"10mm AWI figures" Topic

Hi all

You may remember a previous topic asking for your opinions about 10mm AWI.

I've received and painted my first Pendraken figures. They are nice figures and I recommend them to all you 10mm gamers out there!

The only problem is that range isn't complete yet, although I'm informed that the artillery and cavalry will out for Salute later this month.

Cheers

Brett

Hi Brett: I would love to see some of them painted up. Do you have pictures?

Hi Brett and Sapphon, check out these two galleries for examples of painted British Regiments and American Militia units.

link

link

In the next couple of days I will be posting a new gallery which will contain painted examples of all of the figure variants found in the packs. The first to go up will be packs AWA 1 – 11 (American), the Germans are on my table to do next.

Keep checking Pendraken's site for up dates as Dave will be releasing light Dragoons and Artillery for both sides in the near future.

Hope this helps

Andy Mac

I spoke to Dave a coupls of days back and he told me the same things as Andy max reports and the website will be updated shortly.

Sculpts for British artillery and a pack of dragoons were sent off about 10 days ago, they may be ready for Salute, I haven't had confirmation yet. Dave's really busy with new stuff at the moment.

As promised here's the link to painted examples of figure variants for packs AWA1 – 11. Germans to follow shortly.

link

All the best

Andy Mac

Not more temptation!

These are very nice. If I didn't have so much time/money invested in my 15mm AWI I would definitely go for these. It would give me chance to drop my figure ratio from 1:10 to 1:5! :)

Andy

I'd like to request some information on how they were painted. These are great looking figures.

I am planning AWI using Pendraken 10mm, and I'd like for mine to look this good!

Hi There, many thanks for the comments, Ravens Forge drop me a line at andymacrice at aol dot com and we'll have a chat.

Andy

Andy Mac

Excellent phots thanks for putting up the link

Clibinrium

Dave was moulding the 16th LD as I asked him if there were palns for the 17th LD in the 'Emsdorff' style helmet. This within the last week when I spoke to him.

Thomas,

I thought it was the 17th in the Emsdorff helmet I had sent? I was going to put the 16th in Tarletons; though I see the 16th in Emsdorffs sometimes, the 17th figure does fine with a different paitjob?

I'm looking forward to seeing and no doubt buying Artillery and Cavalry at Salute later this month. Wicked retailer!

Clibinarium,

Not having seen the figures I cannot comment with absolute authority. Dave described them to me as being in Tarleton's hence attribution to 16th. You are more of an authority on what you sent than me! Might be worth a clarification – he may have mistaken the head gear?

That said I harbour some doubt's about the 'orthodoxy' of the 16th being in 'Tarleton' anyway but that is for another thread!.

If one accepts both 16th & 17th as being in an 'Emsdorff; style then a different paint job is all that would be required.

Clibinarium,

Checked with Dave & the dragoons are in the Tarleton!

Err, I don't think so; check your email, I've sent you some pics!

Got pics, definitely Emsdorff helmets no idea why Dave thought that they were Tarletons!

For heaven's sake stop this thread.

It's less than a month to Triples and I know I've already got more money pushed into the piggy bank for things I know I need!

This is going to drag me screaming and kicking to a new project.

At the risk of hijacking…….

Quite a lot of (admittedly mostly circumstantial) evidence that the 16th had Tarletons, and they certainly weren't the only LD regiment that didn't wear the "Emsdorff" helmet.

1) Description of helmets of dismounted division formed in March 1776.

2) Depiction of British cavalry in della Gatta painting of Paoli – the detachment of the 16th was the only British cavalry present, and they clearly have crested helmets unlike those of the 17th.

3) A 1781 order for the 23rd LD to adopt helmets "the same as worn by the Queen's Light Dragoons" (ie 16th) – the 23rd's Colonel was Burgoyne, formerly Colonel of the 16th.

4) Tarleton's choice of this helmet for the British Legion, having served in the 16th throughout the war.

5) There is a tenuous suggestion that the Tarleton is originally of Spanish/Portuguese design; Burgoyne commanded the 16th in Spain during the SYW.

No, feel free to hijack, (provided you don't mention "English Generals") more information is always good. I am happy to put the 16th in Tarletons, for a bit of variety. Well, they'll probably just be listed as "Dragoons in Tarletons", the others "Dragoons in Helmets". Starting to mull over American Dragoons; why couldn't they have adopted one hat and one coat!

"why couldn't they have adopted one hat and one coat"

Because they are Rebels!

SM.

Not at home at the moment but when I get chance I will post some alternatives to your comments on 16th (probably not before the weekend alas). Agree no evidence one way or another but some circumstantial evidence the other way.

What is the latest status on the 10mm AWI cavalry and artillery? Looks like they are very close to ready.

I would like to put in an order for Pendraken AWI & F&I but will probably wait till the artillery is ready first.

Andymac, Holy Crap! Those are fantastic! You are the first person to ever tempt me away from 6mm. I will bookmark your photobucket for my inspiration.

Do you have a blog or anywhere I could keep track of your progress?

Truly inspirational.

Thanks
Dugal

Jagger2008

Some artillery and British light dragoons were being moulded a week or so back in time for Salute, but why not contact Dave directly at Pendraken to find out exact status?

andymac – Those are beautiful paint jobs. Makes it hard to believe that they are actually 10mm. They are better than many of the larger scales I have seen.

link

New figures seem to be up on the Pendraken site now.

TM,

Did you find the stuff on the 16th wearing the "Emsdorff" helmet?

Clibinarium.

Very nice work – keep it up!!! If I didn't have so many Perrys and failing eyesight, I'd be in there like a rat up a wossname.

Hi all,

Many thanks for the comments on my brush work, It's all down to Clibinarium. If he can sculpt something that great it goes that you should be able to do it justice with a brush.

I will be picking up all the new packs from Dave at Triples this weekend and will aim to get few packs done each week along with my other painting. For now I will post the images on Clibinarium's Yahoo site and my Photobucket site. I aim to set up a blog during the summer, details will follow as and when.

All the best

Andy Mac

Forgot, here's the link to the German figures

link

Andy Mac

Picked up the new AWI artillery and cavalry (oh! Another army pack as well!) at Salute. Very nice!

SM

Apologies for the delay in replying, alas work intervened. It has proved an interesting question and I have to say in going through the material I have revised my views somewhat although confirmation is required on one or two points. It is a bit long so get yourself a cup of tea (or soemthing stronger!).

All light dragoons wore Emsdorff style helmets in the early 1760s – based primarily on the Morier paintings that are provisionally dated as 1760. This series includes the 21st, Granby's Royal Foresters disbanded in 1763 so ad ate 1760 -1763 might be a better bracket. All the helmets though broadly of a similar type but are very different in detail, this probably reflects the lack of an approved pattern as referred to by Hinde as late as 1776.

The 1768 warrant calls for all light dragoons to wear a helmet (terminology is important and I will return to it later). The inspection returns in Strachan for the 17th LD refer to brass helmets and this can be seen in the Morier paintings. The 16th are recorded as wearing helmets in the 1771 inspection return. Thus the 'Tarleton' did not originate in Iberia and the 16th were earing Emsdorff's on the eve of the American War.

The precise terminology for the dismounted augmentations of 1776 refers to a 'leathern helmet a good deal like that of the Light Infantry'. This was required for both the 17th and 16th LD and I think points to a cap that is rather like that worn by the light companies rather than a Tarleton. This may be what is shown in the in the foreground of 'The views of Cheeves House…' in McGuire's Battle of Paoli although it may just be a light infantry officer.

Now to the Paoli painting. This is a powerful peace of evidence although of course it dates from 1782 but it is based on presumed eyewitness description although some may disagree. Prominent in the left hand corner are British Light Dragoons – no doubt about that and the only ones present were the 16th. The best quality copy of this to which I have access is the one in McGuire's battle of Paoli. This shows the dragoons wearing something that is definitely NOT an Emsdorff helmet and indeed is more of a cap than anything else. The headgear seems to be a cap of some kind it does not seem to be very like the classic Tarleton but seems more like it than anything else. Certainly it is possible to make out what might be the pseudo-leopardskin turban around the base of the cap although the facings appear to be white rather than blue although it is not entirely clear.

After this visual 'shocker' (surprised Cecil Lawson did not pick up on it!) I returned to the plate description of Troiani's reconstrution of dismounted man of the 16th LD. From the text (p.37) in 'Soldiers in America' comes the following extract: "Leather caps of "an entire new construction" were purchased in 1776, trimmed with cloth turbans painted to resemble leopard skin, "three rows of iron chains around the crown", and surmounted with bearskin "roaches", or crests". Unfortunately no source is attributed for the quotes in this extract but as Kochan earlier referred to a letter from Lt Col Harcourt I assume that is the source is indeed Harcourt (14 volumes of Harcourt mss were privately published in the C19th perhaps one day I will get to the British Library to check).

What this shows I think is that the 16th LD wore the Emsdorff-style helmet up to 1776 and that a change was made in 1776 specifically for the posting to America and that the form of the cap (not helmet) was pretty much what we know as the 'Tarleton'.

I still think there is some doubt abut the dismounted sections. The Commander in Chief's out letter of 23rd June 1776 (Strachanp.100) states that both the 16th and 17th were to have 'leathern helmets' of light infantry style and this may not be the Tarleton.

The comment about the 1781 order to the 23rd LD to adopt the same pattern of helmet as the Queen's LD (16th) is a touch problematic. First an excursion into semantics.

The first complete regulation description of the Tarleton comes from Article 6 of a C in C circular letter to all cavalry colonels of 10th August 1788. This is based on the findings of a Board of General officers and discusses whether helmets (only worn by the 15th LD) or caps (i.e. Tarletons) are best for light dragoons. The conclusion being that all LD are to adopt the Tarleton forthwith. The curious thing is that no mention of head wear is made in the new light dragoon warrant of 1784 although a version from 1792 incorporates the 1788 decision. The upshot Emsdorff = a helmet, Tarleton = a cap. So does the 1781 order actually refer to Tarletons?.

The 16th LD had its men drafted into the 17th & other corps when the regiment returned to Britain where the regimental cadre was filled out again with new recruits. Can we be sure that the Tarleton came back with them? The 23rd LD are problematic as well as they are supposed to be in red coats yet the portrait as Burgoyne as regimental colonel shows him in a green coat and holding what may be a cap or a helmet (the angle is too awkward to be clear what it is) which does not look like a Tarleton. If taken literally the 1781 directive might actually refer to both being in helmets. This needs further work in the Inspection Returns etc.

As to whether Banastre Tarleton introduced his eponymous cap into the British Legion? It is an intriguing proposition. The earliest depiction I have seen of what may be a Loyalist dragoon is in the foreground of the Germantown painting and depicts a rider with an Emsdorff style helmet and dark coat. A deserter notice from the British Legion dating from November 1778 refers to a helmet. This is only a few months after Cathcart & Tarleton were appointed to command the legion which in turn was an aggregation of several existing corps. Presumably the earliest date at which Tarleton's could have been introduced would be the 1779 issue? We may safely assume that they were wearing them in the south due to the references about the similarity of the appearance of the BL and Lee's Legion. From 1782 we have excellent evidence in the form of the portraits of Tarleton and Hanger as well as a couple of engravings.

Enough for now I doubt that anyone is still awake. The answer is not where I expected to end up but evidence is like that some time. The mounted 16th LD did wear Tarletons in America!

Wow. You can always rely on TM to be through!

Great work from andymac, strangely enough I started a blog at the weekend. No doubt I'll be slower painting though. anothersuchvictory.blogspot.com

TM,

Excellent research! As you say, there is no concrete view either way. BTW, I wasn't suggesting that the 16th started wearing Tarletons after their service in Spain, but merely that they may have observed the item whilst there and it was kept in mind by Burgoyne until he became Colonel.

Some observations:-

First, helmets were, I believe, issued every two years, so quite possibly the 16th were due a new issue for 1776 anyway.

Second, Hinde was reprinted several times (I have a 1778 edition), so mentioning the Emsdorff helmet in 1776 could simply mean that the text was not revised.

Third, the Paoli painting could well be an "attempt" at depicting the Tarleton, rather than a perfect representation given the time lapse and the fact that the probable commissioner of the painting was an infantryman.

Fourth, possibly it was the drafts from the 16th who brought the Tarleton into Cathcart's (later British) Legion.

Fifth, the order for the 23rd to make its helmets like those of the 16th suggests (to me at least) that there was something distinctive about the latter's headgear. I agree that Burgoyne's portrait is not terribly helpful.

Again, well done on some superb research.

SM

Apologies, I misinterpreted your earlier post re:Iberia. I know the type of cap you mean worn by some of the light troops in Spanish service. I have tended to think, purely on morphological grounds that the Tarleton (and perhaps the American dragoon cap) evolved from the jockey cap. No proof though mere speculation on my part!

You made some very useful observations.

1) Would explain why a new cap was brought in.

2) Hinde does not specifically mention Emsdorff helmets, he just refers to helmets and points out there is no approved sealed pattern. As far as I can tell apart from the warrant requiring helmets to be issued, there is no pattern approved for the Light Dragoons unitl the 1788 circular letter. No head gear is mentioned in the 1784 warrant that puts the LDs into something like slightly lacey Loyalist dragoons in blue. I am sceptical of claims that the 1784 regs were influenced by hussar dress.

3) Yes I agree. Looked up Cecil Lawson (its in vol 3 pp.80-81). He gets it wrong and thinks they are mounted infantry officers or Provincial troopers. He thinks the head wear as cut down caps. Guess his photograph was not detailed enough?

Lawson in volume 4 (15-17) discusses what he thinks are peaked forms of helmet transitional to a Tarleton. I do not find the suggestion terribly convincing.

4) The timing fits like a glove. The 16th went home in December 1778 so the draftees would be turning up after BT had arrived. If so it might point to a 1779 switch to Tarletons.

5) There is obviously something going on here. The inspection returns might help (if they survive).

In contrast the 22nd seemed to have opted for an 'Emsdorff'-helmet at about the same time. Yet by 1788 4 out 5 of the remaining LD regts are in Tarletons. The only reason the 15th hung on is because their helemts carry the Emsdorff battle honour! Perhaps Burgoyne's portrait is like his generalship?

This is not a topic that I have given thought to previously, but I will throw out a few thoughts.

1. Doesn't this image provide good evidence of the 16th in Tarletons?: link

2. Some Americans are thought to have worn "Tarletons." Would they have done so if Tarleton was known as the inventor? I think it more likely that they were given that name because he popularized them or was otherwise closely linked with them. There were a number of images of him in this helmet in the British press after the war -- around the time that the helmets are first known to have been called by that name.

3. That the dismounted dragoons might not have worn this helmet does not surprise me. Bearskin (which I imagine wasn't cheap) was added to cavalry helmets to cushion the skull from sword blows and to visually obscure the top of the head. It doesn't seem like it would have been so useful for the dismounted dragoons.

This is not my area of expertise, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

Adam D

Although the engraving of depicts Tarleton's capture of Charles Lee in 1776 the engraving actually dates from the 1790s. The uniform shown is he style introduced in 1784, and it may even show the modified form of the LD dress from the warrant of 1796. Unfortunately it is not evidence for the mid 1770s.

The term 'Tarleton' is charged with meaning but it deos not mean that Tarleton actually invented it. It seems likely that the cap was introduced into the 16th LD in the 1776 clothing issue. At tis point Tarleton was in America and can have had no part in the caps introduction into the 16th LD. The BL a couple of years later may be a very different point.

I suspect its use as name for a particular head gear derives from the majestic Reynolds portrait of 1782 (there was also Gainsborough and as you indicate a number of engravings). The 1788 C in C letter just refers to it as a cap and I have been unable to trace the use of Tarleton for this cap (to be honest I have not looked!). The French Army post-AWI introduced a similar cap for the infantry that was apparently called a 'Tarleton' and may be we picked up the the terminology from them!

As you rightly point out a similar form was worn by Continental dragoons, and indeed a very similar cap was used by the light dragoons of the Legion of the United States in the mid 1790s. Its use by Amerian units during the was is why I suspect that the general form may originate from the jockey cap.

Adam D

This what I meant by the later (post 1784) uniform

link

1) Tarleton was a subaltern in 1776, and had only just transferred to the 16th LD from a heavy regiment, so there is no question of him being involved in the design or choice of this particular item of headgear.

2) Bearskin was a lot cheaper (and more acceptable) than it is today, and it would not need many pelts to furnish enough roaches/crests for an entire unit.

3) The infantry of Lee's Legion also wore this style.