We be Souldiers three (1609): singing the plight of the soldier

We be Souldiers three first appeared in Thomas Ravenscoft’s song anthology of 1609, Deuteromelia, consisting of songs he collected and edited. Singers and listeners at the time would have understood the background that gives the song its meaning: England’s military involvement in the Low Countries in the 16^th and early 17^th century, and the plight of soldiers, fighting for little pay while having to fund their own military supplies and food. This background is explained in the article.

Other songs about soldiers, printed in the 16^th and 17^th century as broadside ballads, are then surveyed. They are categorised into themes, and the last theme overlaps with that of Souldiers three: the bitterness of soldiers who put their lives at stake for so little financial reward, who then return home to be cast aside by society, unable to reintegrate into day-to-day civilian life.

We then enter the modern era, outlining the background to songs about the plight of soldiers in World Wars I and II. Finally, a reflection on how these songs relate to us all.

We begin with a video of We be Souldiers three, its three voices sung as printed in 1609 in Deuteromelia.  

Thomas Ravenscroft’s role

We be Souldiers three first appeared in print in Deuteromelia, published in 1609, a book of popular but previously unpublished songs. The collector and editor was Thomas Ravenscroft, a musician and composer whose musical output straddled the secular and the sacred, and what we would now think of as early music and folk music. His life and work will be explored in detail in an article to appear on this site later this year: Thomas Ravenscroft: the life and work of a 17^th century music collector, composer and author.

He published a series of three song books: Pammelia, 1609; Deuteromelia, also 1609; and Melismata, 1611. In the introduction, the Apologie, of his 1614 treatise, A Briefe Discourse, Ravenscroft explains that the songs in Pammelia, Deuteromelia and Melismata were not of his making, that “those former Harmonies by mee published in my Infancy … those Workes for the most part were not Compos’d by My selfe, but by divers and sundry Authors, which I never the lesse compil’d together, in regard of the generall delight men tooke in them.” The material is entirely anonymous and, for many of the pieces, prior versions can be traced in sources from previous decades (as will be done in the dedicated article on Ravenscroft). In the case of Souldiers three, no previous version has survived.

In the introduction to Deuteromelia, he acknowledges songbooks of new and sophisticated music (such as John Dowland’s books, for 1 to 4 voices with lute accompaniment), to make the distinction that his books are of unsophisticated music that is already being sung, “but they are very delightfull, and some way gainfull, too”. He explains this in his wordy early 17^th century way, that Deuteromelia is “full of the same delectation” as his first book, “made to please, as the other were … and that with as much ease, as the other … Now then the nature of these in regard to their facilitie and so their capabilitie is more communicable, then any other kinde of Musicke, and in this respect more commendable; and will be I am sure more acceptable, because the things which many heretofore have privately joyed in, may now by this meanes, publikely be injoyed.” As the second article about There were three Ravens explains, the songs in his books are what we would now call folk or traditional music: passed down generations, changing form as they do so, their purpose social rather than commercial.

The music of soldiers

The origin of We be Souldiers three is unknown. While we cannot state that the song originated in the army, soldiers’ participation in music is well-attested.

Military bands have a long history in Europe dating back to the Roman Empire, when the trumpet (straight, made of copper or iron), the cornu (a large curved trumpet in the shape of a letter G) and the buccina (a smaller cornu) were used for wake up calls; to announce meals; to change the watch; to provide rhythmic accompaniment for marching; to sound an alarm; to signal attack or retreat, or to change formation. Iconography from the 14^th century shows military bands with flutes, bells, drums, bagpipes and trumpets. Swiss soldiers in the 15^th century used flute and drum to signal precise instructions on the battlefield, a technique so effective it was replicated across Europe.

A drawing penned in 1523 by Swiss mercenary, painter, printmaker and goldsmith, Urs Graf, shows a quartet of flutes played by Swiss soldiers (right). As was the norm for any type of instrument, flutes were made in different sizes and therefore at different pitches. Diverse sizes playing together were a consort, as we see in Urs Graf’s drawing.

There are many similar images of 16^th century soldiers with drums and flutes, such as the painting right: The Three Soldiers by the Dutch painter Pieter Bruegel the Elder, 1568 (Frick Collection, New York), shows one soldier carrying a flag (a standard-bearer), one playing a large military drum, and one playing a flute.

One notable soldier-musician was a contemporary of Thomas Ravenscroft. Tobias Hume (c. 1569–1645) was a Scottish viola da gamba player and composer. He produced two books of music. Musicall Humors, published in 1605, has 117 pieces, of which 104 are for solo viol, the first print publication dedicated to the solo viol. Poeticall Musicke, 1607, consists of consort music. Prior to these publications, he had been in military service. In the preface to Musicall Humors, he wrote: “I Doe not studie Eloquence, or profess Musicke, although I doe love Sence, and affect Harmony: my Profession being, as my Education hath beene, Armes, the onely effeminate part of me, hath beene Musicke; which in mee hath beene alwayes Generous, because never Mercenarie.” Following his publications, he returned to the army: he served as captain in the King of Sweden’s army and led the Emperor of Russia’s troops. In 1642, he petitioned the House of Lords to let him serve England against Irish rebels. He was not given the role, and this was only 3 years before his death, probably in his mid-60s, so by then his enthusiasm was no doubt greater than his ability.

Several of Tobias Hume’s compositions have military titles or themes. Click on the blue text for videos of: A Soldiers Resolution, played by Hanna Thiel; A Souldiers Gaillard, played by Ernst Stolz; and The Souldiers Song, sung and played by Francisco Mañalich.

As we will see in the final section of this article, The soldier’s complaint, the creation of song by soldiers, expressing their lives in service, continues until modern times.

The music and history of We be Souldiers three

We be Souldiers three is printed in Deuteromelia under the heading, Freemens Songs of 3. Voices. The freemen’s song, first known in the 15^th and 16^th century as the three men’s song, was sung a cappella by three male polyphonic voices. (Nonetheless, Ravenscroft also has songs under the heading, Freemens Songs to 4. Voices, which is possibly why he preferred the term freemen’s to three men’s.) The characteristics of this genre will be explored in As I walked in the wood so wild: a speculative construction of the freemen’s song sung by Henry VIII, to appear later in 2026.  

As published by Thomas Ravenscroft, the three voices of Souldiers three move in tandem, singing the same words at the same time (as differentiated from a catch and the longer freemen’s catch, and from the motet, in which voices harmonise while singing different words at the same time). The harmonies consist of thirds, some triads, some parallel third movement, and contrary motion based around thirds. The predominant thirds give it a distinctively English sound.

Below is the notation as it appears in Deuteromelia, followed by the same in modern notation. Like the original, the modern notation has not been given a time signature, but it is clearly in units of 3 beats, as indicated by the modern bar lines. In the video performance above (also available by clicking here), the final note is elongated an extra bar to even out the last phrase from 7 bars to 8.

A century after Deuteromelia, the song featured in Thomas D’Urfey’s compilation, Wit and Mirth: or, Pills to Purge Melancholy, The Fourth Edition, Vol. I, first published in 1712, but with only the treble voice (see below), omitting the tenor and bassus voices in Ravenscroft’s book, meaning that in D’Urfey’s print it is no longer a freemen’s or three men’s song. 

Other than that, I can find no trace of Souldiers three in later years, in print or in the oral tradition, except references to Ravenscroft’s Deuteromelia – with one curious exception.

In the early 20^th century, the folk song collector Cecil Sharp travelled the rural villages of England and the USA in search of songs. On 27^th February 1909 he was in Clewer, a village in Berkshire, where he met a woman who was born Eleanor Emma Waring in Axminster, Devon, in October 1838. In her early 30s she became Sister Emma, a Roman Catholic nun in the order of the Sisters of Mercy. When Cecil Sharp met her in Clewer, she was 70 years old.

Sister Emma gave Sharp 19 songs, some sung, some recited as she couldn’t remember the melodies. She sang some songs she learned from her nursemaid when she was 6 years old or younger, and some she learned from her mother. Her repertoire included such traditional classics as The Carrion Crow, Long Lankin, Dance To Thee Daddy, Lord Thomas and Fair Eleanor, and The Wraggle Taggle Gipsies. Cecil Sharp must have made quite an impression on her, as on 13^th March 1909, from her deathbed, she sent him a letter with 7 more songs.

When they met, one of the songs she gave to Sharp was We be soldiers three. This must have been one of the songs she recited rather than sang, since his manuscript does not include the music. As we see on the right, she remembered 3 of the 4 stanzas from Deuteromelia, not including the “And he that will not pledge me this” verse; and she omitted the repeat of the third line followed by “Fa la la la lantido dilly.” Otherwise, these are the words printed by Ravenscroft, with some minor variations. She recited:

• “Lately come home from the old countrie” instead of Ravenscroft’s “Lately come forth of the low country”;
• “They said fellow I drink to thee / To all good fellows whoever they be” instead of “Here Good fellow I drinke to thee / To all good Fellows where ever they be”;
• “Charge it again boys, charge it again, / As long as I have any ink in my pen” instead of “Charge it againe boy, charge it againe, / As long as there is any incke in thy pen”.

These are exactly the kind of changes that naturally occur when a song is committed to memory rather than sung from the page. (This phenomenon is mapped in detail in Three Ravens and Twa Corbies: the transformations of a traditional song from the 17^th to the 20^th century – see especially variants P and Q.) Since there is no trace on the song in the oral tradition in the intervening centuries since Deuteromelia, the source of the song for Sister Emma was almost certainly William Chappell’s book of 1859, Popular Music of the Olden Time, since it includes the words for all the verses exactly as they appear in Ravenscroft, but Chappell mistakenly omits the repeat of the third line followed by “Fa la la la lantido dilly”, just as Sister Emma did.

The meaning of We be Souldiers three

The first verse sets the scene.

WEe be Souldiers three,
Pardona moy je vous an pree,
Lately come forth of the low country, 
with never a penny of mony.
Lately come forth of the low country, 
Fa la la la lantido dilly.

For the modern listener not aware of the background, this raises a series of questions, as follows.

WEe be Souldiers three,

Why are there three soldiers?

As described above, there are three soldiers to match the three voices of the song genre known as the three men’s song or freemen’s song.

In 1609 and before, what did it mean to be an English soldier?

The conditions of soldiering, and what constituted an army, have changed over time. Due to its contents and because it is a freemen’s song, it is safe to assume that We be Souldiers three was composed at some point in the 16^th century or in the early 17^th century, up to its year of publication in 1609. As we will see, any date in this period would make sense of the song. To understand what being a soldier meant in 1609 and before, a brief historical overview.

In the medieval period, a soldier was an armoured knight, and a knight was a member of the aristocracy or gentry, those considered of gentle birth, hence gentleman. All land belonged to the monarch, who leased allotments of land to land-holders as long as conditions were met. The conditions of land-holding for gentlemen was that they were called upon to give military service, with their own soldiers. Those soldiers were the vassals who owed allegiance to the gentleman, who were permanent tenants of the lord of the manor, obliged to be his soldiers, to serve and protect their lord and be prepared to fight for him in battle. (Under them were freemen, rent-paying farmers, tenants who owed little or no service to the lord. Under freemen were bondmen, serfs or villains, unfree tenant farmers who were not allowed to hold land, and themselves belonged to their lord along with the land they worked, so that if the land changed hands, so did the unfree tenant bondmen.)

In the renaissance, by the time of Queen Elizabeth’s reign, there had been substantial changes to this feudal system. Armies were increasingly professionalised, so the medieval knight and his vassal soldiers were no longer part of warfare. Subjects of the crown could own land, and the title of knight was a general title of honour, no longer specific to military service, though serving in the military was still considered a gentlemanly occupation. Males were subject to military service from the age of 16 until 60; after 60, labourers were no longer expected to work and men were no longer liable for military service.

As in the modern period, there were different types of soldiers in European armies when Souldiers three was sung. For example, cavalrymen on horseback were armed, depending on context, with a lance and a sword, a pistol (short handgun) and a sword, or an arquebus (long gun) and a sword; musketeers were armed with a musket, a gun that fired a lead ball which could pierce armour; pikemen were armed with pikes, sticks 10 to 22 feet long tipped with an iron blade.

The soldiers in the song may have been rank and file members of the English military or they may have been contracted, the English word for which is from the Old French mercenaire, from which we derive the English mercenary, meaning a professional hired soldier who will fight for any nation or state for pay, regardless of politics, a paid volunteer rather than a conscript. Mercenaries have long been part of warfare, back to ancient Greece. When William the Conqueror invaded England in 1066, his ships were crowded with non-Norman paid mercenaries. From the early 14^th to the 16^th century, the Italian word for such a contract soldier was condottiere or condottiero (plural condottieri), literally meaning leader, colloquially a soldier of fortune. In Germany from c. 1470, the term for a mercenary was a Landsknecht (plural Landsknechte), meaning servant of the land. German Landsknechte specialised in fighting with pike and shot.

Lately come forth of the low country, 

Where is “the low country”, and why have the soldiers been there?

The “low country” – properly Low Countries – is the lowlands of north-west Europe around the delta of the Rhine, Scheldt, and Meuse rivers. On a modern map, this consists of the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Nord and Pas-de-Calais in northern France, and East Frisia, Guelders and Cleves in north-west Germany.

Due to the depth and length of involvement England had in the Low Countries in the 16^th and early 17^th century, its mention in Souldiers three would have had huge resonance for singers and listeners. To explain why this reference would have been so familiar, we need to delve into the ongoing conflict that involved the Low Countries, Spain and England.

In the 16^th century, the populace of the Low Countries was increasingly Protestant, but the Seventeen Provinces of the Netherlands, which then covered most of the Low Countries, was under the repressive Roman Catholic rule of Spain. To suppress the Dutch Protestants, Spain carried out 300 executions between 1532 and 1566. King Philip II of Spain ruled from 1555, and he increased the suppression of Protestants in the Seventeen Provinces. For example, from 1567 the council for unrest, a law court, sentenced 11 Protestants to banishment and 1,000 to the death penalty. Added to high taxes and attempts to forcibly convert Protestants to Catholicism, this led to the Protestant rebellion for independence from Spain, the Eighty Years War from 1568 to 1648, continuous until the Twelve Years Truce of 1609, which then resumed in 1621 as part of the Thirty Years’ War of 1618–48.

The population of the Seventeen Provinces was far too small to raise an adequate army to defeat Spain, so it was largely made up of foreigners, a combination of international mercenaries, English mercenaries and at times the English royal army, and foreign Protestants who fought for their faith. In an army, a regiment is the major unit, made up of smaller companies. In 1609, the Dutch infantry (foot soldiers) consisted of 43 English companies in 3 regiments, and 32 French companies in 2 regiments, with 20 companies of Scots, 11 of Walloons, 9 of Germans, and only 17 companies of Dutch. Fighting for the Low Countries was a good prospect for a mercenary: it was paid relatively well, employment was all year round rather than seasonal, and those disabled by fighting even had a pension.

The Spanish government in the Netherlands did not have the funds to fight the rebels. In 1576, having not been paid for months, Spanish soldiers mutinied. In anger and revenge, they robbed and destroyed the Dutch city of Antwerp, an act so shocking that Dutch Catholics and Protestants united: the Seventeen Provinces formulated the Pacification of Ghent, a document that demanded the Spanish leave the Netherlands and cease their persecution, signed in November 1576.

England favoured the Protestants, and Queen Elizabeth agreed to send her army to fight for them if King Philip reneged on the Pacification of Ghent. In February 1577 he did renege, but Elizabeth did not follow through. She refused the guidance of her Privy Council to send troops, and instead took two actions. First, she gave support to privateers like Sir Francis Drake. A privateer is the commander or crew of a ship, the same word used for the ship itself, which is an armed private vessel, commissioned by the government to attack and capture enemy ships. For Elizabeth, this not only prevented England from engaging directly in war with Spain, it was massively lucrative: she was the largest shareholder in Drake circumnavigating the globe in 1577–80, attacking Spanish ships and colonies, from which investors made a 4,700% profit. Second, Elizabeth hired Johann (or John) Casimir, a German Calvinist prince, Count Palatine of Simmern, as a mercenary, with the funds for him to raise an army of 6,000 volunteers to fight in the Netherlands. But Casimir’s mercenary army failed to beat the Spanish. Elizabeth had missed a golden opportunity to intervene decisively at Spain’s time of weakness, when Spain’s troops were demoralised and had mutinied and the Spanish crown’s coffers were depleted.

By August 1585 the following events had happened, with the result that Elizabeth belatedly relented on holding back from the crown intervening directly.

• In 1580, the Spanish empire expanded to include Portugal.
• William the Silent or William the Taciturn, more commonly known in the Netherlands as William of Orange (not to be confused with the later William III of Orange, who was King William II of England), led the Dutch Protestant revolt against the Spanish that began the Eighty Years’ War or Dutch Revolt, 1568–1648. In 1580, King Philip II of Spain offered a bounty of 25,000 crowns, a peerage and an inheritable estate to the person who captured or killed William of Orange. That man was Balthazar Gérard, who assassinated William by gunshot in 1584. He was caught fleeing the scene, put on trial, tortured and executed.
• Elizabeth, having been excommunicated as a heretic by Pope Pius V in 1570, knew the Catholic monarch Philip and his forces were a threat to England. In January 1585, France was lost as an ally to England when France and Spain united in the Treaty of Joinville, in which Philip agreed to defend Cardinal de Bourbon’s claim to the French throne in return for the elimination of French Protestantism and France’s support for Spain in the Netherlands.
• In June 1585, the Dutch rebels appealed to Elizabeth: help us defeat the Spanish and become Queen of the Netherlands. She refused.

Finally, in August 1585, the Protestant rebels, called The Council of State, signed the Treaty of Nonsuch with Elizabeth, in which she pledged to send 7,400 troops to fight alongside the Dutch rebels. She sent the royal army to defend the Netherlands under the command of Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester, thinking that if King Philip’s funds were further depleted on that front, he would be less able to attack England. In addition, she sent Sir Francis Drake to weaken Spanish resources by plundering their settlements in the Americas.

It was another failure, and only served to expose Elizabeth’s equivocation and the ruinous intrigue among some of the aristocracy who, under Robert Dudley, defected to give away Dutch territory to Spain to make good their grudge against him. King Philip, enraged by Elizabeth’s involvement, discussed invading England with Pope Sixtus V. His planned invasion to remove Elizabeth came in 1588, and it involved Flanders (modern day northern Belgium) in the Low Countries, that Elizabeth had chosen not to adequately defend. A fleet of ships assembled in Spanish ports, sailed to Flanders to meet with the Spanish army there, then sailed to England to overthrow Elizabeth. This Spanish Armada failed in the English Channel due to the superior tactics, firepower and agility of the smaller English fleet, who were aided by stormy weather, considered an act of God.

The involvement of the English crown, army and mercenaries in the Low Countries continued, well beyond the remit of this article. For example, a later William of Orange was Stadtholder (Steward) of lands in the Dutch Republic (Holland, Zeeland, Utrecht, Guelders, and Overijssel) from 1672. This William of Orange was also King William III of England, Scotland and Ireland from 1689 by marriage to the English Queen Mary II, and he was a key figure in the Dutch revolt against Spanish rule in the 17^th century.

If we assume We be Souldiers three was new when published in 1609, these English soldiers may have been returning from the Dutch War for Independence (1581–1648), since Spain and the northern provinces of the Netherlands negotiated a 12 year truce from 1609–21. The song’s origin may have been decades earlier. We could imagine that the Souldiers three were some of John Casimir’s mercenaries commissioned by Queen Elizabeth in 1577, or three of Robert Dudley’s royal troops sent in 1585. Since the date and occasion of the soldiers being in the Low Countries is absent from the verses of the song, and the conditions of soldiering described in the song didn’t essentially change during the 16^th and 17^th century, this would have given the song continued relevance and longevity.

with never a penny of mony.

Why do the soldiers complain that they have “never a penny of mony”?

Exact amounts for payment are available in military muster rolls and accounts but, for a modern reader, the numbers don’t mean much in isolation. What is meaningful and instructive is to make comparisons, the pay of the ordinary soldier with that of civilian occupations.

A 16^th century soldier earned twice that of an unskilled rural labourer, who was near the bottom of the social scale. Moving up the scale, a soldier earned only 83% the wages of a shepherd, and only 56% what an urban labourer was paid; and shepherds and labourers were supplied with food in addition to wages, whereas soldiers had to pay the cost of their own food and drink, and they usually had to pay for their own military hardware and much of their ammunition (more on this below). In reality, then, after the deduction of costs, an ordinary soldier earned much less than 83% the wages of a shepherd and much less than 56% of an urban labourer. Within the army, an ordinary soldier earned 62.5% that of a sergeant, 24% that of a lieutenant, and 10% that of a captain. (All figures extrapolated from Singman, p. 36 – see bibliography).

The practise of soldiers funding their own supplies, giving them the financial burden for everyday living and often fighting costs, dates back to the medieval feudal system described above. The result was that soldiers either bought food when travelling or stationed, or they foraged for food, drank water from natural sources, and collected firewood for cooking. It is not difficult to imagine soldiers sometimes being supplied either by locals sympathetic to the cause, or by stealing, or by robbing with menaces.

The situation with military supplies depended on context. Towns and cities had stocks of weaponry for their own defence, but otherwise standard procedure in the 16^th century was that infantry (a unit of foot soldiers), mercenaries (hired soldiers), and militia (fighting civilians, not professional soldiers) supplied their own weapons and their own powder and shot (gunpowder and small metal balls as ammunition). The cavalry also supplied much of their own equipment, including their own horses, but they were wealthy aristocrats so they could afford the expensive horses and armour required for mounted warfare, and a cavalryman’s horse lost in service would be recompensed by the army.

When a soldier’s own supply of powder and shot was spent, he would either resupply with ammunition looted from the enemy, which was an unpredictable and unreliable source, or buy from a sutler, also called a victualler. A sutler was a civilian merchant with a licence from the commander to sell military provisions. The sutler followed the army and set up his sales wagon or tent wherever the soldiers were stationed. As well as selling ammunition, he sold clothes, food, sewing needles, buttons – the kind of supplies that may be needed when out in the field. The etymology of sutler is instructive: from the Dutch soetelaar or zoetelaar, meaning a servant who does dirty or tedious work, derived from zoetelen, to foul or to sully.

Through the 16^th century, there was occasionally some centralised supply of provisions, but it was not the norm and, where present, it could not be replied on and was frequently poorly stocked. By the end of the century, standing troops (permanently employed soldiers) increasingly had ammunition supplied by the state army through central magazines (armouries, ammunition storage).

It is clear, then, that given the danger to life and limb and the importance of their role politically, soldiers in the 16^th century were poorly paid, and the conditions of employment were such that their pay was reduced still further, below what the raw numbers would suggest, by having to self-fund.

There is one more reason a soldier of the era would have complained of having “never a penny of mony”: non-payment was an occupational hazard for the regular soldier and mercenary alike. Consider the plight of the soldier, having to supply his own food, his own weapons, his own ammunition, risking his life for pay – and then being unpaid, leading to poverty, an inability to buy food or the military supplies that keep him alive. How would a soldier respond, except by turning what he was trained to do into a way to extract payment or exact revenge?

Some examples, in chronological order.

In 1375, the English condottiere (mercenary employed in Italy) John Hawkwood fought for Pope Gregory XI against a coalition of Italian city-states, led by Florence, in the War of Eight Saints. The Pope did not pay Hawkwood, which meant all those mercenaries who fought with him were likewise unpaid. In December of the same year, the Pope sent Hawkwood and his condottieri to quell a rebellion in Città di Castello. Instead, they captured the city and held it hostage to force payment from the Pope. It worked, and Hawkwood and his mercenaries received their back-pay. In February 1376, on the Pope’s order, Hawkwood and his men went to Faenza to protect it. But because the Pope had again delayed payment, Hawkwood demanded the people of Faenza hand over their weapons, then he and his men looted the town.

In 1527, during the War of the League of Cognac, Holy Roman Emperor Charles V sent his troops to Rome as a threat to Pope Clement VII. Charles’ army consisted of 14,000 Landsknechte (German mercenaries), 6,000 Spanish soldiers, and some unknown number of Italian infantry. Since they had not been paid, they did far more than threaten the Pope. The event is called the Sack of Rome: on 6^th May 1527, the unpaid forces killed those defending the city, looted homes and churches, and murdered and raped civilians. It went on for months, leaving 45,000 wounded, exiled, or murdered.

As described above, in 1576 the army of the Spanish government in the Netherlands were fighting the international soldiers of the Seventeen Provinces of the Netherlands. When Spain did not pay its own soldiers for months, the army mutinied, and they robbed and destroyed the Dutch city of Antwerp.

The Thirty Years War, 1618–48, was a succession of conflicts between Protestant and Catholic states within the Holy Roman Empire, largely in central Europe. During these conflicts, there were regular mutinies due to soldiers’ unpaid wages. In the winter of 1634, mercenaries employed by Sweden were in Linden, a tiny village in Franconia, Germany, which consisted of only 13 cottages. When they remained unpaid, the mercenaries demanded food and wine from the villagers. When the villagers refused, the mercenaries looted provisions and raped a woman, Frau Rosch, and as a result all the inhabitants deserted the village.

We see from these examples that withholding payment from those who are trained to kill is dangerous and foolhardy, but the danger was not to the non-payers, but to innocent people in the vicinity of the unpaid.

It is therefore difficult to imagine that, in Souldiers three, “with never a penny of mony” would be heard as anything but an implied threat: listeners in the imagined location of the song (an alehouse or an inn – see below) would have known what an unpaid mercenary or regular soldier was capable of when unpaid and angered, and would have known to keep on their good side or give them a wide berth.

Pardona moy je vous an pree,

What language is “Pardona moy je vous an pree”, and why are the soldiers speaking it?

The refrain line, “Pardona moy je vous an pre”, is French, Flemish French being one of the languages spoken in the Low Countries from which they have “Lately come forth”.

The first part, Pardona moy, or Pardona moi in modern spelling, is a formal way of saying pardon me or forgive me. As in the English equivalent, I beg your pardon, this is not literal begging for a pardon: the person saying it is not on bended knee, is not at the mercy of the person being addressed, nor is the person asking for the literal granting of a pardon, as no crime has been committed. Rather, I beg your pardon is a formalised demonstration of social status, implicitly stating: you are more important than I, so I must beg for your pardon in the context of my social faux pas of my involuntary cough, or burp, or interrupting you, etc.

The second part, je vous an pre, literally I pray of you or I beg of you, has the sense of excuse me or you’re welcome. Again, this a formal way of speaking, the speaker expressing an implicitly lower social status than the person spoken to. When being thanked by one’s boss, for example, one may reply formally je vous an pre. In modern French, the more informal response to being thanked by one of a similar social status, for example by a friend or a sibling, is de rien, meaning it was nothing; or avec plaisir, with pleasure; or pas de quoi, don’t mention it; or t’inquiète, don’t worry; or pas de souci, no worries.

The lower and upper ranks of the army were drawn from the lower and upper ranks of society so, in the context of the song, the three soldiers express in formal language that they have “Lately come forth” from a French-speaking land in which their social status, as well as the country, was low.

Fa la la la lantido dilly.

What is the meaning of “Fa la la la lantido dilly”?

In Souldiers three there are the same three refrains in each stanza, the first in French, “Pardona moy je vous an pree”, the second in English, “with never a penny of mony”, and the third is “Fa la la la landtido dilly”. The final refrain consists of non-lexical vocables, rhythmic sounds used in song that are not real words.

Non-lexical vocables have been common in song since the medieval period (and quite probably before). In folk music, the practice goes by the names diddling, lilting, mouth music (portaireacht bhéil in Irish, port à beul in Scottish Gaelic) or as jigging among English and Welsh gypsies. In English language songs, the sounds typically follow established practice, commonly combinations of the syllables dum, diddle and dee, or variations on down a derry, or hey (or hay, ay or a), or trolly lolly, or hey nonny nonny, or, as in this song, Fa la la la lantido dilly.

A broadside ballad was a song printed on a broadsheet of cheap paper, without music but indicating the tune by its title, sold in the street from the 16^th to the 19^th century, particularly popular in the 17^th century. A song which uses a similar non-lexical refrain as Souldiers three is the broadside ballad, The Fryer Well-fitted, 1678–80. The first verse is as follows, with the refrains in italics:

As I lay musing all alone,
fa, la, la. la, la,
A pretty jest I thought upon,
fa, la, la, la, la,
Then listen a while, and I will you tell,
Of a Fryer that lov’d a bonny Lass well
fa, la, la, la, la,
fa, la, la lang tree-down-dilly.

A variation on the same refrain appears three times in every stanza in Courage Crowned with Conquest, usually referred to now as Sir Eglamore, 1672. The first stanza, with the refrain in italics, is:

Sir Eglamore that valiant Knight
with his fa, la, lanctre down dilie,
He fetcht his sword and he went to fight;
with his fa la lanctre, &c.
As he went over hill and dale
All cloathed in his Coat of Male.
with his fa la lanctre, &c.

For more detail and more examples of non-lexical vocables, see There were three Ravens: sublime love and ridiculous riddles.

Here Good fellow I drinke to thee,
Pardona moy je vous an pree :
To all good Fellows where ever they be,
with never a penny of mony.

The second stanza partially establishes the location of the singers by the fact that they are drinking a toast with alcohol. In the 16^th and early 17^th century (and before, back to the medieval period), they could have been drinking in an alehouse, a tavern or an inn.

An alehouse was the most humble of the three, run from a family home by the woman who brewed the ale, called an alewife, a brewster, or a brewess. An alehouse was frequented by the lower classes of society.

A tavern was run from a dedicated public building by a man called a vintner (wine seller), who sold wine, ale and imported spirits. A tavern catered for the higher class of society.

An inn, run by a man, was for travellers. An inn sold lodgings (a bed for the night, which could be a communal bed), stabling for horses, meals, wine and ale.

The three soldiers, if singing back in England, would most certainly have been singing in an alehouse rather than a tavern. If on their journey back from the Low Countries, they would likely have been singing in an inn.

Here Good fellow I drinke to thee …
To all good Fellows where ever they be

It is not initially clear who the good fellows are, being drunk to in the alehouse or inn and “where ever they be”. The are two possibilities.

i. If we take the new lines in the verse in isolation, the good fellows being drunk to appear to be each other, the three soldiers, since no other persons are mentioned, and the other good fellows being drunk to, “where ever they be”, would logically be other soldiers.

ii. If we understand the new lines in the verse in combination with the refrain lines, it reads quite differently. Now the good fellows being drunk to are those who are apt to say “Pardona moy je vous an pree”, those of the lower ranks of society, like these three soldiers, and it follows that “all good Fellows where ever they be” are those “with never a penny of mony.”

The meaning must be the second of these, given the content of the following verse.

And he that will not pledge me this,
Pardona moy je vous an pree :
Payes for the shot what ever it is,
with never a penny of mony.

Now what appeared at first to be a good-natured toast to the lower class of society turns into a menace: drink with us and pledge with us that we are good fellows, and that all like us in the lower ranks are good fellows, or we will force you to pay for our shot, meaning our drinks and/or our ammunition. This is word-play on shot, which I attempt to indicate in the video at this point by having the middle singer raise his glass while the two outer singers imitate firing a gun. This requires some explanation.

In modern parlance, a shot meaning alcohol is a small measure of spirit – vodka, whiskey, gin, tequila, rum, or brandy – served straight or neat, that is without a non-alcoholic mixer such as soda, juice, tonic water, or ice. This modern sense is too late to be the meaning of an alcoholic shot in Souldiers three.

Moving back in time, Nathan Bailey’s Universal Etymological English Dictionary, 1721 (see right), defined shot or scot as “a Reckoning, Club, or Score, in a Victualling-House, &c. or the Money paid for it”, and ale-shot is defined as “a Reckoning or Part to be paid at an ale house”. In other words, a shot or scot was what nowadays we would call a bar tab.

Nathan Bailey notes that in Derbyshire, shot also had the alcohol-related meaning of “a Flagon which the Host gives to his Guest if they drink above a Shilling”, a flagon being a large serving jug made of leather, metal or ceramic, holding 2 imperial pints (40 fluid ounces or 1.14 litres). It appears to be this second meaning recorded 45 years earlier in the diary of Rev. Oliver Heywood. His entry for 14^th August 1676 (see bibliography under Turner, J. Horsfall) reads: “I was at the funerall of old Rich : Boocock – after the drinking at Stump-cross, a company of fellows would needs drink 2d a peece, I sate down with them, and though I did not drink, yet I did not appear so much as I ought ag[ains]t their vain way of drinking shots, I saw some lay at it busily, and strove to drink, I left them at it, and am afraid many of them will get too much – I am conscious to myself I was not so faithfull to my god as I ought, though I did say something to dissuade them from intemperance. – Lord pardon.” In the 17^th century, there was 12d (pence) to a shilling, which means at 2d a piece, there must have been 6 men drinking from one shot or flagon. That means from a flagon they drank 6.66 fluid ounces or one third of a pint each. That is a small amount if they were served ale, beer, cider or wine; a different matter if it was a flagon of rum or gin.

Like shot meaning spirit, shot meaning a flagon of alcohol is too late to apply to Souldiers three.

For the origin of its meaning in 1609 and earlier, we go back to the 12^th century, when the noun shot or scot meant a payment shared by several people, such as municipal charges and taxes, or a royal tax, sometimes to support the sheriff or his bailiffs, with the related verb scotten, scot, scotte, scoten, skotten, or scotti. Shot or scot later developed other related meanings, such as shared payment for food or drink provided at a social gathering or feast, or at a tavern, or payment for food and drink given by a host or benefactor. This meaning specific to payment for provision of communal food and drink is attested back to the late 13^th century in The metrical chronicle of Robert of Gloucester, who flourished 1260–1300, referring to the “scot” he paid at an inn. It is likewise the meaning of “scott” in the Tretise of xii degrees of mekenes –  Treatise of Twelve Profits of Tribulation – a Middle English manuscript dated c. 1400 (British Library Royal 17.B.17, Bodleian Library MS Rawlinson C. 894), based on the Latin treatise, De Duodecim Utilitatibus, ascribed to Peter of Blois, Archdeacon of Bath, who died c. 1200. In this treatise, we find advice on what to do with the man who has consumed communal food and drink but then cannot pay (Middle English then modern English in italics):

When a pore mon drinkes in þo tauerne & has not wherof he may paye his scott, byds dyng hym wel & let hym go.

When a poor man drinks in the tavern and has not the means to pay his scott, I ask you to beat him well and let him go.

Moving forward in time, we find the same meaning of “scote” in a 15^th century carol (a danced song) in British Library MS Cotton Titus A xxvi, folio 161r. This is a carol about a feast in a tavern, with food, alcohol and a harper.

Heye the, taverne, I praye the
Go fyll the potteys lyghtyly
And latte us dry[n]ke by and by
And lette the cupe goo route.

Haste, you, tavern, I ask you
Go fill the lightweight pot [communal vessel, a flagon or a bowl]
And let us drink by and by
And let the cup [communal vessel] be passed around.

In stanza 17, this humorous carol reveals that all the carousers were married women who, upon returning home, told their husbands they were at church. Stanzas 15 and 16 tell about paying the “scote”:

Gadyr the scote, and lette us wend …

When they had their countes caste
Everyche of hem spend vi pence at the last

Gather [bring together, collect] the scote [communal payment], and let us be on our way …

When they had made their calculation
Every one of them had spent 6 pence in the end

That was a considerable sum, 6 pence being the equivalent of a day’s wage for a labourer in the 15^th century.

The closely related term ale-scot, ale-schoch, scot-ale, scottes ale, etc., noted by Nathan Bailey’s Universal Etymological English Dictionary in 1721, goes back to the late 12^th century, and means payment for ale at a social gathering. We find this meaning in the carol, Rybbe ne rele, in the 15^th century MS 383, Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge, in which stanza 7 states:

Jacke wol pay for my scoth
A Sonday atte the ale-schoch

Jacke will pay for my scoth
[payment for provisions]
On Sunday at the ale-schoch
[when payment is made for ale]

All of these meaning for shot (scot, scoth, etc.) are variations on the same theme: individuals paying their share of a communal charge, be that for a royal tax, a feast, a bar tab, or a shared flagon.

We see that shot or scot, with one meaning being what today we would call a bar tab, has a long history and was certainly current in 1609 to make meaning of the lines:

And he that will not pledge me this [pledge that we are good fellows],
Payes for the shot [bar tab for alcohol and possibly food] what ever it is

In this verse and the next, shot has a double meaning: bar tab and ammunition. As ammunition, shot is an explosive charge: stone or iron balls for battering holes in walls; or langridge, a short range killer made from scrap iron, broken glass, and stones, which spreads out when fired to hit everything in its path.

It is now obvious from the commentary above why the three soldiers would want others to pay for their shot meaning bar tab, being poorly paid and having to buy their own food and drink, and to pay for their shot meaning ammunition, as they had to fund it themselves. The same theme is in a broadside ballad of 1623–61, The Maunding [begging] Souldier: OR, The Fruits of Warre is Beggery, reprinted with some minor word changes in 1683–1716 as The Low-Country Soldier: OR, His Humble Petition at his Return into England, after his Bold Adventures in Bloody Battels. It is a powerful and bitter complaint about the lot of the soldier, written with blistering honesty and dignity. The second verse states:

To beg I was not borne (sweet Sir)
And therefore blush to make this stirre;
I never went from place to place,
For to divulge my wofull case:
For I am none of those
That roguing goes,
that maunding shewes their drunken blowes,
Which they have onely got,
While they have bang’d the Pot,
in wrangling who should pay the shot.

In other words, the author states he is not one of those soldiers who has got into fights while drunk, begging with menaces for others to pay for his shot. It is ambiguous in this case whether shot means bar tab or ammunition, as contextually it could mean either – or both.

In summary, the meaning of the second and third verse is a call-out to those sharing space in the alehouse or inn with the three soldiers: we drink to all who are, like us, in the lower ranks, whoever and wherever you are; and if you won’t join us and don’t agree that we’re good fellows, then you’re paying for our bar tab, or for our ammunition, or both.

Following on from “And he that will not pledge me this … Payes for the shot what ever it is” as a reference to either alcohol or ammunition, the wordplay continues with …

Charge it againe boy, charge it againe,
As long as there is any incke in thy pen

Subsequent to shot as bar tab, these two lines mean the man who will not pledge that the soldiers and the low paid are good fellows will be the man paying for the charge of the soldiers’ drinks and, on that basis, the shot or bar tab will be added to time and again, each round of drinks being written down by the serving boy of the alehouse or inn until the ink in his pen has run out.

As with “shot”, both “charge” and “inke in thy pen” have double meanings. Following from shot as ammunition, the man who will not pledge that the soldiers and the low paid are good fellows will be the man paying for the charge of a firearm, the loading of its ammunition, or the charge for the same sold by the sutler. So the second meaning of this line’s double-meaning is that the man “that will not pledge me this” will pay for all the soldiers’ ammunition as long as the sutler has ink in his pen.

In summary, We be Souldiers three may or may not have been composed by a soldier, but it was certainly written by someone who understood the soldiers’ plight. They had returned from, or were on their way home from, the Low Countries, where English soldiers fought in the 16^th and 17^th century to free the Protestant region from Spanish Catholic rule. The three soldiers may have been rank and file soldiers or mercenaries. Either way, they had “never a penny of mony” because not only were they poorly paid, especially given the dangerous and potentially fatal work, they had to pay for their own food and drink, equipment and ammunition. The person who would accept such conditions is someone with few options, someone in the lower class of society, expressed in the French line (since French was one of the languages of the Low Countries), “Pardona moy je vous an pree”. So these three soldiers, either back in England in a low-class alehouse or in an inn at a stop-off on their journey home, drink a toast to all those who are like them, those of the lower orders who have “never a penny of mony.” Anyone who dares disagree that they are good fellows is threatened with paying for the bar tab, or the ammunition, until the ink of the serving boy, or the inn-keeper, or the sutler, has run out.   

The soldier in song: the testimony of broadsides

In the 16^th and 17^th century, how were soldiers seen by themselves and by the public? Do the themes of We be Souldiers three fit a general perception? To answer these questions, we turn to soldiers in broadside ballads.

The following survey of ballads about soldiers identifies 16 themes, each briefly described with links to representative ballads. The survey was conducted using the excellent online English Broadside Ballad Archive (see under University of California in the bibliography). Broadside ballads often had voluminous titles which described the contents of the verses, so they are worth citing in full. Titles in blue are links to the ballad on the English Broadside Ballad Archive website. A link takes you to the page showing a facsimile, with tabs for citation details, a transcription of the song, and often a recording of the ballad being sung.

In this survey, we will see that:

a. 16^th and 17^th century broadsides express a wide range of topical concerns of the period about soldiers and soldiering.
b. The ballads about soldiers are not fanciful pulp fiction, but based on real themes and experiences, sometimes stating that the song was written by a soldier, regularly recounting the details of actual battles, usually telling stories that were clearly common experiences.
c. Beyond the particularities of time and place, almost all of the themes transcend time, as they are mostly what concerns soldiers, their loved ones and their families throughout the ages.
d. The Low Countries, from which the soldiers have returned in Souldiers three, are often featured in English broadsides, as English soldiers served there frequently during the 16^th and 17^th centuries (as described above).
e. The final theme overlaps powerfully with what is expressed in Souldiers three. This shows that the concern about being underpaid and cast adrift from society continued through the 17^th century.

Broadside themes about soldiers consist of:

i. Celebrations of military victories and tributes to soldiers defending liberty, such as Lord WILLOUGHBY: Being a true Relation of a famous and bloody BATTEL fought in Flanders, by the Noble and Valiant Lord Willoughby, with 1500 English, against 40000 Spaniards, where the English obtain’d a notable Victory, to the Glory and Renown of our Nation. This ballad celebrates a battle in Flanders (one of the Low Countries) fought in 1588 by Peregrine Bertie, Lord Willoughby de Eresby (1555–1601), first published within a year or two of the events, still in print a century later. The story told in the song is that on the 15^th of July 1588, Lord Willoughby, Captain Norris and Captain Turner led the English in a battle against the Spanish in Flanders. The English were greatly outnumbered: 1,500 men against 40,000. The battle went on for 7 hours, with many casualties. Lord Willoughby led the English in combat so bravely and fiercely that the Spanish retreated with the English in pursuit. In thanks to Lord Willoughby and his men, Queen Elizabeth gave the wounded a pension of 18 pence a day and freed them from service. John Dowland wrote variations for lute in the Folger Dowland lute manuscript, c. 1590 (Ms.V.a.159, Folger-Shakespeare Library, Washington DC) and William Byrd composed variations for keyboard, which appear as the:lo:willobies welcome home in My Ladye Nevells Booke (British Library MS Mus. 1591), a compilation of 42 keyboard pieces by William Byrd, completed by the scribe John Baldwin in 1591. Several copies of the broadside survive, but all from 1686 or later, which testifies to the longevity of the song’s popularity.

ii. Songs of encouragement to serve in or support a war, include Gallants, to Bohemia. Or, let us to the Warres againe: Shewing the forwardnesse of our English Souldiers, both in times past, and at this present, c. 1620.

iii. Ballads which encourage soldiers to press on in the face of adversity because they are fighting for a godly cause, songs to lift the spirits when daunted, include A SPIRITUALL SONG OF COMFORT Or Incouragement to the Souldiers that now are gone forth in the Cause of CHRIST. This broadside, printed in 1643, was written by William Starbucke, about whom nothing is known. Each line is referenced with a biblical verse to inspire the faithful.

iv. Like themes i and ii above, the laments for military defeats and tributes to slain soldiers are not songs with general sentiments, but are specific to time, place, persons, battles and wars. So it is with The Valiant Souldiers Lamentation, FOR The Loss of their Noble General TALMARSH, Who headed the Froces at the Decent on France , where he received his fatal Wound, of which he soon after Died, to the unspeakable Grief of his Friends and Followers, printed in 1694.

v. The next theme, a woman’s fear that her soldier sweetheart will not return, and the emotional conflict of a soldier torn between his love and his duty, takes us from the bombast of the battlefield to the domestic effects of a soldier leaving. This was a rich theme in broadsides, and must surely have drawn upon the experiences of many. They include Voyage to Virginia: OR, The Valiant Souldiers Farewel to his Love, 1685, which includes the following summary verse under the title:

Unto Virginia he’s resolv’d to go,
She begs of him, that he would not do so;
But her intreaties they are all in vain,
For he must Plow the curled Ocean Main;
At length (with sorrow) he doth take his leave,
And leaves his dearest Love at home to grieve.

The affecting verses include:

When first I did behold thy feature,
my sences all were set on fire,
Thy beauty bright, and comely Stature,
which caused me for to admire:
But fates prevent me, for to content thee,
which fills my heart so full of woe;
I cannot tarry with thee to marry,
for I must to Virginia go.

Had I a thousand pounds to leave thee
although it were in good red Gold,
Not half so much it now would grieve me,
to speak the truth I may be bold:
Whatever thou requir’dst of me,
thou never heard’st me answer no;
Therefore content thee, do not prevent me,
for I must to Virginia go.

Take here this ring which I do give thee
my dearest, and do not complain,
For with the same my heart I leave thee,
until that I return again:
I hope hereafter for to imbrace thee,
then suffer not those Tears to flow;
For when I am absent, I will be constant,
although I do to Virginnia go.

And so farewel my dearest Betty,
a thousand times farewel my sweet;
I now afford thee Kisses plenty,
for to remember till we meet:
If cruel Death, of Life deprive us,
i’le meet thee in the shades below,
Where we together, shall be forever,
although I do to Virginnia go.

Two broadsides on this theme pan out from the individual couple to a host of women, together saying their farewells to their soldier-loves and fearing it will be the last time they see them. They are Deplorable News from Southwark; Or, the loving Lasses Lamentations for the loss of their Sweet-hearts, 1644–82, and THE White-Chappel Maids Lamentation For the loss of their Sweet-hearts, upon the Souldiers Departing to the Army to fight for the King, 1685. 

The Souldiers Departure From his Love: OR, The Damosels hope of his happy Return, 1671–1702, stands against the fear in this theme, with the woman expressing absolute faith that her love will return. The soldier’s reported death is proven false in THE SOLDIERS RETURN: OR, His Promise to his Country-men perform’d, c. 1672–96, while the woman’s worst fears are realised in THE Valiant Soldiers last Farewell: OR, His dying Letter to his loving Lady Lucretia, c. 1672–96.

vi. Moving from victory and defeat, fear and death in themes i-v, to faithfulness and unfaithfulness in themes vi–x, beginning with a soldier’s unfounded fear that his lover will not be faithful while he is away fighting. This is the theme in True Love rewarded with Loyalty: Or, Mirth and Joy after sorrow and sadness, 1686–88. The ballad expresses the man’s fear of her seeking another lover while he is away serving, and her reassurance. In The Souldiers Farewel to his love. Being a Dialogue betwixt Thomas and Margaret, 1663–74, the soldier Thomas tests his love Margaret’s love and faithfulness before he leaves, and she passes his tests.

vii. The popular theme of the female soldier who served alongside men had multiple branches.

Several broadsides tell the story of a faithful wife who was so devoted to her soldier husband that she dressed as a man to serve, undiscovered, alongside him in the army, such as The Gallant she Souldier OR, A briefe Relation of a faithful hearted Woman, who for the Love that she bore to her Husband, attired herselfe in mans Apparell and so became a Sould[i]er; and marcht along with him through Ireland France, & Spaine, and never was knowne to be a Woman till at the last she be[i]ng quartered neere unto Tower-hill in London, where she brought foorth a Gallant Man-Child, to the wonder of al her fellow Souldiers. Other Valiant Actions; Honest Carriage & Excelent Behaviour. You shall presently heare, (if you please.), 1640–74.

Or a woman dressed as a man to be the military drummer alongside her husband musketeer in The famous Woman-Drummer Or the valiant proceedings of a Maid which was in love with a Souldier, and how she went with him to the wars, and also of many brave actions that she performed after he had made her his wife, shal here be exprest in this ensuing Ditty, 1655–58.

One broadside has a woman leave her husband to serve in the army disguised as a man: The Woman Warrier: BEING An Account of a young Woman who lived in Cow-Cross, near West-smithfield; who changing her Apparel Entered her self on Board, in quality of a Soldier, and sailed to Ireland, where she Valliantly behaved her self, particularly at the Siege of Cork, where she lost her Toes and received a Mortal Wound in her Body, of which she since Dyed in her return to London, 1690. 

In some ballads, a single and romantically unattached woman disguised herself as a man to serve in the army, such as THE Female SOULDIER: OR, The Virgin Volunteer, 1691, and The Valliant Damsel; Giving an Account of a Maid at Westminster, who put her self in Mans Apparel, and Listed her self for a Soldier for the Wars of Flanders, 1691.

viii. Continuing the theme of faithfulness and unfaithfulness, one popular broadside told the story of the woman who was unfaithful when her soldier was gone (just as the soldier had feared in theme vi): THE Loyal Soldier of Flanders: OR, The Faithless Lass of London, 1675–96.

ix. The reverse can also be true, so the next theme is the soldier who was unfaithful in love, who charmed and took advantage of women just for sex and had no intention of being committed or faithful. This is the story in Two strings to a Bow; or, The cunning Archer, Being A pleasant new ditty of a Souldier, that had two Lasses at one time That dearly loved him, and how he requited their kindness, 1656–64. In the title, Two strings to a Bow is a metaphor for playing two women at the same time. A similar metaphor, which became well-worn in folk song, is that of a man playing a fiddle for a woman, signifying sexual intercourse. Thus it is in The Nightingales Song; Or The Souldiers rare Musick, and Maids Recreation, 1681–84. Readers, singers and listeners would have known exactly what was meant by him taking his fiddle out of his knapsack, which gives the meaning to the couplet under the title on the broadside:

The Song adviseth Maids to have a care,
And of a Souldiers Knap-sack to beware.

x. Completing the trio of unfaithfulness themes, A new Ballad of the Souldier and Peggy, printed between 1624 and 1684, tells the story of the woman who left her husband and baby to be unfaithful with a soldier. The soldier knew she was married, but wooed her anyway. (She returned to her husband when her money ran out and he forgave her!)

xi. The soldier unsuccessfully wooing is the theme of The Souldier his Salutation to the wary Wench of Worcester, Who kindly intreats her to grant him a kisse, Also her Deniall, in answer to this, c. 1660. The soldier tells the maiden …

Ile change my coat and colours,
to go along with thee:
No more of Mars his followers
hence forwards will I be
I am ever bound to be thy slave
Till thou grants to me the thing I crave

… and other such over-the-top declarations. She is not in the least impressed and rejects all his advances:

Change not thy coat nor colours
to tarry hear with me
Good Souldiers by their Valours,
will first approved be
Never say thou art a slave of mine
Nor any thing I have of thine,
Rather shalt thou dig the grave of mine
here in this place
Ere thou shalt wooe me
So to undo me,
fie it is base
To bring poor Country Lasses
Unto such foul disgrace.

xii. The soldier successfully wooing is the next theme. In The True-Lovers Holidaies: OR, The Wooing, Winning, and Wedding of a fair Damosel; performed by a lusty Souldier, being one of the Auxiliaries, 1663–74, the soldier confesses he isn’t skilful with words, but he will do what a soldier can do, which is to defend her, and do the usual wooing act of buying her pretty clothes. Not only does she accept immediately, she is delighted, says she has waited overlong, and promises that when he serves in the army again she not leave his side but go with him (as in theme vii).

In two ballads, the soldier’s courtship is refused, so at first it looks like a repeat of theme xi, but then he succeeds. He does so because the “bonny Lass” is persuaded by him of the nobility of the soldier’s occupation in THE VALIANT Soldier’s Courtship: Wherein he shews a Soldier ought not to be slighted, not only because they venture their Lives, but likewise that Kings and Princes are, and have been of the same Occupation, 1675–96. He succeeded in the end in The willy, witty, neat, and pritty, Damsell: Which to a Souldier often made this answer, I dare not doe no more nor the back of your hand Sir, c. 1649, not through verbal persuasion, but by showing the woman respect. He asked her for a kiss and she refused. He held her by the waist and promised her many fine clothes, but she said no, you’re one of those flattering deceivers who will take my maidenhead then leave me, as happened to my friend Nelly. Because he didn’t continue to try to convince her, but instead he listened long to her concerns and took her seriously, she realised he was not what she feared and decided to become his wife.

xiii. In a ballad on the theme of stationed soldiers and maidens, The Scotch Souldiers Kindness. It being the Sorrowful Ditty of Fifty Young Damsels of Southwark, who lately lost their Maiden-heads with those Valiant Souldiers lately Quartered in that Place, 1671–85, “forty or fifty young Girls” gave their maidenheads to soldiers, thinking by so doing to make them their husbands. The soldiers had other ideas, moved on, and the inevitable result followed:

Poor girls they did use their endeavour,
but still it did prove but in vain:
They are in a woeful condition,
alas they look pittiful wan …

Then Maudlin with Jude and Betty,
together with a[l]l the whole train,
Did sound fo[r]th their sorrowful Ditty,
and weepi[n]g they sigh and complain.

Surprisingly, by the end of the song the women had no regrets:

My S[i]sters why should we be daunted,
and Jude was just of that mind,
W[e] will not with sorrows be haunted,
for once being loving and kind.

Wel leave it Girls when we grow older,
now since it is gone let it go.
I am glad that upon a brave Souldier,
my Maiden-head I did bestow:
Then foll[o]w my kind exhortation,
and on it wel set a good face,
Wel fear not the Worlds exc[l]amation,
a fig for the thoughts of disgrace.

Another broadside focuses on one couple formed when a soldier was stationed, in which the relationship was genuine: The Westminster Madams Lamentation For the breaking up of the CAMPAIGN at Hounslow-Heath, and the loss of their Pleasure they used to receive there. Together with Souldiers kind Answer, in Comforting them, with hopes of meeting again the next Summer, 1685–88.

xiv. In some broadsides, soldiering and military terms are used as metaphors in love and sex, as they are, for example, in Loves fortune. OR, A faint-hearted Souldier will never win the Field, 1678–80.

xv. The penultimate theme is what today we would call war crimes. This is the topic of the voluminously titled A Dreadful Relation, of the Cruel, Bloudy, and most Inhumane Massacre and Butchery, committed on the poor Protestants, in the Dominions of the Duke of Savoy, by his Souldiers, with some French and bloudy Irish joyned together: Where they destroyed thousands, both men, women and children, without mercy; tearing little sucking infants limb from limb before their mothers faces, and dashing their brains out against the rocks; and afterwards ripping up the bowels of the mothers, cutting off their breasts, and turning women with childe, and some lying in, out of dores, in the midst of winter in frost and snow, who perished by cold in the Mountains. Cutting off the ears, then the nose, fingers and toes; then the legs, arms and privie members of men, some being aged above fourscore years, and so torturing them to death, because they would not forsake their Religion and turn Papists: the like cruelties were never known nor heard of before. The truth of this sad story was sent to his Highness the Lord Protector, who appointed a general Fast throughout this Nation, and ordered relief to be gathered, and sent to those that escaped the hands of these bloudy wretches, and are ready to perish for want, in the mountains, 1654–63.

xvi. The final theme overlaps powerfully with that of We be Souldiers three: the penniless, maimed, and politically betrayed soldier.

The Noble Souldiers Advice TO HIS COMRADES: OR, The Red-coats Resolution. Written by a Member of the Army, of unknown date, refers in its title to the red coat uniform of the English army. The ballad asks: Now that the wars are over, how is a soldier to earn a living? The verses name various possible occupations – farm labourer, tailor, shoemaker, tinker – but also expresses the view that fighting again is preferable, as that is what a soldier knows, for how is a soldier with no home, little money and no occupation to reintegrate into civilian life?

Selected verses.

W’ve fought like Souldiers
In blood to the shoulders,
In Holland, in Flanders and Spain;
And have likewise in France,
Marched many a Dance;
Yet to England com’d safe back again.

There’s many of ’s in
Cold Scotland have been,
And Ireland too many a year;
Nay, and some without spleen,
Jamaicah have seen,
But disbanded now must be here.

Many Dangerous times
W’ve ventur’d our Limbs,
W’ve Marcht both in Files and in Ranks;
But now glad we must be,
If Disbanded I see,
With Pay, and a great many Thanks.

Poor Souldiers now,
Must starve, or to Plow,
What course for to live will you take?
There is many of you,
Have no homes to go too,
Pray tell me what shift will you make?

The Maunding Souldier: OR, The Fruits of Warre is Beggery, 1623–61, is a potent indictment of the treatment of soldiers who have risked all for their country. Maunding in the title means begging. The ballad was reprinted with a few minor word changes in 1683–1716 as The Low-Country Soldier: OR, His Humble Petition at his Return into England, after his Bold Adventures in Bloody Battels. The following selected stanzas are from the original printing, expressing in verse the soldier’s lot: during service, subject to the threat of death and the experience of slavery, being wounded by shot and blasted by munitions, resulting in being physically maimed; and after service in poverty, reduced shamefully to seeking charity, not wanting to be seen as a cheating beggar.

The second stanza of this ballad is cited above in the commentary for We be Souldiers three, as it gives background and explanation to the lines:

Here Good fellow I drinke to thee …
To all good Fellows where ever they be,
with never a penny of mony.

And he that will not pledge me this …
Payes for the shot what ever it is,
with never a penny of mony.

Some selected stanzas of The Maunding Souldier: OR, The Fruits of Warre is Beggery:

Good your worship cast your eyes,
Upon a Souldiers miseries;
Let not my leane cheekes, I pray,
Your bounty from a Souldier stay,
But like a Noble friend,
Some Silver lend,
and Jove shall pay you in the end;
And I will pray that Fate,
May make you fortunate,
in heavenly, and in Earth’s estate.

To beg I was not borne (sweet Sir)
And therefore blush to make this stirre;
I never went from place to place,
For to divulge my wofull case:
For I am none of those
That roguing goes,
that maunding shewes their drunken blowes,
Which they have onely got,
While they have bang’d the Pot,
in wrangling who should pay the shot.

But in Olympicke Games have beene,
Whereas brave Battels I have seene;
And where the Cannon use to roare,
My proper spheare was evermore,
the danger I have past,
both first and last,
would make your worships selfe agast,
a thousand times I have
been ready for the grave,
three times I have been made a Slave.

Twice through the Bulke I have been shot,
My braines have boyled like a Pot:
I have at lest these doozen times,
Been blowne up by those roguish Mines,
under a Barracado
in a Bravado,
throwing of a hand-Granado:
Oh death was very neere,
for it tooke away my eare,
and yet (thanke God) cham here, cham here

At push of Pike I lost mine eye,
At Bergen Siege I broke my thigh:
At Ostend, though I were a Lad,
I laid about me as I were mad,
Oh you would little ween,
that I had been,
an old, old Souldier to the Queene,
but if Sir Francis Vere,
were living now and here,
heed tell you how I slasht it there.

Since that I have been in Breda,
Besiegd by Marquesse Spinola,
And since that made a Warlike Dance,
Both into Spaine, and into France,
and there I lost a flood
of Noble blood,
and did but very little good:
and now I home am come,
with ragges about my bumme,
God blesse you Sir, from this poore summe:

And now my case you understand,
Good Sir, will you lend your helping hand,
A little thing will pleasure me,
And keepe in use your charity:
It is not Bread nor Cheese,
nor Barrell Lees [dregs left in a barrel],
nor any scraps of meat like these,
but I doe beg of you,
a shilling or two,
sweet Sir, your Purses strings undoe.

I pray your worship thinke on me,
That am what I doe seeme to be,
No Rooking Rascall, nor no Cheat,
But a Souldier every way compleat,
I have wounds to show,
that prove tis so,
then courteous good Sir, ease my woe,
and I for you will pray,
both night and day,
that your substance never may decay.

The Lamentation of a Bad Market: OR, The Disbanded Souldier, c. 1660, gives further reason for the ex-soldier’s discontent: he receives censure from politicians and public alike for serving in the wars he was ordered to fight before the political winds blew in the opposite direction.

Some selected lines:

IN Red-coat Raggs attired,
I wander up and down,
Since Fate and Foes conspired,
thus to array me,
or betray me,
to the harsh censure of the Town …

I’ve been in France and Holland,
guided by my starrs,
I’ve been in Spain and Poland,
I’ve been in Hungaria,
in Greece and Italy,
and served them in all their Wars …

Some say I am forsaken
by the great men of these times,
And they’re no whit mistaken,
it is my Fate
to be out of date,
my Masters most are guilty of such crimes;
Like an old Almanack I now but represent,
How long since Edge-hill fight, or the Rising was in Kent,
Or since the dissolution of the first Long-Parliament.
Alas poor Souldier, whither wilt thou march?

A ballad published c. 1630, reprinted until c. 1674, states it was composed by a soldier, and tells of his sense of betrayal, returning home from the wars and being distanced from others, who give verbal acknowledgement of his wounds but offer no help. Some selected lines from A Pleasant Song made by a Souldier, whose bringing up had been dainty, and partly fed by those affections of his unbridled youth, is now beaten with his own rod, and therefore tearmeth this his repentence, the fall of his folly.

When I came home I made a proof,
what friends would do if need should be
My nearest Kinsfolks lookt aloof,
as though they had forgotten me.
And as the Owl by chattering charms,
is wondred at of other Birds,
So they came wondring at my harms,
and yield me no relief but words.

Thus do I want while they have store,
that am their equal every way,
Though fortune lent them somwhat more
else had I been as good as they.
Come gently Death and end my grief
ye pretty Birds ring forth my knell,
Let Robin Red-breast be the chief,
to bury me and so farewel.

Let no good Souldier be dismaid,
to fight in field with courage bold,
Yet mark the words that I have said,
trust not to friends when thou art old.

The final example, The Souldiers sad Complaint, 1647, is a printed broadside poem rather than a song. The writer, I. H., expresses burning anger that he has sacrificed so much personally for so little politically, faced danger and death selflessly on behalf of those who are self-serving, to then be discarded and disregarded.

Selected lines:

IS this the upshot then? We that have spent
Our best of Fortunes for a PARLIAMENT?
We that have sweat in bloud, march’t o’re the Land,
And where our feet did tread, our Swords command?
We that like burning Comets did appeare,
Striking astonishment with pallid feare,
Upon the daring aspect of our Foes,
Forcing even Death, under our dreadfull blowes
To flagg his fatall Standard? We that have
Been (as of Banquets) greedy of a grave?
When through the rivlets of our purple gore
Flow’d streames of Victory unto the doore
Of our high palmed STATE, made GODS: no lesse;
And only happy through our wretchednesse.
When in our calmed postures we draw neare
Creeping addresses to that Lofty SPHEAR
In naked Bodies, broken Leggs, and Armes,
In carved Limbs, which were erewhile as Charmes
To quiet Death, and make the Furies husht,
That we should suffer? that we should be crusht
With those iron hands (though guilded with our bloud,
Not seeking others, but their owne selfe-good)
We have upheld? when we make humble plea
With empty entrailes, for our deare earn’d pay,
(Whilest your enlarded guts, and brawny sides
Swine it with Epicurus, stretch your hydes
With glorry morsells) are we kickt away,
As if each Wight [Spirit] had turn’d Apostata?
Is this true Vallors pay? coyn’d out of ayre
And envy? Tyranny? that doth out-dare
The very front of Hell. What, Souldiers? and thus slighted?
The best of actions are the worst requited …
Who gave your SENAT being? the Lawes their breath?
Was’t not our bloud? our hazzarding of death?
And will you counsell murhter? fit to slay
Even those by whom you fit, or whom, you stay?
From your full stores; then reach unto poore soules,
Of what’s their due: Necessity controules
The sharpest Lawes. Oh heare their groanes and cryes
Who haplesse lives, and as yet hopelesse dyes.

In summary, the detail in these broadsides adds much meaning and context to the briefer words of Souldiers three, giving more substantial commentary to the condition of the soldier, who knows how to fight, how to put his very life at risk on behalf of others who reap the rewards; who is relied upon to fight for his country, but his country do not pay him properly; so he has not the means to adjust to civilian life after service; leading to justified anger at his unrecognised sacrifice.

The soldiers’ complaint

If Souldiers three was not a song generated within the military, it must certainly have been composed by someone who understood the plight of the 16^th and 17^th century soldier: engaged in highly dangerous and possibly fatal work, far from home; poorly paid, yet having to buy their own equipment, ammunition and food; suffering the emotional fallout of combat, coped with by drinking alcohol.

Soldiers still sing about their lot, as we know from World War I and II. Two of the most popular songs were Hanging On The Old Barbed Wire from World War I and D–Day Dodgers from World War II, in the same tradition as We be Souldiers three and the final category of broadsides just discussed.

As with all songs in the oral tradition, there are several versions of Hanging On The Old Barbed Wire. All compare the activities of the higher with the lower ranking soldiers, typically the sergeant, who is scrounging round the cookhouse door; the major, drinking all the company rum; the general, pinning another medal to his chest; and finally the private, who is hanging on the old barbed wire. In other words, the higher ranks are away from the action, safe from danger, being greedy, getting drunk, receiving an award, while the private has gone over the top of the dug-out on the front line, and is dead.

In 1943 the Allies invaded Italy, a campaign designed to keep the Axis forces occupied so they were less active on the Russian front or in France, keeping them out of the way in readiness for D–Day the following year. The campaign resulted in the resignation of Italian fascist dictator Benito Mussolini, and his government’s surrender to the Allies.

This led the way for the D–Day landings, which took place on 5 beaches in Normandy on 6^th June 1944. Conservative MP Lady Nancy Astor reputedly called the soldiers still stationed in Italy ‘the D–Day dodgers’, as if they weren’t doing their bit for the war effort, but were instead shirking. Whether she said this remains a matter of dispute, but word spread quickly at the time, as did offence at the reputed remark.

In November 1944, Lance-Sergeant Harry Pynn of the Tank Rescue Section, 19 Army Fire Brigade, stationed with the 78^th Infantry Division south of Bologna, turned the remark into a song. He set his words to the tune of the very popular Lili Marlene, made famous during the war by the German-American singer-actress Marlene Dietrich. The first two verses of Harry Pynn’s D–Day Dodgers, heavy with sarcasm, refer to the British Eighth Army and the US Fifth Army:

We are the D–Day dodgers out in Italy,
Always drinking vino, always on the spree.
8^th Army skivers with 5^th Yanks,
We stroll in Rome far from the tanks.
For we are only D–Day dodgers, out in Italy.

Some landed at Salerno, a holiday with pay,
And Jerry came to meet us to cheer us on our way.
We all sat round with cakes and tea,
And after that the beer was free.
For we are only D–Day dodgers, out in Italy.

The sarcasm was dropped for the final two verses, which cut to the heart. Grigg is Sir James Grigg, Secretary of State for War.

If you wander through the mountains or across the dusty plains,
You’ll find a lot of crosses, some that bear no names:
These were our comrades slumbering on,
And we who are left will sing this song.
We are the D–Day dodgers, out in Italy.

Now Winston Churchill give us leave at home,
Now we have captured Naples, Florence and Rome.
We’ll come back and beat the master race,
And Grigg has got some shipping space.
Oh please let us see home, oh please let us see home.

The song entered the oral tradition, with others changing the words and adding further verses in tribute to the men who fought and died defending democracy in Europe.

It goes without saying that war is brutal, destructive and regrettable. There have been songs in the 20^th century that suggest war can be eradicated. Buffy Sainte-Marie’s Universal Soldier, released in 1964, put forward the notion that war would stop if only men refused to fight.

He’s five foot-two and he’s six feet-four
He fights with missiles and with spears
He’s all of thirty-one and he’s only seventeen
He’s been a soldier for a thousand years

And he’s fighting for Canada
He’s fighting for France
He’s fighting for the USA
And he’s fighting for the Russians
And he’s fighting for Japan
And he thinks we’ll put an end to war this way

But without him, how would Hitler have condemned him at Dachau?
Without him, Caesar would’ve stood alone
He’s the one who gives his body as a weapon of the war
And without him all this killing can’t go on

He’s the universal soldier and he really is to blame
His orders come from far away no more
They come from here and there and you and me
And brothers, can’t you see?
This is not the way we put the end to war.

The implication of her sentiment that all fighting is equally wrong is outrageous, as if Winston Churchill and Adolf Hitler were moral equivalents, as if fighting for democracy and fighting for murderous fascism were identical choices. But then Universal Soldier is astoundingly naïve, expressing the view that the world would be at peace if only everyone refused to fight. It’s never going to happen, Buffy. Imagine that the Allied soldiers had refused to fight World War II because they believed “This is not the way we put the end to war.” Did she really imagine the forces of the National Socialists would see the Allies effectively surrender and not take full advantage to win the war and conquer Europe?

It is irresponsible to pretend that there will be peace in the world if we only we put down arms and learn to be nice to each other. The whole world is never going to stand together, put differences aside and hold hands around a global camp fire singing Kum ba yah. There will always be dictators, brutal ideologues, territorial invaders, international disrupters. And, for all these reasons, we will always need soldiers and armies.

The realistic view was expressed in a pamphlet of c. 1649–50, later printed as a song, without music, in a book called The Loyal Garland, published in 1686 (with later reprints), by “S. N. A Lover of Mirth”. Some selected verses from The Dominion of the Sword.

Lay by your pleading,
Law lies a bleeding,
Burn all your studies down, and throw away your reading,

Small power the word has,
And can afford us,
Not half so much priviledge as the sword does.

It fosters your Masters,
It plaisters [strikes or defeats] Disasters,
It makes the servants quickly greater than their Masters.

It is not season,
To talk of reason,
Nor call it Loyalty, when the Sword will have it Treason.

This makes a Lay-man,
To preach and to pray man,
And this can make a Lord of him that was but a Dray-man [driver of a horse-drawn cart].

No Gospel can guide it,
No Law can decide it,
In Church or State, till the Sword hath sanctifi’d it.

He that can tower,
Or he that is lower,
Would be judg’d a fool to put away his power.

The blood that was spilt, Sir,
Hath gain’d all the Gilt [gold], Sir,
Thus have you seen me run my sword up to the Hilt, Sir.

There have been human predators, aggressors and dictators as long as there have been humans. No person, group, army, nation or international alliance will ever eradicate them all by hope, persuasion, intimidation or termination – or, most outlandishly of all, by refusing to fight back.

We therefore have to accept the fact that national and international predators will always exist, and that we need to take responsible steps to protect ourselves. Part of that duty is to be a less appealing target for attack by having strong forces of defence and effective national security. That requires, among other things, an army, and soldiers to serve in it.

No strategy is ever perfect, as We be Souldiers three and its historical backdrop attest. In reality, every enacted plan has payoffs and drawbacks. The payoff of having an army and hiring mercenaries is that a nation can defend itself against aggressors. The drawback is that if men trained to kill, hired for that task, under the extreme stress of putting their own bodies and their own lives at risk, are not paid well and on time, and after service are not looked after or valued by the society they have served, it doesn’t take a towering intellect to foresee what the consequences might be – for them, and for the rest of us.

And if you are one of those who has put yourself at risk to fight in the armed forces for liberty, for freedom from tyranny, then thank you for your service.

 

© Ian Pittaway. Not to be reproduced in any form without permission. All rights reserved.

 

 

Bibliography

All About French (undated) The French phrase “Je vous en prie” revealed.

Anonymous (undated) The Matchlock Musket.

Anonymous (1623) The military discipline: wherein is most martially shone the order of drilling for ye musket and pike, 1623.

Bailey, Nathan (1721) An Universal Etymological English Dictionary. London: R. Ware, W. Innys and J. Richardson et al.

BFBS Forces News (2016) Why The ‘D-Day Dodgers’ Were Anything But.

Britannica (2026) Mercenary.

Chappell, William (1859) Popular Music of the Olden Time. London: Chappell & Co.

Commonwealth War Graves Commission (2022) Forgotten fighters: the story of the D-Day Dodgers.

English Broadside Ballad Archive – see University of California

Fort Scott National Historic Site (2016) Post Sutler-Historical Background.

Greene, Richard Leighton (1977) The Early English Carols. Second Edition. Revised and Enlarged. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Gush, George (undated) Renaissance Warfare. Part 1: Introduction.

Gush, George (undated) Renaissance Warfare. Part 2: Infantry weapons and organisation.

Gush, George (undated) Renaissance Warfare. Part 5: Cavalry weapons and organisation.

Gush, George (undated) Renaissance Warfare. Part 19: the Dutch army.

Harper, Douglas (2026) Online Etymology Dictionary.

Highland Boundary (2022) Shot taking history, origin & culture.

Huth, Henry, editor (1867) A Collection of Seventy-Nine Black-Letter Ballads and Broadsides, Printed in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, Between the Years 1559 and 1597. London: Joseph Lilly.

Imperial War Museums (2026) Anzio – The Invasion That Almost Failed.

Imperial War Museums (2026) The 10 Things you Need to Know about D-Day.

Kelly, D. B. (2024) Why A Shot Of Liquor Is Actually Called A ‘Shot’.

Major, Stuart (2025) The D-Day Dodgers – The War In Italy.

Met Museum (2026) Armor for Heavy Cavalry with Matching Shaffron (Horse’s Head Defense) French ca. 1600.

Middle English Compendium or Middle English Dictionary – see Regents of the University of Michigan

Morehen, John & Mateer, David, transcribers and editors (2012) Thomas Ravenscroft. Rounds, Canons and Songs from Printed Sources. London: Stainer and Bell.  

Murdoch, Steve & Grosjean, Alexia (2026) Hume, Tobias.

Orland, Rob (2026) Armour & Weaponry.

Percy, Sarah (2013) Mercenaries.

Perrett, Bryan (2007) British Military History For Dummies. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.

Pittaway, Ian (2026) There were three Ravens: sublime love and ridiculous riddles.

Pittaway, Ian (2026) Three Ravens and Twa Corbies: the transformations of a traditional song from the 17^th to the 20^th century.

Powell, Dr. Ardal (2000) Flute History Instruments By Period.

Powell, Dr. Ardal (2000) Military flutes.

Protestant Museum (2026) The foreign war.

Pynn, Harry (1944) D–Day Dodgers. Original words here.

Ravenscroft, Thomas (1609) Deuteromelia: Or The Second part of Musicks melodie. London: Thomas Adams.

Regents of the University of Michigan (2025) Middle English Compendium. References here, here, here and here.

Robert of Gloucester – see Wright, William Aldis

Roberts, Keith (2010) Pike and Shot Tactics 1590–1660. Oxford: Osprey Publishing.

Rollins, Hyder E. (1967) An analytical index to the ballad-entries (1557–1709) in the registers of the Company of Stationers of London. Hatboro, Pennsylvania: Tradition Press.

Russell, Daniel A. (undated) Musical Instruments of Antiquity. Part 2: Roman Military Brass Instruments (Tuba/Trumpet, Cornu, and Buccina).

Sawe, Benjamin Elisha (2018) Where Are The Low Countries?

Singman, Jeffrey L. (1995) Daily Life in Elizabethan England. London: Greenwood Press.

Smith, Natasha (2024) Elizabeth‘s Action in the Netherlands.

S. N. A Lover of Mirth (1673) The Loyal Garland, Containing choice Songs and Sonnets of our late unhappy Revolutions. The Fourth Edition, with Additions. London: T. Johnson.

Stanton, Joy & Russell, John (undated) Armour & Weaponry. 

Sturdy, David (2006) War, Politics and Finance in Tudor England, 1485–1603. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Sutcliffe, David (2019) Sister Emma.

Swift, Dean (2017) The Eighty years War & the Council of Blood.

Trease, Geoffrey (1971) The Condottieri. Soldiers of Fortune. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Turner, J.  Horsfall, ed. (1882) The Rev. Oliver Heywood, B.A., 1630–1702; his autobiography, diaries, anecdote and event books; illustrating the general and family history of Yorkshire and Lancashire. Vol.  I. Leeds: A.  B.  Bayes.

University of California, Patricia Fumerton, director (undated) English Broadside Ballad Archive.

Vaughan Williams Memorial Library (2026) We Be Soldiers Three, 27 Feb 1909.

Whent, Chris (undated) Tobias Hume (c. 1569–1645).

Winkler, Anita (2026) Making war pay.

Wright, William Aldis, ed. (1887) The metrical chronicle of Robert of Gloucester. London: Eyre and Spottiswoode.