Civil War soldiers??? PLEASE help...!?

Question

what are some ways soldiers and their performance of the battlefield could have been affected when children were being hired as soldiers during the civil war?

this is wat i have so far but i need more:
...:::they may think that government does feel that grown men are capable of fighting/getting the job done.
...:::they may not think that government is taking the war so seriously by allowing and not enforcing stronger laws on preventing children to join the war
....:::some might get all emotional about the hardships these children have 2 go through...

Answer 1

Put yourself in the place of the soldier - you have survived hunger, dirt, and seeing your friends die or abandon their commitment to military service. You are tired to the bone and the weather makes your life impossible (either too hot, too cold, etc.) You think constantly of home and family. How would you feel if you had a new enlisted soldier working with you who was eleven years old? This child would have enlisted perhaps due to hopes of a better life, as the previous answerer mentioned, or because of misguided hopes of glory and adventure. How would your performance as a soldier be affected by working alongside of this child? If the soldier was me, I would feel like protecting the child. I might make choices as a human rather than choices as part of a military machine. Would you quickly shoot or stab a ten year old child who was fighting on the opposing side if you came face-to-face with him on the battlefield? Perhaps not - perhaps you would pause, and be shot by that child instead. Try this "first person" approach and see if you can dig inside yourself to come up with some more in depth answers for your project. Good luck - you're definitely on the right track.

Answer 2

There was a difference between the two sides and their sources of soldiers. The Royalist party comprised many landowners with large numbers of tenants and agricultural workers. All the evidence is that these workers were simply pressed by their landlords or employers, to fight on the side of the king. Therefore, the bulk of the Royalist army was untrained, unwilling and not very well disciplined. But there was a strong belief at the time that the king's party would prevail and therefore fighting on his side would be safe and working families would not suffer when the war was over. The Parliamentary party did not include so many rich landowners and a high proportion of the army were volunteers with strong religious beliefs, similar to those of the Pilgrim Fathers who settled America a few years earlier. At the start of the civil war, these bands of volunteers were not well trained or equipped, and somewhat also lacking in discipline. After all they were farm workers, merchants, artisans and tradesmen: not soldiers. But they had a much greater motivation to fight and win because their actions would be considered treason if Parliament lost, and their families would suffer for generations to come. Therefore, they fought with greater vigour. From January 1645, the Parliamentary forces were reformed and a volunteer professional (paid and trained) army was formed under the name New Model Army. These corps had uniforms, standard weapons and equipment, rations and lodgings, and a rigorous training programme. Some infantry regiments did have to be filled by impressment but still soldiers were paid and worked to a book of regulations that promised decent treatment and conditions. From this point onward, the Royalists could not match the Parliamentary army and resorted to employing foreign mercenaries. The impressment of farm workers had to stop because food production was being affected and by late 1646, the two armies were (a) the professional volunteers for Parliament, and (b) largely foreign mercenaries for the Royalist party. Shortly afterwards, the first stage of the civil war came to an end with the "escape" of the king to the Isle of Man. His defiance of Parliament led to the Second Civil War, which ended in his capture, trial and eventual execution in January 1649. So the armies were not feudal hoards. True feudalism had died out in England by about 1371. Some civil war soldiers followed their employers; others followed their consciences - on both sides. By the end of the Third Civil War (basically against the Scots) in 1652, the English army of Parliament comprised professionally trained and paid regiments, and it has remained that way ever since. The Wiki page below is not clear on soldiers' backgrounds but explains much of the timetable and activites surrounding the two armies.

Answer 3

Read the Book "Powder Monkeys and Ponies" it is a history of children in the military service of the United States.

In a nutshell children joined the military because it was a way out of the work houses and squalor or the poor urban dwellers. In must army regiments the children were looked after by the soldiers as if they were the soldier's own children they gave the children custom built uniforms and gave the boy parts of their rations even in lean times each side would trade for sweets for the youths. I would say it made the soldiers more human and reminded them of home at a time when they were involved in the most inhumane activitys.