Reasons for joining

[Didz]

Why do soldiers of the gunpowder (when guns were being used more often in europe to the end of Nepoleonic style armies) join?

As far as the 19th Century British Army was concerned the biggest incentive to join was to escape poverty. A substantial portion of the volunteers were from Ireland and even English Regiments could expect between 10% and 35% of their recruits to be Irish. The biggest incentive to enlist was the bounty paid which varied according to the need for recruits. In 1805 the bounty was £12 guinea's by 1812 it had risen to £23 17s 6d, if you signed up for life, which which was a small fortune for a labourer at the time. Most Irish recruits signed up for life.

According to one recruiting Sergeant, weavers and ploughboys were the easiest to enlist though they required different forms of persuasion. Ploughboys were inevitably persuaded by the idea that they could become Sergeants just like you, whilst Weavers were normally persuaded by idea's of excitment and adventure which got them out of their boring mundane shops.

Another major source of recruits was the militia. The militia were not the army and could not be required to serve oversea's. Any man between the age of 18 and 40 could be drafted into the militia unless they were in a reserved occupation, and Army recruiting parties sometimes resorted to extreme measures to persuade these men to transfer to 'the real army'. There were stories of militia battalions being paraded continuously until the required number of volunteers transferred to the army.

The French of course introduced conscription and so men had no choice but to join their army unless they could afford to pay for a substitute. Therefore, the French Army consisted of a much more diverse mixture of men from the lower social orders than did the British. This was reflected in the way the French allocated their recruits to various Corps, with the more intelligent and literate men being earmarked for the Guard or Elite formations.

Obviously there is a good chance you'll die once the whole front line of an opposing army opens fire, its loke litteraly a wall of lead.

Not really....the accuracy of a musket was less then 15% even at close range so even a full battalion volley of 600 men would only achieve about 90 hits. There are stories of such volleys dropping the entire front rank of the enemy, but one needs to remember that a French column was was formed at least six ranks deep and so the front rank only contained about 80 men.

Battle casualties overall were quite high by modern standards but most of these casualties were caused by artillery fire not musketry.

I've always wondered if there was any specific procedure for selecting who would stand in the front ranks in a gunpowder era unit

There was, certainly in the French Army. Most armies maintained elite companies such as as the British grenadier companies who were expected to lead any attack and were paid more for doing so. The French also had men who volunteered to stand in the front rank of any formation. They were generally referred to as 'the lost children' and they were paid extra money for volunteering. Another factor was that generally speaking men who were to lead such attacks were given extra drink. Certainly, eyewitness accounts suggest that the vast majority of Frenchmen who led the cavalry and infantry attacks at Waterloo were drunk. British regiments also issued extra quantities of both gin and rum prior to battle with those likely to be in the most danger getting the lions share.