Lead Adventure Forum

Miniatures Adventure => Age of the Big Battalions => Topic started by: sjwalker51 on October 15, 2017, 12:31:50 PM

Title: British Regular Infantry uniforms 1745 v. 1779?
Post by: sjwalker51 on October 15, 2017, 12:31:50 PM
Apologies from a newcomer to all matters 18th Century but I need your collective advice...

Very tempted to make the 1745 Jacobite Rebellion a gaming project for next year and was wondering what the major differences in uniform would be between the ‘45 and the American Revolution - can I reasonably proxy my Peter Pig British Regulars for the latter period (planning to use 15mm figures) or are the differences just too great even for a non-purist like me? Would they pass the 2’ rule?

And what about suitable Highlanders? I’ve been looking at Minifigs, Matchlock and Lurkio so far, which seem reasonably compatible, OG look too big alongside them even in separate units, what about Essex?

All advice gratefully received!
Title: Re: British Regular Infantry uniforms 1745 v. 1779?
Post by: Plynkes on October 15, 2017, 01:24:39 PM
No expert on this period by any stretch of then imagination, but to my untrained eye, the uniforms of the 1770s and 80s are more tailored, with a tighter fit, and they're altogether more smart-looking than those of the 1740s and earlier.

Whether this shows in 15mm figures I don't really know without seeing them. The only person who can decide what is acceptable on a table is the person who owns the table. We all have differing degrees of what we're prepared to accept as a proxy. If you identify as a non-purist I think you have already answered your own question. :)





Title: Re: British Regular Infantry uniforms 1745 v. 1779?
Post by: zippyfusenet on October 15, 2017, 03:26:58 PM
Details of cuff, collar and coat length may pass in a small scale like 15mm, but the give-away will be the color of your troops' small-clothes, their breeches and waistcoats, their coat turn-backs and their cross-belts.

In the 1740s and '50s, through 1764, small-clothes were supposed to be colored wool, blue for Royal regiments, red for all others. Coat turn-backs were to be the same facing color as cuffs and lapels.

In the Seven Years War, starting in the 1750s, there was an unofficial change to lighter-weight canvas (osnabrig) small-clothes, in white or drab tan, at first in hot climates like North America and the Caribbean, later spreading to the regiments in Europe.

The 1764 uniform regulation changed the shape of coat collars and cuffs, and made official the change to buff small-clothes for regiments with buff facings and white small-clothes for all other regiments. The 1764 regulations also specified that coat turn-backs were to be in the color of the small-clothes, rather than the facing color. The 1764 regulations were in force for the AWI, although they were much modified in the field.

The color of the cross-belts also changed. In the 1740s, belts were buff leather by regulation. During the SYW, some regiments started whitening their belts. In the 1764 regulations, white belts were made standard.

So, your WAS red-coats should have red or blue breeches, facing color turn-backs and buff cross-belts, while your AWI red-coats should have white or buff breeches and turn-backs, and white belts. I can see the difference, even in 6mm scale.

There is a sweet spot, in the middle of the SYW when the uniform was unofficially changing, when you can pick a regiment with white or buff facings (and therefore white or buff turn-backs), paint the small-clothes likewise white or buff and their belts white, and they won't look too out-of-place for the AWI.

You're welcome.