"1st Edition Old Glory 28mm AWI" Topic

Anyone have any pic of these painted? The price is good but I don't know the quality of this line.

I painted some a couple of years ago and was quite impressed. Sorry, I couldn't find any photos.

Check out this link. It's a review with painted minis

jerseygamers.com/awirev.htm

Dead link for me.

Noss Calavera,

Here is a link to the AWI on the Old Glory direct web site, you have to go through all the AWI pages but there are some pictures there of the painted miniatures. I hope that helps you a little.

link

Kindest Regards,
Teresa

I have a huge collection of 28mm AWI. The vast majority of them are Old Glory. The quality is uneven, but overall averages out as quite good, and some of them are excellent.

As you say, the price is excellent. I like BIG battalions (36 figures per) and have about 17 battalions per side painted now, with at least another 7 to 10 battalions per side to come.

I have not hesitated to mix in other lines -- Perry and Eureka, excellent and expensive, as well as Historifigs, old Hinchliffe, and very old 30mm Scruby. But 80-90% of what I have is Old Glory, and if I were starting over, that would still be what I mainly would buy.

I would recommend, in particular, the various bags of Continentals in cocked hats and brimmed hats, in stockings and in gaiters and in trousers. Each bag has several poses, and there's a variety of heads for most bodies. If you like a variety in your units, and hold the view (as I do) that you'd have found a mixture of hats and leg coverings in most units, then you can put together a large battalion with virtually no identical figures, yet all in roughly the same pose.

A few notes on particular bags:

The Minutemen are smaller than average, and some have big heads for the bodies. I still use them, but they don't look good mixed in with Perry's militia that are noticeably larger.

The British grenadiers are about the same size as the minutemen -- a bit smaller -- and of course grenadiers are supposed to be larger than normal.

The Continental riflemen are excellent figures.

I don't like standard bearers with cast in poles, as they break too easily in my experience. I prefer the open hands to receive wire standards, which 2nd ed. OG has. OG 1st edition has the cast in poles.

Only problem with them (and almost every other range except Perry) is that they don't have British in what would have been the campaign uniform (cut down coat and round hat). Instead they've got them in the full warrant uniform, which current research indicates was abandoned by around the time of Long Island.

So, while the figures are good and the price is excellent, for accurately dressed British you have to use Perry.

There is one OG bag of British light infantry in the round hat. No reason I can see you couldn't use them for the center companies as well. They are among the better figures, too, imho.

The OG British in round hat are wearing a waistcoat. This is sometimes referred to as a "Roundabout". It apparently was just a light infantry waistcoat with sleeves sewn on. It's not the same as a cut down coat, which would have the button hole lace.
The point is that it doesn't really work for center companies.

The OG LI with round hat are not wearing the 'roundabout' as such. It looks as if the figures are based on anyone of a number of reconstructions drrawing on Cecil Lawson's work (eg May & Embleton, Mollo). Unfortunately Lawson did not have particularly good photographs of the della Gatta paintings on which his interpretation is based. Cosequently his interpretation of what 'roundabout' looked like was some akin the the later Napoleonic British infantry coat (but without the lace!)with shallow coat tails.

This is a common mistake and can be seen on not just the OG 1st ed line but also Front Rank, Falcon UK, Dixon (a single figure!) and the early Perry version produced by Foundry. Only the Perry own line shows a 'tail-less' roundabout jacket in the 25-28 ranges.

The heads on some of the OG minutemen look amazingly like Dixon heads and nothing like those in the rest of their range. Hmm.

<<Unfortunately Lawson did not have particularly good photographs of the della Gatta paintings on which his interpretation is based. Cosequently his interpretation of what 'roundabout' looked like was some akin the the later Napoleonic British infantry coat (but without the lace!)with shallow coat tails.>>

TM,

I suspect that Lawson's error was in attribution rather than visual interpretation.

There are two quite distinct uniform modifications seen in the Germantown painting – one is worn by the Light Infantry battalion in the left and centre foreground, the other by the companies of the 40th Foot outside the Chew House in the right background. The former is the addition of the coat sleeves to the distinctive red waistcoat of the light companies. The latter is a conversion of the regimental coat, rather than the waistcoat, from double-breasted to single-breasted, with the lapels removed and the turnbacks shifted round to the front (giving, as you rightly say, a more Napoleonic appearance). From surviving data in a 40th Foot Orderly Book, this was done by the regiment in the summer of 1777.

Mollo/McGregor is just one book that has copied the error and depicted its Light Infantry figures in the 40th style coat. The new "Encyclopedia" has made exactly the same mistake – and then compounded it by giving the officer a sash (noticeably absent from those in the painting).

Mollo/McGregor is just one book that has copied the error and depicted its Light Infantry figures in the 40th style coat. The new "Encyclopedia" has made exactly the same mistake – and then compounded it by giving the officer a sash (noticeably absent from those in the painting).
>>
I liked the Mollo book when I was 10! I still have the very same well used book,but its been irrelavent to me as any kind of useful guide for many years.
And that new encyclopedia was the biggest waste of money I've ever spent on a book,bar none. VERY disappointing.

Bob