SUTLER TO HIS MAJESTY`S GUARD OF FOOT

SUTLER TO HIS MAJESTY'S GUARD OF FOOT
George
Berry
I
have
long
been
intrigued
by
a
seventeenth-century
Williamson u n d e r Uncertain 5 0 , w h i c h r e a d s ,
token,
listed
in
O b v . FTEDWARD ' L L O Y D - S V T T L E R - T O - HIS
Rev.
FTMAIESTIES-GARD-
OF- FOOT*
it
LL it
E ft M
HIS HALF
PENY
A building,
probably
a barracks,
is featured
on the
obverse.
This token w a s u n d o u b t e d l y issued by a sutler s u p p l y i n g food a n d d r i n k
to soldiers of the Royal Regiment of Foot G u a r d s , n e w l y formed in 1665 from
an amalgamation
of Colonel John R u s s e l l ' s regiment
and
Lord
Wentworth's
regiment.1
Thomas W e n t w o r t h ' s corps, g i v e n the designation of His M a j e s t y ' s
Royal
Regiment
of Foot G u a r d s ,
was
formed
from
the
large
n u m b e r s of
Englishmen
w h o flocked to C h a r l e s ' s s t a n d a r d in F l a n d e r s in September 1656.
Colonel John Russell w a s g i v e n command of a similar body formed in London
during
Restoration y e a r ,
w h i c h w a s also k n o w n as the Royal Regiment of
G u a r d s or His M a j e s t y ' s own Regiment of Foot.
The cpmbined body in 1665 first became k n o w n as the K i n g ' s Regiment
of Foot G u a r d s , later as the First Regiment of Foot G u a r d s .
It w a s not
until 1815 that the term G r e n a d i e r G u a r d s w a s u s e d .
The Prince Regent
a p p r o v e d the new title, The First or G r e n a d i e r Regiment of Foot G u a r d s , to
commemorate their defeat of the G r e n a d i e r s of the French Imperial G u a r d s
at the battle of Waterloo.
It seems clear,
therefore, that E d w a r d L l o y d ' s tokens were struck to
be
used
by
his
customers,
guardsmen,
who were the forerunners of the
Grenadier Guards.
They cannot be associated with the other contemporary
royal g u a r d s
regiment,
M o n c k ' s regiment of foot, w h i c h ,
after the battle
of D u n b a r ,
had
its h e a d q u a r t e r s
at Coldstream on the T w e e d .
After the
Restoration this regiment w a s mustered on Tower Hill a n d ordered to lay
down its arms a n d moments later to take them u p a g a i n as the K i n g ' s Second
Regiment of Foot G u a r d s .
The men refused to accept their new n a m e , claiming that they were second to none!
T h e y were then c o m m a n d e d to take up
arms as the Lord G e n e r a l ' s Regiment of Foot G u a r d s .
This w a s its title
between
1661
and
1670.
From 1670 o n w a r d s the regiment became
known
officially as the Coldstream Regiment of Foot G u a r d s .
There are
records of His
Lloyd himself.
several references to men b e a r i n g
the name Lloyd in the
M a j e s t y ' s Royal Regiment of Foot G u a r d s , but not to E d w a r d
This is not surprising as sutlers were c i v i l i a n s ,
belonging
SUTLER TO HIS MAJESTY'S GUARD OF FOOT
159
to the rag taggle of camp followers, w h o supplied soldiers with their v a r i e d
needs.
The word sutler, derived from the D u t c h , has been defined as a
small v e n d o r , petty t r a d e s m a n , victualler, soldier's servant.
A significant
army
ordinance
of
31
December
1590 r e a d s :
'the
Provost
Marechal
and
Sergeant Major of every garrison
shall keepe a perfect roll of all such
E n g l i s h victuallers called in Dutch sutlers, petty marchants a n d other loose
persons of the E n g l i s h n a t i o n ' .
S h a k e s p e a r e ' s Henry V has the line,
'I
shall sutler be unto the campe a n d profits will a c c r u e ' .
A reference to a
sutler attached to a g u a r d s regiment is to be found in a London Gazette of
1701, ' M r Wollaston, sutler at the Horse G u a r d s ' .
By the eighteenth century sutlers attached to British regiments h a d to
be licensed.
Their stalls must h a v e been a r e g u l a r feature not only of camp
life, but also on the battlefield,
as the following army o r d i n a n c e of 1844
reveals:
'no huts are to be allowed in front of, or between the intervals
of the battalions, their proper situation is in the rear of the line of petty
sutlers'.
It seems too that licensed sutlers were subject to the Mutiny Act.
Although most literary references to the sutler seem to be derogatory,
there c a n be no doubt that he p l a y e d an important role in the life of a
regiment.
As Fortescue reminds u s ,
there w a s no such thing as a n Army Service Corps until the end of the
nineteenth century
and
all the business of transport a n d s u p p l y w a s
done b y c o n t r a c t . . .
In that old battleground of the Coldstream,
the
Low
Countries,
a
contractor
could
always
be
found
who
knew
the
b u s i n e s s thoroughly.
But the contractor w a s concerned only with the
b r e a d a n d fuel.
Everything else w a s a regimental matter conducted b y
the regimental sutler, w h i c h meant more stoppages, more financial regulations a n d more accounts.
Incidentally this arrangement must h a v e
been b a d for discipline, for the soldier w h o h a d to p a y for his ration
of meat,
h a d great temptation to lay violent h a n d s upon every fowl,
pig or sheep that came his w a y .
It is worth while to note that in the
regimental sutler lay the germ of the regimental c a n t e e n . 2
I am informed that to this d a y small unit locations in Northern
Ireland,
w h i c h would not be a v i a b l e proposition for the N . A . A . F . I . , employ a sutler,
usually
a
Pakistani,
who
provides
an
amazingly
high s t a n d a r d
canteen
service.3
Returning
to E d w a r d L l o y d ' s token I deem it no coincidence that the
first quarter-master of the newly formed First Regiment of Foot G u a r d s w a s
a John L l o y d .
He w a s appointed on 15 July 1665.
What could be more
natural than that he should employ a member of his family in the capacity
of regimental sutler?
The quarter-master a n d sutler between them supplied
the regiment's
needs.
I n c i d e n t a l l y , John Lloyd w a s replaced as quartermaster b y Thomas Jones on 3 August
1667.
John Lloyd w a s never commissioned, but several members of the Lloyd family were (The First or Grenadier G u a r d s h a s a long history of family loyalty to the r e g i m e n t ) .
APPOINTED
William
Lloyd
Sir Godfrey
Charles
Thus
no
less
than
Lloyd
Lloyd
five
lieutenant
captain
November 1660
August 1667
captain
May
ensign
lieutenant
captain
July 1667
September 1673
November 1681
members
of
the
Lloyd
1666
family
served
the
King's
160
SUTLER TO HIS MAJESTY'S GUARD OF FOOT
Regiment of Foot G u a r d s d u r i n g the period of the t o k e n ' s circulation:
Sir
Godfrey a n d William as c a p t a i n s , Charles as e n s i g n , John as quarter-master
a n d E d w a r d in a civilian capacity as sutler.
The token itself is u n d a t e d , but its style a n d lettering indicate that
it w a s struck in the 1660s.
Morley a n d Pegg in a recent p a p e r classify
similar tokens b e a r i n g a pierced cinqfoil mintmark a n d a cable pattern inner
circle as Group K (1665-66 J.1*
Such
a dating would indicate that it w a s
struck d u r i n g the earliest years of the newly a m a l g a m a t e d Royal Regiment
of Foot G u a r d s ,
a n d would exactly coincide with John L l o y d ' s
appointment
as quarter-master in July 1665.
NOTES
1.
For this a n d other details of
Sir F . W . H a m i l t o n ,
The
Origin
Guards,
3 vols. (1874, 1 8 7 7 ) .
the r e g i m e n t ' s history g i v e n below see,
and
History
of the First
or Grenadier
2.
G.Davies,
The Early
History
introduction b y J . W . F o r t e s c u e
3.
I am indebted to Major ( r e t . ) P.Clifford
Coldstream G u a r d s , for this information.
4.
P.Preston-Morley
and
H.Pegg,
'A
Century Tokens of N o t t i n g h a m s h i r e ' ,
of the
(1924),
Coldstream
Guards
pp.xxi-xxii.
with
of the Regimental
Revised
BNJ
51
Survey
(1981),
of the
172.
a
general
Headquarters,
Seventeenth-