Help support TMP

"La Marine: 28mm French Soldiers for the French & Indian War " Topic

28 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.

Back to the French and Indian Wars Message Board

Back to the Crowdfunding Message Board

1,923 hits since 8 Jul 2017
©1994-2018 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP08 Jul 2017 3:04 p.m. PST

Galloping Major launched a kiki campaign to fund a range of 28mm marine troops miniatures for the Canadian wars.


Main page


historygamer09 Jul 2017 8:01 p.m. PST

Nice milice but not Colonial Marines.

And yikes, that artwork referenced is just wrong. The Marine coats were white, not gray. And the troops did not wear mustaches at this time. I love F&I but get frustrated when all the misinformation that gets thrown into the mix.

Also, there no evidence that the French Colonial Marines wore any sort of soft camp. That is just speculation on both many re-enactors and many figure sculptors part.

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP10 Jul 2017 11:50 a.m. PST

Well… glad you like the figures my friend!. (smile)


historygamer10 Jul 2017 1:33 p.m. PST

They are nicely painted but they are not marines.

Darkfire Supporting Member of TMP10 Jul 2017 8:11 p.m. PST

Who says this? What evidence you have, that they don΄t weared this cloth and a soft camp? It is the same thing why the rangers cut down their tricorns…fighting in the woods need other "uniforms".

I΄m long enough in the "18th century business" to know, that there is not everything written. I like this minis and, in my opinion, that is the importent thing.

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP10 Jul 2017 10:28 p.m. PST

Happy you like them too my friend!.


historygamer11 Jul 2017 4:11 a.m. PST

"What evidence you have, that they don΄t weared this cloth and a soft cap?"

I appreciate your passion, but that's not how historical research works. I don't have to prove a negative – you have to prove a positive – that they did wear such caps. Using your logic, I'd also have to prove they didn't use laser pulse rifles and machine guns. Silly, I know.

The way historical research works is that while you can have an assumption (they wore something), you then have to prove it by research including clothing returns, period descriptions, period paintings, etc. And I am telling you, that currently there is no such evidence that Colonial French Marines wore what are commonly referred to as fatigue caps. I am not expert enough on the French Army of the period to know if they might have or not.

I can prove to you, through such evidence (key word there) that English troops wore such caps. One is shown in a Morier painting done for the Duke of Cumberland before the war.

I can also say, with a good bit of certainty, that the figures Tango01 posted are not Colonial Marines, but more likely Canadian Milice.

Further evidence? The re-enactment unit in the Pittsburgh area that recreates Dumas' company – that was based at then Fort Duquesne – does not wear fatigue hats as they cannot document them. This unit is strongly tied in with leading researchers of the period (the past unit commander is acknowledged as an expert on the subject) including Parcs Canada and others. They recently appeared at Fort Necessity (a National Battlefield Park) as the only Marine unit invited for an anniversary event (even though there are two other French Marine units in the area).

I know my friend who is in that unit is sitting there at his computer nodding his head at the above. :-)

But I am certainly open to new research. What facts (not opinion) do you have that might change what is currently known about French Colonial Marines?

I'll be happy to give my background if you like, as I'm "long" in the business of 18th century stuff too – including working with leading historic sites around the country. I'm not sure I've seen you at any of those sites though. Were you there? :-)

Personal logo Fergal Sponsoring Member of TMP11 Jul 2017 2:15 p.m. PST

I'll be happy to give my background if you like, as I'm "long" in the business of 18th century stuff too – including working with leading historic sites around the country. I'm not sure I've seen you at any of those sites though. Were you there? :-)

This is exactly the type of statement that gives gamers a bad name. You might very well be right, but this just makes you look like an…

Keeping with the scientific approach, can you discribe the appearance of the bloke you just said you're not sure you didn't see? Otherwise how will we know it's true?

historygamer11 Jul 2017 3:39 p.m. PST

So the previous poster posted:

"I΄m long enough in the "18th century business" to know, that there is not everything written."

So unless I missed the mark, it was a passive/aggressive challenge to my knowledge (vs his) and my response was that I didn't exactly just fall off the truck myself. I'll be happy to discuss the subject but it helps to bring more than assumptions and opinions.

Sorry if my reply offended, but it is frustrating for even those with a little knowledge to see all the schlock that is posted here about the F&I period and accepted as fact.

I am a long re-enactor of the period and multiple award winning GM for my 18th century games. The fantasy junk that passes as historical because…. "I like this minis and, in my opinion, that is the importent thing" is just disheartening.

This is such an interesting period that it needs no enhancements with junk history. Note that the responder never posted any facts to counter or add to the discussion. Hey, if someone has some facts I'm all ears.

Your last sentence is just a bunch of gibberish so forgive me if I don't respond to it. If you want to continue the discussion in person I'll be appearing at George Washington Birth Place National Park doing a number of presentations to the public next weekend on the Revolutionary War.

Galloping Major19 Jul 2017 2:37 a.m. PST


Thank you Armand for posting about our "La Marine" Kickstarter, which passed it's initial target for troops in Colonial/outpost clothes and those in vestes (small clothes) in less than a day, and (while I was re-establishing my lost log-on for TMP) has passed the first stretch goal: "La Marine" in coats, and is now making steady progress toward the second stretch goal. Also thanks to Darkfire and Fergal for your comments.

Just a word of explanation about the three orders of dress represented in the Kickstarter project:

The coats were worn or not at the decision of their senior officer, weather being one but not the only factor, but as a general rule of thumb I would go for coats when serving in battalion (several companies drawn together) etc., and in Spring/Autumn weather coats removed and small clothes exposed in hot weather, small clothes and/or Canadian/outpost clothes works well for skirmishing. For winter fighting a mix of coats and capotes would be most likely, along with other warm articles of clothing. The Canadian/outpost clothing became introduced in companies which were stationed in remote outposts for long periods of time where re-supply was difficult or unlikely. The soldiers were allowed to dress in their shirts worn out over breeches (or in some cases shown with breech clouts) with mitasses (Indian leggings) in place of or to preserve their issue uniform coat and waistcoat. I've represented this as campaigning season (Spring-Autumn), for colder weather capotes were worn, often made up from the remnants of their grey coats.


My plan for my own ones is to have a unit or two in coats to act in the same way as army infantry, and a few sub-units in small clothes and Canadian clothes to act in support or separately as light infantry. The compagnies Franches being largely officered by Canadian-raised gentry and training alongside militia (having already learned their formal French infantry drill), and serving on raids with Indians and militia, had learned the woodland way of fighting so as well as fighting in tight military formations were able to work in a light infantry style.


For "La Marine" detachments sent on a raid with Indians and Canadian Militia I'll mostly use the figures in Canadian clothes with some in small clothes. For defending a garrison I'll use mostly soldiers in coats and in small clothes.

The different orders of dress and different hat types can be mixed together, but I think they'll come in very useful as a way of easily differentiating units and sub units.


"La Marine", being independent companies of which there were 28 companies serving in Canada by the beginning of the 18th century, constituted the largest element of French troops (other than the militia) serving in the French & Indian War. As Independent Companies they had no battalion structure, though Montcalm did form a service battalion of Compagnies Franches de la Marine in 1757, Levis organised two battalions in 1760. Serving in battalion they fought in the more structured European style of the army battalions.

I hope this helps – I've structured the Kickstarter for "La Marine" in a way that makes it possible to back it by pledging only against troops in Canadian/outpost dress or in small clothes as well as both together, the soldiers in their uniform coats are in the recently achieved first stretch, we have two weeks in which to reach the second stretch goal which will include a pack of soldiers in coats in "advancing" poses and packs of soldiers in capots.


Galloping Major19 Jul 2017 9:11 a.m. PST

Sadly there have been some rather unpleasant comments made on here by one member of this forum who makes the wrongful assumption that sculptors create ranges of figures without researching their subject. The lack of depth and breadth of this gentleman's own knowledge is betrayed by him, upon seeing red tuques (he calls them forage hats) worn by soldiers in shirt sleeves, he leaps to the mistaken assumption that they are Canadian militia, despite the Marines' gargoussier equipment and muskets. We already have several packs of Canadian militia in our range, mostly using the distinctively different Tulle hunting musket with which the majority were armed.


Quoted from "LA MARINE The French Soldier in Colonial Canada 1745-1761" by Andrew Gallup and Donald F. Shaffer published by Heritage Books, 2008:
"Perhaps nothing is more French Canadian than the Tuque, a woolen stocking cap. The marine had access to this headgear. The Tuque was an issue item in 1757 (Bougainville 1964:87). They were made in various weights, "single caps" or "double caps". They came in various colors, blue and scarlet being most popular. Tuques were knitted as tubes. An example from the Machault cargo is of two-ply yarn knitted in stocking stitch (Hanson 1981:11. Sullivan 1986:82)."
I would highly recommend this book for anyone wishing to learn more about the material culture of the Compagnies Franches de la Marine. It details everything from hats to shoes and razors to fortifications.

I see that the person who denies any evidence for the tuque ever being worn by the Compagnies Franches rolls out his credentials as a reenactor to justify his claims, I must say as a highly experienced reenactor myself, that I'm afraid the views and credibility of reenactors vary as considerably as do those of anyone else. Perhaps each of these reenactors portraying soldiers of the Compagnies Franches in winter weather is mistaken in their headwear?


Or these representing regular soldiers at Fort Ticonderoga? I think not.


Referring to the colour of the Justaucorps or coat, I'll go no further than the above mentioned book "LA MARINE The French Soldier in Colonial Canada 1745-1761":
"The coat was made of a grey-white woollen Lodeve cloth during the early 18th century. After 1732, the cloth was manufactured in Marseilles. The shade of grey-white depended on the raw material. The following quote concerns the regular army but there is no reason to believe that it would not apply to the marines.
‘During the 18th century white was the standard colour of the Line Infantry. This was not as spectacular as might be imagined however, since this was the colour of the coarse undyed wool that was used, dyed cloth, apart from distinctive cuffs and collars, being reserved for the Guards, Cavalry and foreign corps (Thorburn 1976:7).' "
Although referred to as white, the uniform coats of the soldiers were various paler shades of grey, only the coats of the officers approached a true white.


MUIA print by the much celebrated artist Eugene Leliepvre, showing coat colours for soldiers compared to those of officers.

I offer this for those who have an genuine interest in the subject, not as an argument with the views of Historygamer, who appears to believe that his assumptions and selective 'knowledge' constitute the entire sum of human understanding in this area.

historygamer19 Jul 2017 5:38 p.m. PST

"The lack of depth and breadth of this gentleman's own knowledge is betrayed by him, upon seeing red tuques (he calls them forage hats) worn by soldiers in shirt sleeves, he leaps to the mistaken assumption that they are Canadian militia, despite the Marines' gargoussier equipment and muskets…"

I was not mixing up the red knit cap with the forage cap.
I believe I know the difference. I was looking at the other photos in the link. So are you saying the figures pictured in knit caps are in their shirt sleeves? Kind of bulky looking. They look more like a smock or over shirt of some kind. Can you provide some documentation that Colonial Marines went out in their shirts or wore these knit caps in the summer time? They look rather uniform to me, and I didn't realize that was supposed to be shirt.

Regarding the coat – while it has often been mistakenly ascribed to be grey, but it wasn't. No disrespect to Mr. Leliepvre's artwork. I have some as well on other subjects and it is rather dated (he was born in 1908).

Here is a passage from an acknowledged expert on French Marine uniforms:

"The "drap gris-blan" or grey-white wool cloth used as the basic coat material was not dyed but was a natrual off-white resulting from cheap processing where the wool was unbleached. It did retain much of its natural lanolin, giving it some ability to repel water. The blue serge was a somewhat lighter weight; and while dye lots varied greatly, it was usually not a dark navy blue, but a lighter royal blue. It often faded badly."

Text was taken from an article "French Marine Uniforms in North America" by Bruce J. Egli, published in F & I War Magazine, Vol. 2, No. 2, 1984, The Journal of the 18th Century Society, New Alexandria, PA

Bruce, again an acknowledged national expert on French Marine uniforms – never permitted his recreated Company of Marines – Dumas – to wear either fatigue caps and certainly not knit caps. Those that do wear them do so on speculation. Not unreasonable, I grant you, but there is no documentation for either.

Here is a link to what unbleached wool (natural) looks like. It is slightly whiter in person:


Here is the page that gives some background on these wool fabrics.

I will assume you know who Jim Kochan is.

In regards to Andy's and Doc's book, I am sure it is pretty good. But I'd go with Mr. Egli any day on the subject.

Here is a more modern painting, by John Buxton, of Marines attacking Fort Ligonier in mid-October of 1758.


John used Bruce's unit for models in the painting. Actually, that isn't even the full painting as a Marine officer is just out of the cropped frame on the right – and it is a painting of Bruce.

Here is another of John's paintings. FYI – he used me as a model for Washington (so he told me. I think he got a photo of me one year at Old Fort Niagara as the fellow I am chatting with is a doctor up in Michigan)).


Here is a picture of Bruce in his Marine officer's uniform:


So do any of those coats look grey to you? Unbleached wool.

I'm still not clear if the figures Armand originally posted are supposed to be soldiers in winter (as you posted) or summer, or what? I know that having run around the woods of Western PA and NY the last thing I'd want on my head in June/July/Aug is a wool knit cap.

My original comment was that the figures originally posted, do not look like Colonial French Marines.

Just read a passage in a very good book where it talks about a French officer being captured on a raid in 1756 in VA. There is no comment on his clothing. I would be very much interested and open to what you might have on the subject.

I am well read enough about the clothing (or lack, thereof) Beaujeu wore at Braddock's Defeat. There is no known reference on what his marines or accompanying milice wore (civilian clothes – as they were not from the frontier).

I freely admit I am better acquainted with British clothing than French, and no, I don't claim to know everything, but I am fairly well tied into what the current thinking and facts are on much of the period.

Galloping Major20 Jul 2017 2:52 a.m. PST

As I said: "I offer this for those who have an genuine interest in the subject, not as an argument with the views of Historygamer, who appears to believe that his assumptions and selective 'knowledge' constitute the entire sum of human understanding in this area."

Historygamer made a simple mistake re seeing the knitted tuques and assuming that these were milice, ignoring the gargoussiers etc. I had missed that when erroneously referring to "forage caps" he meant the bonnets, and does not believe in their existence in French use at this time, interesting, despite them being a frequently referred to with various French corps back to the last quarter of the 17th century at least. Unbleached wool varies in colour by batch, depending on the source, one thing it is not is white.

Clearly, he confuses what he is looking at, makes critical and excessive blanket statements, asks for one piece of evidence and on receiving it ignores that, and due to his fixed attitude which chooses to select only evidence which supports his pre-formed views (which must be correct, because they are his) he digs in his heels further.

Historygamer, as before, I have no intention of wasting valuable time engaging in any form of discourse with yourself. In all fairness though, I feel I should thank you for helping to bring more attention to our current project than it may otherwise have received on TMP, and, through your attitude, creating the impetus for some who were hovering to react by backing the project.

historygamer20 Jul 2017 7:59 a.m. PST

Or perhaps your figures are just based on what you assume French Marines might have looked like.

I stand by my statements and you have provided no documentation to support that French Marines wore:

1. Only Shirts and red knit caps in the summer (you offered pictures of re-enactors in winter gear instead – you keep ignoring that fact and the other photos of re-enactors I provided)

2. Wore fatigue caps ever (though it is often assumed)

I'm not saying your figures are bad, just saying the ones originally posted on here by Armand are not supported by any documentation by you or anyone else as looking like French Colonial Marines.

Some of the "evidence" you offered was painted likely 40 years ago or more, is clearly wrong by today's update information, or was written by re-enactors (shot at Doc and Andy for years) who never wore the clothes portrayed on those figures. Doc never wore anything but his Colonial Marine officers uniform, and he was portraying a Detroit garrisoned unit at that. Same for his unit.

Hey, I wish you all the best in the world selling your figures, but the ones originally posted here are not supported by any period documentation – unless you have something more you aren't sharing, and if so I'd love to see it.

Personal logo Bowman Supporting Member of TMP23 Jul 2017 1:25 p.m. PST

So is this an incorrect representation of a Marine in summer campaign clothing?


historygamer23 Jul 2017 2:43 p.m. PST

Does that match the photo Armand posted?

Personal logo Bowman Supporting Member of TMP23 Jul 2017 6:00 p.m. PST

I'll assume that's a no.

How about the third picture from this old thread that you have commented on here:

TMP link

Unfortunately, the pictures you comment on cannot be retrieved.

Or this one:


Granted, it is not a unit that served in Canada. But the link I provided above calls it a fatigue cap. It also said they wore woollen toques when the weather got colder. I'm asking because I want Marines that can fight at Fort Niagara and Quebec.

Personal logo Bowman Supporting Member of TMP23 Jul 2017 6:39 p.m. PST

This seems like the headgear worn by the Conquest/Warlord sculpts. It's a type of bonnet de police and a hooded capot.


Also similar to the Osprey illustration, is it not?


historygamer24 Jul 2017 5:10 a.m. PST

All I know on the subject of the French marine fatigue hat (you can call it different things) is that one of the leading US expert on the subject states that there is no documentation for them. It doesn't mean they didn't wear something – just that there is no documentation for them. That said, the fatigue caps, cut out of old clothing (which the soldiers owned) and made into every day work caps were common to the period. They were not regulation, and likely varied greatly – in the Colonial Marines' case (if they wore them), likely from company to company due to their deployment. Someone that was handy with a needle and thread would sew them up for a fee.

I don't recall the garrison of Marines at OFN, but I do recall that the fort was the southern most station for French regulars.

Rene is an acknowledged expert at French uniforms worn during this time period. He is also very good friends and in regular contact with the author of the article I cut and pasted above (Bruce Egli). Bruce's unit does not allow the wearing of any fatigue caps since they can't document them. That, of course, is a unit call. When re-enacting the 18th century there are often gaps till better documentation comes along. Note, in the article Rene co-wrote, there is no specific documentation for such headwear.

That said, if I were painting up Colonial Marines, I would likely have a mix of hats (tricorne and fatigue) and the wearing of small clothes during the summer months (Amherst put the regimental coats in storage during the summer 1759 campaign, though Wolfe's troops obviously wore theirs).

My comments were/are originally about the photo (singular) linked and posted in Armand's original thread – the first one here.

I am not aware (doesn't mean it doesn't exist) of any works on how Colonial Marines may have dressed when out serving on Indian raids (if that even happened). The commonly held view is that they looked something like the picture above (left their justacorps behind) and woolen leggings for both sides were common. I have come across a couple of period references of captured French Colonial officers out with the Indians (no mention of captured enlisted – at least yet in my reading), but no reference on how they were dressed.

When speculating on how Colonial Marines might have dressed – first that's okay if you say that, like Gerry Embleton did with the old Wolfe's Army Robin May Osprey portraying a 60th RAR grenadier in a bearskin. The problem is that people (wargamers especially) often take that for gospel, and such speculation takes on a life of its own. Note Gerry's speculation found its way into the movie Last of the Mohicans and on some sculpts of figures.

Making huge leaps gets more problematic.

Soldiers generally wore soldiers' clothing. The figured posted above makes the jump with the smock/fatigue shirt, and knit cap. For me, that's a bridge too far. Some may like the figures, and that's fine.

historygamer24 Jul 2017 5:19 a.m. PST

One more thought on Colonial Marines accompanying the Indians on raids – I am currently reading a book on the Virginia frontier (1755 to 1759? – haven't gotten that far yet). There are numerous period references to French and Indian raids on the VA frontier. One French (Marine?) officer was captured. No description of his clothing. Since he was found with orders to burn a VA magazine, no doubt he was trying to get the Indians to cooperate (they never did, with or without him).

I have yet to see any reference to Frenchmen actually sighted during these raids, though lots of eye witnesses of Indians though no descriptions of what they looked like either.

Personal logo Bowman Supporting Member of TMP24 Jul 2017 10:36 a.m. PST

Thanks for the reasoned reply.

If you indulge me to do a little speculation on my own, I'd be much obliged. I think the problem with clothing in such a poorly documented time is one of time and place.

As for time, as you well know the Compagnies Franches de Marines have about a 70 year history in New France. As those decades went on the British naval blockades became more and more effective. Canadian shipping manifests are pretty complete and it would be interesting to see how many uniforms were being sent over from France to replace worn out ones. I'm willing to speculate that fewer formal uniforms were available in the later years.
Notwithstanding the ones worn by the brigades sent over with Montcalm, together with the regular line troops.

But more importantly is distance. I suggest that the nice formal "parade ground" uniforms were worn mostly in the urbanized areas of Montreal, Quebec City and Trois Rivieres. Also, in larger forts such as Fort Carillon (Ticonderoga) and Louisbourg. The farther the Marines had to campaign from these centers the more they would tend to adopt some of the clothes of the militia, coureurs de bois and Indians. As you well know the first Marines were brought to New France in 1683 to fight against the Iroquois who were disrupting the lucrative fur trade. I wonder if they would head out into the forests in their buckled shoes, white stockings and formal white coats after the Iroquois warriors. Also, even at this early date, the Compagnies were ill supplied from France, especially insufficient clothing.

Russ, Christopher J. Les Troupes De La Marine, 1683-1713. , 1971.

Finally to the lack of pictorial evidence. Sadly this is clearly evident. But this may be a case for the old cliche, "Absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence". Lets assume Governor Vaudreuil brings a painter to New France to draw scenes of life in the Colony. (He was a corrupt administrator and poor tactician but he always tried to promote further colonization and emigration). The painter sketches the Compagnies Franches de Marines. Ok, where does he do so? In Montreal and Quebec City? Or in some god forsaken fort around St Louis? I'd expect the former. So we have paintings and sketches of the urban stationed Marines in formal uniforms and not in their deep woods campaign dress. Modern reenactors are shown in the nice white formal jackets and even having a colour guard. Would they do this in combat? In the Plains of Abraham for sure, but deep in the forests?


As similar case happens in something that I am much better versed in, The Aztecs and Conquistadors. The conquistadors, especially the mounted Hidalgos, came to Mexico wearing partial plate armour. They'd have various armour for their legs and hips, breastplates and helmets. Then two things happened. First the heat and humidity made wearing this armour stifling hot and difficult to endure. Secondly, the Aztecs had no penetrating melee weapons similar to the Spanish rapiers. All the native melee weapons, such as the maquahuitl (obsidian edged sword) and tepoztopilli (obsidian edged spear) were slashing weapons. The Spanish quickly figured out that they could jettison their metal armour and wear the cooler cotton filled "flak jacket" known as the ichcuahuapilli. Not only was it lighter, and cooler, but the dense cotton padding could resist a slash from the native weapons. All the Conquistadors mention this in their books. However, when it came time to illustrate this, the artists always have the Conquistadors in partial plate armour in combat. Even very late in the campaign with the fall of Tenochtitlan, the Lienzo de Tlaxcala shows Spanish knights with heavy European styled armour. I cant think of an illustration showing a European wearing an ichcuahuapilli, even though many did. You can't always trust the artwork.

I'm not disagreeing with you at all, I'm just speculating on a few matters. The link I produced above mentions the wearing of the "bonnet de police" and this is what the Conquest/Warlord Marines seem to be wearing. It also describes them wearing "woolen toques" and this is what the Galloping Major figures seem to be wearing.

historygamer25 Jul 2017 9:51 p.m. PST

Some quick thoughts after visiting with my friend who is in a recreated Colonial Marine unit.

Note the first picture you posted – one man in three is wearing some sort of soft cap. One. Same for the older art work Galloping Major posted. One. In the other pictures you linked to – note the soldier on duty wears his tricorne hat while those off duty wear their fatigue caps for fatigue work. On duty, tricorne, fatigue work, fatigue cap.

Think of this another way – what are your figures portraying? Did everyone's uniform wear out at the same time? If so, do you really think they'd all field looking the same? Natty red caps, a scarf, and new smock? That looks like they were all issued the same clothing to me. That does not seem reasonable at all given supply problems, lack of money and materials. We know there was not one uniform for parade and another for the field. They had what the had, which is well documented throughout 18th century armies. Soldiers were often reported in near rags waiting for the next issue of clothing.

Are we talking Marines out on Indian raids? Or are we talking garrison troops out for battle – like at Braddock's defeat? Perhaps two different things. Perhaps not. I'm having a hard time finding out what numbers of Marines even went out on Indian raids. Some did, but how many, from where, and wearing what? In the largest raid of the war into VA, the French were all from far western outposts, not Detroit or Fort Duquesne.

What was issued to them? What was modified? What ran out? It is more likely that breeches wore out before sleeved waistcoats (trust me, they do) or coats. Hats take a beating in weather. A more practical modification to a tricorne is being shown by the one French soldier in the painting – you uncock the hat for shade, or to keep rain out of your face. We know the English did this. So why not the French? Why the assumption they all ran into the woods with fatigue caps on instead? A cap I might argue that does not help with sun or rain. So why not some French figures in uncocked hats? If not, then why not English figures all wearing fatigue caps too?

Maybe one guy has a cocked hat, another a fatigue cap, and a third with an uncocked hat? Why not one in sleeved waistcoat with cocked hat, with another in a fatigue cap? If the unit is to portray ragged and worn out clothes then there would be some variation of the basic uniform, right?

Just some more things to ponder based on what we know from other armies of the period.

historygamer25 Jul 2017 9:52 p.m. PST


Go down to the second picture, click on it and look at the guy by the fire with the woman. Uncocked hat there.

Dwindling Gravitas Inactive Member26 Jul 2017 12:37 p.m. PST

F++k me, you lads really take your hats seriously :-)

HANS GRUBER26 Jul 2017 12:50 p.m. PST

Historygamer, I think you have made your opinion known. In the end, figure producers are free to use the research they find appropriate as the basis for their figure designs and buyers are free to use the figures as they see fit (regardless of labeling). It's a pretty good system. And personally, I find TMPers quite knowledgeable about their purchases. Information can be helpful, but lecturing about what is right and what is wrong isn't productive.

historygamer26 Jul 2017 5:36 p.m. PST

I think I said that previously. I was answering Bowman's post. Just like figures, if you don't like the thread then move on.

Kimber VanRy Inactive Member27 Jul 2017 4:51 a.m. PST

The Kickstarter is going well, and a free officer figure stretch goal was just added. I'm a huge fan of GM miniatures, backed the KS in its first hour and I'm always glad to have more options in the hobby. There's stilntime to check it out in the link below.


marco56 Supporting Member of TMP28 Jul 2017 6:21 a.m. PST

This is probably the most complete FIW line out there or will be.Redoubt probably bigger at this stage but GM will probably surpass them eventually.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.