I'm particularly interested in the comparison of basic army recruit training in the 19th century in the colonial superpowers, especially Great Britain. More specifically, the army.
How does it compare to modern day army training i.e running, ruck marching, press ups, obstacle courses, marching etc. How would the training be adapted to the line infantry tactics used at the time?
Are you interested in Swedish army training in this era too?
When you were recruited, conscripted, or enlisted in the army, a soldier usually had a plethora of regiments to join. However, they could not always choose which one. The recruiting sergeants may get you, and you wouldn't have a choice in that matter. It's off you go! During the American War for Independence, some joined fencibles (militia) because they knew they would not be shipped over seas.
Line infantry in the British army first went through an initial period of training before they drilled. This training included military posture, marching, and weapons handling. They had to be deemed "fit for the ranks" before they could join their company. Mechanical drilling had four parts to it: the manual of arms exercise, platoon exercise, firings, and maneuvers. (Spring 118) The only additional training one would get if one were in the Light Companies which received training for "bushfighting" and flank maneuvers. This meant drilling on how to fight among trees and brush, often consisting of either taking cover behind a tree while loading or laying flat on the ground. Recruits would be drill consistently until they knew the manual of arms by heart. In contrary to popular belief, British soldiers did learn how to aim their muskets to the fullest effect. They did have "range time" like modern recruits do. (Spring 208). They were expected to be able to fire 3 shots in a minute under duress. Officers knew that the recruits needed to have discipline until they got experience in war, something that could not be replicated in drilling. Maintaining order was the main thing officers wanted in the field so that a soldier could be fully effective when confronted by the enemy. Discipline would keep them in line until they got experience and could have a coolness about them in the field.
Light Infantry had different drills as mentioned. First established in the Seven Years War, the British reinstated them in 1775 at the outbreak of the AWI. They were to counter the rebels in bushfighting in the woods. However, I would not equate them as the same as the Rangers, Indians, or Mountainmen in that regard. They had different training, such as different march patterns and orders. By the later periods of the revolution, the British army had adopted two ranks and loose orders. Light companies would pair off and be ordered to fire from cover of tree. I would like to add that the British army usually liked to pick the smallest and fastest men possible for Light companies, some as short as 5'4".
Rucking? Almost. A soldier under march would often carry what he would need on him at all times. Including 60 rounds, food in the haversack, a knapsack full of clothes and other items, blanket, and often one tin kettle per mess. Bayonet, tomahawk too depending on regiment, and the musket. All of this could be more than 60lbs so a soldier had to be fit to carry this on a march. They wouldn't always get wagon trains to transport equipment.
When it came down to hand to hand fighting, not a lot of training was given. Soldiers learned bayoneting drills and that was pretty much it. Hand to hand combat was rare and would usually come down to the soldier's own grit when it came to that. There were not any martial arts training like modern armies.
Source:
Matthew H. Spring. With Zeal and Bayonets Only: The British Army on Campaign in North America, 1775 - 1783.