Regarding Cocked Hats and Musket Drill - which way should it be worn?

[Condottiere]

Are there any paintings dated to the War of the Spanish Succession period showing soldiers wearing three cornered cocked hats aka tricorns that are worn correctly, like mentioned in these videos. The ones used as reference for the War of the Spanish Succession, to prove that hat is worn with a corner pointing forwards, date from the 19th or early 20th Century. In earlier paintings, with only one side cocked and sometimes worn rakishly tilted, this is the side the wearer carries a musket or a pike.

Firelock Games' box of soldiers have the cocked hats designed so that the corner faces forwards and I think this is incorrect and requires slight modification to get it to fit correctly on the head. On FB, one person tried to prove me wrong by posting an image of Jean Alaux's 1712 Battle of Denain, showing the hats worn pointing forward, but I checked and it was made in 1839.     

[has.been]

Thanks for posting. Are the figure manufacturers paying attention I wonder.

[Old Contemptable]

You would think someone would have tested the design of the hat before it was approved. I have a few figures that are wearing cocked hats but most are wearing it the incorrect way. I never really understood the term before. I just assume it was a flight of fancy by soldiers in the field. I guess this explains the shako.

[Condottiere]

You would think someone would have tested the design of the hat before it was approved. I have a few figures that are wearing cocked hats but most are wearing it the incorrect way. I never really understood the term before. I just assume it was a flight of fancy by soldiers in the field. I guess this explains the shako.

There's nothing wrong with cocked hats and they offered better protection from the elements than shakos. I read somewhere that shakos offered better protection from sword slashes, but a cocked hat could be reinforced with a metal skull cap and neither offered any facial protection.

[Condottiere]

Thanks for posting. Are the figure manufacturers paying attention I wonder.

They pay attention to Ospreys...

There's no guarantee drawings and paintings made around the time of events, as a lot of art made during the Napoleonic Wars and shortly after have the wrong shako or facings. I'd like to know if there are any regulations from any of the combatants in the WSS about the way the cocked hat was supposed to be worn.   

[carlos marighela]

They pay attention to Ospreys...

There's no guarantee drawings and paintings made around the time of events, as a lot of art made during the Napoleonic Wars and shortly after have the wrong shako or facings. I'd like to know if there are any regulations from any of the combatants in the WSS about the way the cocked hat was supposed to be worn.

Beyond the 'ye hatte is to be worn upon the head?'? I doubt you'll find much in the way of army regulations for the WSS as the clothing of their men and peculiarities of dress was very much the preserve of their individual colonels at that time.

As for the way the hat was worn, well there actually are some fairly authoritative depictions later in the century. While he is best known for the Grenadier paintings, David Morier also depicted 'hat men' and cavalry wearing the three corner hat. Morier was commissioned by the Duke of Cumberland, head of the army to accurately depict each and every regiment. Those paintings are not just, the Osprey of the period, they are effectively the official guide. Morier was given access to and painted a soldier from each regiment.

Other contemporary works from around the time of the WAS also depict foot regiments in hats. To this end there is a comprehensive set of 104 coloured engravings from 1742 in A Representation of the Cloathing of His Majesty's Houshold and of all the Forces upon the Establishments of Great Britain 1742

Now you can argue that the WSS is 30 years prior but the predominant influence on military dress was civilian fashion and at that time the tricorn hat worn with point over the forehead and ears reigned supreme.

Spoiler alert. Taking our cue from  contemporary fashion portaits, the paintings of Morier and the 1742 dress regulations it seems the popular trope of manufacturers may not be wrong after all.

[Condottiere]

Beyond the 'ye hatte is to be worn upon the head?'? I doubt you'll find much in the way of army regulations for the WSS as the clothing of their men and peculiarities of dress was very much the preserve of their individual colonels at that time.

As for the way the hat was worn, well there actually are some fairly authoritative depictions later in the century. While he is best known for the Grenadier paintings, David Morier also depicted 'hat men' and cavalry wearing the three corner hat. Morier was commissioned by the Duke of Cumberland, head of the army to accurately depict each and every regiment. Those paintings are not just, the Osprey of the period, they are effectively the official guide. Morier was given access to and painted a soldier from each regiment.

Other contemporary works from around the time of the WAS also depict foot regiments in hats. To this end there is a comprehensive set of 104 coloured engravings from 1742 in A Representation of the Cloathing of His Majesty's Houshold and of all the Forces upon the Establishments of Great Britain 1742

Now you can argue that the WSS is 30 years prior but the predominant influence on military dress was civilian fashion and at that time the tricorn hat worn with point over the forehead and ears reigned supreme.

Spoiler alert. Taking our cue from  contemporary fashion portaits, the paintings of Morier and the 1742 dress regulations it seems the popular trope of manufacturers may not be wrong after all.

I read that sailors would wear their three cornered hats backwards, so the front point wouldn't interfere with their work at sea, so soldiers would've worn their hats to not interfere with drills.

Any surviving manual of arms from the late 17th Century and WSS? If you look at paintings of those "floppy hats", one side is turned up and that's part the musket would be shouldered. I have Nosworthy's The Anatomy of Victory: Battle Tactics 1689-1763 and while there's no mention of clothing, it covers the transition of pike and shot to just shot and musketeer ranks closing up after the adoption of flintlocks. In a close order formation, you'd need to be able to turn your head, but if the brim or point is sticking out, it'd bump into the musket shouldered on the left or right.

Morier image I Googled, labeled as grenadiers, since not every regiment wore mitres. 



The corner is not on the nose, but on the left eye, just as mentioned in the videos, in contrast with civilian wear. I unfairly maligned the Ospreys, as not all are awful. In Stuart Reid's King George's Army 1740-93: (1) Infantry, the re-enactors are all wearing the cocked hats with the point above the left eye and the same in the plates. The book has a number of Morier portraits and on page 4 is a b&w of a private of the 1st Regiment (1742). Can't find an online image, but I found an identical image, though of a solider of the 37th - the hat is cocked with the corner above the left eye.



I can't find any WSS paintings dated to around the time that depicts battalion men from the front. The paintings usually focus on cavalry, grenadiers and officers, with hat men in the background in an angle I can't determine the way the hat is worn.

[carlos marighela]

That last plate of the soldier in the 37th Foot is in fact from A Representation of the Cloathing of His Majesty's Houshold and of all the Forces upon the Establishments of Great Britain 1742. I think the NAM holds an original edition.

Nose, left eye, whatever. The point I was making is that contemporary illustrations by people intimately familiar with their subject matter show the hat being worn pretty much as depicted over the years by figure sculptors. I suspect that at least some of them have accessed the same source material, which is fairly well known and has been extensively reprinted, copied and used in books on the subject.