 inches 60 inches 68 Inches