Help support TMP


"The origin of infantry facing colours" Topic


57 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 Napoleonic Discussion Message Board



1,718 hits since 28 Sep 2017
©1994-2017 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Pages: 1 2 

4th Cuirassier29 Sep 2017 1:27 a.m. PST

Looking at the British army, was there any basis on which a unit's facing colours were chosen?

Obviously any regiment with 'Royal' in its title had garter blue facings, but I struggle to identify any other principle other than perhaps cost of uniform production. That seems weak though because if it were a key factor all facing colours would have been much the same.

I have analysed out facings by county or region for the British army and no obvious principle springs out. There were two Buckinghamshire and two Gloucestershire regiments, but one had buff and the other yellow facings. There were three Devonshire regiments of which two had pale yellow and one had green facings. The two Hampshire regiments had yellow and pale yellow. Most Highland and Irish regiments had yellow, but then yellow was the commonest colour overall.

Was it just arbitrary?

Gunfreak Supporting Member of TMP29 Sep 2017 1:36 a.m. PST

Wild, wild guess, but up to at least mid 18th century, it seemed somewhat up to the colonel of the regiment?

And then the facings colours simply stuck?
Some regiments did change facings colours between the WSS and SYW, but most didn't I think.

robert piepenbrink Supporting Member of TMP29 Sep 2017 3:01 a.m. PST

As a general rule, no--no pattern. Every now and then, you get hints of a relationship between facing colors and livery colors--suggesting the drummers in "reversed" colors are sometimes wearing the livery colors of some early colonel. And when you think about it, royal regiments and gun carriage colors often match the royal livery colors. This is true of regiments in a number of countries, but I've never seen a methodical study in any of them.

The sort of province or geographical facing colors you suggest are a 19th Century thing. The Prussians go to them following 1806/07, and the British adopt them with the Cardwell reforms. The US attempt to match the facings of Continental regiments with groups of states may be the first. (Napoleon, of course, tries to go strictly by regimental number with the white uniform--no focus of loyalty or identity was permitted other than the Emperor himself.) But I don't think anyone had such a system in the 17th Century, nor--except for the Continentals--in the 18th.

4th Cuirassier29 Sep 2017 4:05 a.m. PST

Thanks.

FWIW I come up with the following for British foot units:

Yellow 22
Buff 16
Blue 15
Pale Yellow 13
Blue-Green 12
White 9
Black 6
Red 4
Yellow-Green 2
Green 2
Gosling Green 1
Pale-Buff 1
Orange 1
Yellowish-Green 1
Pea Green 1
Purple 1


The point about royal livery is well made. The Austrian predilection for yellow-ochre gun carriages matches the colour of the Schoenbrunn, which was thus painted because it was the favourite colour of a former empress. It seems plausible that the same principle was applied to other stuff such as the colour of the gun carriages.

Personal logo 22ndFoot Supporting Member of TMP29 Sep 2017 4:18 a.m. PST

At least in the 1768 warrant, the British rule was very clear:

"No Colonel is to put his arms, crest, device, or livery, on any part of the appointments of the regiment under his command."

It should be noted too, that although the colonel changed often, the facing colours rarely did which would suggest that they were originally chosen on the basis of what was cheap, available and distinctive.

4th Cuirassier29 Sep 2017 4:23 a.m. PST

As software developers might say, "cheap, available and distinctive: pick any two"

:-)

Which would explain both yellow and purple facings…

Personal logo 22ndFoot Supporting Member of TMP29 Sep 2017 4:30 a.m. PST

I suspect cheap and available trumped distinctive, hence, as you say, all the yellow and buff. Cheers.

Also, to the OP, the county affiliations came later – often much later – and so had no correlation at all with either colonels or facing colours. Only in 1881 were British facings standardised on blue for royal regiments; white for English and Welsh; yellow for Scots and green for Irish.

robert piepenbrink Supporting Member of TMP29 Sep 2017 6:23 a.m. PST

22nd Foot is quite right--in 1768, and for the British. If it happened that that a Colonel's livery influenced facings, we're probably talking Stuart times in Britain. My impression is that it went on much later with some of the Swiss regiments, and I had a professor who insisted it happened in early modern France--but as I said, no serious methodical study.
Gun carriage colors. Forget the Schoenbrun. Think of a black eagle on a gold field. Then think of an ochre yellow gun with black metalwork. Now think of a black eagle on a silver field, and think of medium blue guns with black metalwork. Look at the black and yellow on a Saxon coat of arms and black guns with yellow metalwork, or a white horse on a red field and red Hanoverian guns, a red Danish flag and red Danish guns. I could go on for a bit. The British flip back and forth from royal livery red to Cromwellian "dull leaden colour" for better than half a century before gray wins out, and you can sometimes find a painting of a Tudor gun in Tudor white and green.

Things get so dull in the 20th Century.

Murvihill29 Sep 2017 7:59 a.m. PST

"Things get so dull in the 20th Century." But then you get to paint tanks…

4th Cuirassier29 Sep 2017 8:08 a.m. PST

What is perhaps surprising is that only four regiments – 33rd, 41st, 53rd and 76th – had red facings. On a red coat, constructively that means no facings at all. If cost were an important factor, you'd expect to see more than that, because you could stint on paying for the coats to have facings sewn on. Hence perhaps some other factor was at work.

County was an obvious possibility but the only reason I looked at this at all was in connection with militia regiments. Militia facing colours are harder to research (without laying out cash), so I was looking for a credible basis off which to guess facing colours. My thinking was simply that if the two Lincolnshire or the two Norfolk regiments happened to have the same facing colour as each other, then there was some chance that the local militia would have done so, too.

There is no such correlation evident at all. What stands out most obviously instead is that of the 92 regiments that didn't have garter blue facings, 51 had them in some shade of yellow or buff, and 19 in some shade of green.

So in fact the choice of facing colour seems to have been determined on the basis of "You can have yellow or green. Pick one" with those unable to choose ending up with shades such as gosling green…

Personal logo McLaddie Supporting Member of TMP29 Sep 2017 9:46 a.m. PST

"No Colonel is to put his arms, crest, device, or livery, on any part of the appointments of the regiment under his command."

That doesn't mean he can't choose the color of the facings or the lace etc., only that they can not be made a personal extension of HIS personal colors or family devices/crests.

Colonels did choose the colors of the regiments when created, but after that, maybe, maybe not, along with pride and tradition. That is why you see some change and others do not.

From what I understand, when Thomas Graham formed the three battalions of the 90th infantry in 1798, he chose the color of the facings. Of course, if the regiment had been formed, disbanded and then reformed again, [Say between the American Revolution and the Napoleonic wars] as many were through the 18th and 19th Centuries, the reformed regiments may well have kept the original facing colors.

Garde de Paris29 Sep 2017 10:10 a.m. PST

Back in the 1960's I examined British units in the Peninsular War, and listed them on card stock by facing color. This was the basis for my choosing units to paint.

I have long lost the cards, but I do not remember the yellows being all that much greater in number than the buffs and the greens.

My plan is (IVth Diivision of Lowry Cole)3 battalion with blue; 3 with buff; and the Loyal Lusitanian Legion with 4 Portuguese battalions.

My "composite" 8th Division: 3 with varied greens; 3 with yellow; and a brigade with the 43rd (white) and 50th (black), tied in with half battalion of the 95th, and a battalion of Portuguese cacadores.

By the way, were there actually 3 Regiments with Gosling Green? Haythornthwaite in Uniforms of the Peninsular War, 1807-14 (1978) shows 5th Northumberland (2 battalion in Spain); 36th Herefordshire; and 66th Berkshire.

GdeP

dibble29 Sep 2017 11:43 a.m. PST

A lot of the regiments original facing/lining colour was yellow under James II, who preferred that colour for ‘most' of his infantry .

1st 1633 Even though they were made royal in in 1687 they remained in their original white lining/facings up to the last few years of the 17th century before changing to royal blue.

2nd 1661 Was sea green but was changed to blue by 1768.

3rd 1667 Red coats with yellow lining later the facings were noted as being ‘flesh' then as buff or ash. The nickname of ‘The Buffs' is recorded officially in 1747, but likely used many years before.

4th 1680 Yellow but changed sometime in the early 18th century to blue

5th 1685 Originally yellow facings in the 1680's. 1742 yellow-green but officially as gosling green in 1751

6th Seem to have had deep yellow facing from the start in 1685

7th Was yellow from 1685, the change to blue is not clear but they were recorded as blue in 1702.

8th From 1685 the facing colour was 'dark'? yellow but changed to blue in 1716

9th 1685 Was orange but changed to green at an unknown date.. In 1733, official permission was given to change the colour from bright green to light orange. By 1747 this was called yellow.

10th Had blue coats when raised in 1685., faced red (Could be to Earl of Bath's livery colours of blue and red). Blue coats changed to red in 1691. Yellow linings may have been introduced during Williams reign, and the yellow facings a little later.

11th Changed from tawny yellow of 1685 to yellow early in the next century but this was changed to dark green.

12th Were white lined 1685 changed to yellow facings by 1742

13th Yellow facings 1685 and continued sometimes called light yellow (dead leaf yellow)

14th Nothing is known before 1742 where buff facings were worn.

15th 1685 Lined red but yellow facings by 1742.

16th 1688 Red lined but changed to white and changed again to yellow facings by 1742

17th 1688 Had grey coats, but by 1742 red coats pearl grey facings (reported as white in 1769)

18th 1684 Red coats blue lining and later blue facings.

19th 1688 Possibly blue coated with yellow facings. Yellow facings were recorded in 1709. Changed to green by about 1738, recorded as green in 1742 the green varied from yellow-green to dull green.

20th 1688 Uniform unknown. Said to be red, lined and faced white. By 1740 the facings were yellow.

Well that's the first 20. If you want more, I'll post more in a few days.

Paul :)

Khusrau29 Sep 2017 11:51 a.m. PST

Colours would seem to have been a compromise between what was cheap and locally available,not the same as the coat colour, not prohibited (blue), and had some relation to colonels colours.

This essentially comes down to white, black, yellow and green, (see the colour rules for arms) – black was a rarity as difficult to make fast. white got filthy and was expensive to produce, so yellow and green were popular.

Anthony Barton29 Sep 2017 12:22 p.m. PST

White was cheap : undyed wool , might need a bit of bleaching.( The Austrian favourite because so economical). Yellow was cheap , if a bit pale , from the Weld plant.
Green was more expensive, since it was normally made with two dyeings, one with Indigo and one with Weld, thus adding considerably to cost.There were other green dyes, but they tended to fade so fast as to be unsuitable.

Personal logo Flashman14 Supporting Member of TMP29 Sep 2017 1:04 p.m. PST

I believe it started in the ECW when the sleeves of long coats were rolled up, the different colored linings became visible. This became a formalized with the creation of the New Model Army. Right?

Paul B29 Sep 2017 1:55 p.m. PST

Paul (dibble),
Your information about the first 20 was very useful, I'm sure lots of us would be interested in what you have to say on the others.
I've always wondered why only one regiment had purple.
Paul

Ottoathome29 Sep 2017 2:57 p.m. PST

Ummm.. It's fashion.

"Facings" are only going to be seen once the coat is "turned back" to reveal the lining. Coats back then were made in three layers. The central lining was "buckram" which was like a light burlap. This gave the coat its body so it didn't degenerate into a shapeless rag. The lining was soft for comfort against the shirt and the skin, and the outer layer was for warmth and durability. The liner could be of light stuff. You were only going to see the liner when the skirts flashed open, unless they were purposely turned back and buttoned. The cuffs were usually cut long to allow the soldier to have a shroud over his hands in cold weather. In warmer weather they were turned back and buttoned on the sleeve. Gloves were universally worn, but the glove frequently inhibited the soldier in the manual of arms and certainly was cumbersome when put through a trigger guard and could set off the trigger accidentally. Collars the same. Made to be turned up in the cold.

The color would be on the inner liner and seen only when turned back. Most of the time it was the cheapest that could be found of odd-lot dyestock because it was only meant to guard the Bleeped text from getting hitched or tangled in the buckram.

Remember this is for very early in the period like just after the Thirty Years War. Later, as the contrast became seen it became a bit of military fashion and vanity.

This was taken from a book "Military Fashion: a history of Military Costume" which is long out of print.

dibble29 Sep 2017 6:04 p.m. PST

Paul B

I've always wondered why only one regiment had purple.

The 56th (1755) The original facing colours were called deep crimson but by 1764 had changed to purple. the colour seems to have varied at different times due to the vagaries of dying. though this problem persisted, it was still a colour that was said to derive from Madam de Pompadour.

From the Richard Cannon Historical Records of the British Army series.


Paul :)

Supercilius Maximus In the TMP Dawghouse29 Sep 2017 7:00 p.m. PST

Actually, two regiments had "purple" * – the other was the 59th but they changed it to white when a new Colonel took over after the regiment was drafted and sent home in late 1775.

* It actually seems to have been closer to a pinkish lilac.

Edwulf29 Sep 2017 8:14 p.m. PST

It was usually the colonels choice I believe. With blue reserved for units with royal.

At some point in the 19th century 1880s I think it was regulated at English – white, Irish green, Scottish- yellow.

Trajanus30 Sep 2017 3:26 a.m. PST

In the British Army I'd always thought it was linked to the Civil War where some Regiments had a matching coat colour and Flag system. Like the London Trained Bands who were known by their individual colours. That one may just have been the flags though.

Not sure if this continued into the New Model Army but I'm pretty sure that when every one started dressing in red the idea of having Regimental Colours (as in an actual colour, as well as a term for flags) was adopted.

So if the NMA had coloured flags did they not have some associated coat decoration on the Red. If not it seems logical that it developed into Charles II and as noted already James II's reign.

Timbo W30 Sep 2017 4:52 a.m. PST

Sort of Trajanus, usually in the Civil Wars flag colour and coat colour were unrelated.

In the New Model (and in Essex's army beforehand) coats were issued with different lining colour. Unfortunately its not really clear which regiments of the NMA got which lining colour, so I don't think we can really say for definite whether or not the linings matched with the flag colours.

dibble30 Sep 2017 11:50 a.m. PST

Supercilius Maximus

Actually, two regiments had "purple" * – the other was the 59th but they changed it to white when a new Colonel took over after the regiment was drafted and sent home in late 1775.

* It actually seems to have been closer to a pinkish lilac.

59th (1755)the first facing colours was light crimson and later called Purple. Changed to white in 1776.

The civil war brought up many different regiments being named by the colour of coat that they wore 'White coats', Green coats' Blue coats, etc. From what I gather, those line infantry regiments have nothing to do with the lining or facings of the later regiments. Anyway, by James II rule he had many regiments dressed with 'his' favourite yellow lining and facings. William (of Orange) III, had his Dutch in blue coats, he also had some British regiments raised and clothed in blue jackets, The original 23rd Royal Welch Fusiliers (1688 )for instance, were thus clothed with white facings

Paul :)

dibble30 Sep 2017 4:11 p.m. PST

Here's some more.

21st 1678 Coats were red lined and faced red. By 1751 they were a Royal regiment and their facings changed to blue.

22nd 1689 Buff facings worn from the earliest days but the exact shade varied.

23rd 1688 Wore blue coats faced and lined white. No date known when they changed to red coats and nor when the facing colour changed, but a possibility would be about 1714 when the facings changed to blue.

24th 1689 Only information about the uniform is known from 1742 where the facings were recorded as green. Willow green was the early description of the colour but later described as grass green.

25th 1689 First the colour of the facings was quoted as deep yellow, and later almost orange . In 1805 the facings changed to blue when they became a royal regiment.

26th 1689 ‘May' have been white lining and facings. In 1742, changed to pale yellow.

27th 1689 no evidence of the original facing colour but by 1742, they were buff.

28th 1694 Red coat faced bright yellow.

29th 1694 White coats faced yellow worn for the first two years, then changed to red coats with yellow facings.

30th 1694 Red coats faced yellow

31st 1702 Originally red coats lined yellow. Later re-raised red coats buff facings.

32nd 1702 Red faced and lined green. Later green lined white cuffs 1751 white facings.

33rd 1702 Red coat lined yellow. Later red facings with white lining. 1742, red facings.

34th 1702 Red coat lined grey, changed to white with grey facings and later changed to light yellow.

35th 1701 raised in Ireland, coats had orange facings in honour of King William's house of Orange.

36th 1701 Only known to have had green facings from 1742. Later shades of green are described as gosling green, grass green etc,

37th 1702 known to have yellow facing by 1742.

38th 1702 Not clear for early days but from 1742 were yellow facings.

39th 1702 No records of distinctive facings before 1742, with no fixed shade of green which varied from pale green, willow green, popinjay, light green etc, etc.

40th 1717 May have been buff from the beginning.

41st 1719 Originally an invalid regiment which included the Royal regiment of Wales. Originally in red coats faced and lined blue.(Chelsea pensioners have a similar uniform today). The 41st became an active regiment (invalids removed) in 1787 the facings changed to red.

42nd 1739 Red coat faced buff. Changed in 1758 to Royal blue.

43rd 1741 White facings chosen by their colonel due to his prior service with the 7th Dragoons.

44th 1741Yellow facings

45th 1741Originally deep green facings, later Lincoln green.
46th 1741 Yellow facings.

47th 1741 white facings.

48th 1741 Buff Facings.

49th 1743 Early facing colour was named as full green and later called Lincoln green.

50th 1755 Black facings.

51st 1755 Sea green, later called dull green.

52nd 1755 Buff facings.

53rd 1755 Originally had red facings with yellow lining but changed in 1768 to white lining.

54th 1755 First popinjay green facings then later became known as grass green.

55th 1755 Dark green, then later Lincoln green.

56th 1755 The original facing colours were called deep crimson but by 1764 had changed to purple. the colour seems to have varied at different times due to the vagaries of dying. though this problem persisted, it was still a colour that was said to derive from Madam de Pompadour.

57th 1755 Were yellow facings.

58th 1755 Black facings

59th 1755 The first facing colours was light crimson and later called Purple. Changed to white in 1776.

60th 1755 Red coat, Royal blue facings. 1797 5th Battalion had dark green coats with red facings.

61st 1756 Buff facings.

62nd 1756 Yellow-buff facings and lining. Then buff.

63rd 1756 Very dark green facings with buff lining. 1767 White lining Lincoln green facings.

64th 1756 Black facings with white lining.

65th 1756 White lining and facings.

66th 1756 Yellow-green facings and lining, later described as gosling green and emerald green.

67th 1756 Yellow facings and lining, changing to yellow facings and white lining by 1767.

68th 1757 Dark green facings, later known as bottle green.

69th 1756 Willow green facings, though the green shade varied over the years and was known as grass green too.

70th 1756 Red coats had white lining but by 1763 the facings were black.

71st 1777 Buff facings.

72nd 1778 Yellow facings.

73rd 1780 Dark green.

74th 1787 White facings.

75th 1787 Yellow facings.

76th 1787 Red facings.

77th 1787 Yellow Facings.

78th 1793 Buff facings.

79th 1793 Dark green facings.

80th 1793 Yellow facings.

81st 1794 Buff facings.

82nd 1793 Buff facings.

83rd 1793 Yellow facings.

84th 1793 Pale yellow.

85th 1793 Yellow facings

86th 1793 Facings were yellow up to 1812 when they changed to Royal blue.

87th 1793 Green facings.

88th 1793 Yellow facings.

89th 1793 Black facings.

90th 1794 Buff facings.

91st 1794 Yellow facings.

92nd 1794 Yellow facings.

93rd 1800 Yellow facings.

**********************************

I'll post the rest at a later date.

Paul :)

dibble08 Oct 2017 4:20 p.m. PST

I promised 'more later' in my post above so I started work on an schematic type of reference on similar lines of the classic charts of de Bosset and Hamilton Smith.

I don't know if these charts (Infantry Regiments only) will be of use but I thought I would post them for your perusal. I used all the same references as C.E Franklin but also drawing on my extensive library of contemporary illustrations, portraits etc, and of course, Richard Cannon, W.Y Carman and C.P Lawson, who's cartouches were the template that I used but with a little adaptation.

If anyone has any questions pertaining my work, please don't hesitate to ask questions or indeed to highlight any errors you see.

I hope soon to be able to do similar work pertaining cavalry, volunteer foot and cavalry regiments.







The last is of the colours used.

Paul :)

42flanker09 Oct 2017 4:17 a.m. PST

Paul, thanks for these.

Does this represent a snapshot of a particular date or period? The three Rifle units, suggest a date circa 1800 although the combination of white and regimental lace perhaps indicates a more generalised survey of the later C18th/early C19th.

(Cross posted on ACG)

dibble09 Oct 2017 7:33 a.m. PST

Well as you know, the lace detail of many regiments changed after 1812 so (in general) I have stuck to the lace pattern up to that date. The changes to a few regiments from line to Royal came about in 1812. The 60th thing is just a depiction of both battalions compared to the red coated battalions of that regiment.

The Kilt then trouser (1809)transition is depicted where you see half tartan half buff/white in that section of the cartouche and kilted regiments are depicted where the tartan is shown right up to the lace section with a thick black border demarcation line.

So yes, It's a general survey. If I had tried to show all variations and changes individually, 'Id still be working on it. Anyway, It's for wargamers really and I suppose most of the finer details don't really matter to them seeing as they work mainly up to 28/30mm.

Anyone working on 54mm and above and who need lace detail for after 1812 can always ask and I will supply….

Thanks for the interest jf'

Paul :)

42flanker09 Oct 2017 8:24 a.m. PST

Ah, that all makes sense. The tartan sections confused me momentarily but now all is klar. Thanks

4th Cuirassier10 Oct 2017 5:43 a.m. PST

I'd be interested in a version of that that covered militia and volunteers!

dibble10 Oct 2017 12:06 p.m. PST

I'm going to start compiling (or rather gathering what I have along with what I can find) information this week though I don't know how long it will take But hopefully, I'll have something to post by the end of the month.

Paul :)

attilathepun4712 Oct 2017 11:34 a.m. PST

@dibble,

Thanks so much for all your work. I already have a reprint of Hamilton Smith's work, but this will be very useful for comparison and clarification on some points. It might be useful for you to add, at some point, a list of the official regimental titles (if any) as they were during the Napoleonic era.

42flanker12 Oct 2017 12:46 p.m. PST

Try this for regimental titles.

link

It is not flawless and because it was archived some years ago you will hit the odd blank but click along the Wayback Machine panel at the top and eventually the page will come up. It's a very useful starter point.

dibble12 Oct 2017 6:48 p.m. PST

Attillathepun47

Hamilton Smith's charts are flawed I'm afraid.

*********************************************

And here's you official name listing

1st Regiment of Foot Guards

Coldstream Regiment of Foot Guards

3rd Regiment of Foot Guards

1st (or the Royal Scots Regiment) of Foot

2nd (or the Queen's Royal) Regiment of Foot

3rd (or East Kent) Regiment of Foot

4th (or King's Own) Regiment of Foot

5th (or the Northumberland) Regiment of Foot

6th (or the 1st Warwickshire) Regiment of Foot

7th Regiment of Foot (or Royal Fusiliers)

8th (or the KIng's) Regiment of Foot

9th (or the East Norfolk) Regiment of Foot

10th (or the North Lincolnshire) Regiment of Foot

11th (or the North Devonshire) Regiment of Foot

12th (or the East Suffolk) Regiment of Foot

13th (or the 1st Somersetshire) Regiment of Foot

14th (or the Buckinghamshire) Regiment of Foot

15th (or the Yorkshire) Regiment of Foot

16th (or the Bedfordshire) Regiment of Foot

17th (or the Leicestershire) Regiment of Foot

18th (or the Royal Irish) Regiment of Foot

19th (or the 1st Yorkshire North Riding) Regiment of Foot

20th (or the East Devonshire) Regiment of Foot

21st Regiment of Foot (or the North British Fusileers)

22nd (or the Cheshire) Regiment of Foot

23rd Regiment of Foot (or the Royal Welch Fusileers)

24th (or the 2nd Warwickshire) Regiment of Foot

25th (or the King's Own Borderers) Regiment of Foot

26th (or the Cameronian) Regiment of Foot

27th (or the Inniskilling) Regiment of Foot

28th (or the North Gloucestershire) Regiment of Foot

29th (or the Worcestershire) Regiment of Foot

30th (or the Cambridgeshire) Regiment of Foot

31st (or the Huntingdonshire) Regiment of Foot

32nd (or the Cornwall) Regiment of Foot

33rd (or the 1st Yorkshire and West Riding) Regiment of Foot

34th (or the Cumberland) Regiment of Foot

35th (Sussex) Regiment of Foot

36th (or the Herefordshire) Regiment of Foot

37th (or the North Hampshire) Regiment of Foot

38th (or the 1st Staffordshire) Regiment of Foot

39th (or the Dorsetshire) Regiment of Foot

40th (or the 2nd Somersetshire) Regiment of Foot

41st Regiment of Foot

42nd (or the Royal Highland) Regiment of Foot

43rd (or the Monmouthshire) Regiment of Foot (Light Infantry)

44th (or the East Essex) Regiment of Foot

45th (or the Nottinghamshire) Regiment of Foot

46th (or the South Devonshire) Regiment of Foot

47th (or the Lancashire) Regiment of Foot

48th (or the Northamptonshire) Regiment of Foot

49th (or the Hertfordshire) Regiment of Foot

50th (or the West Kent) Regiment of Foot

51st (or the 2nd Yorkshire and West Riding) Regiment of Foot (Light Infantry)

52nd (or the Oxfordshire) Regiment of Foot (Light Infantry)

53rd (or the Shropshire) Regiment of Foot

54th (or the West Norfolk) Regiment of Foot

55th (or the Westmoreland) Regiment of Foot

56th (or the West Essex) Regiment of Foot

57th (or the West Middlesex) Regiment of Foot

58th (or the Rutlandshire) Regiment of Foot

59th (or the 2nd Nottinghamshire) Regiment of Foot

60th (or Royal American) Regiment of Foot

60th (or Royal American) Regiment of Foot (Light Infantry)(1815)

61st (or the South Gloucestershire) Regiment of Foot

62nd (or the Wiltshire) Regiment of Foot

63rd (or the West Suffolk) Regiment of Foot

64th (or the 2nd Staffordshire) Regiment of Foot

65th (or the 2nd Yorkshire and North Riding) Regiment of Foot

66th (or the Berkshire) Regiment of Foot

67th (or the South Hampshire) Regiment of Foot

68th (or the Durham) Regiment of Foot (Light Infantry)

69th (or the South Lincolnshire) Regiment of Foot

70th (or the Glasgow Lowland) Regiment of Foot

71st (Highland) Regiment of Foot (light Infantry)

72nd Regiment of Foot

73rd Regiment of Foot

74th Regiment of Foot

75th Regiment of Foot

76th Regiment of Foot

77th (or the East Middlesex) Regiment of Foot

78th (Highland) Regiment of Foot (Ross-shire Buffs)

79th (or the Cameronian Highlanders) Regiment of Foot

80th Regiment of Foot (or the Staffordshire Volunteers)

81st Regiment of Foot

82nd Regiment of Foot (or the Prince of Wales's Volunteers)

83rd Regiment of Foot

84th (or the York and Lancaster) Regiment of Foot

85th Regiment of Foot (or Bucks Volunteers) (Light Infantry)

86th (or the Royal County Down) Regiment of Foot

87th (or the Prince of Wales's Own Irish) Regiment of Foot

88th Regiment of Foot(or the Connaught Rangers)

89th Regiment of Foot

90th (light Infantry) Regiment of Foot (or the Perthshire Volunteers)

91st Regiment of Foot

92nd (Highland) Regiment of Foot (Also known as the Gordon Highlanders)

93rd (Highlanders) Regiment of Foot (the Sutherland Highlanders)

94th Regiment of Foot (also known as the Scotch Brigade)

95th Regiment of Foot (Riflemen)

96th (Queen's Royal Irish) Regiment of Foot

97th (Queen's Own) Regiment of Foot

98th Regiment of Foot

99th (or Prince of Wales's Tipperaty) Regiment of Foot

100th (or his Royal Highness the Prince Regent's County of Dublin) Regiment of Foot

101st (Duke of York's Irish) Regiment of Foot

102nd Regiment of Foot

103rd Regiment of Foot

104th (or the New Brunswick) Regiment of Foot

Paul :)

attilathepun4712 Oct 2017 9:44 p.m. PST

Thank you again to dibble, and also 42flanker. The regimental titles correspond, except in some minor points, to what I have compiled through the years. I just thought it would be good to have that coupled with your uniform chart for the benefit of everyone here on TMP. Yes, I was aware of faults in Hamilton Smith's chart. Apart from outright errors, all the original copies of his work had to be hand-painted with watercolors. As anyone who has ever tried it can testify, it is very difficult to faithfully duplicate a color over many copies, when it involves repeated hand mixing, and I doubt that all those employed doing the painting were overly concerned about absolute accuracy.

42flanker13 Oct 2017 9:57 a.m. PST

Between 1802 and 1812 there was a degree of fun and games, with swopping around county titles, removing Highland identities from some regiments, and changing others to the light role. Or both.

dibble13 Oct 2017 1:35 p.m. PST

Though not as confusing as with the Light cavalry arm a few years earlier

Paul :)

42flanker13 Oct 2017 3:21 p.m. PST

That's No lie.

Le Breton14 Oct 2017 1:08 a.m. PST

@diddle

Paul, I don't play British and I know virtually nothing about their army or military history. But your research and its presentation is fascinating! Thank you very much for your time and efforts to share what you have researched. It is just plain "way cool"!

dibble14 Oct 2017 11:47 a.m. PST

Le Breton

Thanks for the compliment.

I don't wargame and haven't since the early/mid 80's so in effect, I have done this for any who are interested. People are forever asking aspects about military dress of certain units and if this helps in the smallest of ways, then all the better for your hobby. Hopefully this will help and encourage people who wish or are thinking to battle with the Brit's but find it difficult, to get the info together.

All in all, most of the information out there commercially is pretty accurate, all I have done is made it just a little more accurate but at no expense other than the movement of the hand, finger and the click of a mouse!

I've started on the Hamilton Smith, Militia charts which date from 1815, but to be quite honest, I'm not comfortable with the data or that given by Lawson, and by just having a cursory look at one or two contemporary pictures of Regiments listed, I can see huge trouble ahead.

As for the Yeomanry cavalry, that looks nasty too.

I'll be doing regular cavalry regiments too but they will have to be compiled in two sections of before and after 1812. I was expecting to be all done by Christmas 2018! But Britain may well have left the EU before I have finished. :D

There is another, 'more worrying' aspect of the Regular regiments facing colours too. I'll be looking into that at another date and hopefully, have my doubts assuaged.

Paul :)

attilathepun4714 Oct 2017 6:59 p.m. PST

@dibble,

If you're doing all this just for the sake of helping out others, then you can sign me up for your fan club!

dibble15 Oct 2017 3:10 p.m. PST

be careful! Because my schematics above has an error in it. I found out that the 58th had square pairs instead of square single lace tapes. I forgot to amend my info and thus the detail, and whilst I was at it, I also gave them silver Officers lace when it should have been gold.

The 58th having single lace tapes is an error that is yet another passed down via the de Bosset/Hamilton Smith charts

Here is an updated 'revised' 58th schematic along with the evidence that de Bosset/Hamilton Smith were incorrect.

Paul :)

4th Cuirassier16 Oct 2017 12:31 a.m. PST

Hi Paul

How do you know the portraits depict members of that regiment?

dibble16 Oct 2017 7:56 a.m. PST

Through research.

I also have about four portraits of the 78th Ross-shire buffs who are also recorded as single bastion loops by deBosset and Hamilton Smith, but are in fact bastion pairs. which has also come down to us. These errors have been repeated in C.E Franklin's tome.


Paul :)

dibble16 Oct 2017 1:16 p.m. PST

just to add. The pictures above show the buttons with '58' on them. the actual buttons were a large '58' encercled by a end fonded wreath. The picture on the right shows the shoulder -belt plate with a large '58' surmounted with a crown. There is an extant example which can be seen below, (bottom left of the set).

Paul :)

Windy Miller17 Oct 2017 6:49 a.m. PST

Paul, that's an incredibly useful and well laid out reference. If it's not too late to edit there is one error, probably caused by autocorrect, in the list of regimental names. The 79th were the Cameron Highlanders not Cameronian Highlanders.

Windy

42flanker17 Oct 2017 9:31 a.m. PST

To some extent, yes, and, then again, no. After Alan Cameron of Erracht was authorised to raise a Highland corps in August 1793, the regiment was first known as the 79th Regiment, Cameronian Volunteers. In 1804, that title changed to 79th Regiment of Foot (Cameron Highlanders).

This does seem to have caused confusion down the years, with one modern author stating that in 1940 the Cameronians were the last regiment to take the field wearing the kilt.

Men in Douglas trews no doubt were spinning in their graves!

4th Cuirassier17 Oct 2017 9:46 a.m. PST

To add even more confusion the 26th Regiment were the Cameronian Regiment of Foot. They had pale yellow facings and silver lace.

dibble17 Oct 2017 11:16 a.m. PST

Windy Miller

You are quite right that it should read 'Cameron' for the 79th and not 'Cameronian‘. I am unable to correct any mistakes as the time to make amendments has elapsed.

Thanks for the highlight.

Paul :)

42flanker18 Oct 2017 2:04 a.m. PST

To add even more confusion the 26th Regiment were the Cameronian Regiment of Foot. They had pale yellow facings and silver lace.

Sorry. Yes. I was taking it as understood that my second reference was to THE Cameronians (former 26th & 90th) in their later incarnation

Pages: 1 2